PDA

View Full Version : King Arthur: A Financial Bomb


CFC
12-07-2004, 11:55 PM
I really liked King Arthur, I saw it twice, but financially it was a bomb :(

They spent around $170 million on it. $130 making it. $40 on marketing.
(I'll find the link were I saw these numbers)

1st week gross: $23.6million

frodo1511
13-07-2004, 12:07 AM
I was reading in the paper that some disney reps acually thought that the movie's opening weekend was "above their expectations."



:D

Anyway, I hope more people see it in the coming weeks, or have a great first-week in the UK.

Damn you, Spiderman :cool:

CFC
13-07-2004, 12:12 AM
Well from what I have been told; the movie was supposed to open this past winter around christmas time. However it was going to be released with an R rating. Diseny wanted Fuqua to edit it so it would be PG-13. This delayed the release until this summer.

Had it opened this past winter I think it would have done much better. Yeah I agree, damn Spiderman and Anchorman. Even thought anchorman was funny.

Hazzle
13-07-2004, 12:43 AM
Errr...let's not forget the 130 on making it will be offset by the ENTIRE receipts from the WORLD, not just the American market. The film was ACTUALLY made for the European market, as shown by Antoine's choice of using a European cast...and I suspect it'll do a LOT better here, especially as Spidey 2 is out over a month before KA is.

I still suspect when the year's out we'll find this film's covered its costs...especially given how many will buy the DVD for the deleted scenes :p

CFC
13-07-2004, 12:45 AM
I hope it does a lot better in Europe. I will be one of the people buying the directors cut DVD if there is one.

DragonRat
13-07-2004, 12:48 AM
One must also remember the heavy amount of criticism it received. Regardless of what fans here think, many people do listen and read what critics have to say, and this movie was a critics' bomb. Of course, it ran against the bullet train that is Spider-Man 2, and the Will Ferrell comedy Anchorman. Hard to really have anything worthy of beating out a comic-book hero and a fart-and-piss comedy.

frodo1511
13-07-2004, 02:59 AM
No doubt it'll do better in Europe( English cast, duh!!!) And, yes, I will be one of many buying the DVD/Extended Edition/R-rated( whatever the heck it's being called:) version on day one.

Kyle_West
13-07-2004, 03:03 AM
These are brittish actors, as Hazzle reminds us. It will rake in the dough. It will easily make over what it took to spend World Wide. The US it is bombing because we simply have no taste. Anchorman, please. Arthur will be much better, but us americans are obligated to see what Will Ferrel is in. Look at elf.

frodo1511
13-07-2004, 03:08 AM
These are brittish actors, as Hazzle reminds us. It will rake in the dough. It will easily make over what it took to spend World Wide. The US it is bombing because we simply have no taste. Anchorman, please. Arthur will be much better, but us americans are obligated to see what Will Ferrel is in. Look at elf.

Agreed, America's in general have zero taste for movies(look at last years oscars- Chicago over the Two towers? PLEASE!!!) Anyway, from what my friends have said, Anchorman sucked major ass, the only semi-good thing about the movie is that Will Ferrel is in it(and that only helps it slightly :) oh and to all who have not seen the movie, Arthur IS better than anchorman.

Hazzle
13-07-2004, 11:29 PM
Hehe...I was also going to say Mr Farrell isn't the huge phenomenon here he is there...he's popular, sure...but I'm not even sure if Anchorman is being released here this summer, as I've heard nothing about it yet...and if it is I suspect KA will beat it out...as for spidey...my bad...it's only two weeks gap between the two (16th for Spidey, 30th for KA, with previews of Spidey on the 15th and KA on the 29th). Should still be enough methinks.

frodo1511
14-07-2004, 04:49 AM
Hehe...I was also going to say Mr Farrell isn't the huge phenomenon here he is there...he's popular, sure...but I'm not even sure if Anchorman is being released here this summer, as I've heard nothing about it yet...and if it is I suspect KA will beat it out...as for spidey...my bad...it's only two weeks gap between the two (16th for Spidey, 30th for KA, with previews of Spidey on the 15th and KA on the 29th). Should still be enough methinks.


