Talk:List of biggest box-office bombs

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This information is not to be archived. It is being preserved to address future queries about article content and layout. FYI - wolf

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Trimmed list[edit]

The list is currently limited to a soft limit of around 100 films. Films cut from the list will be maintained here in the event that we need to re-add one or in case the decision is taken to extend the list at some point. Betty Logan (talk)

Trimmed list
Title Year Production budget Gross Estimated loss (millions) Ref
Nominal Adjusted for inflation [nb 1]
Alice Through the Looking Glass 2016 $170 $299.5 $70+ $89+ [# 1]
Aloha 2015 $37,000,000 $26,300,000 $65,000,000 $84 [# 2]
Babylon 2022 $80 $63.4 $87.4 $91 [# 3]
Battleship 2012 $209,000,000 $303,000,000 $58,000,000 $77 [# 4]
The Bonfire of the Vanities 1990 $47,000,000 $15,700,000 $31,300,000 $73 [# 5]
Catwoman 2004 $100,000,000 $82,100,000 $52,900,000 $85 [# 6]
Conan the Barbarian 2011 $90 $48.8 $60 $81 [# 7]
The Cotton Club 1984 $47 $25.9 $32.1 $94 [# 8]
Cowboys & Aliens 2011 $163 $174.8 $63 $85 [# 9]
Devotion 2022 $90 $21.8 $89 $93 [# 10]
Ender's Game 2013 $110 $125.5 $68 $89 [# 11]
Geostorm 2017 $120 $221.6 $71.6 $89 [# 12]
Gods and Generals 2003 $55,000,000–60,00,000 $12,900,000 $47,100,000 $78 [# 13]
Happy Feet Two 2011 $135 $158 $65 $88 [# 14]
Hello, Dolly! 1969 $25,300,000 $33,200,000 $10,000,000 $83 [# 15]
Honky Tonk Freeway 1981 $24,000,000 $2,000,000 $22,000,000 $74 [# 16]
Justice League 2017 $300 $657.9 $60 $75 [# 17]
Land of the Lost 2009 $100 $68.8 $64 $91 [# 18]
The Last Castle 2001 $72,000,000 $27,600,000 $44,400,000 $76 [# 19]
Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return 2014 $70 $20.1 $71 $91 [# 20]
The Lovely Bones 2009 $65,000,000 $93,600,000 $58,000,000 $82 [# 21]
Lucky You 2007 $55 $8.4 $61 $90 [# 22]
Mr. Peabody & Sherman 2014 $145,000,000 $275,700,000 $57,000,000 $73 [# 23]
Nine 2009 $80,000,000 $54,000,000 $57,000,000 $81 [# 24]
The Nutcracker and the Four Realms 2018 $120,000,000 $173,900,000 $65,800,000 $80 [# 25]
Power Rangers 2017 $100 $142.3 $76 $94 [# 26]
One from the Heart 1982 $26,000,000 $600,000 $25,400,000 $80 [# 27]
Quest for Camelot 1998 $40,000,000 $38,200,000 $40,000,000 $75 [# 28]
Revolution 1985 $28,000,000 $400,000 $27,600,000 $78 [# 29]
Rollerball 2002 $70 $25.9 $54 $91 [# 30]
Rush Hour 3 2007 $140 $258 $59 $87 [# 31]
Solo: A Star Wars Story 2018 $250 $393.2 $76.9 $93 [# 32]

Other flops with unknown losses[edit]

Filmsite.org[edit]

Betty Logan (talk)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

2023[edit]

So far in June, I don't see any lists for this year, 2023, box office bombs. Is it for saved for later, or is it something else. 24.235.144.97 (talk) 23:18, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A little bit of both, I'd say. When a film tanks it usually takes a while to ascertain how much it will lose; 2023 films will probably start to appear on the list towards the end of the year, and mostly next year. Betty Logan (talk) 14:22, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The 2023 bombs should be added to this page. Nostalgia Zone (talk) 21:19, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did anyone suggest they wouldn't be? If a bomb is currently missing from the list, and there's proper sourcing to back the amount, then obviously it should be added. --GoneIn60 (talk) 22:22, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Marvels[edit]

