WORLDWIDE
$382,688,455
and you all thought the Crystal Skull was bad, lol
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)
WORLDWIDE
$790,653,942
just proof that when you go woke you go broke...
It's painful to think about the amount of money lost on this . Don't know if it's because Disney is "woke" but they are crashing so hard
shareDisney is top.of the tree after 7 releases so far in 2023, 23% market share with 106 million tickets sold, 2nd is universal with a 22% market share with 103 million tickets sold , lest said about wb the better.
shareMarket share or not most of those 7 releases were money-losers unlike Universal's. The "less said about wb the better"? Well I guess youdon't want to talk about Barbie...the hottest ticket of the summer?
shareYou want to talk about money losers and universal, Ticket to Paradise, Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken, Reinfield, The Fablemens, Knock at the cabin, Cocaine Bear , Violent Night, jeez if it wasn't for Mario id say there on par with WB. Every studio is taking a huge hit, not just Disney, times are changing, its only Disney that can afford huge budgets.
shareI don't know about all of them, but cocaine bear, violent night and knock at the cabin did great, respectively to their budget. They make them cheap so they don't need to get a billion in sales. Those were smaller movies anyway, with no hopes of being global blockbusters.
share76 million is great box office now is it? considering it cost 20 million to make and just as much to market??
shareYes, if the budget is low enough, 76 million is fantastic. That's
almost quadruple the movies budget, which is always considered a success by any standard. I noticed you cherry picked one movie of the 3, but didn't bother clarifying as to which, but I know which one. Incidentally,
it was widely praised for being such a financial success, and it almost immediately was greenlit for a sequel. Lastly, what in the world would ever make you think they spent 20 million to market that movie? Not every movie gets MCU level marketing, and never does the marketing match the budget.
Btw...Barbie...with a production budget of just 100 million will have made that back after a couple of weeks in theaters then it's pure profit after that.
shareGood grief you are deluded, have you not paid attention, every release WB has flopped hard for sometime now, Barbie hasnt made a dime back yet and your still shilling for WB? Look at the absolutely shocking disasters, the flash, black adam, house party, magic mike, mummies, shazam, jesus combine these and the still didnt make what GOTG 3 made, and you have the nerve to say Disney is crashing lol.
shareIt has everything to do with the fact that the movie going experience is dying out. It has nothing to do with woke or the quality of the film. People just simply don't want to go to the theater anymore. I mean they still do but not in the numbers they used to. Social media, the pandemic, streaming sites etc has seen to that.
sharePlease explain Top Gun: Maverick and Avatar: Way of the Water
shareOne was 30 years in the making, and the other was also highly anticipated, its rarer now for films to make over a billion , pre covid it was more frequent
shareExactly. I fully expect MI to do very well this week. Also Tom Cruise still appeals to a larger group set. In 15 or 20 years he will be in the same position as Ford. Cruise is the last of his breed as well. After he's done the movie industry won't really have any great leading men left.
shareDude where did I say it's not happening. It's dying....DYING. Not completely gone... π
shareYou posted this in response to the OP.
.It has everything to do with the fact that the movie going experience is dying out. It has nothing to do with woke or the quality of the film. People just simply don't want to go to the theater anymore. I mean they still do but not in the numbers they used to. Social media, the pandemic, streaming sites etc has seen to that.
Dude I didn't say it was completely gone. The days of going to the movies is quickly becoming a thing of the past. People want big event films and THAT'S IT. Tom Cruise also still has a bigger demographic than Ford. Most of Fords fans are over 45 or dead.
Sure people are still going to the movies but not like they used to. Give it another 10 to 15 years and it will be even more eroded than what it is now. Once Pandora's box has been opened it hard to close.
People want big event films and THAT'S IT.
Again it does not appeal to the youth, less ticket sales overall, and most films not all but most that people want to see big event fx films. So most dramas, comedy's etc. People are not rushing out to see. They don't even release that many anymore. Fantasy and scifi and high action is what people want. Indy would have for the bill but again younger movie goers have ZERO clue who Indiana Jones is and don't want to watch a 42 year old film to get caught up. In the end it doesn't fucking matter. It's the last film. It cost way to much for it to make its cash back at the box office. But for me it just doesn't matter because I get to see Indy in one last film ..
Oh and it probably is also struggling because morons can't accept a female as a sidekick... π
Lots of factors.
Back to my original reply to you. Please explain Top Gun.
