Lionsgate execs today are despondent as they try to figure out what went wrong for Conan The Barbarian to only earn a dismal $10.5M from 3,015 theaters. “It’s one of those weekends that gives me a stomach ache,” one Lionsgate exec told me Friday night. “It’s a headscratcher, but it won’t kill us.” But they also know that with Carl Icahn back breathing down Lionsgate’s mane by buying up company shares, and the annual stockholders meeting scheduled for Sept. 13, this is a really lousy time for this secondary studio to have such a box office bomb. Over the last two weeks, Icahn has acquired 756,840 shares in Lionsgate, growing his ownership to 33.2% from 32.6%, presumably in his so-far-unsuccessful effort to gift his son Brent with a Hollywood studio. Last year, Icahn tried but failed to seize control and, after a brief respite, he’s trying yet again, all the while carping about Lionsgate’s profligate management and moviemaking strategy. Here’s more ammunition for him. First off, being in business with Avi Lerner’s Nu Image/Millennium film company is a dicey proposition at best. Especially when this reboot cost nearly $90M, which makes this weekend’s opening disastrous even if Lionsgate’s exposure was mitigated by the co-production and co-release. Not even spreading the buzz that previous Conan the Barbarian Arnold Schwarzenegger was treated to a private screening and “really liked it” helped box office, which didn’t come near to even Lionsgate’s low-ball expectation of $15M from a wide release.
This R-rated 3D reboot of the 1930s Robert E. Howard original source material, portraying the character as the Cimmerian warrior, was supposed to have a devoted fanbase. And tracking showed strong interest from African-American and Hispanic male moveiegoers. There seemed to be a ton of interest when Deadline’s Mike Fleming broke first news of the remake. That is, until Conan was cast. Even Lionsgate admits that the film absolutely hinged on finding the right Conan, and fanboys reacted horribly to then virtual unknown Jason Momoa even though he has since become a break-out star from his role on HBO’s Game of Thrones. Problem: “There’s so much history with this character and this brand they needed someone who could both really ‘own’ Conan (making him feel relatable for this generation), but also who offered continuity with what fans already know and love. Because there’s no competing with Arnold, Jason’s performance bypasses all of the comparisons, playing the character in a very different way than Arnold did and instead taking inspiration from the written source,” a Lionsgate exec emailed me. I happen to think the studios should have bet on a wrestling The Rock-style star with a ready-made fanbase.
The concensus among Avi Lerner and Joe Drake, who had successfully released The Expendables together, is that Conan The Barbarian didn’t have the “brand equity” they hoped it would. The pair had convinced themselves that the brand was ripe for a reboot and that the fans were ready for it, so they rescued the film from the major development purgatory it had been caught in for so long. The backstory is that Paradox Entertainment bought the rights in 2002 when the brand was hitting rock-bottom, with a bevy of licensed products in the marketplace but also quality and consistency issues at every turn. The duo’s first move was to take everything off the market. Then they connected with select partners to introduce the rehabilitated Conan via just three laser-focused licensed products that appealed to a core demo of young adult males (comics, toys, and a computer game). Marketing generated considerable awareness, with a significant Comic-Con presence (which included: talent appearances, bar invasion promotions, interactive fan experiences at the booth). They targeted Hispanic outreach with Momoa traveling to Miami. They also released an online redband clip to reassure young males fearing this reboot would be sanitized. But it was all for naught. In the end, the execution was just poor, poor, poor. Rotten Tomatoes showed only 26% positive reviews. The director was remake specialist Marcus Nispel (Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Friday the 13th) and the credited screenwriters were Thomas Dean Donnelly, Joshua Oppenheimer, Sean Hood, and Andrew Lobel.
For more estimates listed by title, see box office results here...Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.


Dwayne Johnson was the only way this film was going to work and even with him you would have needed to give him a bad-ass villain because as much as I like him he hasn’t proven *yet* to be a full fledged box office star. And Fast Five is as much Vin Diesel as it is him.
