# Film industry people - do you know you're making a bomb? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [November 12, 2015, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346 "2015-11-12T01:44:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![magnusblitz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@magnusblitz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magnusblitz)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2015, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/81 "2015-11-14T00:41:31Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > One thing that makes it easy to predict a bomb is a big budget. What really makes a bomb is a lack of profit. The more money that’s spent the harder it is to recover it. Some bombs have decent releases that would be successes for a movie that cost a reasonable amount to make in the first place. Some movies are completed and distributed knowing that they will bomb, Hollywood is a rat’s nest, a lot of people can make a lot of money from a movie that bombs. Someone will lose, and the winners aren’t the Three Musketeers, in Tinsel Town it’s All for One, and One for One. I think one thing about big budget bombs is that it’s more likely the people making it realize it’s a bomb, but by that point, it’s too late - the movie is financed and the movie will be made. If people quit they will likely just be replaced. Sunk costs and all that (and releasing a film will always make at least some of the money back, certainly more than an unreleased film will make). Now, the small projects that are works of love like The Room or the aforementioned Ed Wood films… those are much more likely to be made without realizing that it’s a bomb. ---
**Author:** ![williambaskerville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f14d63/32.png) [@williambaskerville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/williambaskerville)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2015, 8:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/82 "2015-11-14T08:51:45Z")
> [@Knowed\_Out](#): > > They have one chapter called “The Elizabeth Taylor Wing.” She was apparently such a fragile creature who had to be coddled with expensive jewelry whenever she had a temper tantrum, or she’d come down with an illness that would delay production for weeks. I remember a quote from I think Roddy McDowall that a 50,000 dollar diamond would make Liz Taylor perfectly happy :- for 3 days. ---
**Author:** ![Master\_Wang-Ka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/master_wang-ka/32/3325_2.png) [@Master\_Wang-Ka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Master_Wang-Ka)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2015, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/83 "2015-11-14T15:35:39Z")
I think it may depend, to some degree, on what you were aiming for. Roger Corman thought of himself as a working director, making product for sale and distribution. Even in his memoirs, he never thought of himself as an “auteur,” even when he was making “message” films that he had a deep personal investment in. (On a side note, check out “Shame,” with William Shatner, perhaps the best thing Shatner did in his life. “Shame” wound up bombing, largely because, I think, it was just too contemporary with race riots, MLK, and racial tensions; in his autobiography, Corman talks about how the townspeople he used as extras thought Shatner was the GOOD guy…) From what I have read, _Star Wars_ was thought by many to be a bombasaurus in the making by many involved with it. _Star Trek: The Motion Picture_, on the other hand, was thought to be a can’t-lose proposition; EVERYONE wanted their name on that puppy, for purposes of resume. Except maybe Leonard Nimoy, who had to be bribed into submission before he’d participate. Whoopsie. Took the work of Harve Bennett and the leashing of Gene Roddenberry’s ego to save the franchise. …but the most recent remake of _The Island Of Dr. Moreau_ was thought by pretty much everyone to be a disaster ongoing and in the making, largely due to the antics of its big name actors and its possibly insane director. Turns out they were right… ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2015, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/84 "2015-11-14T16:23:01Z")
> [@Siam\_Sam](#): > > 😕 We liked _Bringing Out the Dead_. That’s great. I’m glad you liked it. But given the calibre of the director and the cast, and the acclaimed novel it was based on, the movie was expected to be Oscar bait. Instead, it was widely panned by critics and flopped at the box office. This was one of the first big movies my brother ever worked on, and he thought it was a privilege to see such a well-oiled machine at work. Nothing but top notch acting, a brilliant director, and a great production team performing at a high level. They ended up creating a movie that most viewers found plodding and pointless. By contrast, some great movies have been made by people who were constantly fighting and on sets where everything seemed to be going wrong. ---
**Author:** ![gaffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gaffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gaffa)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2015, 7:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/85 "2015-11-15T07:06:12Z")
> [@Master\_Wang-Ka](#): > > I think it may depend, to some degree, on what you were aiming for. Roger Corman thought of himself as a working director, making product for sale and distribution. Even in his memoirs, he never thought of himself as an “auteur,” even when he was making “message” films that he had a deep personal investment in. Corman’s book _[How I Made A Hundred Movies In Hollywood And Never Lost A Dime](http://www.amazon.com/Made-Hundred-Movies-Hollywood-Never/dp/0306808749)_ is one of the best I’ve ever read about Hollywood. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2015, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/86 "2015-11-15T18:06:08Z")
