# Revenge of the Sith a flop?



## johnsemlak (Jul 12, 2005)

Interesting article.  Any thoughts?  I handn't realized RotS was doing badly.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2005/07/11/1120934177171.html?oneclick=true



> What sank the Sith?
> By David Dale
> July 12, 2005
> 
> ...


----------



## RangerWickett (Jul 12, 2005)

I am unhappy that it made that much money. I am unhappy that people do not agree with me on how bad the movie was.

I am unhappy that "Hudson Hawk" did not make $432 million.


----------



## wingsandsword (Jul 12, 2005)

It's a flop because it's *only* the 8th highest grossing film in US history?

It's hard to call a film a flop when it makes a huge profit, and was pretty widely loved by it's fan base and critics.  The DVD sales will be huge too.  

The IMDb reports its budget at around $115 million, which it made back its opening weekend.  Now with around $360 million, and a roughly equivalent amount from non-US showings (according to the IMDb, it had $360 million in non-US showings a month ago).  That's over $700 milliion in global take.  It didn't overtake Titanic, and it isn't the biggest thing ever, but it certainly made Lucas even richer, and nobodys career or bank account is hurting.

Lucas knew up front this wasn't a movie for everybody.  He even warned against taking small kids to it, and in a nationwide (I don't know about worldwide) overall box office slump as people prefer to watch movies at home on DVD and not pay huge ticket costs and the theater environment it did pretty dang good.


----------



## Endur (Jul 12, 2005)

Phantom Menace was the flop, not Revenge of the Sith.

Phantom Menace hurt the Star Wars franchise so badly that both follow-on movies could not recover from the damage that was done.

Lots of people who would have gone to see all three saw Phantom Menace and didn't bother to go see the other two.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 12, 2005)

I call BS.


----------



## Dark Jezter (Jul 12, 2005)

> Revenge of the Sith a flop?









"Maybe, just maybe Revenge of the Sith is a flop.  Yeah, and maybe I'm a Chinese fighter pilot."


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 12, 2005)

Let's put things in perspective....

A flop?  The movie's made $370M in North America, plus almost the same amount overseas.

That's huge money....especially considering that this year is like the worst year for ticket sales in 15 years or something, from what I've heard.

Out of the 3 prequels, I liked Sith the best personally.  I actually find it on par with the original trilogy, when I remove nostalgic distortions of how good they actually were from the mix.

Banshee


----------



## Pozatronic (Jul 12, 2005)

I can't believe "Crocodile Dundee" is only #2!


----------



## trancejeremy (Jul 12, 2005)

I think that there was so much pent up excitement for Star Wars for the Phantom Menance, because it had been what, 20 years since the last movie. Much of that is gone.

Box Office Mojo has a chart comparing the 3 prequels, and how they did day by day

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=starwarsprequel.htm

ROTS did much better than TPM at first, but TPM seems to have had more legs. But ROTS will still probably end up at $400 million or so.  (The guy in the article seems to have ignored that TPM was apparently in theaters for 24 weeks, while ROTS has only been in them for 8. While most the business is done, it should probably still draw in 20-30 million more).  And of course, it's already done much better than Attack of the Clones, which made $300 million.


Still, maybe most of us were wrong, and Lucas was right about Jar Jar Binks.  Maybe ROTS would have done better if Jar Jar had more screen time?


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 12, 2005)

Bah.  Boxoffice numbers are becoming less and less important.  DVD, home theater and pay-per-view are becoming much more popular.  The theater experience (not to mention the prices) isn't as comfy as it used to be for most people.  And this is coming from someone who LOVES to go to the theater.

There are some films that I immediately label as "wait for it on DVD."  Even though it might be good there is no reason to see it on the big screen.  Unless theaters can start giving a much better experience than a typical home set up this trend is gonna continue.  

And considering that the source is from an Australian site and focusing on the local impact it really doesn't mean all that much except to further the fact that the theater industry is and has been fading.  Movies come out on DVD within a year of their release and some much sooner.  Personally, I saw Phantom Menance so many times in the theater simply because I wanted to watch it enough times to have it stick in my memory.  Who knew when we'd get a VHS release (DVD was still new)?