Johnson hasn`t proven yet to be a full fledged boxoffice star because he`s terrible at picking scripts. What made Arnie stand out were iconic roles in iconic movies (Terminator, T2, Predator, Conan the Barbarian) and some well-liked/fondly remebered antries such as Total Recall and True Lies. Goodwill from a popular movie/character can have a long reach. Diesel had that after Pitch Black but squandered it quickly especially with the terrible, ill-begotten Chronicals of Riddick.
A better actor would have helped but the results would have been close to the same.
THIS MOVIE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE MARKETED LIKE ONE OF THE BIGGEST MOVIES OF ALL TIME: THE LORD OF THE RINGS.
Instead they blew it by going for primarily an action trailer on TV with rock music that doesn’t even belong in the genre. AGAIN, CONAN’S WORLD IS LIKE THE LORD OF THE RINGS YET THE PEOPLE WHO RELEASED THIS FILM WENT THE LOW ROAD IN TRYING TO APPEAL TO COLLEGE KIDS. When they should have tried to appeal to a BROADER audience.
Let this be a lesson: If you have a fantasy genre like Lord of the Rings then treat it with the same dignity! Since, more people would have been open to Conan if they had made an R-Rated version with the same level of story/drama AND marketing of Lord of the Rings.
LORD OF THE RINGS: 4TH BIGGEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME WITH OVER A BILLION DOLLARS IN EARNINGS and they couldn’t even use it as an example. Stupid. This could have been the opportunity to give the public the R-Rated version of Lord of the Rings, with blood and sex. But, they forgot the important ingredient of quality in story and quality in marketing.
I don’t actually think it’s the actor’s fault, or the choice of him. The script it is reported was never finished before shooting. There is no way I’ll pay, I’ll wait for dvd. I am assuming there aren’t enough pythons, ancient wizards, frothy women from the Frazetta paintings. In a better world, the trailer would have had lots of Lord of The Rings style moments – set in a desert – with more sex and blood. Anyway, Conan’s really a thief in the books, not a buff warrior. And those pounding drums. Where were the pounding drums?
er….Conan IS buff in the books, Robert e. Howard goes into great detail about his massive arms, broad chest . etc.
The script wasn’t finished because they hired Sean Hood to add some authentic REH touches to an otherwise hopeless story. This script doctoring is very common in the industry, and should be no reason to miss a film.
Its not marketing, for you’re conveying that if you inundate you’ll get enough suckers under the big-top tent!; come on PT Barnum you still had a good act to display.
The reason it just didn’t flop but failed is first, the unfilled movie premise; the script lines; the over-use of computer graphics; the mediocrity of the actors performance; the “over-the-top” approach. Just too much as the movie was muddled from the outset by cluttered background and gore. Guess what, 10-15 minutes into the movie other things stated, you knew just where it was going and how it was going to end, so why stay.
They should take a lesson from earlier movies where the actor could be understood, followed and enjoyed because the actor was acting and if you lost the audio and it came back you still could follow and enjoy during those… interruptions.
By the way, everybody today is a “star” or a “diva” whats with that
This movie SUCKED because no one is interested in Conan the Barbarian. It’s so 80′s.
Actually Conan is so 1930′s when he was written.
The movie flopped because it was poorly written & edited (it was a real mess). Acting was fine enough – casting was good enough (although to be true to the books you do need a much larger conan)
In the end the story was just not strong enough – I think they would have done better if they had taken one of the 30 or so stories and embellished on them.
There seems to be plenty of interest for Conan comics, games and RPGs, judging by the fact Conan’s one of Dark Horse’s top selling titles, Age of Conan is still running even after many of its contemporaries have shut down their servers, and the Mongoose RPG released dozens of supplementary source books…
No, it sucked because of the shitty production and direction. There’s plenty of interest in the Character, they failed to deliver.
Dwayne Johnson? Tooth-fairy the Barbarian????
At one time they were discussing Vin Diesel as Conan. I don’t know what it would have cost in terms of money and control, but casting Diesel would have been worth it. This version still cost $80 million and they were shooting in cheap Bulgaria. Momoa and a $20 million budget would have been fine.
Diesel? That would have made the film an even bigger bomb, if possible.