Lucky. KA had a 1-week gap after Spidey. Plus, we had to contend with it's expotanious 4th of July take of 180 mill.
:(

Spire
14-07-2004, 07:36 AM
I had a feeling King Arthur would bomb. I mean, I like the movie and everything, and I was really looking forward to seeing Keira on the big screen again, but I knew it wasn't going to fly that high. It didn't bomb as bad as The Alamo though. That film cost $120 million to make and made $19 million during it's first 3 weeks. Another Disney bomb. But this film isn't going to tarnish Keira's career, it's just another role under her belt.

danny cool
14-07-2004, 07:47 AM
evan if the film had been released at christmas i dont think it would have made to much of a diffrence because rotk was out and we all know how well that did

Hazzle
14-07-2004, 01:46 PM
Would've been THIS christmas. ROTK was LAST christmas.

Elijahfan
14-07-2004, 03:12 PM
over the last week i saw all spiderman2 (my mom wanted to take me to a movie), anchorman with my brother on opening friday, and KA on opening wednesday. i didnt really care for spiderman2 ithought it was just the same as the first one for me, anchorman was okay, because scenes were also cut from that (it had an R rating but they cut it down), and KA was okay for me. i would of wanted to see more keira, even though she was advertised the most i knew she didnt even appear in the movie until 40 minutes into it.

on the cost and how much the movie will make, in total, world wide and from dvd and video sales it'll probably cover the cost and go over a little, as stated by others before. and for the opening weekend, it was up against two big movies, Spiderman and anchorman. it's an ovious choice for the majority of audiences to see a comedy with will farrell or a comicbook movie thats being praised by critics all around.

CFC
14-07-2004, 03:58 PM
Then again. This was done by Disney. I mean they cover so much in terms of the entertainment/media market that they can afford to take a lot of risks.

I still would have liked to see it do better becaue I really enjoyed it. I saw it twice. :)

frodo1511
14-07-2004, 04:20 PM
Then again. This was done by Disney. I mean they cover so much in terms of the entertainment/media market that they can afford to take a lot of risks.

I still would have liked to see it do better becaue I really enjoyed it. I saw it twice. :)


Agreed, Disney has taken many hits, but still gets back up. BTW, I'm seeing KA again on thursday, right before I,Robot(which, after seeing Arthur, dosen't look as good as I originally thought...)

alby
15-07-2004, 10:47 PM
It's kind of funny how Disney thought it could make money with Around the World in 80 Days, Raising Helen, and the Alamo.

Hopefully, overseas revenues will compensate for sluggish domestic gross. This was certainly the case for Troy and the Last Samurai. I remember reading an article about how Troy was making nearly three times as much overseas as it was domestically, and Troy is raking in $476 million in total. Craziness.

Spire
15-07-2004, 11:47 PM
I think Disney was hoping King Arthur would turn into another PotC. PotC was a huge surprise hit, and Disney thought they could try to cut off the Spiderman 2 craze with another surprise. Unfortunately, KA doesn't have the charm or big name actors that PotC did.

ChocolateMoose
16-07-2004, 12:37 AM
I'm definatly going to see it! At least twice. And I know i'll like it...maybe not woah its amazing kind of thing, but it'll be cool! The British cast does help, lol. I mean, it has Keira, Ioan and Hugh! Three great actors who are just getting into big films and who rock! They should have opened it in the UK first...lol.

Kelsey
16-07-2004, 12:38 AM
King Arthur's failure here has nothing to do with America's taste in film. That's rediculous. Look who the advertising was aimed at. There were problems from day one. I hope the British cast helps the movie do well in Europe, but here it had critic's negative views on it, movies aimed at similar audiences (that had positive reviews), a bad release date, and nearly unknown names. It just had a lot to compete with.

Hazzle
16-07-2004, 02:16 AM
King Arthur's failure here has nothing to do with America's taste in film. That's rediculous. Look who the advertising was aimed at. There were problems from day one. I hope the British cast helps the movie do well in Europe, but here it had critic's negative views on it, movies aimed at similar audiences (that had positive reviews), a bad release date, and nearly unknown names. It just had a lot to compete with.

Who said it did? I actually think the critics negative reviews really hurt it, and then the fact Disney decided to target it at a new audience (which it really was never suited to target) and a changed released date...basically everything you said...that was the reason it did poorly. Like I said, I suspect the better placement in terms of release, the better reputation of the cast (it's a purely European cast, I believe, with some Dutch and German representative too, if memory serves) and the fact that European critics tend to be less harsh at panning stuff (they will do it, but it takes a lot for them to totally decimate a film like the US critics did to KA) will help it do better. Ahh well...I'll be in a better place to judge when I see it.

