MOVIES

Sequels To Huge Movies That Flopped Hard At The Box Office

At this point, a trend might be emerging: returning to make a sequel as part of a franchise that’s been dormant from quite some time might not be the best idea. When he made “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny” in 2023 director James Mangold — who penned the movie alongside Jez Butterworth, John-Henry Butterworth, and David Koepp — picked up the series fifteen years after the most recent sequel, the much-maligned “Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull,” and based on both the reviews and box office returns, it feels like Mangold perhaps should have left well enough alone. Set in 1969, the movie pairs original star Harrison Ford with franchise newbie Phoebe Waller-Bridge (best known for her award-winning series “Fleabag”), who shows up as Indy’s goddaughter Helena as the two try to find a historical relic that could go back and change the outcome of World War II.

The reviews weren’t terrible but largely middling — but as far as the box office was concerned, “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny” was an utter disaster for Disney’s bottom line. Even though the movie made $384 million worldwide, that still marked a huge loss for Disney when you consider that it was one of the most expensive movies  ever made with a budget of just under $295 million (though even larger numbers were reported, marking serious inconsistencies regarding the movie’s enormous budget). In the end, it was one of the House of Mouse’s biggest financial flops ever … and it marked the end of the “Indiana Jones” franchise, according to a press release obtained by ScreenRant in the spring of 2023.

Source link

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button

GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX GOOGLE INDEX