‘Ben-Hur’ Is Latest Flop for Paramount

>During new pressure on Viacom to turn around Paramount Pictures, the studio misfired again over the weekend: “Ben-Hur,” which cost Paramount and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer about $100 million to make, not including marketing expenses, arrived to a disastrous $11.4 million in domestic ticket sales.

>Big-budget flops are no longer uncommon in Hollywood. What is unusual is the patience that Paramount’s corporate owner has afforded the studio. In addition to “Ben-Hur,” “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows,” “Whiskey Tango Foxtrot” and “Zoolander 2” failed to find audiences for Paramount.

>“Star Trek Beyond” has been a hit. But domestic ticket sales for that film trail its series predecessor by 36 percent. (“Star Trek Beyond” is still rolling out in major markets overseas.) On Friday, as Viacom ousted its chief executive, a media analyst, Michael Nathanson, called Paramount a “truly shocking” problem, noting in a report that the studio may lose $350 million this year.

>Paramount did protect itself financially on “Ben-Hur” by teaming with Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, which paid for 80 percent of the production costs. Paramount also believes that “Ben-Hur” can take in $100 million overseas. “Movies like ‘Ghostbusters,’ ‘Independence Day’ and ‘Ben-Hur’ certainly looked like they were going to be big going into the summer, but audiences, especially in the world of remakes, have been very tough,” Rob Moore, Paramount’s vice chairman, said in a phone interview on Sunday.

archive.is/ODAYI

Is Hollywood going bankrupt?

It would take a literal moron to think a movie like Ben Hur would make bank in today's movie market landscape.

Whoever thought it was a good idea should be flogged, sold as a slave and his entire family destroyed.
Maybe eventually he would rise again by saving a high ranking producer or by competing in a chariot race through the studio lots.

The SS Paramount and SS MGM certainly looking like they're close to sinking, but Hollywood overall will be fine.

It will start losing studios one by one in the coming decades though. Just like how there used to be many choices for oil companies.

I saw this coming as soon as it was Greenlit.

It just never seems to surprise me how someone in a creative field cannot see that certain genres are absolutely meaningless to moviegoers now.

This also goes for Tarzan, and I'm not even going to look at see if there is another Flash Gordon in development...

imho eventually companies like Amazon and Netflix will start producing feature length movies on par with regular Hollywood hits except they'll probably be more inclined to take risks since they can throw money at projects

At least Paramount and MGM aren't Sony

>Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, which paid for 80 percent of the production costs
kek

sony and paramount are run by people who are literally fucking retarded and legitimately worse than worthless, and warner and mgm aren't much better.

if i didn't know any better (desu i don't) i would really start to suspect that these people have shorted their own companys. the weird thing is most of these movies make sense at a third or even half the budgets they get, but they seem to think that the more money you light on fire, much more will come back.

instead its just a really big fire.

Isn't Viacom run by a 99 year old man who can't even communicate properly?

there's a massive tug-of-war lawsuit about the top management at viacom ongoing now

>been her

Kikes really pushing the tranny shit hard lately. Won't be seeing this trash.

I bet literally every top executive meeting has the top dog slapping box office numbers on the table going "HOW COME THEY HAVE THESE HITS, WHAT DO WE HAVE?!?! SPEAK UP!!!" and then some moron starts blubbering about what properties they have that they can reboot because it's sure money.

They probably have a little board with all the greatest hits their studio ever produced and then they look at it to decide what to reboot next since it HAS TO rake in money. It would be foolish to think otherwise.

Literal underrated post

>cannot see that certain genres are absolutely meaningless to moviegoers now.

And to those for whom it is meaningful, Ben-Hur 1959 is perfect and this shitty re-remake is fucking sacrilege

Can't wait for the new Citizen Kane.

Christ, you know it's coming. Except it'll be Donald Trump this time instead of Hearst.

Unless this disaster box office year starts to convince Hollywood that everyone is sick of remakes.

judging by the results this cant be far from the truth

I can see this 100%

>THEY'RE MAKING FUCKTONS OF MONEY AND WE'VE GOT SHIT, SOMEONE GET ME AN IDEA HERE
>sir we can just remake Beloved Film X, it's already got brand recognition and that gets us halfway to a hit right there
>MARKETING, IS THAT TRUE?
>yes sir, branding is everything. trust me i'm a marketer
>ALRIGHT YOU'VE GOT $150 MILLION, BUT GOONIES: RESURRECTION BETTER BANK A BILLION

Paramount deserve to go bankrupt if their stupid enough to not learn from the mistake made by whichever studio made the Bourne films when they tried to make a Bourne movie without Matt Damon.

Paramount execs are seriously considering making a Mission Impossible movie without Tom Cruise, because they decided to act like typical Jews and not give one of THE biggest movie stars on the planet, who does all the crazy stunts himself, is the face of the franchise, is also the producer, and almost guarantees a movie starring him will make a ton of profit a 10 or 20 million $ raise.

I really hate Sony

Everything about them sucks, every facet of their company is garbage

I can't wait for those morons to go bankrupt

>STAR POWER IS OVER
>THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IS THE FRANCHISE
>PEOPLE GO TO SEE THE FRANCHISE
>TRANSFORMERS PROVES IT

Has any ancient world film since Gladiator not flopped?

300

Here's an idea: STOP MAKING REMAKES

Flash Gordon will just be "we want the Guardians of the Galaxy audience".

>Ben-Hur 1959 is perfect

Except for being written by a commie.

What made it so bad? just because it was a reboot?

>Money Laundering: The Movie

1. no big names except morgan freeman
2. shot in digital

honestly it wasn't that bad. i'd give it a 6/10, maybe even a 7.