The Marvels just grossed around 200 million against a 270 Million dollar budget. How long is it going to be before it's added to this page. What are the most reliable sources estimated the box office loss as of now? UnboundBeartic (talk) 01:39, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

$70M loss is too low for inclusion. Masem (t) 01:44, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not True at all, Actually, some of the films on this page have a loss of less then 70M. Plus if you factor in the Break Even Point which is somewhere between 540M and 700M then the loss is somewhere between 330M and 500M. UnboundBeartic (talk) 01:54, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All of the films on this list have lost potentially $90 million or more, adjusted to 2022 prices. That is clearly stated in the paragraph preceding the chart. There are some films where the nominal loss is under $70 million (Heaven's Gate, for example) but the adjusted loss in all cases is over $90 million. If it has lost as much money as you say then it will be added to the list in due course, once we get some concrete loss figures. Betty Logan (talk) 05:11, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Its the loss adjusted for inflation, so older films may have losses in their day <$70m but now are over $95m. As the Marvels just happened this year, that $70m is what we work with, and unless a reliable source gives us the actual full production and marketing/distribution budget, we go with the reported production budget numbers. Masem (t) 05:18, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They have to make at least twice the budget to Break Even, The Break Even Point is at least $548m So it cost Disney at least $343m. UnboundBeartic (talk) 14:34, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thats original research, however. Not all films require that to break even. Masem (t) 14:36, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well any big budget films especially one's on Marvel's level do. Plus that's not including marketing which was probably really high. UnboundBeartic (talk) 14:52, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, here's some sources proving my point.
https://collider.com/the-marvels-gross-break-even/#:~:text=A%20budget%20that%20high%2C%20combined,if%20it%27s%20to%20squeeze%20into
https://gamerant.com/the-marvels-box-office-numbers-break-even/ UnboundBeartic (talk) 14:55, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If The Marvels has indeed lost $343 million, that would mean it has obliterated the record held by Lone Ranger/John Carter by a good $100 million. That would be massive news, and yet I haven't seen news outlet report it. If it is the biggest bomb ever, then it's only a matter of time before that is reported and when it is the film will be added to this list. There's obviously a reason why the likes of Variety//Hollywood Reporter/Deadline are not reporting that type of loss—either it is incorrect, or if it is correct they have not been able to corroborate it. Betty Logan (talk) 14:52, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well which of these sources reliable? UnboundBeartic (talk) 15:07, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neither of the sources above provide a loss figure of $343 million, just that it would need to earn $700 million to enter profitability. It's also not clear whether that $700 million figure represents the studio revenue figure or if it includes the theaters' share as well. As I said, if the film had indeed lost $343 million (a solid $100 million more than the previous record-holder) then that would be big news, but nobody is reporting losses of that magnitude. Please read WP:EXCEPTIONAL. Betty Logan (talk) 15:16, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I found another reliable source with a break-even point confirming a lower break even point.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinereid/2023/09/20/disney-reveals-270-million-bill-for-the-marvels/?sh=25fb397638da UnboundBeartic (talk) 15:28, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.mensjournal.com/streaming/the-marvels-must-make-440-million-to-break-even# UnboundBeartic (talk) 15:36, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@UnboundBeartic: Not a comment on this specific discussion, just letting you know that the Forbes source may not necessarily be considered reliable. Per WP:RSP, articles written by Forbes Staff Writers are generally considered reliable, while articles written by "Senior Contributors", such as the one you've linked above, are generally not considered reliable. (FYI) - wolf 08:03, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
See the earlier "The Marvels" section above, but there is exception for Caroline Reid as a reliable source despite being a Forbes contributor. Normally you're right but we do have a case for her as an reputable source. Masem (t) 13:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's like talking to a brick wall. This list documents losses, not break-even points: a break-even point is not representative of the loss if it includes the theaters' share of the gross. And you cannot deduce the loss from the break-even point without knowing how much the film has taken from its ancillary revenue streams. Betty Logan (talk) 20:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not True at all, many of the films on this site take the Break Even Point into account. UnboundBeartic (talk) 21:49, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is not a single film here where loss has been determined by us based on a theoretical break-even point. I know that for a fact because I helped build the list and have vetted every single film on it. Every single film on this list is accompanied by a reliable source that states clearly how much money the film has lost. Even if we could do what you are suggesting (which actually is not possible unless you know the theater share, the marketing costs and projected ancillary revenue) we wouldn't be permitted to because it would violate WP:Original research. It's time for you to WP:DROPTHESTICK. Betty Logan (talk) 22:08, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Or to stress more, if we have a source that says that (well after the film's theatrical release) the total losses greatly exceeded the budget by a numerical figure that includes the Break Even Point estimates, that's fine. We can use such "original research" when put forth by reliable sources. But we simply cannot make that leap of logic ourselves, even if we know what base industry estimates might be. Masem (t) 22:44, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The 2022 entries on this list were added earlier this year. Any 2023 films that make the cut will most likely be added some time next year. Betty Logan (talk) 03:12, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Question, if next year, reliable sources say the film had a box office loss of $500 Million Dollars. How much will it affect this and several other similar pages? UnboundBeartic (talk) 00:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If a source like Variety or Hollywood Reports asserts the Marvels lost $500M, then yes, it would go on this list. What other pages that would be affected we don't know.
