I'm going to take a stab at the reason why this bombed. The dialog is half unintelligible for a US audience. Maybe it did well in the UK? Mini Me is maybe less then half intelligible. I love a lot of Gilliam's films but this one I found the hardest to comprehend. FYI, I watch a lot of TV and films from the UK so I'm not an average US viewer.
shareThere were maybe a couple of lines that were hard to understand. What?
shareAmericans have a problem with intelligent films. There was nothing unintelligible about the dialogue, at least to an English-speaking person of normal intelligence.
shareMaybe many Americans do have a problem with intelligent films, but please do not try to lump us all together with blanket statements. I am an American who purposely seeks out intelligent and "different" films, usually foreign, in order to escape the all too typical Hollywood fodder released here in the US. My journey has lead me to many wonderful films, and foreign or not, I never have had trouble "understanding them".
That said, I agree. The dialogue was absolutely fine and easy to understand for, as you said, any English-speaking person of normal intelligence.
Thank you, I am so tired of everyone thinking that all Americans want to see in the theaters are The Avengers and rom-coms.
shareIt bombed because is a boring POS
Americans have a problem with intelligent films. There was nothing unintelligible about the dialogue, at least to an English-speaking person of normal intelligence.
[deleted]
English is just my second language but I have no problem what so ever with the dialogue.
shareI watched it in German and the only thing that puzzled me was the appearance changes of Tony. Was fun though. First time was a lol moment and second time wtf ^^
Afterwards I read that the actor died and got replaced by several others. Weird but okay.
However, that movie was only so-so.
Lack of advertisement may be the main cause for the bad box office results.
Ive my doubts that its entirely the content. Other movies with such imaginary high fantasy paid off well.
Check What Dreams May Come. One of my faves.
---
Lincoln Lee: I lost a partner.
Peter Bishop: I lost a universe!
had they made it clear that it was a Terry Gilliam flick it may have done a lot better!
sharehaha, it's interesting you say that because, I've been a Terry Gilliam fan for a long time. Maybe not as long as some people, but longer than others, lol. I really wanted to see "Baron Munchausen" but whenever it came out, it was like not even really advertised. I was literally waiting for it to come out, then 6 months later I see that it's on VHS. I'm sure I wasn't the only one.
That's not to say there are these millions of Gilliam fanboys out there waiting to pay $10 to see everything he puts out there, but actually, I dunno, maybe that's actually closer to the truth than whatever it is the promoters believe. Because I'm pretty sure "Munchausen" was straight-up sabotaged by the new administration of Columbia to make David Putnam's people look like failures. Gilliam says it, and it makes sense with all the actual facts that I've been able to find out over the years.
I don't know if somebody sabotaged "Dr. Parnassus", but they sure didn't put any muscle behind it. I think that there were a lot of people in Hollywood who really had a high stake in the public perception that "The Dark Knight" was Heath Ledger's last film. That's all I'm gonna say.
Did I not love him, Cooch? MY OWN FLESH I DIDN'T LOVE BETTER!!! But he had to say 'Nooooooooo'
US voters cast more than twice as many votes for this film as non-US voters, and gave it a higher average rating.
The reason some films don't make money is due to a complicated system of competing films and studios/release dates. It's most often has little to do with people's actual opinions of the movie.