A SnagFilms company
Trending: Critics Rank the Top Films & Performances of Sundance 2013
Celebrating 16 Years of Film.Biz.Fans.
more
Box Office
by Peter Knegt
Fri Jan 04 10:55:58 EST 2013
14 Comments
  • |

The 5 Biggest Disappointments at the 2012 Specialty Box Office

"The Paperboy"
There were indeed a lot of good news to come out of the 2012 indie box office, as yesterday's article on the year's 10 biggest specialty market success stories can attest. But it wasn't all roses and dollar signs, as these 5 major specialty disappointments make clear:

1. Indie films starring Zac Efron, Kristen Stewart or Robert Pattinson
They all faired very well with wide releases this year ("The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn, Part 2," "Snow White and the Huntsman," "The Lucky One," "The Lorax"), but three of young Hollywood's biggest stars all had serious box office issues when it came to indie fare this year. After they all turned up at Cannes with promising films like David Cronenberg's "Cosmopolis," Lee Daniels' "The Paperboy," and Walter Salles' "On The Road," each saw their films make it to Stateside release with a thud. "Cosmopolis" -- starring Pattinson as a twentysomething billionaire riding around Manhattan in his limo -- grossed just $763,556; The promise of a whole lot of Zac Efron in his tighty whiteys helped bring "The Paperboy" to a gross of just $693,286; and while Stewart's turn in "On The Road" only had a one week qualifying run in December (with a wider release coming in a few weeks) -- its numbers weren't promising (it averaged $9,888 from 4 screens, but again -- the jury is still out). All three films can take solace in the fact that their grosses weren't as dismal as Pattinson's "Bel Ami," which was released in the Spring to the tune of just $120,462. That's probably about how much "Breaking Dawn, Part 2" made in its first 10 seconds of release.

2. "Atlas Shrugged, Part II"
Considering "Atlas Shrugged, Part I" wasn't exactly a big hit -- grossed $4.6 million on its $20 million budget -- it shouldn't come as a surprise that its sequel did so poorly as well. What should come as a surprise is that it was even made at all. But where there's a will there's a way, though despite opening on more than three times the screens of "Part I," the sequel barely improved on "Part I"'s opening weekend ($1.7 million on 1,012 screens).  Adjusted for inflation, the film had the 109th worst wide openings of the past 30 years, followed by one of the 200 worst second-week drops for the same period (65%). The end result was a $3.3 million gross. "Atlas Shrugged, Part III," anyone? Anyone?

Box Office
get email updates on Box Office
  • |
TAGS: The Paperboy, Box Office, On The Road, Cosmopolis, Vamps, The Master, Atlas Shrugged: Part 2

14 Comments

  • rsd | Sun Jan 06 00:22:39 EST 2013Reply

    It is interesting that all these films grossing 40 million are mentioned in this article as great results, and the one grossing 15 million too, even when it cost 35 million to make. When Remember Me grossed 19 million (on at 16 million budget) in the US and 55 million nationwide (officially, because Rob stated in an interview it was actually close to 70 million), most articles I read portrayed it as a flop (???) I guess it is because its lead was "that guy from Twilight..."

  • Freda Magritt | Sat Jan 05 09:41:42 EST 2013Reply

    What about Bale's "The Flowers of war", released in 2012 as well? Its total gross was $311,000 - much less than Cosmopolis or The Paperboy.

  • Kanerwa | Sun Jan 06 06:57:35 EST 2013

    Exactly,Freda,but The Flowers of War was released in 2011,but I'm sure it didn't make the list of The 5 Biggest Dissapoitments at the 2011.What about Rust and Bone ($600,000,with Oscar winner Cotillard),Amour($200,000 Palme d'Or winner),Holy Motors(500,000)?But of course it's easier to pointed ''serious box office issues'' of actors that became famous starring in fangirls flicks than to write honest article.The worst thing is that Indiwire journalist instead of praising actors for courage and taking challenging roles in R-rated dramas,he puts them down and writting how disappointing their movies were at the box office,especially if there are even more disappoitment films.

  • caro | Sat Jan 05 10:00:30 EST 2013

    the movie released on 30 movie theaters the first week then on 13 theaters the second then on 5 theaters without publicity
    for a chinese movie about a chinese event with bad reviews,it's not so bad
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1410063/business

  • jspattzfan | Fri Jan 04 17:47:41 EST 2013Reply

    One fact about Bel Ami. In the states it had a very limited run in few theaters, which didn't help the gross, but it was released OnDemand the same day it came out and a lot of people saw it that way. I never saw any figures on total hits for that. It suffered from a flawed screenplay, but looked great with sets and costumes. Mr Pattinson wasn't all that bad and has gotten a lot better. The movie had been made two years before it was released and had virtually no promotion.

  • Marie | Sat Jan 05 03:32:17 EST 2013

    "he wasn't all that bad" glad to see a rpatzz fan with a bit of lucidity.

  • Marie | Fri Jan 04 12:54:02 EST 2013Reply

    only $ 9.888 from 4 screens for On The Road? even with their 6954874523 screenings, KStew naked and giving countless interviews spewing the same pretencious bullshit ? what a pity!

  • tam | Sun Jan 06 17:10:54 EST 2013

    Third weekend in theaters and it only has an average of $3,600.

  • McMuffin | Fri Jan 04 11:44:09 EST 2013Reply

    Lol. Prepare for the Twihards-oops I mean Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart's "serious movie" fans-to attack this article. Oh the Twihard drama.

  • Kanerwa | Sat Jan 05 06:39:52 EST 2013

    People want to see the hero in condome costiume and plastic ears,plus many explosions and gun shots,any actor between age 25-35 could have playedBatman in 250mln $ budget movie.The Twilight actors made the blockbuster from almost indie budget movie(Twilight 37mln $ budget,almost 400mln$ worldwide)- this is success.I'm sure nobody downloads pics of Bale's dreamy eyes and sleeps in his E.Cullen bedspread,because he's not playing romantic vampire hero only comic hero,so I'm sure bunch of little nerds and grown-up men getting exited watching their collection of plastic Batman/Bane/Joker toys.Don't worry about Twi actors careers they're good actors and they gained a lot,they had movies at Cannes Festival at age of 26 and 22.This is enough success for a such young people,even if those movies weren't successful at the box office.

  • McMuffin | Fri Jan 04 16:13:37 EST 2013

    Christian Bale is how you spell his name. I'm pretty sure any movie Christian Bale makes is capable of at least making $1 Million. Something your Twilight heros couldn't do. $1 Million, how hard can that be for two of the most famous people in their age group. Of course Christian Bale is a GOOD actor, people want to go see him act not just download pictures of his dreamy eyes and sleep with his Edward Cullen bedspread. That's the difference.

  • Kanerwa | Fri Jan 04 13:30:32 EST 2013

    I'm waiting for amazing box-office of Cristian Bale's movie with Malick.I'm expecting Batman numbers .Batman fanboys drama:D

  • june | Fri Jan 04 11:41:31 EST 2013Reply

    You got it wrong Peter. Cosmopolis is the best reviewed with 65% from RT, The Paperboy 39% and On the road at 46%. Cosmopolis also had lots more top/best of lists for 2012 compared to the other 2 films.

  • alice | Fri Jan 04 11:07:19 EST 2013Reply

    The best reviewed of the three films is Cosmopolis w 65% fresh on RT.

fresh from the blogs

browse the blog network »
Dave Grohl Admits: 'I haven't the slightest idea how this sh*t works'

the network

indiewire

categories