> [@BrotherCadfael](#): > > 66 posts and no one points out the obvious? > Of course the people involved know it’s dreck. But, there’s no business like show business… Sometimes the obvious needs subtlety. Post 35. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Don\_Guy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/that_don_guy/32/538_2.png) [@That\_Don\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Don_Guy)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2015, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/87 "2015-11-15T18:33:58Z")
The one case I can think of where somebody knew going into a movie that it would probably be a bomb was when Ron Howard agreed to do _Eat My Dust!_ in exchange for being able to direct (and star in) _Grand Theft Auto_ (no relation to the video games). What about movies that are clearly meant to be direct-to-video but, for whatever reason, play in one theater for a few days? ---
**Author:** ![D\_Odds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/d_odds/32/2882_2.png) [@D\_Odds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Odds)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2015, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/88 "2015-11-15T19:58:02Z")
> [@That\_Don\_Guy](#): > > What about movies that are clearly meant to be direct-to-video but, for whatever reason, play in one theater for a few days? I remember reading that some distribution outlets, like Walmart, would not stock a movie that did not have a theatrical run. Didn’t have to be a long run, just had to be in theaters. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2015, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/89 "2015-11-15T22:25:06Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > The Omega Man is a monster movie, pure and simple. I can’t imagine 2001 having any effect on it. I’ve seen it and read **I Am Legend** and my recollection is that it isn’t a really good adaptation, throwing out the stuff that made the book interesting. I’ve never seen the first adaptation. [Here’s your chance!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuPgXDWMB-Q) A spaghetti sci-fi, part-written by Matheson, follows the book mostly, fell into the PD in the '80s. Not a terrible way to waste an hour and a half, though it needs Sven-Surround. Another vote for _Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt._ ---
**Author:** ![StusBlues](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@StusBlues](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/StusBlues)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2015, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/90 "2015-11-16T02:01:53Z")
In Jackie Gleason’s “apology” for the game show clinker _You’re in the Picture_, The Great One stresses that everyone on the production thought the show was going to be a hit. They playtested it in their offices with the secretarial pool with everyone thinking it was funny. It wasn’t until they actually rolled out the production that they realized - very quickly - that this show was the biggest bomb any of them had ever seen. It lasted two nights: one where they actually played the game, and one where Gleason sat in a chair and apologized for the first night. In explaining how a bomb that big could happen, he told the story of a Broadway production he’d been involved in with A-level writing, acting, and musical talent all around. Everyone was sure it would be a success; it was anything but. He contrasted that with a show about an ugly butcher who can’t get a date starring an unknown. Needless to say, _Marty_ was a huge hit. ---
**Author:** ![Ferd\_Burfel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ecccb3/32.png) [@Ferd\_Burfel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ferd_Burfel)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2015, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/91 "2015-11-16T03:06:41Z")
> [@SpoilerVirgin](#): > > I’ve read a number of books about people who were trying really, really hard to make a great movie as it fell apart around them. Some of them seem to know what’s happening, while others are completely oblivious. > > [Final Cut](http://www.amazon.com/Final-Cut-Making-Heavens-Artists/dp/1557043744/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1447349873&sr=8-4&keywords=Final+Cut)(about the making of Heaven’s Gate) > [The Devil’s Candy](http://www.amazon.com/The-Devils-Candy-Anatomy-Hollywood/dp/0306811235/ref=pd_sim_14_1?ie=UTF8&dpID=51obvYOTuCL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR104%2C160_&refRID=0ZRMCFP5A0S92RHWA720) (about the making of Bonfire of the Vanities) > [Fiasco](http://www.amazon.com/Fiasco-History-Hollywoods-Iconic-Flops/dp/0470098295/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1447350068&sr=1-5&keywords=Fiasco) (stories of 15 Hollywood flops) I can recommend [“The Disaster Artist”](http://www.amazon.com/The-Disaster-Artist-Inside-Greatest/dp/1451661193) Greg Sestero’s memoir of the production of [“The Room”](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0368226/) and his friendship with auteur Tommy Wiseau. According to his account, everyone on the production was convinced that the film would never be released because it was so bad. For your viewing pleasure, there’s [Popatopolis](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1453253/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1), a documentary that follows B movie director Jim Wynorski as he makes a feature … in 3 days! The cast and crew in this production acknowledge their awareness of the quality of the film. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2015, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/92 "2015-11-18T15:33:35Z")
