Why is this movie such a bomb?

The opinion on this movie is very divided, it seems that half the people really don't like it and the other half do, this is pretty much reflected in it's IMDB rating.

I haven't seen it either but I think I'll enjoy it (if I ever get the opportunity to watch it-still no release date here). I can see why you don't like the look of it though. Having read the book, when the trailers started coming out, I was immediately a little worried, Focus Features were determined to promote it as an all out comedy which, even if they changed a few things, I knew it wouldn't be. I really think FF have really messed up tbh. A lot of people have also criticised the script, I've read some spoilers from the movie and there is one particular plot point that Karen Croner changed completely from the book and I really don't understand why she changed it.

This movie has issues, that much is clear BUT, although a lot of people didn't enjoy it, it's clear that a lot of people did. :-)

================================================================================
Just because YOU don't like something doesn't mean it is empirically not good.-Tina Fey

I have not read the book, and have not seen the movie, nor do I intend to, so I'm not going to comment on its quality. However, I would go beyond calling it just "poorly marketed". This might be one of the worst marketing jobs I've ever seen. Even my 21 year old sister, who loves Tina Fey and has since her early SNL/Mean Girls days, thinks it looks awful. Doesn't help that Paul Rudd can't, and never could, be a draw on his own.

Rudd's problem is that "his" movies have grossed over a billion dollars. Trouble is, he has never really hit one out of the water where he has been the sole male lead. The films he has been expected to carry are:

Our Idiot Brother (24 million on a 5 million budget)
Wanderlust (21 million on a 35 million budget)
This is 40 (81 million on a 35 million budget)
Admission (6 million thus far on a 13 million budget)

So his successes are Our Idiot Brother, which was a pretty big success, but in that indie-vein (decidedly NOT the feel of Admission's marketing) and This is 40 (which had Leslie Mann and whatever fuel was left in the Apatow machine and people roped because of the Knocked Up connection). Of course, he was close to being the lead in I Love You, Man, but America was riding pretty high on Jason Segel at the time, so it got a boost from him.

The nation's love affair with Tina Fey might be over as well, but that's not as sure a thing as Rudd just not being able to carry a film on his own.

My opinion on why this movie hasn't done so well;

(1) This movie was marketed as a comedy, there were some funny parts but I wouldn't consider it a comedy.

(2) Paul Rudd as the romantic lead. I like him, he's a charming guy, but he's much better in supporting roles.



"And she acted like I was teaching her about everything."

I did see it. It's just so bland. Very slow moving. Sometimes (not always) I feel that movies are better when you have that one crazy, funny, eccentric person to lighten the mood. When both leads are trying to be funny it just ruins it. Of course in a straight up comedy like Hangover, that's not the case. But in romantic comedies (I think that's what this is classified as), it just doesn't work for me. Just my opinion.

Absolutely terrible marketing. Comedies generally don't have the huge draw that most would expect them to (I'm always expecting high BO amounts for comedies than they get) but do have staying power (ie Bridesmaids, Ted) IF the consensus is that they really are funny.
But Admission just can't be sold as a comedy. I don't know of a single person who laughed, so not only did the comedy angle not work for it, but it got killed by word of mouth.

I liked it - kind of. I was expecting a comedy though so that definitely hurt my response to it.

If they marketed the film correctly that this is a drama with some romantic and semi-comedic moments, it would have done better. It also would have done better if they didn't try to sell it as a piece of sh!t - the trailers and posters imply that it is a really bad movie which we've seen a million times before. But it is better than that.

People are generally more receptive if the movie is the genre that it's supposed to be. I think that would have worked wonders for this film. They also could have gotten the mature female audience (an audience which has very few films marketed towards them) if they marketed the film the way it actually is.


My film reviews site: www.FilmGateReviews.com

Big Tina Fey and Paul Rudd fan the both of them. But there was nothing about the trailers that made me want to see this movie. And so much of the promotion for it seemed to be selling the appeal of the oh so affable stars that it made me feel that the studio didn't have much confidence in the film itself.

____________
When Barrett sang 'nocturne de rond' I though he said 'nocturnal blond'

Because it was TERRIBLE. Bad movies deserve such a fate.

uhmmmm the tv people actually have to pay to put it on tv.

its not really a flop if its got people waiting to see it on tv.