by Seán McGovern
If 2017 is showing any consistency in audience tastes over the last few years it's that no amount of star power, budget or marketing gimmicks can force audiences to buy tickets, with news that the US Memorial Weekend was the lowest grossing since 1999. I've been told variances of the rule that for every production budget on a blockbuster, you can expect the marketing budget to be half if not equal to that - meaning that managing to break even is still a loss.
The year is noticeable once again for some high profile box office casualties - King Arthur, Ghost in the Shell, Power Rangers, Baywatch, possibly Alien: Covenant and the latest Pirates of the Caribbean, which regardless of its #1 spot at the Box Office has a budget of $230m (!) to recoup and turn into profit.
There is plenty of speculation that the way we watch films is contributing to the losses, but how to explain Star Wars, Guardians of the Galaxy and the Marvel Universe - huge financial successes that tick many of the same boxes as the recent failures? If we like to believe that audiences are more selective or that we truly consider the reviews, then why do the Transformers films keep getting made? (seriously please someone explain)
Full figures (and reader speculation welcome) after the jump...
KING ARTHUR
Budget: $175m Box Office to Date: $120
In its favor: Guy Richie's particular directorial style, the potential crowning of Charlie Hunman as a true screen star and King Arthur being neither sci-fi nor superhero gave it the chance to stand out.
Hindrances: An enormous budget places immense pressure on a film to succeed, and the shifting release dates from July 2016, to February 2017, to March, to May shows a complete lack of faith in the project. Perhaps swords and sorcery just does not appeal to audiences at the moment.
GHOST IN THE SHELL
Budget: $110m Box Office to Date: $169m
In its favor: A very popular and well respected original source, a pre-made demographic, ScarJo: Queen of Sci-Fi, the 3D factor and admittedly sumptuous visuals.
Hindrances: Controversy surrounding the casting of a non-Asian actress and the reports of making Johansson appear Asian, the philosophical core of the original was skimmed off, generally very dour with characters hard to care about.
POWER RANGERS*
Budget: $100m Box Office to Date: $140
In its favour: Nostalgia and a pre-made audience of millennials, Elizabeth Banks (imho), removing the kitsch factor of the original series while keeping the silliness (Rita Repulsa eats gold. Gold.), a new young cast.
Hindrances: The kitsch factor of the original series was what made it so loved and fans of the original likely didn't need a reintroduction. Origin stories are neither new nor exciting.
*It's being reported that a sequel may get produced, not due to tickets but to toy sales.
BAYWATCH
Budget: $69m Box Office to Date: $28.5m
In its favor: The R-rated Risk - adult content for an adult audience, bankable and gorgeous stars like Dwayne Johnson and Zac Efron, nostalgia of the original TV show.
Hindrances: Baywatch was always a guilty pleasure and maybe audiences didn't really feel the need to be reintroduced to it, TV adaptations are increasingly high risk with 21 Jump Street more an exception than a rule, the R-rating prevented a younger audience from seeing it - who probably should have been the intended audience to begin with.
ALIEN: COVENANT
Budget: $97m Box Office to Date: $160m
In its favor: The Alien title attached - not just Prometheus this time, Ridley Scott, the legacy of the previous films, the Xenomorph we all know and love.
Hindrances: A ponderous script, characters no-one really cared about, over-exposure with the alien itself removes the fear factor that was only unique in the original. There may still be time to recoup losses.