'80 Days' a Flop

Disney Doom: '80 Days' the Latest $100 Million Flop After Just One Day Disney, the movie studio that can't buy a break these days, is about to have a very bad weekend. Their big new $100 million-plus movie, "Around the World in 80 Days," opened on Wednesday to very little interest. Its take was about $1.5 million on over 2,700 screens. According to boxofficemojo.com, the negatively-reviewed movie starring Jackie Chan had a $540 per screen average. That translates into about 50 people per theater. "80 Days" finished at No. 7 on Wednesday. "Harry Potter," "Shrek 2" and "Garfield: The Movie" were the top three movies that night, and that's not a good thing since "80 Days" is being pegged as a family film. All of those others are family films, too, which means that over the weekend, families will likely be ignoring "80 Days" or viewing it as a fourth choice. For Disney, the humiliation must be numbing at this point. They've recently released a series of expensive duds: "The Alamo," "The Ladykillers," and "Raising Helen." The latter, which has barely made $33 million, will lose three-quarters of its theaters today, dropping to around 400 screens before it disappears completely. ...

Disney got too full of themselves with the "we can do no wrong" philosophy. They should've remembered that the revival that started with "The Little Mermaid" actually started a year earlier with the (practically) forgotten "Oliver & Co." (which should be forgotten).

80 Days was done as a comedy once: it had the 3 Stooges. Any modern re-interpretations have to compete (in my mind, at least) with the mini-series of maybe a dozen years back with Pierce Brosnan (not great, but it had its moments and it actually stuck with the book more than some other versions I've seen). And Jackie Chan is not a great choice. Jackie Chan movies don't scream "family film".

As far as "Raising Helen" goes, I saw it mostly because I had a three-hour gap in my schedule one weekday and I was in the mood for nachos. That and the fact that I was planning on catching "Shrek 2" on the weekend with the kids. Kate Hudson is a cutie and the film didn't suck, but it took a while to get going. The posters for the film give you no clue what the film is about, except that Kate Hudson is a cutie. Was it light drama or light comedy? I don't know. I don't like movies that are supposed to be light or funny that introduce characters and then kill them off in a non-humorous way and have to have the characters react and respond and grieve and whatever. It isn't the place. (Note: nothing wrong if they are already dead when the movie starts and they are then introduced and shown via flashbacks. The initial shock and much of the grief would already have passed.)

Disney has its problems, though, especially now that they lost Pixar. Time will tell.

For Disney, the humiliation must be numbing at this point. They've recently released a series of expensive duds: "The Alamo," "The Ladykillers," and "Raising Helen." The latter, which has barely made $33 million, will lose three-quarters of its theaters today, dropping to around 400 screens before it disappears completely. ...

Yet if Eisner is completely forced out of Disney, the media's spin will be that it was his passing on Fahrenheit 9/11 that caused his exit, not all these big flops (and don't forget Hidalgo and Home on the Range.)

and don't forget Hidalgo and Home on the Range.

So, the rhetorical question is, can you forget something that you don't remember? Or is that not forget what you don't
remember (using the double negative)?

Not that I'm a big fan of what attempts to pass for current cultural, but I'm clueless about either of those movies.

Yes, I could go look them up on imdb.com. Maybe I will. When I see one scheduled for 3AM and am trying to decide if it is
worth recording.

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.