Kelsey
16-07-2004, 05:08 AM
Who said it did? I actually think the critics negative reviews really hurt it, and then the fact Disney decided to target it at a new audience (which it really was never suited to target) and a changed released date...basically everything you said...that was the reason it did poorly. Like I said, I suspect the better placement in terms of release, the better reputation of the cast (it's a purely European cast, I believe, with some Dutch and German representative too, if memory serves) and the fact that European critics tend to be less harsh at panning stuff (they will do it, but it takes a lot for them to totally decimate a film like the US critics did to KA) will help it do better. Ahh well...I'll be in a better place to judge when I see it.

...Yeah, that's what I just said....
And someone (actually I think two people) said it was America's taste in film, I'm just too lazy to scroll back and see who it was.

alby
16-07-2004, 05:23 AM
King Arthur's failure here has nothing to do with America's taste in film. That's rediculous. Look who the advertising was aimed at. There were problems from day one. I hope the British cast helps the movie do well in Europe, but here it had critic's negative views on it, movies aimed at similar audiences (that had positive reviews), a bad release date, and nearly unknown names. It just had a lot to compete with.

I agree with Kelsey. Couldn't have been said better. As Ebert wrote: "'King Arthur' is not a bad movie, although it could have been better."

West made that comment.

Actually, international critics can be just as harsh in their reviews.

deviljet88
16-07-2004, 09:01 AM
I think critics hurt it the most, but there have been movies where critics have rated high :P But the release date was crap, should of been one week earlier in Australia so it could be in school holidays. Its not a kiddy movie, but still.

frodo1511
16-07-2004, 07:11 PM
Yeah, release date in the US sucked. One week after the 4th? And on a Wednsday? Most people who saw spidey got the week off for the holiday, and were in work during KA's release. But, yeah, when critics give movies bad reviews, than the movie suffers(except for rare occurences, like Van Helsing, Shrek 2, and as of late, probably I, Robot-reviews on the new movie haven't been preety, but somehow better than KA... most likely b/c of Will Smith in it...)

johnnyboy
16-07-2004, 08:08 PM
Did Shrek 2 really get a bad rating? That surprises me somehow:confused: I haven't seen KA yet, but I will, and twill be good :)

frodo1511
17-07-2004, 01:01 AM
Did Shrek 2 really get a bad rating? That surprises me somehow:confused: I haven't seen KA yet, but I will, and twill be good :)

Let's put it this way: State of the art graphics, but some critics thought it didn't live up to the expectations of the first. I found it a little boring compared to the original, except for Antonio Bandaras' Puss in Boots character. He was the only reason I saw the movie.

alby
18-07-2004, 12:43 AM
Did KA open overseas yet? No figures have come in from outside the US.

frodo1511
18-07-2004, 03:09 AM
Did KA open overseas yet? No figures have come in from outside the US.

Only release date I know of is the U.K which opens on the 30th. If I'm not mistaked, I believe the Aussie version just came out.

Kyle_West
18-07-2004, 05:07 AM
i think it opened the 15 in australia.

Hazzle
18-07-2004, 05:14 AM
...Yeah, that's what I just said....
And someone (actually I think two people) said it was America's taste in film, I'm just too lazy to scroll back and see who it was.

Yeah...I acknowledged I was merely repeating stuff you'd said, since I agreed with it...sheesh.

And yeah, Alby has pointed out Kyle's hidden remark in an earlier post which is sooo wrong.

Narg
18-07-2004, 06:32 AM
i think it opened the 15 in australia.

Yer, it did, i went to see it at my local theatre, it was packed, about 60 percent full, i enjoyed it :).

Kyle_West
18-07-2004, 08:47 AM
What did I put so wrong? oooo was it the bombing thing?...I looked back and thats all I could figure out. Kinda funny if thats it.

Edward
18-07-2004, 09:26 AM
what's the running time on it?

Hazzle
18-07-2004, 02:13 PM
What did I put so wrong? oooo was it the bombing thing?...I looked back and thats all I could figure out. Kinda funny if thats it.

Nahh...was just taking the piss out of your remark that it's poor US taste...sure you yanks DO lack taste :p...but that had nothing to do with KA's poor showing at the Box Office.

frodo1511
18-07-2004, 04:34 PM
what's the running time on it?

The movie comes out at around 2hrs. But with previews(the best part of movies) it may clock 2 and a half, depending on how many there are.

Richard
18-07-2004, 11:58 PM
Is it true that Keira didn't make her appearance until after the first hour of the film?

EDIT : Nevermind. My lack of effort to look at the other threads before I asked the question got to me before my senses. It's true, which is disappointing.

Pinkfairy
19-07-2004, 07:12 AM
It dropped down to #6. Anchorman is now on the fourth spot, while F 9/11 went up to #5. I blame the critics for this. BTW, A cinderella story is on the third spot...

