‘Jack the Giant Slayer’ Bombs at the Box Office

Published 1 year ago by

jack the giant slayer nicholas hoult box office Jack the Giant Slayer Bombs at the Box Office

It seems that Hollywood just can’t get enough of reinventing fairy tales, though the audience and box office response to them has been mixed at best. “Beauty and the Beast in high school” romance flick Beastly was almost universally scorned by critics, though it managed to earn a modest profit off its relatively low production budget. Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters and Snow White and the Huntsman both did well enough overseas to compensate for their lukewarm domestic gross, and it was more or less the same deal for Snow White and the Huntsman‘s rival, Mirror Mirror.

The fairy tale trend is not over yet, though. Next year we can expect to see Maleficent, a live-action origin story for Disney’s Sleeping Beauty villain, and Guillermo Del Toro is planning another Beauty and the Beast adaptation with Emma Watson as the heroine. For whatever reason, live-action reinventions of classic fairy tales are incredibly in vogue right now. Personally, I blame Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland, which was one of the few fairy tale success stories at the box office, earning a worldwide gross of over $1 billion.

Legendary Pictures hasn’t been so lucky with its big-budget, CGI-heavy fantasy adventure Jack the Giant Slayer. Despite a worldwide marketing budget of over $100 million, on top of the production budget of $200 million, Yahoo reports that the film has so far only earned only around $157 million since its March 1st release date, with THR predicting that it will top out at just over $200 million. This will leave Legendary Pictures (who financed half of the film’s total budget) with losses of between $125 and $140 million, and Warner Bros. facing significant losses as well.

jack the giant slayer ewan mcgregor ian mcshane Jack the Giant Slayer Bombs at the Box Office

The film’s plot was conflated from different sources, with the magic beans and beanstalk derived from the classic fairy tale “Jack and the Beanstalk”, and the title and royal love interest (Eleanor Tomlinson) drawn from the Arthurian folk tales of “Jack the Giant Killer.” It featured Nicholas Hoult in the lead role and was produced and directed by Bryan Singer, who will hopefully make a recovery with next year’s release of X-Men: Days of Future Past.

If the estimated numbers hold, Jack the Giant Slayer‘s overall losses will fall somewhere between those for 2012 disasters Battleship and John Carter, making it an early contender for 2013′s “Flop of the Year” award. It’s worth noting, however, that critic and audience responses were somewhat more positive than the box office intake. The film has received middling-to-good reviews, with Screen Rant’s Ben Kendrick describing it as “surprisingly entertaining,” and the majority of our poll voters rating it between 4 and 5 stars.

Were you one of the people who saw Jack the Giant Slayer in theaters last month? Did it deserve better numbers than it got? Share your thoughts in the comments.

____

Jack the Giant Slayer is predicted to get a DVD and Blu-ray release in July 2013.

Source: Yahoo (via THR)

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: Jack the Giant Slayer

80 Comments

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

  1. I am in shock at the 3 movies listed I consider myself a self proclaimed movie critic and battleship was a great movie. Lacked stronger acting at some of the co star roles but overall good movie. John carted also enjoyed very much. Went and saw jack the giant slayer opening night and was shocked the theater was at 20% capacity at best. Good movie though would watch it again, big downfall though it did not use enough of the original story line people, well myself anyway like to see memorable events of retold stories. The talking harp , golden eggs (chicken etc.) but shocked these 3 movies were busts,ive seen much worse movies do much better

    • I would much rather watch Jack the Giant slayer than anyone of the Twilight movies….I think this is all due to lack of proper advertising. And I agree, Battleship was pretty good :)

    • @jason

      Battleship either sucked or it rocked depending on the audience. If you’re very “hoorah” pro-military, it was awesome. If you’re more of a unbathed hippy, then it was “nationalistic propaganda,” while you fix your hipster glasses and beret…

    • Excellent movie, much better than expected. Didn’t realize Magregor was so short, Ian McShane too. The CGI was good enough and the action was well paced. Should benefit from cable and Blue-Ray/DVD.

  2. Saw this in IMAX 3D last week and enjoyed it quite a bit, as did my father (who hadn’t seen a 3D movie since the 1950s!) and my son. It wasn’t as good as John Carter (which we liked A LOT), but it most certainly didn’t suck.

    For those who’ve seen it. . .when Ewan McGregor got rolled in dough, did anyone else think “Obi-Wan Cannoli?” :)

    • HAHAHA – Never Even Crossed My Mind!!

      GENIUS

  3. No surprise on the 1st 2 bombs. Battleship was complete garbage and John Carter lost my interest an hour into it. Ill give Jack a shot once it comes out on blu-ray but it never interested me enough to want to go drop ten bucks to see it. The cast in all 3 is lackluster at best. Taylor Kitsch, as much as they try, is not a leading man and Ewan McGregor can’t lead a a big budget film either. Ian McShane is a great actor, but he just looks ridiculous in that picture above in his bright gold suit of armor.