I will say that your insistence to get Marvels added is edging on WP:TE, and also along the likes of WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS, but in this case, because you may feel it must be included because it was a poorly reviewed and performing Marvel CU film. That's not how editing on WP works. We have to go by sources. Masem (t) 01:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
box office: https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt10676048/
budget: https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinereid/2023/09/20/disney-reveals-270-million-bill-for-the-marvels/?sh=591aa68938da
loss on budget alone will be over 100 million not including all of the delays, reshoots, and marketing and promotion. plenty more links for box office, budget showing 100 million+ loss Holydiver82 (talk) 16:14, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neither of the two sources you have provided state the losses incurred. As explained above, we do not add editorial guesswork to the article as it would violate WP:Original research. Films are added to the list as and when a reliable source publishes a credible loss figure. Betty Logan (talk) 17:46, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, as stated in multiple ways throughout this page and its archives, we need to wait until we have a final estimate from a high-quality source that combines all known factors into a grand total calculation. Carolyn Reid's source is a great start, but it is not a final estimate (it was published a couple months prior to the film's release).
  • Side note: Please stop breaking up your sentences into individual lines. This can make discussions harder to follow, especially when your response shares the same indentation as other responses above yours. I have fixed it this time, but you should do this moving forward; write in paragraph form. Thank you. --GoneIn60 (talk) 18:25, 26 January 2024 (UTC) [reply]
https://thedirect.com/article/the-marvels-box-office-mcu
this source puts loss at 255 million Holydiver82 (talk) 07:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Never heard of TheDirect, and if a film had lost $255 million then top tier media outlets such as Variety, Deadline and The Hollywood Reporter would have picked up on the story. Besides, The Direct does not put the loss at $255 million; this is what they actual say: "So, The Marvels appears to have lost Disney and Marvel Studios around $255 million looking exclusively at the figures from its theatrical run. Luckily, much of this revenue ought to be recouped in home entertainment sales - including digital and physical - along with streaming deals like the amount Disney pays itself to put its movies on Disney+." I reiterate what I stated below: it helps to read the whole article. Betty Logan (talk) 07:26, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
does this list of box office bombs use the box office revenue or all revenue generated by the film? because this article will need a massive update if we are including home entertainment sales and after box office earnings. i was under the impression this box office bomb list was about the box office figures. correct me if i am wrong, so i can go through and start looking at all the films listed as bombs and review the listed losses to see if the sources take into account the total revenue generated years after it left theaters Holydiver82 (talk) 16:12, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Direct is largely a fan site/blog, and it is deemed an unreliable source by the MCU taskforce standards. It is not an official source for box office information, let alone a highly reputable source for its terminology or labeling. Trailblazer101 (talk) 23:34, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
good to know, thanks Holydiver82 (talk) 20:07, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Going back to your point about post-box office revenue, perhaps Betty Logan can shed some light on that. I realize some sources like Deadline release total revenue that includes post-box office, but other sources don't always specify that's been taken into account. Also considering the term is "box office bomb", should box office revenue be the only factor assessed when making that determination? It's definitely a good question. --GoneIn60 (talk) 21:27, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Profit/loss analysis should make a reasonable attempt to account for revenue from ancillary markets, and costs such as marketing and distribution. This doesn't mean the sources require a full audit of those things, though. If you take The Man from UNCLE discussion below, THR based its analysis on a projection of the box-office gross, and based its analysis on reasonable assumptions about ancillary revenue. Once a film has been in play in all of its major markets for a few weeks, the box-office trajectory is relatively straightforward to project, as most films follow a logarithmic curve (you can see this here). The overseas ratio often stabilises, and the box-office usually accounts for at least half of a film's income these days. Once you reach that point, either the studio or industry writers can porject how much they are likely to lose. Some sources such as THR offer a "snapshot", while others such TheNumbers treat their biggest money-loses chart as a work in progress, updating their projections depending on how strong home video sales are.