Now I have little problem missing movies, especially ones I'm on the fence about.  Add to that - films very rarely stay in the theater for more than 6-8 weeks.  So if you miss it, it's gone and you may as well just wait a bit longer for the DVD.  Spend $4 on a rental and save some cash to catch it at home.

And comparing this release to Phantom Menace (aka - the most anticipated movie of All Time) is completely unfair.  Even if it is still Star Wars.  The quality didn't matter, people just wanted to see it.

So, again - bah.


----------



## S'mon (Jul 12, 2005)

Endur said:
			
		

> Phantom Menace was the flop, not Revenge of the Sith.
> 
> Phantom Menace hurt the Star Wars franchise so badly that both follow-on movies could not recover from the damage that was done.
> 
> Lots of people who would have gone to see all three saw Phantom Menace and didn't bother to go see the other two.




Yep, that's the thing.  On the momentum of the original trilogy, TPM made a lot of money.  But it was a terrible movie and it badly hurt the franchise.  RoTS was better, but still not very good.  Many people like me, long term SW fans (but not fanatics), went to see it more with a grim determination to see how the whole thing tied together rather than with any sense of joyful anticipation.  And, well, it was mostly ok.  Better than TPM.  Better than Disney's "The Black Hole".  Worse than 50% of sf movies over the past 20 years.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jul 12, 2005)

I just don't see it, times have changed and movies have changed and it is how you break it down but when a movie makes Worldwide: $750,243,185 - Domestic $370,819,889 - 49.4% of total and overseas $379,423,296 - 50.6%, that is not a flop.  http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=starwars3.htm

Other information: 
BOM Users' Grades (2005 Releases) - 2 
Worldwide Yearly 2005 - 1 
Yearly Opening Weekends (Wide) 2005 - 1 
All Time Domestic - 9 
All Time Adjusted - 56 
All Time Worldwide - 18 
Yearly 2005 - 1 
Opening Day Gross - 1 
Theater Average - Opening Weekends - 158 
Opening Weekends - 2 
Opening Weekends - May 2 
Top 4-Day Grosses - 1 
Top 5-Day Grosses - 1 
Most Weekends at #1 (non-consecutive) - 134 
Consecutive Weekends At #1 - 122 
Memorial Day 4-Day Holiday Weekends - 7 
Second Weekends - 4 
Third Weekends - 15 
Fourth Weekends - 27 
Fifth Weekends - 43 
Sixth Weekends - 89 
Seventh Weekends - 121 
Eighth Weekends - 162 
Smallest Drops, 3,000+ theaters (Super-Saturation) - 124 
Smallest Drops, 2,500+ theaters (Saturation) - 360 
Smallest Drops, 2,000+ theaters (Very Wide) - 647 
Smallest Drops, All Wide Releases - 1,938 
Widest Releases - 19 
Widest Opening Releases - 15 
Fastest to $100 million - 1 
Fastest to $200 million - 2 
Fastest to $300 million - 1 
Slowest to $100 million - 292 
Slowest to $200 million - 53


----------



## GlassJaw (Jul 12, 2005)

The article is from Australia.  Seriously now, what do they know?


----------



## Mark Chance (Jul 12, 2005)

wingsandsword said:
			
		

> Lucas knew up front this wasn't a movie for everybody.  He even warned against taking small kids to it....




And yet the movie was still written at an 8-year-old level.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jul 12, 2005)

Don't let Hong hear you say that.


----------



## Mark Chance (Jul 12, 2005)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> The quality didn't matter, people just wanted to see it.




That sums up pretty much every Star Wars movie.


----------



## reveal (Jul 12, 2005)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> I am unhappy that "Hudson Hawk" did not make $432 million.




If you're serious, then you, me, and my wife are the only people I've ever known who believe this.


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 12, 2005)

Since when did anyone think Sith was supposed to pass up Titanic or even Phantom Menace in the first place?  The guy's calling Sith a flop for not doing what anyone even expected it to do?  WTF?


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jul 12, 2005)

reveal said:
			
		

> If you're serious, then you, me, and my wife are the only people I've ever known who believe this.