The original Conan was fun because back in 1982, these massive behemoth cut roid-heads were still a rarity. The only place you saw them was on Wide World Of Sports. And Arnie was, literally, head and shoulders above all of them. Go look at some of his Mr. Universe appearances. He was massive, even by bodybuilding standards. Seeing him up on the screen had a very “holy shit, look at that monster!” feel.
Today, almost 3 decades later, they’re common place. You see these people in movies, TV shows, even commercials. Jason Momoa is a big dude, no question. But is he really that unusual now? Does he stand out from a pumped up The Rock, or the swarms of Orcs running through the LOTR movies, or the warriors who ran through 300, shirtless, swinging huge swords and lopping people’s heads off?
The uniqueness of see some MASSIVE dude chopping off people’s head is over. No actor would have saved this.
I think you pretty much nailed it. Sometimes a movie comes at the right time with the right star and you cant recapture what made it the sensation it was. Arnie WAS Conan for better or worse.
And Arnie even had to LOSE weight for the role.
He was massive.
For a supposed rarity there were a hell of a lot of bodybuilders-cum-”actors” starring in Conan knockoffs and contemporaries like Ator, Yor, Deathstalker, Beastmaster and more. I really don’t think Arnold’s physique was the pure defining factor.
Arnold had a rare combination of freakish physique and real, personal charm. However, I don’t agree this doomed the remake.
Instead of trying to be bigger than modern action movies, Conan should have been different. Maybe something really dark – something that would leave people talking about it. The story that was filmed is so generic… so forgettable.
Dan you are totally right about Jason’s body. He’s big, but I’ve seen it all too many times before. However, there are real bodybuilders out there who could have provided the ‘wow factor’ Conan was missing. Why not cast someone unknown for the role?
I say put a modern day roid freak who can act (I think we can do better than the bar set by Momoa) and make him an unstoppable killing machine in a disturbingingly bleak world.
Vin Diesel as Conan? Is this thinking outside the box?
Still waiting and hoping for the autopsy report on Cowboys and Aliens — the most expensive bomb of 2011 and one that impacts three separate studios Universal, Dreamworks and Paramount.
YES! I want that report too! Especially considering that C&A bombing scared Disney off The Lone Ranger.
Ditto, we want the C&A report!
How about next time you start with a good script? Script was boring and dull from the get go. Then actually hire an exciting director.
Maybe go produce Milius’ Conan: Crown of Iron script.
I agree with you, Casey. I love how these execs and studios love to make these kinds of failures into some type of scientific equation. While I agree with the enormous amounts of money, that there should be some careful analysis and performance metrics involved, it’s really not that complicated.
Start with a good story. Tell a good story. Respect the audience. Case closed.
Conan would have succeeded if they didn’t start production with only 12 pages of script and relied solely on the “brand name” to carry it.
+1 for crown of iron. arnie’s old enough for it now.
I agree – While I did like the movie overall the story was pretty pedantic.
I did like that first scene of the young Conan a lot – I just wish they could have captured that kind of raw emotion in the story after he was older.
Really? They’re scratching their heads that a not-so-great and hardly followed movie remade with a star nobody’s ever heard of directed by a guy whose one big hit wasn’t fully his own didn’t make huge box office?
With that kind of thinking bankruptcy looks pretty logical.
So true – I mean, when you have a Character like “Conan”, don’t you think you need an Actor who brings some kind of excitement to the role? Why hire a “No-Name” – I mean, at least hire a “Sort-of-have-a-Name”. Craps – I wonder how “Superman” is going to do?
I don’t know, hiring a “no name” to play Wolverine worked out pretty nicely, didn’t it?
He wasnt a no name
Sam Worthington/Avatar, Chris Hemsworth/Thor; those movies were successful on the strength of the material and didn’t need the star power.
Its the end of the summer. In the real world, an economic Holocaust is in its third year. Movies are $11-14 bucks. Pop corn is $8!!! You don’t need an Autopsy to know why the public did not show up for these three pieces of shit.
I think the issue, similar to what happened with Green Lantern, is execs thinking people want to see something just because it exists. Did anyone want a Green Lantern movie? Not really. Then when it actually came, the few people that watched it found it to be cheesy and lame and negative word-of-mouth killed it. Cheesy and lame is fine as long as people have an affinity for the thing to begin with. I don’t know anyone who has an affinity for Conan the Barbarian.
