Yep. Disney is happy as a clam to have something to "write off" against the earnings of their profitable films.
If they can jack the "loss" from 'John Carter' up to $300M, they will.
Posted on 03/19/2012 6:29:06 PM PDT by Vince Ferrer
"John Carter" is now officially a flop of galactic proportions.
The Walt Disney Co. said Monday that it expects to book a loss of $200 million on the movie in the quarter through March.
"In light of the theatrical performance of John Carter ($184 million global box office), we expect the film to generate an operating loss of approximately $200 million during our second fiscal quarter ending March 31.
(Excerpt) Read more at movies.msn.com ...
It’s really true. My boys growing up always had access to the Disney channel. Never watched it. Nothing on it appealed to boys.
Son and I watched it in 3D. We both loved it. It was standard consumption sci-fi. Entertaining and reasonably clean for teens.
As I said, all aimed at a little girl’s sensibility.
Not that there’s anything intrinsically wrong with that I guess except when they go out side their comfort zone they lose enormous amounts of money.
And Avatar doesn't count because the hero goes native (literally) and then pulls a full Benedict Arnold - after which he slinks off with a blue-skinned she-alien.
Now if the she-alien was a green-skinned slave girl from Orion, I might cut the hero some slack. But getting hitched to a blue-skinned relative of Manute Bol? - no way should a red-blooded American cut the hero slack for that.
How interesting that the blue skinned girl was once roomates with one of the green skinned girls.
CGI is a big part of what makes these movies lousy to begin with. It imparts a fakeness to every film that relies on it too heavily.
Haven’t you heard? All movies lose money. I know a director who shot 5 weeks on location then moved to Hollywood for editing, etc. He was ahead of schedule and under budget. In one week he was over budget according to the suits. One executive was shown a rough cut of the film and the production was charged $75,000. That’s how they do it.
All I could think of is John Carter is the U,S. Congressman in our neighboring district.
Ha. I saw it with my son in 3d too.
“My boys growing up always had access to the Disney channel. Never watched it. Nothing on it appealed to boys.”
And the characters on those Disney Channel shows are just absolutely deplorable little sh*ts. That young girls across America right now are taking cues from these horrible characters bodes quite ill for our nation in the future.
I heard it costs about $350 million.
How stupid cana company be?
This is one of the worst decisions since NBC nearly went bankrupt making “Supertrain”.
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull :) Indy married Marion Ravenwood at the end.
They tried to include boys with "Mars Needs Moms"... another major flop. Probably the worst title in the history of movies.
I can't believe some FReepers think the movie would have made money if the girl was naked the whole time. What kind of rating do you think that would have gotten?
I thought it was okay. 3D version was worthwhile.
I look at it this way. That’s $200 million Barry isn’t going to get.
Disney doing Cthulhu? Such blashemy might actually awaken the eldritch horrors....
Hollywood accounting is carefully designed so that no movie makes a profit until there is no other choice...:)
James Cameron would beg to differ.
A little charity is called for. Literary critics have shown that there are only seven different stories in the human experience. They all have been told since antiquity, and everything since antiquity is merely derivative.
Yep. Disney is happy as a clam to have something to "write off" against the earnings of their profitable films.
If they can jack the "loss" from 'John Carter' up to $300M, they will.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.