Ultimately, films go on making money indefinitely; both Cleopatra and Waterworld move out of bomb territory thanks to licensing of TV rights. A similar thing happened with Justice League which lost a ton in theaters but had surprisingly strong home video sales (which didn't save it from bomb stats, but moved it off this chart). John Carter was especially interesting, because Disney itself took a writedown of $200 million, and TheNumbers projected that the loss ended up being half of that. The porcess for this chart is straightforward: we wait for a reputable source to bring forward some meaningful analysis and we add it to the list if it qualifies; if those numbers change based on future sales then we update accordingly, if the source is available. Due to the inherent uncertainty linked to the figures, it is why this chart is not numbered. It is also why we have more than 100 films on the list, because we actually have more than 100 films competing for the top 100 places, on the basis that some films have loss "ranges".
In recent months, unfortunately, the list has become something of a battleground for editors from rival comic-book camps. For those of us who maintain this article it is just a numerical exercise: we don't actually care which films make the list and which don't; we only care about the quality of the source. The numbers aren't really that important at the end of the day because we are not a financial tracker, they just provide a quantitative criteria for us to approximate list of the biggest bombs of all-time. Betty Logan (talk) 00:12, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent summary. So it seems the viewpoint, then, is that a film that bombs at the box office but makes up the loss in whole or part through post-box-office revenue (i.e. home entertainment sales, streaming, etc.) would have the ability to shake the box-office bomb label. Perhaps that's what trips up editors that assume the label only applies to the theatrical run and the revenue generated from that portion of a film's lifespan. Admittedly, I would have assumed the same. You would think there's a difference between bombing at the box office and bombing overall. -- GoneIn60 (talk) 03:51, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you can probably make a case for the distinction, but most sources don't so we are stuck with what we can source. Ancillary markets are kind of factored in now, and pretty much everything except the tentpoles are not expected to break even until they hit home video. Deadline did a really interesting article on this issue in relation to Waterworld and how even though it has entered profitability it is still thought of as flop. This article has had several titles down the years; around a decade ago it was called List of movies generating losses, which was probably less ambiguous, but a less intuitive name. Betty Logan (talk) 07:41, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. Well, at the very least, it seems the context should probably be scrutinized more closely in sources moving forward (note to self). One source might label a film a box-office bomb based on analysis of its theatrical run, while another shows the film nearly broke even and didn't flop based on ancillary revenue. In this hypothetical, neither is necessarily wrong, and retaining the box-office bomb label in the article could still be reasonably argued (assuming MOS:ACCLAIMED is satisfied). -- GoneIn60 (talk) 17:09, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
do you count home entertainment sales including subsidiaries "paying" each other for streaming rights? If so how do you source that. Because you made a point of putting that in bold in previous replies and it's a significant distinction Holydiver82 (talk) 05:15, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We would need a reliable source to discuss that side of income. Most actually don't. Its why the COVID-released films like Turning Red are on this list because of the technicality that we can only readily track box office. From a read of how the film went at Disney, it wasn't considered a complete failure, just that Disney isn't going to let us in on how they financially calculated that. So it gets the Asterisk of Doom on this list. Masem (t) 05:22, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
considering disney can assign any arbitrary amount to "pay" itself for streaming rights of its own films it would be a totally useless and irrelevant figure. its simply a hollywood accounting entry to say one subsidiary of disney "paid" another subsidiary 10 mill, 50 mill, 100 mill for the streaming rights and then call that revenue for the film. no one actually gets any money, its just for accounting purposes and to move losses around different subsidiaries. if this list includes "home entertainment sales - including digital and physical - along with streaming deals like the amount Disney pays itself to put its movies on Disney+ as stated by Betty then it is not actually a list of box office bombs Holydiver82 (talk) 20:33, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
However, in classifying box office bombs, if the media has access to home releases, and that still makes it a significant loss, they will still call it a box office bomb, probably because its theatrical release didn't pan out. It's not up to us to remove entries that have big losses even after home media is accounted for. It does point to the issue that the total profits and total costs of a film are not consistently track to include all facets (international, home and streaming media as profit; marketing and promotion as costs), so we just have to take what reliable sources give us. Masem (t) 20:53, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The prose makes the scope of the topic very clear: The following is a partial list of films that lost the most money, based on documented losses or estimated by expert analysis of various financial factors such as the production budget, marketing and distribution costs, gross box-office receipts and other ancillary revenues. Most reputable sources do not limit their analysis just to box-office receipts: Deadline doesn't, The Hollywood Reporter doesn't, The Numbers doesn't, which would take out the bulk of the sources we rely on. If you think the article is inappropriately named then you are free to initiate a rename discussion. Betty Logan (talk) 03:02, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aquaman 2[edit]

