MovieChat Forums > Doctor Sleep (2019) Discussion > Reasons why this movie bombed

Reasons why this movie bombed


i'm going to see it when it opens in my country, but even without having seen it yet, i can tell why this movie wasn't successful at the u.s. box office. basically the only interesting thing about this movie is that it is being helmed by mike flanagan who delivered good horror stuff in the past.
but on the other hand:
1.) it's overlong. a 2:30 hour movie is a true horror... for people's bladders.
2.) the alleged "stephen king hype" is a fallacy - 'it' was such a massive success mainly because of the killer clown hype in recent years, not because people want to see stephen king adaptions in general
3.) even though 'shining' is a great book/film, it's a self-contained story that never demanded a sequel. stephen king's novel 'doctor sleep' wasn't very good.
4.) ewan mcgregor doesn't have the star power to attract big audiences.
5.) how can a horror movie cost 50m dollar? you don't need 50m to scare people.
6.) the trailers were pretty boring, mainly relying on 'shining' fan service...

reply

All good points. King's name is definitely not the must-see selling point it was 30 years ago. In fact, I daresay the opposite is implied. I love Ewan but he's not an A List star. He can't open a big film on his smile and charm alone. Doctor Sleep was not a huge book that blew up with either critics or fans. Which I like fine, by the way. It's a solidly okay book. Which i'm sure is what this film is. But the biggest problem was the marketing made this look boring as hell. Even King's tweet about it, which was like "go check it out, dig the vibe." Dig the vibe?? My lord if the vibe is all this movie has going on, then this movie has nothing going on.

reply

"King's name is definitely not the must-see selling point it was 30 years ago. "

This isn't really true.

If you look at the history of the box office, King adaptations have always been hit and miss. In fact, he had a stretch in the 80s that wasn't successful at all. Part of the reason is that early in his career he sold a number of his short stories to people who ended up making b movies out of them. I'd say the last 10 -20 years have been better for King movies than the 80s were.

reply

You have no clue what you are talking about. Stephen Kings book adaptations are selling like hot cake.

reply

no

reply

1) It's as long as it needed to be to tell the story. The Shining was only nine minutes shorter and actually had a simpler storyline, slower pace.

2) Somewhat true, though in fact King's name never was a guarantee of box office success. It doesn't hurt, though.

3) You're in the minority there. Having actually read Doctor Sleep, I can say it was pretty good imo, and I'm not alone. It's got 4 1/2 stars on Amazon from nearly 10,000 reviews. I think the consensus of King's readers is that it's one of the better novels from the latter half of his career. You might not have liked it, but it doesn't have a reputation as a failure.

4) Probably not. He's a great character actor though.

5) Did you see the movie? Sets, special effects. 50 million is not a particularly high budget these days. Certainly having the money to pull off convincing effects won't cause a movie to bomb. This criticism is pretty nonsensical.

6) Valid . They were a bit misleading, considering how this story really didn't resemble the one in the shining very much. People might have thought they'd be getting a rehash, judging by the trailers. I suppose the marketing dept. wanted to make people aware that this was a sequel to the Shining, but they overdid it.

I'd also add that the movie isn't quite the disaster some are making it out to be. It was number one at the box office. 50 million is not a huge budget by modern standards, and when it's all said and done it won't be a massive money loser for the studio.

reply

1) It's as long as it needed to be to tell the story. The Shining was only seven minutes shorter and actually had a simpler storyline, slower pace.


still with a movie over 2 hours many people will consider watching it at home when it hits vod rather than seeing it in the theatre.

5) Did you see the movie? Sets, special effects. 50 million is not a particularly high budget these days. Certainly having the money to pull off convincing effects won't cause a movie to bomb. This criticism is pretty nonsensical.

for a horror movie it is a particularly high budget. if it had the usual horror movie budget of say 1-10m dollar, it wouldn't have been a financial failure.
i haven't seen it yet, but i assume the expensive part of the movie was recreating stuff from 'the shining' via cgi.


reply

Also read the novel and personally loved it.

I also liked this movie and enjoyed how it managed to remain true to the essence of the novel while serving as a solid sequel to the film version of The Shining (which is crazy different than the novel). I'm disappointed this didn't find a wider audience because I thought it was a damn good horror film.

I'm still baffled that they didn't release this a week or two earlier to give people looking for a horror movie around Halloween something to go to. There were no major horror releases in October this year which is so strange to me.

reply

Totally agree.

Instead they released it the same weekend as Midway, another movie aimed at an adult audience.

Huge mistake, IMO.

reply

I think at very least they could have released around Halloween. I still dont understand why they didnt, definitely would have made more in that time-frame.

reply

I thought the same thing

reply

The only explanation I can come up with is that they didn't want to go up against Disney's Maleficent. But it was a very odd move.

reply

I pretty much agree with all these points. The first point being the most important. I told someone recently that this movie's curse was that it had only 4 showings throughout the day because of its length. A film that long should have a short run in theaters and then be shown on Netflix.

reply

For me, I am a big fan of the Kubrick Shining film, and I had zero faith of this new film even coming close to the artistry of that film. Also, and this is petty, but.... the title “doctor sleep” is just plain stupid and does nothing to entice me.

reply

It's a good movie though.


reply

It's not an accesible film, if you compare it with other mainstream horror movies. Also, it doesn't work as a standalone one.

reply

Its a good movie, well worth seeing. No its not even close to the greatness of the original, but still worth a watch.

reply