DragonRat
19-07-2004, 07:28 AM
How A Cinderella Story could beat King Arthur is beyond me. The average teeny-bopper should realize the ugliness inside and commit themselves to the ravishment of Hilary Duff by gorillas in three years' time. Or perhaps the dynamic duo of Hilary and the 'oh-so-dreamy' Chad Michael Murray of One Tree Hill convinces the teeny-bopper to buy a ticket to see a movie based upon this fairy tale now reduced to mere mockery.

But yeah, A Cinderella Story appeals to one crowd, and that crowd does not care for the semi-historical drama of King Arthur, the stupendous slapstick of Anchorman, the political clout of Fahrenheit 9/11, or the comic-book nerdiness of Spider-Man 2.

Pinkfairy
19-07-2004, 08:55 AM
I just thought that it would take some time for it to reach #1, but it seems to be doing worse. Whoever thought that A cinderella story would be tough competition... I'm positive though that movie will do well internationally, specially Europe. And the DVD will do really well. I still have hope for it here, I mean, people are bound to get tired of watching Spider-man, and some may realize that hilary duff's movie isn't all that creative. Audiences won't go watch KA because it's another Arthur film, but instead they go watch A cinderella story (it might as well have been called Another Cinderella story). I guess some people don't like change.

alby
19-07-2004, 09:33 AM
BTW, A cinderella story is on the third spot...

So the same people who brought America the second worst channel, right after UPN, has done it again.

Every junior high girl is watching it. Their loss.

Dyce_Blue
23-07-2004, 08:55 PM
King Arthur was a bust, and no one remembers The Alamo. Both of these were made by Buena Vista, a division of Disney. Come to think of it, when was the last time a non-Pixar movie made Disney any money? Disney has slowly begun to lose money in the past years, I guess the golden years of Aladdin and the Lion King are over.

Object Of Affection
23-07-2004, 09:56 PM
Mah!

I saw king arthur wednesday night when we got it in the cinema :) but yeah i was dissapointed :( with the outcome not a great movie it has to be said and allthough it has an all out british cast i don't think it's going to do well over here either ... such a shame (DIE DISNEY DIE!!!!) thats who ruined it :mad:

I mean our cinema has only got it in 1 screen where as shrek 2 and spiderman 2 are in still in 3 screens each. Allthought spiderman 2 hasn't really taken off in our cinema :icon_conf

:fencing: <..CrazY

Totally agree with "dyce_blue" there. Disney are going down the pan and thats why pixar are leaving them MwahA! (could be the end for disney :icon_mod: )

Dyce_Blue
24-07-2004, 12:51 AM
In the US, Spiderman 2 and I, Robot have quickly become the most popular movies of the summer. Dodgeball also had a nice little run. King Arthur definitely did not live up to expectations, the same with The Chronicles of Riddick. Which movies are more popular in Europe?

apoggy
24-07-2004, 12:59 AM
In the UK only spiderman has been released so far, last week and I have no idea how it is done. I suspect KA to fair better over here, but I dont see it being a massive hit

Dyce_Blue
24-07-2004, 01:07 AM
Are there a lot of British movies that we don't get here in the US? I remember Love Actually did O.K., but it was really hyped up. I can't really think of many others recently

DesignatedJerk
24-07-2004, 05:15 AM
i saw this movie and it was a solid movie. i thought keira' s acting was nicely played. the roles weren't so bad, i really felt the movie was pretty good in my opinion. i think it was just a bad decesion to release it around the same date as spider man 2. I think it's pretty much a sleeper hit like Last Samurai or what not.

Kelsey
24-07-2004, 07:31 AM
Disney didn't ruin King Arthur, they're just the easy target at the moment. And Pixar was always planning on leaving Disney; they've actually stayed for more projects than originally planned.

KnightleyNews
24-07-2004, 01:51 PM
Variety had this a few days ago on the international box office:

"King Arthur" took the crown in four markets and looks capable of emulating other period adventures such as "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen," "Master & Commander: The Far Side of the World," "Troy" and "The Last Samurai," all of which turned out to be far more popular overseas than in the U.S.


The Antoine Fuqua-directed knights tale nabbed $2.4 million on 245 screens in Australia (in local currency 12% bigger than "Master & Commander"), $397,000 on 33 screens in Singapore (13% up on "Gladiator"), and $324,000 on 41 screens in Malaysia (on par with "Troy").
The Jerry Bruckheimer production corralled a strapping $342,000 on 62 screens in New Zealand but couldn't unseat the Spidey 2 and "Shrek 2" holdovers.