Oh and it probably is also struggling because morons can't accept a female as a sidekick... π
Indy would have for the bill but again younger movie goers have ZERO clue who Indiana Jones is
Hmmm, gonna have to nitpick your comparison slightly as it's not exactly apples to apples. Tom Cruise is only 61 compared to Harrison Ford's 80, so he's not *that* old. Cruise has shown repeatedly that he's still got it as an action star, whereas Ford hasn't had a huge action hit since, well, Crystal Skull (I'm not counting The Force Awakens because he was more of a supporting actor in that one).
shareThis is valid and Tom Cruise is a bigger draw than Harrison Ford. Ford hasn't headlined a movie as the main draw since... I don't know when.
In my defense, I will say that the post I was replying to specifically referenced the character and how well the main character is known to the younger audience. I would argue that more young people know Indiana Jones than Pete Mitchell.
dude. Tom Cruise was only 56 when filmingf Maverick. He's 20 fucking years younger than Harrison. He has much younger fans and a bigger fan base. Half of Harrison's fans are probably dead by now....I have explained this three times on this board now...
shareMaverick had an unusually old audience - little wonder, as its primary target demographic were fans of the original.
As for "morons can't accept a female as a sidekick" - what are you talking about? Every single Indy film has had a female sidekick. It's tradition. And has been a pretty common feature in action films for at least 50 years.
Exactly. So why are Indy fans so full of shit??? Talking woke this and woke that??? When the film was not woke....
shareMy point is, the movie is obviously not "struggling because morons can't accept a female as a sidekick". The people complaining about "woke" aren't complaining because Indy might get cooties, they're complaining that the sidekick is taking the front seat. I'm not sure I agree that's what happened in the movie - to me it's this:
Mutt was much of what was wrong about Indy 4. Helena was simply a new Mutt. With a new Short Round, and Short Round was much of what was wrong with Indy 2.
I will say this, though: the new Short Round was inoffensive, and so did not contribute to what was wrong with Indy 5. But Helena was, if anything, a worse Mutt.
I wish someone would explain Avatar to me because I canβt understand the appeal of watching a 2 to 3 hour movie with blue CGI people.
shareI'm with you in that I don't find it particularly enjoyable. However, I do know that the appeal for a lot of people is the idea of an alternate environment with this sort of pristine purity.
I remember during the first one, there was actually a phenomenon where fans fell into a depression when they were forced to come to the realization that Pandora was not a real place.
That CGI is beautiful, detailed, and looks real. I was a bit nervous driving home after the original Avatar because visuals from the film kept dominating my inner eye. Say what you want about the story, it was a visual feast. Water was different but still quite impressive.
shareCouldn't agree more, plus a lot people have access to direct streams that show pirated versions, i mean a decent copy of Dial of destiny was available 2 days after release.
shareThink about all the money they just lost on Marvels. That is truly embarrassing.
shareI haven't seen either, so I can't tell you if Diarrhea of Destiny is worse or "more woke" than Kingdom of the Numbskulls.
In either case, the Indy TRILOGY went out with a bang, as Indy rode off into the sunset with the dad at the end of the LAST Crusade.
Any stories about Indy having an illegitimate son named "Mutt", surviving an A-bomb at ground zero by hiding in a fridge, time traveling with his "goddaughter", or running around with a whip when he's 80 years old are just bad fan fiction dreamed up by Short Round!
You apparently are forgetting about the young Indy series and the scenes of Indy at 93....
shareHas Kathleen Kennedy been fired yet? Or is her βgirl powerβ more important to Disney than profits?
shareIt has nothing to do with a female in the movie moron. It has everything to do with the fact that you are old and fat and the young skinny people have their own stuff they are interested in... π
sharefemale? just calling it as I see it. a terrible movie.
there is no way the Dial of Flopestiny makes $800m.
It's doesn't need to and I don't care if it does ...
shareI dont care either, its just funny that everyone says the crystal skull was a terrible movie, yet it made almost $800m...
shareBecause Crystal Skull was a 19 year wait. Destiny was 15 and its a while different market now. Ford was 79 making the film and his demographic is much smaller now. Probably Half the fans from the first three films are probably dead now.lol. People under 40 don't care.
How much money a money makes has nothing to do with quality. Look at the awful last 4 films of Fast and Furious. Awful reviews, fans bitching but they are still making cash .....
Top Gun 2 was a 36 year wait and it made $1.3b. the flop of destiny is a terrible movie, thats why it didnt make any money. at least the Crystal Skull was a great movie.
shareTop Gun 2 is tech porn galore, it had also worked without Cruise or the Top Gun name. Compare it with the last (to my knowledge) bigger Jet-Movie Stealth - thats worlds in quality. Top Gun 2 also can stand for it alone. There are many aspects which could attract people.
Indiana Jones is all about a grumpy grandpa hunting a magic item. The core Indiana Jones Fans now having kids and can wait for a movie to get released on streaming. Whoever approved the 300M budget, must be a die hard Indiana Jones fan or was totally on cocaine, potentially both (the movie was finally approved by Disney after their perfect run 2019).
