Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny, The Flash, and The Little Mermaid remake all recently came out in theaters and landed with a dull thud and ridicule on social media. They are now in a neck-and-neck horse race over which film will flop the hardest!
I'm not sure which one to bet on... they ALL suck SO badly and ruin iconic characters while trying to cash in on nostalgia for a beloved childhood film from 1989!
DoD has the lowest Imdb rating - 7.0 Thu, 6.9 Fri, 6.8 Sun! Other two are 7.2.
Flash dropped 70% 2nd week, LM 27% 6th week! LM headed for $550m WW, twice budget?
Havenβt seen Dial of Destiny yet but no way it sucks as much as Fast X, that will go down as one of if not the worst big budget films of the year for me regardless of how much itβs made at the box office.
shareThat's interesting.
Could you explain where Fast X went wrong for you compared with F9, Fate of the Furious or Furious 7 for example?
I didn't care for Fate of the Furious or F9 either and think the franchise should have ended at 7. At this point it's just rehashing plots from the previous films and I didn't think Leterrier did a very good job directing Fast X, the editing was choppy and the pacing was poor and the running time was too long. Also plenty of fight scenes but not many action scenes involving cars. I'll give Jason Momoa credit because he actually puts in an entertaining performance but everyone else, particular Vin Diesel are just on autopilot.
I'll watch the last one (I hope it's the last one) but I think that franchise is creatively bankrupt at this point.
You guys are getting off topic. The Fast and the Furious, part 10 (a.k.a. "Fast X") is a whole different ballgame than The Little Mermaid/The Flash/Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny. The latter three are trying to cash in on nostaglia for beloved classic films from the 1980s, and ruining iconic characters that people know and love.
The Fast and the Furious, part 10 is just YET ANOTHER unnecessary sequel in a shallow "modern" 21st century action movie franchise that wasn't very good to BEGIN with. It would be more apt to compare to the latest live action Transformers sequel.
Fair enough. I will say that cashing in on nostalgia isn't always a bad thing (Top Gun: Maverick was great) but yeah most of the time it is poorly done in service of a quick cash grab (Star Wars sequel trilogy, Indiana Jones 4 and 5, Jurassic World trilogy to name a few.)
The Flash was okay I thought, you can tell they actually put in some effort into the story but the visual effects are bad. The Little Mermaid was another Disney soulless remake of a beloved animated classic. I'm seeing Indiana Jones on Wednesday so we'll see how it turns out. Thankfully I see these films for free thanks to being good friends with a manager of a cinema but I probably wouldn't go see them if I had to pay for them. There have been films worth paying to see at the cinema this year (John Wick 4, Spider-Verse, Guardians of the Galaxy 3) but Little Mermaid/Flash/Indiana Jones seem like films that aren't essential viewing. Will be interesting to see which one flops the most, it could easily be Indiana Jones considering how massive the budget is, doesn't it have to make $900 million just to break even?
...I think that franchise is creatively bankrupt at this point.
Yeah that's true, I guess it's just personal preference for the franchise then at this point. Bond is interesting because it's had different actors playing the role, a lot of the films are standalone and I find the character more interesting. Dominic Toretto is quite a bland protagonist in my opinion.
shareFunny thing is I reckon Fast & Furious pretty much is James Bond now anyway.
At least since 6 anyway, which was why I was asking before what you found different about X.
Pretty much every one from 6 onwards is:-
"James, sorry Dom, we've come across this evil character who is intent on destroying the world using this macguffin device he / she's got their hands on.
Please can you go to various exotic locations around the world and find your contact there to continue the mission and recover said device / defeat Dr Evil. Feel free to throw in some outrageous stunts and fine looking ladies doing whatever...
See you at the end back at my office, sorry I meant your barbeque hangout for a tasty debrief..."
I also wished this. They are so bad now I'm embarrassed to have ever been a fan.π
shareEnjoyed The Flash. Not being either a little girl nor a grown up ex-little girl, I didn't care about Little Mermaid.
However, I'd consider myself a fan of the classic Indy films yet I have no interest in going to see this.
It's time for Disney's toxic nostalgia drive to end.
Last Crusade should definitely have been the last Indiana Jones film. I guess I can't really blame Paramount/Lucasfilm back in 2008 for releasing a fourth film as it went on to become the second highest grossing film of 2008 but it still is a soulless and unnecessary film and a rare misfire for Spielberg. With Dial of Destiny though Ford is certainly too old. Does he even have a fight scene in this film where he trades roundhouse punches with a hulking henchman? Or is the whole movie just chase sequences with old man Indiana Jones being grumpy? Certainly doesn't sound like a good idea and the mixed reviews seem to have confirmed it.
shareI'm not even into the Indy films, but I did really enjoy Last Crusade.
shareThe Little Mermaid has made over $500 million worldwide. The other two movies would kill for that at this point.
shareYeah, I think we have the answer now. Dial of Destiny opened with similar number to The Flash, but cost almost twice to make, so far it looks like the biggest flop.