Paul

DesignatedJerk
24-07-2004, 04:36 PM
Variety had this a few days ago on the international box office:

"King Arthur" took the crown in four markets and looks capable of emulating other period adventures such as "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen," "Master & Commander: The Far Side of the World," "Troy" and "The Last Samurai," all of which turned out to be far more popular overseas than in the U.S.


The Antoine Fuqua-directed knights tale nabbed $2.4 million on 245 screens in Australia (in local currency 12% bigger than "Master & Commander"), $397,000 on 33 screens in Singapore (13% up on "Gladiator"), and $324,000 on 41 screens in Malaysia (on par with "Troy").
The Jerry Bruckheimer production corralled a strapping $342,000 on 62 screens in New Zealand but couldn't unseat the Spidey 2 and "Shrek 2" holdovers.

Paul


oh well that's good. leave it to european countries to have good taste in movies :). go europe :icon_cool

Dyce_Blue
24-07-2004, 06:07 PM
The original Bourne I.D. did very well in US market 2 years ago. I expect it to unseat I, Robot as the leader and move Spidey to 3rd. With Catwoman also being released this week, I can't see King Arthur being above #9 on the list. This is quite unfortunate because King Arthur is better than that Cinderella and Sleepover crap that is above it on the list.

What are the top ten movies in Europe?

Kelsey
24-07-2004, 07:37 PM
Cinderella and Sleepover are above it on the list because those are the only movies out right now directed at a younger audience, whereas every other movie out right now is directed at the same audience as K.A.

Dyce_Blue
24-07-2004, 10:00 PM
It's official. Tonight I'm going to see the Bourne Supremacy, and once I return I will post the review on my yahoo movies profile. I have a list of all the movies I have seen in the theater, along with a letter grade and sometimes a review.

http://movies.yahoo.com/profiles/dyce_blue

check it out, I have put a lot of hours into it.

mufiman
24-07-2004, 11:27 PM
It's official. Tonight I'm going to see the Bourne Supremacy, and once I return I will post the review on my yahoo movies profile. I have a list of all the movies I have seen in the theater, along with a letter grade and sometimes a review.

its official. your post has nothing to do with Keira or king arthur. try to stay on topic.
king arthur will probably be at about 45-50 million [in the U.S.] at the end of this weekend and will probably get 55-60 million here. with worldwide box office, it will probably get back its budget and make profit off DVD sales, so its not that big of a financial disaster.

alby
25-07-2004, 06:00 AM
overseas gross is $4 million as of july 23.

piracy would probably affect earnings in asia as it always seems to do.

frodo1511
25-07-2004, 11:49 PM
overseas gross is $4 million as of july 23.

piracy would probably affect earnings in asia as it always seems to do.


Curious- How bad is the piracy in Asia? I've heard mixed rumors of it being terrible/ not as bad as in the states.
Oh, and KA sinks (unfortunately) lower into the top ten w/ the release of the Bourne Supremacy(kick-ass movie-go see it.)

Hazzle
26-07-2004, 12:49 AM
Curious- How bad is the piracy in Asia? I've heard mixed rumors of it being terrible/ not as bad as in the states.
Oh, and KA sinks (unfortunately) lower into the top ten w/ the release of the Bourne Supremacy(kick-ass movie-go see it.)

It's pretty damn bad...there are whole economies built on it, trust me :)

frodo1511
26-07-2004, 12:56 AM
It's pretty damn bad...there are whole economies built on it, trust me :)

Moses, that sucks. So what is it over there, some sort of mafia/underground movie-jacking thugs? Sucks to be them.

Dyce_Blue
26-07-2004, 01:00 AM
The piracy problem in Asia is really bad. My friend just got back from China with Dodgeball on DVD the day it was released. It was not good quality, but it kept my 8 bucks out of the theater. He also got me a DVD with every single Jackie Chan movie on it. It would cost hundreds of dollars to compile that manually.

Hazzle
26-07-2004, 01:35 AM
Moses, that sucks. So what is it over there, some sort of mafia/underground movie-jacking thugs? Sucks to be them.

It's often a family thing...whole families take part in it...but yeah...there are a LOT of VERY influential people with a LOT of money at stake who make sure the Asian countries maintain weak copyright. It's BIG business.

frodo1511
26-07-2004, 01:52 AM
It's often a family thing...whole families take part in it...but yeah...there are a LOT of VERY influential people with a LOT of money at stake who make sure the Asian countries maintain weak copyright. It's BIG business.


