In April 2015, The Hollywood reporter It found that Warner Bros. was preparing to “flood” the market this summer with a list of nine films to close the gap, which is due to the absence of Christopher Nolans “Dark Knight” trilogy and the “Harry -Potter “films was left. At that time Warner’s domestic sales manager Dan Fellman said to The Outlet: “It will be difficult work, but I think it will pay off.”
In a way, WB’s approach paid off. The “San Andreas” led by Dwayne Johnson, which was produced with a budget of $ 110 million 474 million US dollars worldwide. And while “Mad Max: Fury Road” was not quite as good and did $ 380 million worldwide with a budget of 150 million US Films in the Saga “Mad Max”. But a big budget Warner project failed both a critical and commercial front.
A Peter Pan Origin story with Hugh Jackman as Blackbeard The Pirat next to Levi Miller as Peter Pan does not sound as if it had been a disaster from the departure and departure. But it was and it lost Warner Bros. a damn a lot of money.
Pan was a cash disaster
“Pan” was a story by Peter Pan Origin by Joe Wright, who was previously an Oscar candidate with the best picture with “atonement”, a unique action thriller with “Hanna” and a solid historical drama, which also Oscar nominations with “Anna received Karenina.” As such, there was no indication that his story of Peter Pan Origin would prove to be as great as it was at some point “Pan” failed at the box office spectacular.
2015 was full of cash stitches, from “Star Wars: Episode VII – The Force Awakens”, which more than $ 2 billion worldwide to “Jurassic World”, which was not far behind 1.6 billion US dollars. Unfortunately, a stacked year left Little Room for Wright’s film, which for Warner Bros. meant losing a considerable part of change.
The studio had given Wright 150 million US dollars to make his film, and that’s pretty much Exactly What the film made in terms of its global income. This does not seem to be like a disaster, but when you consider that studios usually get half of the domestic box office and less for some international markets, and the fact that Warners had given a significant amount for marketing meant the studio, That the studio would have lost a lot of money – about 150 US dollars millions after reports at that time.
What was the problem? Apart from the fact that 2015 was stacked with blockbuster offers, the critics largely agreed: “Pan” was just bad.
A Peter Pan Origin story that is not worth to be told
Originally planned for a publication in June 2015, “Pan” was withdrawn until October, supposedly space among the overcrowded slate of this year. As a spectacular Visueller Tour de Force, the film was initially intended for an Imax publication, with Warners A publishing Featureette Astonish the efforts of the VFX team to create a breathtaking 3D experience. When “Pan” debuted on October 9, 2015, it happened in regular theaters and not on IMAX screens.
This anti -climate -acting debut was just the beginning of Joe Wright and WBS problems. “Pan” did something The Hollywood reporter In his opening weekend as a “catastrophic” US dollar, described as “catastrophic” and ultimately only integrated 35 million US dollars in Germany. According to ThR, the global marketing spending of Warner was 125 million US dollars, which increased the total cost of “Pan” to 275 million US dollars. The global intake of 151.5 million US dollars of the film was more than a little disappointing – especially since Warner Bros. had also seen that Henry Cavill -Leiten “The Man of Uncle” bomb at the box office earlier in the same year.
Of course, the critical drubbing pan that has been preserved did not help. The reviewers were merciless in their assessments of the film, which currently has low 26% Lazy tomatoes. Critics had a special problem with the extent of the film work of the film. Like that Just’ Kate Muir wrote: “The overuse of CGI effects in ‘Pan’ is exhausting and incomprehensible, even within the crazy logic of a fairy tale.” Elsewhere, “Pan” actually had Donald Clarke from the Irish times Longing for a reassessment of Steven Spielberg’s “Hook”, a film that the director himself does not trust while shooting.
Likewise, the “positive” reviews for “Pan” could hardly be described as devastated, with Robbie Collin from the Daily Telegraph Writing “Jubilant Uncool (…) one of the best compliments they can pay Could have been written 100 years ago. Perhaps the worst indictment came from Peter Travers. In his one-star Rab Review, he described Wright’s film as a “joyless, lush (…) theme-park trip from hell”. If I were Warners, I would have put this last part on the posters to record some business of confused cinema -goers.