How much did it lose? 5.89.210.114 (talk) 20:53, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Far far too soon to know. Masem (t) 23:08, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now, do we know yet? 5.89.210.114 (talk) 20:00, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still far too soon. Wed like be looking to June 2024 before making a determination. Masem (t) 20:02, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, this talk page is to discuss potential changes you want to make to the list. Please do not treat it as a help desk or forum. You are encouraged to seek your own answers in reliable sources. If you have a question about something you find in a source, feel free to bring that here. All other general questions, such as asking for a status, may be hidden or removed. See WP:NOTFORUM and WP:TPG for more information. --GoneIn60 (talk) 23:47, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2023 box office bombs[edit]

Several 2023 movies need to be added to this list, including The Flash, Wish, Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny, Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning and The Marvels. conman33 (. . .talk) 02:48, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think I can pretty easily guess what Masem and Betty Logan's response will be to this: there needs to be reliable sources explicitly telling us the numerical loss. From above, sources for box office losses that they have mentioned include Caroline Reid from Forbes, Variety, Hollywood Reporter, and Deadline. JM (talk) 02:56, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately this list is always a year behind—the 2022 entries were added last year, and the 2023 entries will be added over the course of this year, and this year's flops will be added next year. It's just the nature of the beast, I'm afraid. Deadline will do it's annual round-up in April in any case, so not much longer to wait. Betty Logan (talk) 10:22, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll add again that I think there's also an impression that big budget films that did poorly with audiences and/or critics are necessarily bombs, which is not always true. I know there's a small contingent of the Internet that wants to see the Marvels fail hard (being as female-oriented as it is, and thus in their terms, "woke") but that isn't going to push us any faster to add it to this list without an affirmed lost number. Masem (t) 13:35, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, the way marketing costs are typically lumped together with other films at Disney, we'll have no way of knowing for sure how much was spent on marketing for The Marvels unless Disney chooses to reveal that information. But on pre-production and production costs alone, this film is going to lose a massive amount of money. Just taking those two into account, the film is expected to lose at least $200 million per Carolyn Reid's numbers that say the film needed at least $440 million to break even. Not a final estimate yet, just an early one, since marketing and post-production wasn't estimated. As mentioned, we'll need to wait for a list that reveals solid estimates for each film, but don't be surprised to see Marvels at the top of the list. -- GoneIn60 (talk) 20:23, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. Nostalgia Zone (talk) 21:13, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hotel Transylvania: Transformania[edit]