So, where do the police/government come into this? Don't they crack down on the piracy?

Hazzle
26-07-2004, 02:00 AM
So, where do the police/government come into this? Don't they crack down on the piracy?

Powerful financial interests...BUT...this is WAY off topic now...I'll start a thread about piracy if you like...there used to be one I think.

Dyce_Blue
26-07-2004, 02:18 AM
I just talked to 2 of my friends. One just got back from China, and one visited India last summer. My friend from China says that the police look the other way from pirated movie vendors. They are checked at customs, and if they are found, they are confiscated. This did not happen in his case, hence the 2 DVDs I received. The government doesn't seem to have that much of a problem either. The video stores are full of pirated stuff, even video games. The same goes in India as well, according to my other source. He compiled an X-Box collection of 80 games after returning from the subcontinent.

To get back on topic, according to my Chinese friend, King Arthur was not really a big seller for the vendors he met. It sold for 2 rmb, which is about 30 cents American. I hope the movie didn't lose a lot of viewers due to this. I can't really believe that they wouldn't want to see Keira on the big screen, especially when she is wearing that belt as a top.

More about KA. When I was at the theater to see the Bourne Supremacy today, I spied a King Arthur poster in what appeared to be a very flimsy case. My friend and I spent at least 5 minutes trying to wrestle that thing open, but we forgot about the several surveilance cameras in that capacious lobby. We eventually gave up when we realized that we needed a screwdriver to open them, and that everyone in the theater seemed to be staring at us. A little embarassing I would say, but I'd do anything for a Keira poster.

As you can see in the "Picture Time" board, I have no Keira posters. If anyone has one just lying around, I have a birthday coming up. What a great gift!

frodo1511
26-07-2004, 02:28 AM
Yeah, I wanted a couple of my friends to steal one of the KA posters outside of my local movie plex. We tried for a few minutes, but, like Dyce, I forgot my screensaver. But, hope was not lost!!! For I bought one at Sam Goody for $7 Any amount of money is worth for a big piece of paper with Keira Knightley on it:)

Dyce_Blue
26-07-2004, 04:15 AM
It's good to know that I'm not the only Keira-driven hoodlum.

(good looking-out frodo.)

frodo1511
26-07-2004, 04:35 AM
It's good to know that I'm the only Keira-driven hoodlum.


i think you ment to put the word "not" in between I'm and the. Just a hunch:)

Kelsey
26-07-2004, 05:18 AM
I got both versions of the King Arthur poster and the banner from the theater I work at. I'm sure you can buy them online.

frodo1511
26-07-2004, 06:21 AM
I got both versions of the King Arthur poster and the banner from the theater I work at. I'm sure you can buy them online.


Already got my Guinevere poster 3 weeks ago. Preety shabby if I do say so myself:)

alby
28-07-2004, 01:21 AM
Curious- How bad is the piracy in Asia? I've heard mixed rumors of it being terrible/ not as bad as in the states.
Oh, and KA sinks (unfortunately) lower into the top ten w/ the release of the Bourne Supremacy(kick-ass movie-go see it.)

It depends on the country. Indonesia is one of the worst.

Dyce_Blue
28-07-2004, 03:09 AM
Does anyone know the sales numbers for the King Arthur soundtrack and posters. I can't seem to find them. From all of the discussion on the site, I think they might be doing very well (maybe better than the movie)...

KRev
28-07-2004, 03:30 AM
I saw it twice, too. But the 1.5 hours when her face wasn't on the screen weren't as tolerable as the other movies she's been in.

Dyce_Blue
28-07-2004, 04:47 AM
It seems there is going to be a King Arthur videogame for XBox, PS2, and Gamecube. I really didn't think they would make one. I wonder how much of Keira we will see in this game, if they ever release it.

Here is the link. There are a lot of screens, but I haven't looked through them yet...

http://www.gamershell.com/news_BKingArthurBScreens.shtml

frodo1511
28-07-2004, 04:56 AM
It seems there is going to be a King Arthur videogame for XBox, PS2, and Gamecube. I really didn't think they would make one. I wonder how much of Keira we will see in this game, if they ever release it.

Here is the link. There are a lot of screens, but I haven't looked through them yet...

http://www.gamershell.com/news_BKingArthurBScreens.shtml


Yeah the game is supposed to come out this fall, and featuring playable characters of Arthur, Lancelot, and Guinevere(don't know if the real actors will record new dialogue/ digitally scan there faces for the game)
Anywho, the gameplay will be reminiscant of the Lord of the Rings games by EA, with photorealistic backgrounds from the movie.