>Cheesy and lame is fine as long as people have an affinity for the thing to begin with
Quint was an important character in the original JAWS. When they reboot JAWS, they need to handle the Quint character with care. I think they should make the new Quint a woman. Maybe Sharon Stone.
“When they reboot JAWS…”??
You’re just taking it for granted that they’re going to? Do you have some kind of insider information about this, Mark, because I hope to hell you are just talking for effect here, or else are just plain wrong.
I do.
And you could have said the same thing about Iron Man, which was a massive hit.
THE MARKETING ON CONAN SUCKED. IRON MAN’S CAMPAIGN WORKED.
Iron Man, possibly yes, but I think Robert Downey Jr. is the reason that was such an initial hit. A lot of my teenage girl friends wanted to see the second one just because he was in it.
I did not know that RDJ was such a hit with the teenage girl demographic. I find that a little frightening.
“I don’t know anyone who has an affinity for Conan the Barbarian.”
And I don’t know anyone who has an affinity for Twilight, but that doesn’t mean there’s quite obviously a fanbase out there.
You don’t get out much then.
“They targeted Hispanic outreach with Momoa traveling to Miami.”
That is hilarious. Like targeting Canadians by traveling to Cancun. Lions Gate is poorly run and now more than ever you need a star. It doesn’t matter how much of a “breakout” star Momoa is on HBO. Normal people don’t know who he is.
also latino americans are not a monolithic group. and even if momoa looks latino, isn’t he from hawaii?
this was yet another hollywood film with a metrosexual male cast in the lead. men and women don’t respond to these guys. that’s reality.
What are you talking about? Most Male Stars are “Metrosexuals” – I don’t want to name names cuz that would put them on the spot, but c’mon if the weren’t they’d be Character Actors.
I donno, I let a ladyfriend give me a makeover once, cut my hair, tell me which clothes to throw out, what have you. I got laid more often during those 6 months than I ever did before or since.
Unfortunately, the whole thing was too high maintenance, so when the hair putty she bought me ran out and my hair grew longer, I just kinda went back to being a punk. What can I say, I missed my Doc Marten’s.
Point being, women certainly do respond to the whole metro thing. That said, Momoa is far from metro.
“Now more than ever you need a star”..???
I thought we were entering a “post-movie star” era where “marquee casting” isn’t as crucial anymore.
And I’m not sure last year’s CLASH OF THE TITANS had any big draws either, did it? But that was an epic scale fantasy reboot that made a ton of money, which is just further proof of William Goldman’s famous dictum that “Nobody knows anything.”
The recent CONAN reboot could easily have worked in its present form and we will never — ever — if we live to be a thousand — know precisely why it failed.
I didn’t know that “Clash Of the Titans” was considered a hit but if it was, then I think it’s a good comparison which all the commenters below wailing about “unnecessary remakes”, “the comic con crowd” and “3D ticket prices” (also, “good scripts” LOL) need to start factoring into their arguments. Even though I agree that “nobody knows anything” I don’t think we can give up on this one just yet. *There* are differences between Clash and Conan. A couple that spring to mind are the age ratings and release dates.
The sequels on its way and was huge hit. The movie cost 125M and made 490m world wide.
What do all three movies that tanked this weekend have in common? They were cheesy reboots of originally cheesy movies. Maybe, just maybe, Hollywood will get a clue and stop the recycling. Get some damn new ideas already.
They are all gone. All that’s left is to re-work existing ones into new directions.
Conan the Barbarian is a character who could easily support tons of story ideas because REH wrote him doing so many different things. There will always be a niche for his character in the movie world. All someone has to do is work The Year of the Dragon into a movie script. They could easily make a trilogy out of that one story.
I thought Momoa was fine in the movie. He played the role differently. It was closer to REH’s Conan than Arnold’s, which was more refined than animalistic. I took a positive view of the movie because I knew what to expect from the movie and got what I expected: Lots of gory deaths, lots of big bare breasts and an uncomplicated, straight-ahead story.
Conan! What is best in life?
To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.
