Big Trouble in Little China grossed $11 million but cost $20 million to make so it was a box office failure, at least. Do we go with Rotten Tomatoes or the bottom line of any film…how much money did it make at the box office?
From Wikipedia:
After the commercial and critical failure of the film, Carpenter became very disillusioned with Hollywood and became an independent filmmaker.[32] He said in an interview, “The experience [of Big Trouble ] was the reason I stopped making movies for the Hollywood studios. I won’t work for them again. I think Big Trouble is a wonderful film, and I’m very proud of it. But the reception it received, and the reasons for that reception, were too much for me to deal with. I’m too old for that sort of bullshit.”[33]SOURCE
I think this review of The 13th Warrior sums it up well:
The 13th Warrior isn’t a terrible film, but it is terribly broken. The film’s title change from the eerie and eye-catching Eaters of the Dead to the bland and milquetoast The 13th Warrior , coupled with the final cut’s removal of much of the story’s overt connection to Beowulf , did away with some of the film’s biggest strengths, leaving a dully plotted medieval adventure movie that is all but indistinguishable from the majority of the genre. The noticeable deletion of characters and plotlines leaves our charismatic lead characters lurching from one Wendol fight to the next with no real indication of stakes or scope or even why they (and by extension we) should care. And in a truly mind-blowing turn of events, The 13th Warrior undermines its own excellent final act by tacking on a goofy “boss fight” that does nothing but delay the end credits for a few more minutes. Still, engaging performances from Banderas, Storhøi, and Kulich, combined with some excellent costumes and props and McTiernan’s skilled hand at directing frantic action sequences, saves The 13th Warrior from being unwatchable. It will never be a good movie, but man, it could’ve been. SOURCE
On Rotten Tomatoes, The Stepford Wives holds an approval rating of 26%, based on 175 reviews with an average rating of 4.70/10. The website’s critical consensus reads, “In exchanging the chilling satire of the original into mindless camp, this remake has itself become Stepford-ized.”[13]
Pete Travers of Rolling Stone said that the on-set complications of the film “can’t compare to the mess onscreen.”[14]Lisa Schwarzbaum of Entertainment Weekly said, “The remake is, in fact, marooned in a swamp of camp, inconsequentiality.”[15]A. O. Scott of The New York Times said, “the movie never lives up to its satiric potential, collapsing at the end into incoherence and wishy-washy, have-it-all sentimentality.”[16]
Excalibur (1981) I was going to say this. I saw it first in junior high and it was the best thing I’ve ever seen. Still a big fan. In fact, I named my 2 cats Guinivere and Morgana.
I was 14/15 when I saw that and loved it too but I thought it was not well received at the time. @Wendell_Wagner says it was though so ok…was way too long ago for me to remember well.
Given that Stallone is like one of ten characters in the film and the pacing and direction are about half the humor, I feel like you may be putting too much focus on the one thing.
I really liked the movie version of The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle. The one with Renee Russo, Piper Perabo, and Robert DeNiro. It seems to be widely panned, but I thought it was a great homage to the TV series. I groaned. I chuckled. I laughed. Gave me the smiles.
Alec Baldwin is excellent in this, both as Lamont Cranston and The Shadow. And parts of it are really clever (I’m going to watch it again, just for the way the bad guy disguised his headquarters).
This is also in the category of “Guilty Pleasures That My (Then-Little) Kids Would Beg Me To Rent 100 Times”… along with The Rocketeer, Newsies, Rat Race, Goodburger. And Mouse Hunt! (Christopher Walken, Michael Jeter, and… Nathan Lane as Ernie Smuntz)… gotta watch this again, too.
Hmm, I guess those “films” would all definitely be on my list.
+1. This was one of those things that found me instead of vice-versa. I.e. I found it in the bargain bin somewhere, thought ‘Why not?’ and it didn’t disappoint.
Since digs refocused my attention on the thread, I wanted to add another film that hasn’t been mentioned yet - Freaked (1993). With a 50 / 65 on Rotten Tomatoes and hated by it’s studio who made no effort to advertise it, it opened on two screens and of course was a massive flop in terms of profit (made under $13,000 on a budget of $12 million).
The movie makes zero effort to take itself seriously, which is why it works. It is endless fun and I have it on DVD which took some doing.
Side note to @gdave - we shared our love of Bunraku in a similar thread a while ago, and I still agree, it’s actually an amazing movie, just too different from any possible expectations to be really successful.
My usual go-to entry here is Ken Russel’s Lair of the White Worm. Part Lovecraft, part Hammer horror, and part acid-trip starring a very young Hugh Grant and Peter Capaldi.
The Fantastic Four(1994). I think they did a wonderful job with what they had to work with and, in my opinion, it came closest to sticking to the comic book origin and attitude.
The mention of kids reminded me of a super guilty pleasure-- Good Burger. It is dumb, '90s pre-teen nonsense starring Kenan and Kel (hey, I just found out Kenan is the longest tenured member of SNL and GodDAMN, I’m old!) but it cracked me up. If I was going to be subjected to an awful Nick pre-teen movie, I’d convince my kids to watch Good Burger instead of Surf Ninjas for the thousandth time.