Dyce_Blue
28-07-2004, 05:04 AM
Judging by the screen shots, the game looks like it completely follows the story. All of the screens I saw were from the first scene of the movie with the ambush of the transport. I wonder if Keira's belt "armor" will be a part of the game...

By the way, thank God that Konami is making the game. I am sick of EA and Activision.

frodo1511
28-07-2004, 05:16 AM
I just hope that the game will be good. I mean, if it follows in the footsteps of LOTR, that there's no problem. Props to Konami, they do a wonderous job with there games, unlike EA, who just makes a game to make a game, not for the social value, only for the money.

Edward
28-07-2004, 08:50 AM
By the way, thank God that Konami is making the game. I am sick of EA and Activision.
yes!! Konami and Codemasters all the way

Hazzle
28-07-2004, 04:05 PM
EA man myself...for me they make far better games these days compared to most...suppose it's merely "cool" to dislike them...like it's "cool" to prefer Pro-evo to Fifa...personally I like both but Fifa's by far the better game, just that Pro-Evo is a little more challenging. Difference is EA make games you can pick up and play, for people who aren't sad enough to be obsessed gamers.

Back to topic...the game'll surely help in terms of the film's take, as although they make no direct money out of its sale it would have had to have been licensed by the filmmakers.

frodo1511
28-07-2004, 11:01 PM
EA man myself...for me they make far better games these days compared to most...suppose it's merely "cool" to dislike them...like it's "cool" to prefer Pro-evo to Fifa...personally I like both but Fifa's by far the better game, just that Pro-Evo is a little more challenging. Difference is EA make games you can pick up and play, for people who aren't sad enough to be obsessed gamers.

Back to topic...the game'll surely help in terms of the film's take, as although they make no direct money out of its sale it would have had to have been licensed by the filmmakers.


Yeah, it's the opposite for the LOTR games by EA. The movie helped the sale of the game, while KA the game will help out the movie.
On the soccer remark, fifa and Pro-Evo are nothing compared to Konami's Winning Eleven-Seven Int'l. that's a gem right there.

Dyce_Blue
29-07-2004, 02:12 AM
On the football front, SEGA's ESPN NFL 2K series has surpassed EA's Madden since its early days on the Dreamcast. It is just considered a part of society to buy Madden. I know people that spent $50 on it last year, and it still sits in the wrapper. ESPN NFL costs only $20 this year, hopefully people will finally realize SEGA is the right decision.

Getting back on topic. (poggs...)

Do you think that King Arthur would have done better in the box office had it been made through a different production company. Buena Vista isn't exactly top dog in the industry right now. My opinion is that if King Arthur would have been released by: Columbia (Sony) Pictures, Universal Pictures, or 20th Century Fox, it would have been in much better hands from the start. Really any company besides Miramax and BV would have been good for the project...


By the way, how do you pronounce the name of the director (Antoine Fuqua) from King Arthur? In the previews it's pronounced like Foo-Kwa. In Houston (4th largest city in US) though, as well as San Antonio (8th largest), there are streets named Fuqua. In both cities the name is pronounced FyooKway.

Is this name more common in Europe? I don't really know what language it comes from, but if it were to be correctly pronounced in Spanish, it would sound like FooKai. Maybe it is French...

Object Of Affection
29-07-2004, 04:23 PM
"sorry off topic"

Well this piracy thing needs to be sorted.

I mean in asia and russia and other places in the far east piracy is perfectly normal thing to do i mean it was on the news over here that 9/10 video shops in russia sale pirate dvds of films that have only just come on the cinema.

I don't think it is there fault if dvd's are £10-£20 i mean alot of people over there can't afford to waste money like that on dvds so they choose to go for the pirate dvds at £3-£4.

Making it a hugely popular thing to do.

Sad really but unless something is done then it's only going to get worse in the future!

Hazzle
30-07-2004, 12:22 AM
Please...stay on topic...and I did try and start a thread about this topic but it got out of hand...if you want to discuss this topic, try IRC...

Back ON topic...I've actually always discussed Fuqua as Fukwa (not so much two seperate syllables as two blurred syllables).

And I'm not sure if better distribution would've helped...being distributed at Christmas might've been better, and keeping it aimed at the target it was intended for initially...basically they fucked Fuqua all over the shop and in the end the film could've done so much better if Disney hadn't been so pricky about it. Oh well.

frodo1511
30-07-2004, 01:06 AM
All hope is not lost- Wait for the DVD.