Compare to Dial of Destiny and The Flash, The Little Mermaid could even be considered a hit.
Well, according to Wikipedia, The Flash had budget of around 220 million, and Dial of Destiny had a budget of around $275, so its higher but not "twice as much to make".
We also have to factor in the fact that The Flash was basically shot 3 years ago but endlessly "delayed" until now. We're looking at how a film made in 2020 did when it was released in 2023, after sitting in a vault for 3 years (Covid & Ezra Miller personal life drama & post-Snyderverse revised ending & Batgirl cancelled causing the film to be pushed further and further back). No doubt WB lost zillions due to the "delays", whereas Indy was filmed and completed like a normal production schedule (Filming wrapped in early 2022, post-production was completed by the end of the year, and the film made its summer 2023 release date). Plus, they gotta factor in overseas $$$, I'm not sure if Indy 5 has debuted worldwide yet, and I think The Flash really tanked overseas whereas Indy just got "disappointing" overseas numbers opening weekend.
You're probably right that Indy 5 will ultimately be the bigger flop, but it would be interesting to crunch the exact numbers.
And yeah, probably The Little Mermaid would be considered a hit compared to the other two, but unfortunately for The Little Mermaid, it was released next to The Super Mario Bros. Movie grossing over $1 billion and slaughtering it at the box office, which looks really bad when a iconic Disney princess gets crushed by a video game adaptation (video game movie adaptations have traditionally ALWAYS done poorly!)
Somehow I remembered Dial of Destiny cost 395, but it turned out 295 was what I read, but still a lot more.
The Independence Day probably will help Dial of Destiny a bit, then again it could just be front loading, for some reason the future numbers are already out: https://www.boxofficemojo.com/release/rl2776598017/?ref_=bo_hm_rd
The Super Mario Bros is a surprise hit, at least to me, I mean what happened to the world?
I bet there will be more video game adoption in the future.
Maybe it's just you that sucks now. Just another cynical fat fannerd that DOESN'T realize the movie industry has changed and the days of 1 billion in ticket sales is over. It has nothing to do with the quality of the films...so just STFU and go watch 1980's films and relive your youth till the end of your days.
shareDidn't Maverick just make a billion?
shareThat was last year.
shareMario Bros. just made a billion too.
shareHaha. Well I guess I need to change my statement and say those days are coming to an end. π That film got worse reviews than Indy. John wick 4 got good reviews and made less than half of Mario bros. It only cost 100 mill to make so it's considered a success. Indy cost a bundle so it will be considered a flop even if it breaks even or makes what John wick made. I personally don't concern myself with what a film makes for me to like it of course. This is the last Indy so it really doesn't matter since it won't have any bearing on an Indy 6 .. π
share>> This is the last Indy so it really doesn't matter since it won't have any bearing on an Indy 6 .. π <<
So was the third film. It's the "last" Indy film... until someone in Hollywood decides to squeeze more money out of the franchise.
Dude there is ZERO....and I mean ZERO, NADA,ZILCH chance that Harrison Ford will ever play Indy in a feature length film again. Reboot the character maybe. But I will be way too old to care at that point ..
shareYeah, and there was "ZERO" chance Jamie Lee Curtis would EVER play Laurie Strode in a Halloween movie again after 2002. After 25 years, she was DONE with the franchise (after previously being "DONE" with the franchise in 1981 and "killed" off after THAT movie) and her character was OFFICIALLY "killed off" AGAIN, on screen, at the very START of Halloween: Resurrection, to ensure Laurie would "never be back". It was her "farewell" to the "fans", as they stated over and over again in 2002. See Jamie Lee as Laurie ONE LAST TIME!
Until it wasn't, in 2018 they revived the franchise YET AGAIN, reconned the events of Halloween: Resurrection as having "never happened" AGAIN, paid Jamie Lee Curtis a zillion bucks to entice her to return AGAIN, and had Michael Myers running around chasing her with a knife, AGAIN.
Actors OLDER than Ford have returned as their iconic characters after previously vowing they were "done" with the role, like Leonard Nimoy (age 83) as Spock in the JJ movies, or Christopher Lee (age 90) as Sauron in the Middle Earth movies. Ellen Burstyn is about to join that club as well, she's 89 and some greedy Hollywood execs are bring her back for a new Exorcist movie.
Canonically, according to the Young Indiana Jones Adventures, Indy is alive and well at age 93. So mark my words, if Harrison Ford is still alive and healthy enough to appear on screen age 90, and some greedy Hollywood exec wants to rape our childhood some more, they will bring him back for Indy 6!
Yeah I get that. But there's no way he could lead an action movie again like Indy and do any action. Indy at 93 ate dinner and reminisced about the past. I think the most exciting thing he did at 93 was drive some guys lifted 4x4. He was pretty excited about driving it... π
Maybe this will be the summer that will finally cause Hollywood to change.
share