It is really quite simple. Who wants to pay 15-20 for a 3D movie. As soon as the studios and chains figure that out, people will go to movies. Even so-so Conan or Fright Night ones.
That’s a silly comment. These films are also released simultaneously in 2D at a cheaper price. Still, nobody goes.
Nice try, but you’re just being a blatant 3D hater with nothing useful to say.
Some theaters seem to be releasing this just in 3D. If you aren’t sure you want to see the film, the extra cost might keep you away.
Wrong, a thousand times wrong. Many theaters only had it in 3d and the ones that didn’t were showing it on the crappy postage stamp-sized screens. That pretty much means it’s 3d or nothing. Jason Mamoa was terrific in the role but the script was awful and the 3d presentation was entirely unacceptable.
Perhaps qhere you live at is/was so.
However in many places the films are only on 3D screens.
Where I am, about half the 3D movies see one week of 2D screentime, then only the 3D remains. We won’t even talk bout the condition and size of those 2D acreens…
At the theater where I saw the movie there was one 2D showing a day. ONE. That was on the opening weekend, I just looked at the listings for said theater and even that is now gone. I agree totally with many here that think this movie on the whole stinks, but I think something Hollywood needs to realize is that in today’s economy forcing people to pay more $ just to see it in 3D is not IMO the best business move to make.
Well the problem certainly wasn’t Jason Momoa. He’s a sexy, charasmatic, likeable guy and totally believable action star whom could have been marketed as the next big thing. The problem was the D-list supporting cast and the decision to turn it into an over the top, Uwe Boll-style gorefest. The film had come off more Tarantino style gore, it would have been great. Or even just stuck to traditional big fun action. Instead it felt cliche, silly, and just plain stupid. And the lackluster marketing didn’t help. They relied too much on word of mouth from fanboys who’ve known about the movie being made for a couple years, and didn’t both to appea to the general masses.
Had they cast an A-list leading lady and strong supporting cast opposite Momoa, and had a great director and more marketing, this could have been a decent hit. But in general, overally, it really just wasn’t the right time for this project.
“The problem was the D-list supporting cast and the decision to turn it into an over the top, Uwe Boll-style gorefest.”
But fanboys who hang out on AICN and show up dressed as Yoda at SDCC want all movies to be hard R gorefests. Surely they are totally in touch with what masses want to see?
Ok, joking aside, great contribution to Authopsy Report, Me0w! This column and comments are going to be my most anticipated come Sunday.
couldn’t have said it any better.
everything about this movie (from the embarrassing supporting cast, to the marketing) screamed third-rate, direct-to-DVD.
i don’t know where all that $90 million went but it sure as hell didn’t go into this movie. Kick-Ass, with it’s $35 million budget looked better.
You’re wrong. Momoa is exactly why the movie failed. He looks like a Fabio wanna-be, which is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what fans of the original would want cast in the lead.
Sure, it would have been nice if it had a decent story as well, but the girly looking Momoa was a horrible choice for this film.
Fans of the original weren’t the target audience though, because that’s not a lot of people. The entire movie going public over the age of 17 should have been marketed to. And Momoa certainly can appeal to the masses. The action and a super sexy A-list female costar should have drawn in the men, and Momoa should have drawn in the women. Every interview I’ve seen this guy do with a female, they swoon. He’s got an “it” factor and is very likable to boot, a family man, etc.
This movie just failed in every way: horrible script, poor directing style, bad casting, and out of touch marketing. Like someone else said above, it was a straight to DVD production with a tentpole budget. And thus, EPIC FAIL.
Did this really need an autopsy? It’s was a moronic idea from the start. The autopsy should be “Why Conan failed?” It should be “Why do any of these idiots have jobs that don’t require them to ask the customers if they want fires with their order?”
As one Bill to another, you are on point.
They should have gotten the guy who played Conan The Librarian in UHF. Then this movie would have been a hit.
The fact that any of them thought this pile up stood a chance shows you why they should post their keys through the letter box and not go to work tomorrow. Get someone on these projects with love, passion and talent.
Love it love it LOVE it that we’re reading three autopsy reports on wide-releases that are remaked, re-booted, part 4 in a sickly franchise and in 3D. These films sucked and they bombed.