Truffaut’s [Day For Night](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070460/) is a great film about film making. (Starring himself as the director of course.) He has a nice line about making a movie in it: “Making a film is like a stagecoach ride in the old west. When you start, you are hoping for a pleasant trip. By the halfway point, you just hope to survive.” Outside of low budget schlock, Adam Sandler films, and such, most people start off hoping it’s going to turn out well. Somewhere along the line, reality sets in. Could be in pre-production, could be at the premiere. Usually it’s during filming. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2015, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/93 "2015-11-18T17:19:54Z")
Though \*\*\*Shakespeare in Love \*\*\*was nominally about Elizabethan theater, it was really a satire of modern Hollywood. Recall Geoffrey Rush’s words: “Allow me to explain about the theatre business. The natural condition is one of insurmountable obstacles on the road to imminent disaster.” A distraught investor asks, “So, what do we do?” Rush answers, “Nothing. Strangely enough, it all turns out well.” That is FREQUENTLY (though, God knows, not ALWAYS) the case with making a movie. To use just one example, Steven Spielberg will tell you that, during the making of _ **Jaws** _, everything that could possibly go wrong did, and they were constantly worrying that the result would be an expensive megabomb, rather than the classic thriller it turned out to be. Not long before _ **Titanic** _ came out, the show biz press was calling it the biggest disaster since _ **Heaven’s Gate** _! Everyone seemed to agree that James Cameron’s ego and excesses had wasted two to three hundred million dollars on a turkey. For that matter, before _ **Dances With Wolves** _ came out, everyone in Hollywood was calling it “Kevin’s Gate.” It looked as if a star’s vanity project had yielded an expensive turd. Which just goes to show that… William Goldman was right. “Nobody really knows anything.” ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2015, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/94 "2015-11-18T18:40:50Z")
Jack Lemmon was on Larry King many years ago and the topic of “Grumpy Old Men” came up. He told King that he and Walter Mathau figured part-way through that the movie was horrible. Lame script, lame jokes, total piece of crap. Then, it came out and was a pretty good hit. They even made a sequel. It goes the other way, too. I know Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron were furious(heh) at George Miller during Mad Max 4’s production. I’m not sure if they thought it would bomb, but I don’t think either thought it would be the great movie it ended up being. And of course, Donald Sutherland and Elliott Gould thought Robert Altman was an incompetent director and tried to get him removed from MASH. Who knew it would actually edit into a funny and great movie? ---
**Author:** ![Jim\_s\_Son](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19adc/32.png) [@Jim\_s\_Son](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jim_s_Son)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2015, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/95 "2015-11-18T19:31:32Z")
While people who worked on “Life with Lucy” realized it was a turkey, those at the top: Lucille Ball, Aaron Spelling, ABC thought they had a massive hit like “Golden Girls” on their hands. > **[Life With Lucy](http://www.tvparty.com/movlucy4.html)** > > Life With Lucy ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2015, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/96 "2015-11-18T20:56:23Z")
> [@OpusThePenguin](#): > > I remember reading that an interview with Alicia Silversone that the main cast of Batman & Robin knew they were in a bad movie but were contractually obligated to finish it. The thing is that 1. Of course they had to finish the movie; it would be career suicide not to. An actor who quits a movie will be unwanted by any reputable producer. An actor who finished a terrible movie like a professional is like every other actor there is; pretty much ANY actor with a respectable list of credits has been in a bomb or three. 2. Even if the movie turned out badly, it would probably still make some of its money back. Especially a Batman movie. All the movies that actually hit theatres were MEANT to be good. As has been pointed out, the production of a large scale film is a complicated process, almost always involves mid-production re-writes, and is difficult to determine the success of until you’re pretty far into it. By the time you become sure the movie will be really bad, most of the money is already spent. The principal shooting is done, the sets and costumes long paid for, the union labor paid. At that point it is almost always going to be worth it to finish the movie to extract whatever revenue you possibly can. “Batman and Robin” was a financial disaster but it did pull it over $100 million at the box office; had it not been released it would have pulled in nothing at all, and by the time they knew how bad it would be most of the dough had already been spent and the cost to finish it was far less than $100 million. ---