You are so wrong. I'm 37 and plenty of people my age and a bit younger are fans of the Indy movies. My little sister who is 30 years old enjoyed them when she was a kid and my oldest nephew who is 14 likes them too. And frankly plenty of parents show their kids older films. Also Disney has them on Disney plus which wouldn't be the case if what you say was true. As far as I'm concerned you are a compulsive liar and and a sadist.
shareFirst off you are almost 40. Second I was speaking generally..... Idiot ... π
shareWhat about the transformer movies? They made a fuck ton of money. I do love the first one though.
shareThe real money lost is how much Disney couldβve raked in if they werenβt pushing the Democrat mental illness agenda.
Oh well, I guess Elon will just have to buy and fix Disney next.
I talk to people about movies and their interests in film. Most who saw this were fine with the movie. They didn't like Helena, but they enjoyed the film. Personally, I liked it more than I thought I would. The opening and chase sequences were fine. Helena and the third act were terrible.
When asking why people don't want to see it, it's not the woke aspect. It's the fact that so many retreads of famous ips are disappointing. "The last one sucked so I'm not interested" is the common phrase. The next comment is that they don't see the point of watching an 80 year old do another adventure flick.
Politically, most people don't care. Movies became a streaming function rather than theater function. Remakes and sequels have dominated the theater. Hollywood focuses on CGI to tell stories which bloat the budget. This is why film in theater is in a slump.
can't really compare a movie that's been in theaters 2 weeks to a movie that had a full runtime. Seems pretty obvious it's a flawed comparison at this point.
shareWORLDWIDE
$258,230,900
In Release
14 days/2 weeks
Widest Release
4,600 theaters
not looking good so far...
Completely irrelevant to my statement.
shareI will check back in 3 months for the final tally.
shareAt that point, your comment will be relevant, which was my point from the beginning.
shareits relevant now, there is no way this movie makes $800m thus beating Crystal skull financially.
shareIt's not relevance, it's speculation. Those aren't the same thing.
sharemy speculation was accurate.
WORLDWIDE
$339,105,165
Indiana 5 is a terrible movie and a sad way to end the franchise.
Sad in what way??
sharesad that Harrison's last Indiana movie was a joke and a complete failure. at least the crystal skull was a good way to go out.
[β] Enigmaticocean77 (1875) a year ago
This movie is going to be a shit storm of epic proportions. Disney had no idea how to handle Star Wars, and you're still holding out hope that they will know how to handle Indiana Jones? Not to be mean, but I really feel as if your fanboyness is deluding you into having too much hope for the inevitable nightmare that is to come.
Sad in what way????
shareits a common English phrase.
example: sad that Harrison's last Indiana movie was a joke and a complete failure.
What made it a joke and complete failure?
sharekilled off main character - Mutt, replaced with woman (see Terminator reboot)
Indy was old
Indy needed the help of a woman
Nazis again
waited too long between movies
too expensive to make
Disney ruins icons and legends
Disney ruins franchises (see Star Wars)
no hype or marketing
terrible reviews
box office is terrible
no Spielberg
Killing off mutt was the BEST thing the movie did...lmao....Helena a much better character..... π
sharehttps://moviechat.org/tt1462764/Indiana-Jones-and-the-Dial-of-Destiny/60c43158a3aa0850c266e606/No-Mutt-no-movie
I called it 2 years ago...flop.
Well I dont know what you called. You did proclaim your love for the character. Which is rare with Mutt. I didn't hate KOTCS. But Mutt was definitely the weak point for me. I bumped your mutt thread back up .. ..I see that I responded to it two years ago as well ..π
shareI like the Mutt character. I would have preferred one last movie with him and Indiana to wrap up the series. but unfortunately Shia went a bit loco and now studios wont touch him.
sharegreat list, its weird no one is trolling you...
shareNo ancient threads to bump, so you're just replying to yourself now?
https://media.tenor.com/aSotFy84NYAAAAAC/anger-management-michael-arden.gif
I guess? thought it was a great list compiled by me. still waiting for someone to troll me for saying the flop of flopestiny would flop.
people called me crazy for saying top gun 2 would make a billion...
[β] Burk48917 (9696) a year agoshare
It's been out for 3 weeks, one of which was a holiday weekend. At this point in most movies, the decline is so significant, the earnings are not adding much. And yes, your market (age group) needs to account for the budget, since you assume they will be the majority of ticket buyers. So yes, the box office results have a direct correlation on whether or not your appealing to the intended market.
the last Indiana movie was a total failure and flop.
we are lucky to at least have 4 great Indiana movies to enjoy....