Meanwhile an ADULT DRAMA starring — oh my God! — middle-aged African American women! is cleaning house and raking in the green. Oh, by the way, it’s a great movie that someone actually put some thought into making. Maybe they thought a little more about character and story than how to court the fanboys at ComiCon.
Time to wake the fvck up Hollywood.
THIS comment! Yes!!!
” Maybe they thought a little more about character and story than how to court the fanboys at ComiCon.”
Quoted for life!
If we’ve truly arrived at a point when the ONLY significant choices in movie theaters are a 3D rebootquel that no one asked for OR a vapid book-club drama about how magically-enlightened white people invented the Civil Rights movement by teaching black maids how to stand up for themselves; we’re in worse trouble than ANYONE thinks.
“The Help” and “Conan” are both artless, disposable, formulaic, pandering wastes of time – the only thing of substance seperating the two is that the audience that “The Help” panders to lapped it up; while the audience for “Conan” said ‘no thanks, this looks like crap!’ and watched the monkey movie again.
And RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES treated it’s Ape characters with more respect than THE HELP treated it’s Black characters.
And RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES treated it’s Ape characters and their world with more respect than CTB 2011 treated Conan or his world.
The Rock’s “ready-made fanbase” hasn’t exactly come out for his leading man roles. His non-kids flick leading roles have opened at around 16 million and he probably would have cost A LOT more than a newcomer like Momoa.
The bottom line is that Conan (like Fright Night) was an 80′s film that nobody besides fanboys really were all that fired up about updating. Also, if you take out the iconic actor from the lead, then there’s really no reason to redo it at all. It’s like remaking Rambo without Stallone.
“The bottom line is that Conan (like Fright Night) was an 80?s film that nobody besides fanboys really were all that fired up about updating.”
And yet Planet of the Apes hasn’t been a blip on the cultural landscape since 2001. Meanwhile, Conan’s been one of Dark Horse’s top selling and critically acclaimed series, the MMORPG’s still standing where many MMOs have folded, the RPG has multiple sourcebooks out, and the original 80-year-old stories are still being reprinted by many different companies.
Conan was in better shape for a film than Planet of the Apes, but clearly, quality won out over the end, as people would rather see a good Planet of the Apes than a terrible Conan.
At my usual theater, there wasn’t even an option for 2D. So that was a big turn off for me. Are distributers, producers really that dumb!? They just don’t get it.
Also, I think they also need to stay away from Comic-Con. They need to reach out to a broader audience, not just fanboys and girls.
The arrogance of movie executives who think they can easily replace the genius writing and directing skills of John Milius by just hiring hacks and get the same result. These executives obviously have no clue about the creative process.
I heard they started production on this film with only 18 pages of script done. The people who greenlit this move do not belong in the movie business.
not only that, they allowed the talent to discuss the fact that there were only 18 pages finished, on camera, during the press junket!
Don’t forget that Oliver Stone shared written by credit on it.
It’s a glorified B-movie. It’s actually a fairly enjoyable B-movie. I liked it for the campy little ride that it was. But it sure as hell shouldn’t have cost $90m. Not with that cast. I think Momoa is a great fit, but no one in their right mind should expect him to be able to headline a blockbuster at this point in his career.
Yeah. The thing is, why the hell did Nu Image and Lionsgate pour close to $90M in this film. At the most it should’ve been half that, with a better, completed script.
I really don’t get the hate for Momoa. Anyone who’s re-watched the 1982 original recently and how wooden the Governator was in that — it wasn’t that hard to top. Not to mention Momoa actually looked the part, and he had presence. It’s a shame the script didn’t do the books justice.
At least he has “Game of Thrones” as a reliable back-up plan.
Spoiler alert: Momoa’s character was killed off by the end of season one of Game of Thrones.
Mamoa has a backup? As I recall, he DIED on Game of Thrones. No recurring role there ;-p
“At least he has “Game of Thrones” as a reliable back-up plan.”
…yeah.
Yeah, “Game of Thrones” is a pretty excellent back up plan for Momoa. He and Sean Bean can rest easy until the ratings dip…!