Well, I was close to taking Ranger's temp - to see if he was suffering from a feaver. Now I'm wondering about you. Hudson Hawk? Good Lord.

Thinking RotS was bad, I can see that. I don't agree, but I can understand the perspective. Liking HH? I think you've fallen under a Sith mind trick.

And if a movie that grosses something like $700 million, domestic and international, is a flop (when it cost less than 1/4th that to make), what does a movie have to do to be a winner?


----------



## Henry (Jul 12, 2005)

The writer of this article is NOT grounded in that little thing I like to call reality. Unless the movie cost 375 million to make all by itself, this thing is in no way, stretch, or form a FLOP. In fact, I'm betting it didn't cost over 100 million. Knowing George's ability to cut corners, heck, it may have only cost 75 million or so!


----------



## Gentlegamer (Jul 12, 2005)

Didn't Lucas predict RotS would make the least of the prequel films?


----------



## reveal (Jul 12, 2005)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> Thinking RotS was bad, I can see that. I don't agree, but I can understand the perspective. Liking HH? I think you've fallen under a Sith mind trick.




_Oh would you like to swing on a star?
Carry moonbeams home in a jar?
And be better off than you are?
Or would you rather be a Sith?_


----------



## mojo1701 (Jul 12, 2005)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> Bah.  Boxoffice numbers are becoming less and less important.  DVD, home theater and pay-per-view are becoming much more popular.  The theater experience (not to mention the prices) isn't as comfy as it used to be for most people.  And this is coming from someone who LOVES to go to the theater.




One thing I think they should do is hire ushers to kick out the rowdy kids that come in and spoil a movie. Or hit-men. Either way, to get the job done.


----------



## Crimson_Manticore (Jul 12, 2005)

I only wish I could make a 700+ million dollar flop!

I'd be one happy failure!

Edit: Here's an interesting chart to show how RotS is actually doing.

http://www.the-numbers.com/features/starwars.php

Edit2: On a side note, it is very interesting to note that in actual number of tickets sold, each SW movie has done WORSE than all of its predecessors, with the exception of RotS, which has already sold more tickets than AotC.

Edit3: Of course, that is including the ticket sales from the re-release of the original trilogy.


----------



## fett527 (Jul 12, 2005)

reveal said:
			
		

> If you're serious, then you, me, and my wife are the only people I've ever known who believe this.




"Bunny!  Ball, Ball!"


----------



## Wystan (Jul 12, 2005)

"Here's your stamps Mr. Hawk"

"French Fries"


----------



## Umbran (Jul 12, 2005)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> Liking HH? I think you've fallen under a Sith mind trick.




People (including myself) like _Hudson Hawk_ for the same reason they like Bruce Campbell movies, or _The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra_ - goofy and/or campy can be fun.  Wht's wrong with a bit of silly fun now and again?


----------



## Rackhir (Jul 12, 2005)

Umbran said:
			
		

> People (including myself) like _Hudson Hawk_ for the same reason they like Bruce Campbell movies, or _The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra_ - goofy and/or campy can be fun.  Wht's wrong with a bit of silly fun now and again?




In Japan many stars who won't do comercials here, do do them and usually get paid obscene amounts of money for it. Bruce Willis had one for the Legacy (I think it's an Acura over here), in which he says "I think with Legacy". I always thought that explained a lot about Hudson Hawk. 

The movie was too slapstick for my tastes. So I simply didn't find it funny. At all. Though I love Bruce Cambell movies, probably because he's more deadpan about his humor.


----------



## wingsandsword (Jul 12, 2005)

Remember this about the "quality" of Star Wars, in terms of plot, acting and writing:  It is a modern serial.  It is old space opera matinees and serials blended in with some samurai and WWII movies while you're at it, reshot with much bigger budgets.  $100 million dollar pulp.  Paragon Space Opera.  It is meant to be that way.  The corny dialogue, hokey names, and black & white morality is part of the entire concept of the pictures.

Original Star Wars, a.k.a. Episode IV is in terms a direct rip, almost just a Sci-Fi remake of The Hidden Fortress in the first half (an old Samurai recruits a rogue and a farmboy to save a princess from a mighty fortress) and The Dambusters in the second half (a squad of pilots must destroy an invincible and heavily guarded fortress by dropping a bomb at a very precise place through dangerous flying), even to the point of recycling dialogue almost verbatim from both movies.

