We've had a cracking year – proper stellar. But not every movie can be a hit. These are the releases that landed with a splat and just didn't make the bucks expected.
Scroll right past the notes below if you don't care about what qualifies as a flop.
Note: the listed production budget for a movie typically won't include its marketing spend, so it's still possible for a film to be considered a 'flop' even if it made back more than its production budget. Therefore we've had to make some judgment calls on what makes the list, including titles that took less than expected or failed critically as well as those that were out-and-out financial disasters.
We're not including low-budget indies (because you're not a big flop if you cost buttons in the first place) or titles which got a limited release and generated their main revenue outside of theatres. It's also worth bearing in mind that the higher the budget, the higher the expected return – so a $20m film which makes $40m isn't bad while a $200m movie which makes $220m would be considered a big failure.
Another note: This year featured some franchises and franchise starters that were flops despite looking like they made quite a bit of money on paper. These include Assassin's Creed, The Mummy, Baywatch and Transformers: The Last Knight. Last Knight took $522m on a budget of $217m, which might look respectable, but for a Transformers movie that's rubbish, given the last two Transformers movie both took over $1 billion.
We're not ranking them. It's just too difficult, accounting-wise.
Live by Night
This crime drama based on a Dennis Lehane novel and directed by Ben Affleck came out to no fanfare. Released right in the middle of awards season, it received a total of zero major nominations and was liked by neither critics nor audiences. If the estimates are correct, the production budget was $108m, while worldwide takings were an insulting $22.7m. Ooof, that's got to hurt.
Patriot's Day
Despite having the word 'Patriot' in the title and being based on the real-life events surrounding the Boston Marathon bombing, response to Patriot's Day was muted. It wasn't that the reviews were bad, more that no one went to see this movie, directed by Peter Berg, the man who sank Battleship. It took $48m on a budget of $45m.
A Cure for Wellness
[youtube ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF1rLFCdewU&t=3s[/youtube]
Gore Verbinski might have made a packet with the Pirates movie but that didn't translate to this bloated high-concept vanity project. It looked like a poor man's Shutter Island, but goodness, was it a whole lot sillier. Dane DeHaan plays the businessman out to find a colleague who's holed up in a European spa. Made for $40m, it took just $27m. Verbinski's got form when it comes to flops – he made The Lone Ranger. Let's hope his mojo returns in time for Gambit.
CHiPs
[youtube ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IfqqUTW-i4&t=1s[/youtube]
Horribly misguided TV spin-off that wanted to be 21 Jump Street but managed none of its charm. CHiPs made $26.8m off a budget of $25m. Do not expect a sequel.
Free Fire
[youtube ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDD3I0uOlqY&t=2s[/youtube]
Director Ben Wheatley made his name with low-budget independent films, while this crime caper had a budget of $10m – most of which, we imagine, must have gone on the excellent high-profile ensemble cast. Reviews were mixed, audiences were scarce. It took just $1.8m worldwide.
Ghost in the Shell
Surrounded by controversy from the start with the casting of Scarlett Johansson as the lead in this adaptation of the manga, Ghost in the Shell was shiny but hollow. It was a complicated but cold high-concept sci-fi which looked nice but appealed neither to fans of the original nor newcomers. It took $169.8m from a $110m budget.
King Arthur: Legend of the Sword
[youtube ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SX9y5JPuRHY&t=2s[/youtube]
Massive shocker: audiences did not turn out in droves to see Guy Ritchie's take on the Arthurian legend starring Charlie Hunnam and David Beckham – it tanked, taking $148.7m from a $175m budget. Originally Ritchie claimed this would be a six-film series. How's that working out for you, Guy?
The Dark Tower
Made for $60m, this very long-awaited Stephen King adap took just $111.8m at the box office, despite starring bankers Idris Elba and Matthew McConaughey. At least we reckon they didn't spend heaps on marketing – this movie seemed to appear and then disappear without trace.
mother!
[youtube ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpICoc65uh0&t=8s[/youtube]
To be fair to Darren Aronofsky, we can't imagine he ever thought his baby-eating Biblical allegory was going to bag him the big dollarz. He'd have been right – it took $44.5m on a budget of $33m. Neither the controversy factor nor the casting of Jennifer Lawrence could resurrect it from the dead.
Blade Runner 2049
Ridley Scott's original Blade Runner was a box-office flop at release so it's perhaps only fitting that his 35-years-later sequel should also bomb. In the states it took $91.4m against a budget of $150m, only vaguely boosted by worldwide takings lifting it to a total of $258m. Maybe Scott will do multiple home ents releases and make up for ticket sales there?
The Snowman
An adaptation of a best-selling novel, starring Michael Fassbender in the lead, directed by the guy who made Let The Right One In – it certainly could have proved a hit. But it did not – largely, we assume, because it is a terrible, terrible film. It took $43m on a budget of $35m.
Only the Brave
This story of elite firefighters protecting a town from wildfire couldn't be more current, though sadly that didn't translate into box-office bucks, with the movie taking $22.5m from a $38m budget. The cast is good – Josh Brolin, Miles Teller and Jeff Bridges star – though Taylor Kitsch, who is apparently cursed after John Carter and Battleship, is also in there.