This was not released in theatres globally only in China with only $18.5 million on a $75 million budget 205.172.121.203 (talk) 20:24, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have reliable sources to warrant an entry here? Harryhenry1 (talk) 07:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Even with numbers, the lower bound on this list is around $95m, which the budget doesn't even reach. Masem (t) 19:21, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Although if they spent enough on marketing then it could end up with a 95m+ loss. But the IP didn't provide a source anyway so it doesn't matter. JM (talk) 10:29, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Man from U.N.C.L.E.[edit]

per the wiki page it lists, as a 80 million dollar loss with a worldwide gross of 109 million. however the sourced article that gives that estimated loss of 80 million is using a global gross number of only 72.1 million. and the box office mojo figure which seems to be the standard used on this page to source global gross is giving 110 million global gross

something does not add up with the listed totals for gross and estimated loss and the sources do not support the totals given. the wiki article for the film lists 107 million box office gross Holydiver82 (talk) 16:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It helps if you actually read the article fully. At the time the article was written, The Man from UNCLE had grossed $72 million, but The Hollywood Reporter clearly states "Here are five big bombs of the season when accounting for budget, marketing spend and revenue the film can expect to earn in ancillary markets. Grosses are through Sept. 4, with several titles still in release worldwide." In other words, THR based their projected loss on an estimate of total income. Once you are several weeks into a film's run it is fairly straightforward to project a film's box-office trajectory. It is also worth noting that THR gives loss ranges for their estimates in that article, and the loss for The Man from UNCLE is their baseline figure. It is not as though it opened in any large markets after the cut-off date in the article. Betty Logan (talk) 19:16, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So the source made a guess about the loss based on incomplete information with assumptions about the future. Interesting response to attack me and the defend using projections and incomplete information to put films on the list. Seems odd if the general opinion of the talk page is to wait and be patient to make sure you have the full accounting and the final figures. And in this case have the sole source of the loss be based on one source that was making guesses before the film was out of theatres (the film went on to generate 50% more revenue than reported in the article)
Also odd that your response in no way wants to address that issue or try to confirm or correct the information based on other sources that could have better information. Holydiver82 (talk) 20:16, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: We may want to execute WP:DENY to prevent any further disruption with this user. If that doesn't work, then WP:ANI may be the best route. Mike Allen 21:39, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because I posted about incomplete and contradictory information in the article, to which the person who has decided they own this page attacked me accusing me of not reading the source (which I had). Also odd Holydiver82 (talk) 22:25, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Holydiver82: There are no attacks above. This is now the third time I've had to remind you to focus on content, not the contributor and to assume good faith. If you have a problem with a behavioral issue, take it to WP:ANI. You also need to start writing in paragraph form (I've fixed this, yet again). Patience on these two areas is running very thin. --GoneIn60 (talk) 14:08, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Holydiver82 asked a reasonable question, and got a reasonable answer. The lead makes it clear that the "figures of losses are usually rough estimates at best". The Man from UNCLE is not dealt with any differently to all the other films in the list. We have never asked for "full accounting" for any entry on this page, just a reliably sourced loss figure, from a reputable industry publication. If he has knowledge of alternative loss projections for The Man from UNCLE we are always happy to review them. Betty Logan (talk) 22:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinocchio (Zemeckis)[edit]

unlike the Garrone and Del Toro movies, Zemeckis' Pinocchio is unanimously contidered terrible. Is it enough pf a flop to be on here? 2.37.48.42 (talk) 19:30, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It has zero theatrical run, only been streaming, so I don't think we include streaming-only releases. Also being a critical failure does not equate to box office bomb. Masem (t) 20:48, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Madame Web[edit]