"Attack of the Clones", "The Phantom Menace", "The Empire Strikes Back", those are all the sort of "over the top" names you'd expect from some old 30's or 40's serial, or a 50's movie matinee.


----------



## Angel Tarragon (Jul 12, 2005)

Dark Jezter said:
			
		

> "Maybe, just maybe Revenge of the Sith is a flop.  Yeah, and maybe I'm a Chinese fighter pilot."



Thats great! Love it!


----------



## Korgan26 (Jul 12, 2005)

Rangerwickett







> I am unhappy that "Hudson Hawk" did not make $432 million.




I couldn't agree more.

Z


----------



## BiggusGeekus (Jul 12, 2005)

GlassJaw said:
			
		

> The article is from Australia.  Seriously now, what do they know?




Beer.

Let me know if you have any other questions.


----------



## kyloss (Jul 12, 2005)

reveal said:
			
		

> If you're serious, then you, me, and my wife are the only people I've ever known who believe this.



add me to that list


----------



## Henry (Jul 12, 2005)

Hudson Hawk was a surprisingly entertaining movie. It's not high drama, it's not particularly deep, it's just fun, and worth seeing. It's in the same category as the original Rush Hour for me, or Demolition Man - just fun to watch.


----------



## warlord (Jul 12, 2005)

Burn in hell David Dale I refuse to believe your lies! Burn you evil bastard BURN!!!!


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 13, 2005)

mojo1701 said:
			
		

> One thing I think they should do is hire ushers to kick out the rowdy kids that come in and spoil a movie. Or hit-men. Either way, to get the job done.



I'm cool with that.

If I knew enough big dudes I'd start a service called Theater Enforcers.  The only fee would be to pay for them to get in plus a soda.  These fine fellows would calmly approach the offending butt-munches, issue one warning and then remove them.  They could even wear cheezy badges so potential annoyers will have been given due notice.

I'd pay for that.  

Or simply give the ushers low-volt tazers.  Incapacitate loud folks for a few minutes while still staying conscious and able to enjoy the feature.  Everyone weens.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Jul 13, 2005)

Crimson_Manticore said:
			
		

> Edit2: On a side note, it is very interesting to note that in actual number of tickets sold, each SW movie has done WORSE than all of its predecessors, with the exception of RotS, which has already sold more tickets than AotC.
> 
> Edit3: Of course, that is including the ticket sales from the re-release of the original trilogy.




It should have sold more! Heck, I bought six, repeat SIX, tickets for this one!!   Four for me and two for my friend to see it on different dates.


----------



## KidCthulhu (Jul 13, 2005)

I don't know about a flop, but I have noticed that in my area there are a lot of TV and radio ads saying "Go see RotS".  The approach seems to be "You've seen all the others.  You won't be complete until you've seen the final one."

This leads me to believe that regardless of income, some advertizing agency somewhere has been given the mandate to get folks into this movie, and to use an approach which will specifically target folks who aren't seeing it for one reason or another.  

Interesting....


----------



## Rackhir (Jul 13, 2005)

One thing that really struck me about the comercials for RotS, was how bad they were. In fact I'd say they were some of the worst comercials I'd ever seen especially for a movie. They seemed to me like they'd handed the job to some second year art college student. They were very crude and amaturistic. Anyone else get that impression from them?


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 13, 2005)

Rackhir said:
			
		

> Anyone else get that impression from them?




Nope, not at all.


----------



## Umbran (Jul 13, 2005)

KidCthulhu said:
			
		

> This leads me to believe that regardless of income, some advertizing agency somewhere has been given the mandate to get folks into this movie, and to use an approach which will specifically target folks who aren't seeing it for one reason or another.




Well, either not targetting at all, or targetting those who haven't seen it, is the usual approach.  Targettign folks who have already seen the thing is rare indeed.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jul 13, 2005)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> I call BS.




You rang, sir?


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 13, 2005)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> You rang, sir?



 Took you long enough.