    • you know jacks played by nicholas hoult right? ewan mcgregors not the lead but he totally could be.. he’s an extremely charismatic actor (see big fish, and some parts of revenge of the sith I repeat SOME PARTS)..

      I actually really enjoyed the movie dude, you should definitely at least rent it. Sure its flawed but its an enjoyable ride nonetheless.

    • Not going to comment on the rest of what you said because that’s all opinion, but regarding the “ridiculous” looking suit of armor, that was intentional… This movie is full of humor, and there is a kind of on-going gag about how ridiculous the king has to keep dressing up… But it’s kind of subtle, and not really in-your-face, so it never becomes to the point that it’s just cheesy and kills the joke…

  4. I saw it and also found it surprisingly enjoyable. And I too enjoyed it more than Oz, which I saw as well.

  5. 200 mil spent in making the movie but the movie’s visuals were nothing spectacular…100 mil spent in amrkelting the movie still i think it was poorly promoted…the problem is not with the movie’s gross but with the amount of money spent…

    • Studios are overspending on essentially “B-movies” (for reasons too detailed to get into) then unable to make back their nut — even in the lucrative overseas market — because audiences and critics are generally non-linear in their moviegoing tastes.

      What is clear, producers are swinging for the fences with an endless stream of fairytales, and running the risk of over-saturation. The problem is that no one is willing to past up a front row seat at a smorgasborg when what they really want is a la carte.

      • Yep.

    • *marketing

  6. I just didn’t have any urge to see it whatsoever.

  7. After my favorite film of 2012 (John Carter) was labelled a bomb at the box-office, I have given up trying to figure out any relationship between quality of film and box-office earnings. I have not yet seen “Jack the Giant Slayer”, so I will withhold judgement on it — but I won’t join in calling it a bomb simply because its budget was much bigger than its box-office receipts.

  8. Jack the giant slayer……I think it should have been named “Jack the Giant Killer”. Much like the one many years before.
    But other than that, I was very surprised how good it was. I really liked it!
    The corny bits involved the sideways looks of approval (almost camp) of the King and the knight. But a very minor detail. If I was to rate it…….I would have to say 4 stars. Which is pretty good for a fantasy. I personally rate it more highly than the rings series, because it does not have the flat spots(slow bits). It pretty much just kept going. Just the way I like it. Great movie.
    By the way, I love John Carter…Own it on Blue Ray. And have watched it a least 4 times since it release.
    Fantasy movies rule.
    As long as they are not toooooo long (rings x 3 and Hobbitt).

    • @Peter

      Repeat after me “Blu-ray” Blu without the e, b-l-u…

      lol, just messing with you man… ;-)

  9. I saw “Jack the Giant Slayer” with my children who are age 8 & 10. I have to say I was pleasantly surprised. I found myself engrossed right along with my kids. Personally I think you can’t always go by box office predictions. I watch a large amount of independent films that rarely make the top 10 yet they are amazing, well written, well directed body’s of work. Although the film may not have reached expectations, I for one believe it was a solid well made film for family’s. In this economy there are way to many grounds for why a film, did not do as well as to be expected. Just to many variables to speculate on.

    • I agree. The box office performances are anything but an accurate indication of a movie’s actual quality. For example, Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland is a worldwide massive hit, but it received mediocre reviews and is one of the worst movies I’ve seen. Same with the Transformers movies, which are poorly written and poorly acted, yet they always dominate at the box office.

  10. “This will leave Legendary Pictures (who financed half of the film’s total budget) with losses of between $125 and $140 million, and Warner Bros. facing significant losses as well.”
    How does the author’s loss numbers add up if Jack makes $200 million and it cost a total of $300 million? The total loss between all sources would be $100 million.

  11. What a shame that this movie didn’t do well as I thought it was very good-and I don’t often say that about movies these days!! Didn’t think it was going to be all that great but went with kids and friends to the discount theater. It employed all the story elements in an exciting way! I was on the edge of my seat throughout the entire movie.

    I initially thought, another classic story modernized with
    violence and the dark side, this one was different!

    • I was surprised that this movie did so poorly too. It was actually quite enjoyable to watch. I blame the release date and the marketing.

  12. My husband and I just watched the movie Jack the Giant Slayer and found it very exciting and entertaining. We were going to the movie to see it but something happend and we never got there. We bought the dvd and it was worth every dollar. We also loved the movie Battleship. Don’t know why these two movies didn’t do well at the theaters but they are both very good movies!

  13. OMG!! what the?? Jack the Giant Slayer is pretty COOL and AWESOME!! How can it drop? seriously its one of the best movies I’ve seen so far apart from Hansel and Gretel and Battleship!! :)