Uh, Momoa’s character died at the end of the first season, so no.
“No one knows anything.”
There are no more TRULY original stories — whatever — but there certainly ARE original ways to tell those classic stories other than the soulless “reboot/remake” we’re regurgitating on the movie-going public (Conan looked like nothing more than something that might be fun on a PS3).
Execs always have and always will try to “figure the audience out” with closed door meetings calculating statistics, demographics and ticket sales (now with or w/o 3D) and no one has the balls to risk termination and say “We can’t. Let’s just present the best product possible.”
But at the end of the day, ticket sales will dictate content. It might take a while (We can be pretty hard of hearing), but when the shareholders want to know why our $200M rebooted remake of CHINATOWN with Taylor Lautner and Elizabeth Banks did less than that character piece written and directed by that first timer for under ten, SOMEONE will need to provide an “answer”.
Name a character driven flick made for under ten that outgrosses the average tent-pole movie. You can’t because the don’t exist. Juno – which was made for about 17 mil all in, nominated for Best Pic and had a ton of buzz – it made 231 mil worldwide – while the crappy, poorly reviewed Fantastic Four movie made 330 mil – that’s why they keep making those films.
Yeah…but Juno made 13.5x its’ budget and Fantastic Four cost 100 million, so it made 3.3x its’ budget. the ROI of Juno is vastly superior.
Of course, most low-budget character movies don’t do Juno business, whereas most middling tent poles do make a couple hundred million. So, consistency and ancillary sales are really the reason.
But at the end of the day, I wouldn’t be surprised if Juno were more profitable than many tent poles.
Whatever you’re smoking bill please pass it to the left.
JUNO was made for 7M and grossed 140M domestically. FANTASTIC FOUR was made for 100M for a gross of 150M. Seems like you might be bad at math so I’ll do that part for you and tell you that’s a return on investment of about 150% vs. 2,000%.
I am so sick of hearing there are no original stories! There are tons and TONS. Is just Hollywood that refuses to even consider anything original and that just keeps cranking out the same old CRAP.
Conan is not a genre that interests me particularly, nor am I into muscle-bound guys. But the original had a great theme that no one’s mentioned and that’s still a good one today: the mesmerizing intimidating power of cults, religions and superstitions – and overcoming that. Did this reboot have anything equivalent? I still enjoy the old Conan because of its theme.
I will keep saying this until the money-grab 3D fad fades away… people see the marketing for a movie coming out in 3D and unless it’s Avatar or Transformers… they avoid it. This is an economic depression people… The public can watch all the movies they want via Netflix on the big screen they bought with their home equity four years ago for $8. Why would they pay $15 – $20 per person (well over $100 including snacks for a whole family) in major cities to see ANY 3D movie? I saw Captain America in 2D and completely enjoyed it… stop 3Ding our wallets to death, Hollywood!!
AMEN! And as an added bonus, not only do we elect to see movies in 2d, but making them in 3d costs more money, thus requiring them to make more money to break even.
Silly filmmakers, gimmicks are for rubes.
it all starts with a good script, and Josh Oppenheimer & Tom Donnelly’s script was not.
Could the problem be that the people making decisions are largely B-School douche-tards who know lots about ‘tracking’ and ‘brand equity’ but very little about film making and creativity?
Bueller?
^ This.
What went wrong is very obvious, even if LGF execs scratch their heads:
Avi Lerner and Joe Drake went wrong.
Conan Properties Inc. have had great success relaunching Conan in comics, games and toys by completely ignoring every version of Conan except the original and only true Conan by Robert E. Howard. That included ignoring EVERY LAST DETAIL of what the Milius movie did to the character. This gave the character new life, and a new fanbase.
Millennium and LGF undermined this, and took the polar opposite approach. They overruled CPI’s wishes to stay true to Howard, and forced the movie into being a de facto remake of the Milius movie – which is incompatible with the literary Conan. This is what killed the screen story right there.
To top it off, LGF delivered the worst marketing campaign since Punisher: War Zone.
Milennium and LGF alone are responsible here.
Boom goes the dynamite.
You nailed it.