**Author:** ![Jim\_s\_Son](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19adc/32.png) [@Jim\_s\_Son](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jim_s_Son)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2015, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/97 "2015-11-18T22:07:02Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > You’re obviously not a science fiction fan, either. There had been plenty of science fictiuon films before, many of them critically and financially successful > **The Day the Earth Stood Still** > > [The Day the Earth Stood Still - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Day_the_Earth_Stood_Still) > > **The Andromeda Strain** > > [The Andromeda Strain (film) - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Andromeda_Strain_(film)) > **Fantastic Voyage** > > [Fantastic Voyage - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantastic_Voyage) > In addition to the aforementioned 2001, there were also the many SF films of George Pal (_Destination Moon, Conquest of Space, When Worlds Collide, The Time Machine_), Ray Harryhausen (\*The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms, _It Came from beneath the Sea, 20 Million Miles to Earth, earth vs. the Flying Saucers,_, etc.) and more, too numerous to mention. If these hadn’t succeeded, they wouldn’t have greenlighted the others. > > To say that there was no precedent for a successful science fiction movie before _Star Wars_ is absurd. ``` On a commentary track for the 1953 version "War of the Worlds", one of the sci fi film historians notes that scifi films were usually profitable in the 1950s. Yet no studio decided to make a huge mega bucks sci fi film which seems baffling. ``` ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2015, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/98 "2015-11-18T22:54:18Z")
My favorite example of this comes from one of the all-time turkeys: “King Kong Lives”. Allegedly, writer Steven Pressfield thought it would be great - even after watching it - and was totally crushed when it bombed. From his book “The Art of War”: > [@](#): > > The first professional writing job I ever had, after 17 years of trying, was on a movie called King Kong Lives. I and my partner-at-the-time, Ron Shusett (a brilliant writer and producer who also did Alien and Total Recall), hammered out the screenplay for Dino De Laurentiis. We loved it; we were sure we had a hit. Even after we’d seen the finished film, we were certain it was gonna be a smash. We invited everyone we knew to the premiere, even rented out the joint next door for a post-triumph blowout. “Get there early,” we warned our friends. “The place’ll be mobbed.” > > Nobody showed. There was only one guy in line besides our guests, and he was muttering something about spare change. In the theater, our friends watched the movie in mute stupefaction. When the lights came up, they fled like cockroaches into the night. > > Next came the review in Variety. ” … Ronald Shusett and Steven Pressfield; we hope these are not their real names, for their parents’ sake.” When the first week’s grosses came in, the flick barely registered. Still, I clung to hope. Maybe it’s only tanking in urban areas; maybe it’s playing better in the burbs. I motored to an Edge City megaplex. A youth manned the popcorn booth. “How’s King Kong Lives?” I asked. He flashed thumbs-down. “Miss it, man. It sucks.” > > I was crushed. Here I was, 42 years old, divorced, childless, having given up all normal human pursuits to pursue the dream of being a writer; now I’ve finally got my name on a big-time Hollywood production starring Linda Hamilton, and what happens? I’m a loser, a phony, my life is worthless and so am I. > > My friend Tony Keppelman snapped me out of it by asking if I was gonna quit. Hell, no! “Then be happy. You’re where you wanted to be, aren’t you? So you’re taking a few blows. That’s the price for being on the field and not on the sidelines. Stop complaining and be grateful.” ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2015, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/99 "2015-11-18T23:20:45Z")
> [@Jim\_s\_Son](#): > > On a commentary track for the 1953 version “War of the Worlds”, one of the sci fi film historians notes that scifi films were usually profitable in the 1950s. Yet no studio decided to make a huge mega bucks sci fi film which seems baffling. Not really. The studios at that time were still geared to churning out more standard fare, and besides, the quality of special effects was generally pretty crappy. Not only that, they were prohibitively expensive. To film blockbusters like _ **Star Wars** _, they would have needed technology vastly superior to what was available. There were, of course, exceptions to the above, e.g., _ **Destination Moon** _, _ **The Day the Earth Stood Still** _, and _ **Forbidden Planet** _, but today they look very dated. The original _ **Star Wars** _ movies will still look fresh 100 years from now. ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2015, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346/100 "2015-11-19T01:02:46Z")
> [@terentii](#): > > The original _ **Star Wars** _ movies will still look fresh 100 years from now. Especially if they keep going back and adding new special effects every now and then. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/film-industry-people-do-you-know-youre-making-a-bomb/737346.md?page=6)