----------



## Staffan (Jul 13, 2005)

Rackhir said:
			
		

> One thing that really struck me about the comercials for RotS, was how bad they were. In fact I'd say they were some of the worst comercials I'd ever seen especially for a movie. They seemed to me like they'd handed the job to some second year art college student. They were very crude and amaturistic. Anyone else get that impression from them?



Not me.

Especially not the subtitled version of the RotS trailer. "Level 50 senator LFG," indeed.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jul 13, 2005)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> Took you long enough.




I'm sorry sir.  I will aim to do better in the future.


----------



## takyris (Jul 13, 2005)

The article is obviously using hyperbole. It's not a flop in the sense that it's losing money. I, who was disappointed with the movie, have no problem saying that the movie is making good money.

But I think it could well be a flop by the standards of "Will make more money than Ep1", which it has not done. It's going to make everyone money, certainly, but it's not going to beat Titanic, it's not going to beat Ep1, and it's not going to break the big box office slump that the entertainment rags keep complaining about.

By the lore of the first geeks, it was supposed to be the fantastic conclusion to a fantastic series that made a massive ton of money, more than any Star Wars movie had ever made, and won that Academy award for Best Picture that Annie Hall so unrighteously stole from "A New Hope" decades before. That's what it was supposed to be, and while others here on this board may feel that it was certainly that way for them, the box office has spoken differently. 

That's not even wholly a judgment of RotS, although the critical "enh" I saw in most places (usually around a B- or 2-star level in most non-geek movie areas) certainly didn't help. An old author whose name I forget said something that I'll badly paraphrase with "The beginning of my book sells my book. The end of that book sells my NEXT book."

TPM and AotC hamstrung RotS, both by hurting the number of people who could have come and by lowering the overall enthusiasm such that people who did come weren't all jazzed and starry eyed and didn't overlook the flaws as readily and weren't willing to see it multiple times. (Yeah, I know that people here did. I get that. I know. Really. I'm speaking generally.) So you have a movie that did very respectably well, but isn't going to shatter the records.

And it really really really could have, with a stronger script, better fight choreography, and two lead-in movies that were, if not wonderful, at least not disincentives.

It didn't do as well as it could have, should have, would have. Which makes it, if you apply that standard, a flop.


----------



## drothgery (Jul 13, 2005)

takyris said:
			
		

> But I think it could well be a flop by the standards of "Will make more money than Ep1", which it has not done. It's going to make everyone money, certainly, but it's not going to beat Titanic, it's not going to beat Ep1, and it's not going to break the big box office slump that the entertainment rags keep complaining about.




Of course, I've seen more movies this summer than I have in a long time, but four (Revenge of the Sith, Batman Begins, Mr. & Mrs. Smith, and Fantasitc 4) is a lot of movies in a summer for me.


----------



## Queen_Dopplepopolis (Jul 13, 2005)

Sort of off-topic, but sort of not... I read a really good article the other day on CNN about how the whole "box office slump" is very inacurate - especially when you're comparing numbers to last year.  

Passion of the Christ pulled in insane dollars for weeks upon weeks upon weeks... and then did it all again over Easter.  The film pulled people to the movies that generally wouldn't have gone, and made a crap-ton of money... *shrug*

~~~

I'd tend to agree with the majority of folks here - RotS was, by no means, a flop.  Herbie Fully Loaded on the other hand... lowest grossing film ever to be released in over 3500 theatres.  Wow.  That's bad.


----------



## Mark Chance (Jul 13, 2005)

Queen_Dopplepopolis said:
			
		

> Herbie Fully Loaded on the other hand... lowest grossing film ever to be released in over 3500 theatres.  Wow.  That's bad.




And yet the script and acting where almost on par with RotS.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Jul 14, 2005)

> Originally Posted by Ankh-Morpork Guard
> I call BS.






			
				Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> You rang, sir?






			
				Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> Took you long enough.




ROFLMAO


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jul 14, 2005)

Darth K'Trava said:
			
		

> ROFLMAO



Thanks, I try.


----------



## Testament (Jul 14, 2005)

One thing that article's also ignoring is the general downturn in cinema ticket sales over the past two years.  That may go a long way towards explaining this.


----------