How much money did it lose? Could it be put on this list? 2.37.17.23 (talk) 00:18, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Way way way too soon, wait for it to have been out a month to start looking for reliable sourcing. Masem (t) 00:19, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please stop asking for general help on this page, like "How much did a film lose", "Can it be added to the list", etc. You've done this at least 4 times now in recent months. Future posts like this will be immediately removed. This page is not a forum or helpdesk; it should be used for discussing specific improvements to the article based on claims in reliable sources. If you do not have any reliable sources to share, spend your time researching instead of posting here. You can also take your questions to non-Wikipedia platforms such as Reddit, which is better suited for general discussion. --GoneIn60 (talk) 01:31, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Argylle[edit]

Aygylle is officially out of theaters this week and with it having a $200 million budget and only made $94.4 millon, safe to say it should be here BoiLeoKing (talk) 16:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully from the comments in other threads above, you understand that we cannot look at the numbers and guess the amount that a film lost. We know the budget and box office, yes, but there are a lot of other hidden variables, such as tax credits, which may not get reported until the end of the tax filing season. Also in different countries, theaters get a different cut of the revenue, which affects profit. We need a reliable source that reports an estimated loss (at least a range) before it can be added to the list. Until then it sits on a waitlist, and all we can do is say, "Yeah, we know it lost a lot, but we can't say how much exactly." -- GoneIn60 (talk) 17:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disney's Wish[edit]

It ended its box office, making 254 million, against over 200 million dollar budget. Does that count on the list? 24.235.144.97 (talk) 02:24, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We need reliable sources backing up a description of it as a bomb, otherwise it's original research. Harryhenry1 (talk) 02:26, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a profit of 54m, so no. Masem (t) 02:26, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Advertisement, its usually said you need somewhere between 1.5 to 2.5 the budget to actually make a profit Braganza (talk) 10:40, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the added costs of marketing beyond the reported budget are well recognized but we need a reliable source to document that total number and assert that it was a box office bomb/flop. Masem (t) 13:27, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
that's very much not how box office revenue works for the studio making the film. i find it very bizarre how many people post on these topics who do not understand how box office revenue works at all. Holydiver82 (talk) 15:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But don't you also find it "bizarre" how many posts are asking about film losses? Why are we evaluating raw numbers to begin with? We shouldn't be. That's not our job. -- GoneIn60 (talk) 19:26, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
no I do not. people asking about movies that obviously lost disney significant amounts of money, in this case easy estimate of 50 million+. so someone who clearly does not understand all the rules and regulations of wikipedia asking if films that lost huge amounts of money belong on the list seems like the exact thing that should be on the talk page. just LOL. in fact it would seem to make sense to start a talk for each film that appears to belong on the list to work out the sourcing and determine if it should be added. pretty much the entire purpose of the talk page Holydiver82 (talk) 16:37, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course you don't, big shocker. When the same question is answered the same way each time, yet gets asked repeatedly over and over, it goes from being a productive use of the community's time to being disruptive. Talk pages can be used to help determine if source(s) qualify, but if you come to the table empty handed and overlook/ignore similar discussions already on the page, you're wasting everyone's time. --GoneIn60 (talk) 19:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Cite error: There are <ref group=nb> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=nb}} template (see the help page).
Cite error: There are <ref group=#> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=#}} template (see the help page).

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_biggest_box-office_bombs&oldid=1220256895"