Kurt Busiek got it with the reboot in Dark Horse comics, echoing Robert E Howard and then Roy Thomas in the Marvel years – Conan is not just a brute bastard with a sword – he is a canny, calculating, clever, cocky SonOfaBitch. Ignoring that and going for the musclemania gorefest was suicide. Conan is actually compelling in print. Apparently doomed to never be so in film.
I’ve been waiting to find out whether this movie is what I want – nothing to do with the Milius crap, but rather a successful adaptation the original REH stories/Marvel comics. But sadly too few movie reviewers are even aware that Conan had any life before the Governator so I haven’t been able to get a sense of whether this movie is worth seeing. From your post, I see I shouldn’t bother. Thanks for the head’s up. Now I don’t have to feel bad that it’s a big fat bomb.
Yeah, sure, maybe the marketing was off, the story so-so, the 3D awful etc. The fact remains, as Niki pointed out, that either this mythical Conan fan-base that Paradox/CPI believes exists in the millions isn’t there or, if they are, they chose to boycott the film because it wasn’t up to their purist standards. If the fan base IS there, and boycotted the film, then they simply chose to cut off their noses to spite their faces as this essentially buries the franchise forever. Even if the film was not to their liking, by showing up for the film, they could have at least ensured an opportunity to see their hero in some future (hopefully better) incarnation. Not anymore. Now, there will be no future young fanbase clamoring for Conan – only the ageing one. Don’t forget, LOTR’s success (sure the film was infinitely better) actually got young audiences to go back and read the books, reanimating what many thought too old a franchise – because the fan base showed up. Conan will not have that opportunity. For today’s generation, it will be relegated to the Buck Rogers memory dust bin. It also spells another nail in the REH body of work after the disaster of “Solomon Kane.”
It took 30 years to reboot the film because every studio it was shopped to didn’t believe that the fanbase was really there. Or that Arnold could not be replaced. Both points were proven. I doubt even anyone will even venture again into the cheesy series arena again. It’s a sad day for Hyboria. Conan R.I.P.
People keep dissecting this failure and leaving out the fact that fans of the original did not want to see a Fabio-like actor in the lead role! Momoa turned off MANY, MANY, MANY fans to this remake. You can all bash the script and the marketing until the cows come home, but Momoa was the main problem. The moment people saw him they were like, “Yeah, I don’t think so.”
A REAL shame Conan is a wonderful charater and love the RHW BOOKS the movie was fun but not to loyal to the source books fans purist stayed away now i will never see a Conan RED NAILS OR QUEEN OF THE BLACK COAST OR HOUR OF THE DRAGON . THANKS ALOT PEOPLE. BTW JASON was good the cast game the SCRIPT NOT SO MUCH. SAD DAY.
I think Arnold could have been replaced. Momoa wasn’t the problem. I thought he was great but everything else was horrible. It didn’t feel like a Conan film.
I am one of the fan base- we exist, though I don’t know in what numbers because we don’t hang out in loincloths at Comic Con. Or maybe THEY do, but I don’t. Anyway, from the instant I heard about this project, I knew I wasn’t going to go- because it was obvious they were going to ignore the literature in true Hollywood style and make something “better”. Then when they started without a script, well, you get the picture…
There was an excellent “King Conan” script I read a while back that I would have seen in a heartbeat, and of course you could just go back to any of the great longer Conan stories such as “Red Nails” and trust the source material rather than changing it. Too much to ask I guess. Then again, maybe we are lucky- they could have done a mash-up with Conan appearing on Glee…
Like all comments seem to skew: the film wasn’t up to expecations (some even say awful). However, it is still the first Conan reboot in almost 30 years! That’s a generation. And no one showed up even to give condolences that our baby was still-born on the battlefield.
Now, all the studios are saying “we told you so, there is no fan base which is why we didn’t touch it for 20 years and won’t ever again.”
LG and Millenium took a chance. They didn’t do it right but were the only ones willing to try. Now no one will ever again, for at least 30-50 more years.
If at least the fan base had shown up and made the B.O. bearable, studios and marketers would know there is a base out there that cares and is accessible — and we’d have the possibility of other incarnations (maybe even better ones?).
I don’t think boycotting the film was the best solution for the fans.
^This