Dyce_Blue
31-07-2004, 01:21 AM
All hope is not lost- Wait for the DVD.

Seriously, with a fresh ad campaign, the DVD really has a chance of selling well. This really worked with Jason Statham's The Transporter DVD. The movie didn't do overly well in theaters, but the DVD sold very well.

It's really all about management. The movie is already out, and people know what to expect. With DVD advertisements, it is all about making the consumer think they are getting more.

frodo1511
31-07-2004, 02:02 AM
Seriously, with a fresh ad campaign, the DVD really has a chance of selling well. This really worked with Jason Statham's The Transporter DVD. The movie didn't do overly well in theaters, but the DVD sold very well.

It's really all about management. The movie is already out, and people know what to expect. With DVD advertisements, it is all about making the consumer think they are getting more.




With ads saying "PACKED WITH NEW AND DELETED SCENES!" and, "HOURS OF NEVER-BEFORE-SEEN FOOTAGE!" (or something like that) I believe the DVD will do just great.

Dyce_Blue
31-07-2004, 02:10 AM
With ads saying "PACKED WITH NEW AND DELETED SCENES!" and, "HOURS OF NEVER-BEFORE-SEEN FOOTAGE!" (or something like that) I believe the DVD will do just great.

Yeah, that usually gets me to buy a DVD, but I never watch them. It's just good to know that they're there.

The Pirates of the Caribbean DVD (of course featuring Keira) has also sold very well. I think the people at Buena Vista will be pleased that Keira Knightley is popular in the US, because having Clive Owen on the cover just isn't enough to sell a DVD.

fantastic
31-07-2004, 08:13 AM
In China <king arthur>will soon appear on the market, I think it will do
a good job

Spire
31-07-2004, 04:51 PM
I'm not sure if Disney is going to be willing to sink more money into the DVD to try to make up for the box-office sales.

Dyce_Blue
31-07-2004, 05:07 PM
I'm not sure if Disney is going to be willing to sink more money into the DVD to try to make up for the box-office sales.


You are right. Disney hasn't made a good decision in almost a decade. I bet they release King Arthur in one of the crappy cases. The one that all the Warner Bros. movies come in. They are made of a thick paper and a little plastic snap on the right side.

Disney needs a new marketing Rep. if they want to avoid another collapse like KA.

danny cool
01-08-2004, 05:12 PM
im sure im in a minority hear but i dintthink troy was great yet people would go and c it because they thought it looked good in the trailors.the actors are good il give them that but everwere u looked u could c posters trailors .. the same with spiderman 2.And so far what av i seen of king arthur 1 poster on a bus stop and that was facin away from the traffic so it was hard to c and i was looking. i think that if they want to c any real money back from this film they need to up how the stakes in the ad campaigh for the dvd release.

Samurai Deli
01-08-2004, 07:29 PM
I think the DVD sales will do well. I mean, there might be a Directors' Cut version that's rated R and has more scenes. So I think more people will buy that.

danny cool
01-08-2004, 08:32 PM
yes me for sure , taking the blood and gore out of the the film reall lost somthing u canrt have i film thats got 3 battle sequinces in it with no blood

Samurai Deli
01-08-2004, 08:42 PM
Yeah, that's true. It loses its realism.

frodo1511
01-08-2004, 08:48 PM
I think the DVD sales will do well. I mean, there might be a Directors' Cut version that's rated R and has more scenes. So I think more people will buy that.

there is already a planned director's cut DVD in the works, since there was already so much of the film cut(to get the lower rating)

Dyce_Blue
01-08-2004, 08:51 PM
It's a good thing they cut a lot of the blood, not from a quality standpoint though. If KA would have come out at a rated R movie, it would have lost another chunk of the teen audience. That demographic is increasingly more important these days.

frodo1511
01-08-2004, 09:21 PM
It's a good thing they cut a lot of the blood, not from a quality standpoint though. If KA would have come out at a rated R movie, it would have lost another chunk of the teen audience. That demographic is increasingly more important these days.


I would have to dissagree with you, dyce. Whenever a restricted movie comes out, and contains teen humor and/or fighting, all the underaged teenagers try to get into the movie, either by bringing there parents, sneaking in, or buying a ticket when some loser is at the ticket booth, not caring what age they are. They do this so they can boast to people about how they got into an R-rated movie. I'm sure these tricks will work for "Harod and Kumar". But take The Martix Reloaded and the Passion of the Christ. For both movies, I'm shooting at a 50% total Box Office gross was contributed by minors.