Jack the Giant Slayer Forum

Studios can't just glide along on the profits from their existing franchises: They need to create new blockbuster series. Sometimes it works: Last year's THE HUNGER GAMES is a perfect example. Other times, it fails spectacularly. Last year brought three of such bombs: JOHN CARTER, BATTLESHIP, and TOTAL RECALL. If you look at the numbers TOTAL RECALL looks to have lost the most money and BATTLESHIP was the one that the Razzies decided to pick on (it isn't actually a bad movie, by the way), but JOHN CARTER is the phrase that now signifies a colossal big budget failure. Do we have a new movie to take that title?

Yes, I am talking about JACK THE GIANT SLAYER. On paper, it probably looked good. It has a great cast, it is from the director of X-MEN and X2, and it has the same early March release date that made ALICE IN WONDERLAND pass a billion dollars in 2010. But with five days to go until its release date, things are looking terrible.

According to ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY, it is looking at a $25 million gross, which is lower that CARTER and BATTLESHIP opened to. That would be bad enough for a movie with a production budget of under $180 million, but factor into it how much Warner Bros. is spending on marketing. It was originally supposed to open last June, but they bumped it to 2013 for a variety of reasons (probably it just wasn't completed). Every week they release a new trailer and poster (like JOHN CARTER, then even changed the title part way though marketing from GIANT-KILLER to GIANT-SLAYER), which is the same last ditch effort they employed with GREEN LANTERN in 2011. And just look at how many commercial are running? There is no way a $25 million gross is going to pay those fees off!

Apparently (according to ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY, at least) the problem is that it has a PG-13 rating, but seems to be more family oriented. I guess the hope was to get both the CHRONICLES OF NARNIA and SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN audiences, but it appears they lost both.

Also, the following weeks are packed. Seven days later you get OZ: THE GREAT AND POWERFUL, which means a gigantic second weekend drop for JACK. Plus, the next month brings THE CROODS, OLYMPUS HAS FALLEN, and GI JOE: RETALIATION.

So, will this movie surprise, or will it be the first big bomb of 2013?

I don't think the title change is all that worrisome, not to point of John Carter "of Mars", but it was the shift from June of last year to spring of this year. I'm all for new big blockbuster franchises, but I just wish they didn't cost so much to make. The beauty of the success of The Hunger Games was its budget was below 100 million without marketing and made a huge sum of cash at the box office (it was one of the few successes of last year that made more domestically than its international intake).

@RockinKemosabe: I think March is a fantastic time to open. In addition to 300, ALICE IN WONDERLAND, and THE HUNGER GAMES, there has been THE LORAX and HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON. Of course the best opening in the world won't help if people aren't interesting in the movie, which seems to be the case with JACK.

You're right about the cost. These big blockbuster pictures cost so much they need to pull in incredible numbers to get a sequel.

It is hard to tell with the international market surpassing America as the means in which most movies make their money. Plus it is technically the first movie of the Summer/Spring Blockbuster season so I expect it to at the very least break even when all is said and done. Also John Carter was not a bomb and eventually turned a profit just like Waterworld.

I've noticed that DirectTv (my television provider) has been heavily advertising this movie by showing brief trailers of the film. I'm looking forward to it because I loved the X-Men movies that Bryan Singer made.

Honestly, I don't think it will be a huge failure because, it will definitely attract some families this weekend. I just think it's going to need a lot of positive feedback from moviegoers for it to be successful at the box-office.

@Ghost_of_GhostDad said:

It is hard to tell with the international market surpassing America as the means in which most movies make their money. Plus it is technically the first movie of the Summer/Spring Blockbuster season so I expect it to at the very least break even when all is said and done. Also John Carter was not a bomb and eventually turned a profit just like Waterworld.

CARTER made back its production budget but it didn't even approach paying off marketing costs. Disney posted $200 million losses for that quarter.

It looks like it will be a duel between this movie and the Lone Ranger for biggest bomb of the year.

John Carter had a lot more hype and marketing money thrown at it (and turned out to be a good movie imo). So this is no John Carter.

I didn't even hear about this movie until a week or so ago.

@FinalDasa said:

John Carter had a lot more hype and marketing money thrown at it (and turned out to be a good movie imo). So this is no John Carter.

I didn't even hear about this movie until a week or so ago.

i think the fact that you didn't hear about this until a week ago demonstrates my point. This has a budget well over $100 million. It was meant to be an event movie. And Warner Brothers has put a lot of money into marketing it to.

I agree JOHN CARTER wasn't that bad. It wasn't great, but it was decent.

I just can't help but think that this movie came out a year or two too late. It has missed both the 3D craze AND is coming in at the tail end of a salvo of "new and darker fairy tale" movies (Mirror, Mirror, Snow White and the Huntsman, Hansel and Gretel, et al). With those two strikes against it (on top of the fact it looks pretty generic) I can't see this movie turning much of a profit, if any.