Awful horror movies don’t bomb often. Sure, a lot of bad ones get made, but the
budgets are never big enough to really cost the stakeholders any money.
That’s the whole business model of Blumhouse, and it’s incredible.
However, every once in a while, somebody gets a really big head and decides that their flick
deserves more money than any of the films it’s trying to compete with, and goes completely
off the rails. Re-shoots, unnecessary CGI, forgetting that
the strength of most horror movies is the withholding of monsters. All reasons to go
over budget and underperform. But realistically, unless you’re shooting
a sci-fi horror monstrosity, there’s no reason for a spooky flick to bomb, which makes
it even more interesting when they do. Honourable mentions to CATS, which is both
scarier and less financially viable than any of the flicks on today’s list.
Ugh, I still can’t unsee that cockroach scene.
Hello horror heads, and welcome back to the scariest channel on YouTube: Top5ScaryVideos.
I’m your horror host, Keegan Hughes, and today we’re counting down the Top 5 Terrible
Horror Movies That Lost Studios Millions. Yes, I know that good horror movies often
do underperform, and it’s one of life’s greatest tragedies.
However, we’re only looking at the objectively bad ones because why not make fun of stuff,
right? I’ll see you in the comments when you’re all calling for my head on a stake.
Before we begin, make sure to give this video a big thumbs up, and subscribe for more scary,
cinematic stinkers. Wicked, let’s get started.
NUMBER FIVE: THE WOLFMAN (2010) Universal Studios wanted to do a re-tooling
of their classic 1941 wolf-based horror. Seems like a good idea! Iconic character,
tried-and-true story, wide appeal, you name it.
Apparently Universal isn’t very good at rebooting things, right The Mummy fans?
Well, in the days leading up to The Wolfman’s release, they got together a stellar crew.
Benicio del Toro, Anthony Hopkins, Emily Blunt, Hugo Weaving. All big names. All pretty expensive,
I’m assuming. Mark Romanek was on to direct, working on
the pre-production for about a year, but it wasn’t exactly what the executives were
looking for. Romanek walked away from the project about
three weeks out from the start of production, leaving the studio to scramble and find a
new director. Enter Joe Johnson, three days after Romanek
left. Three weeks of prep later, they were shooting.
Initially the movie had a budget of around $85 million, but with extensive reshoots,
additional VFX, a lengthy recut process, and Danny Elfman’s score being replaced, it
quickly became more expensive. In the end the movie cost $150 million, and
that’s not even including the marketing money.
It was released to mixed reviews, most feeling that it was just okay, and couldn’t capture
the magic of the original. It’s a movie that’s big in scale, with
plenty of high-tier effects, but it’s missing something.
Plus, for a horror it’s not too tense or scary.
Joe Johnston has this to say about joining late: “the production was a leaky, rudderless
ship in a perfect storm suffering from bad decisions, infighting, reluctance of the powers-that-be
to take responsibility, and too many under-qualified cooks in the kitchen.”
Not exactly what you want your director saying about the movie he’s heading.
If that wasn’t enough, the then-president of Universal Ronald Meyer called it “crappy”
and “one of the worst movies we ever made.” In the end, The Wolfman made 139.8 million,
which is a lot, but definitely not enough for a movie with a much bigger budget.
NUMBER FOUR: SPECIES II After the huge, surprise success of the original
Species, Frank Mancuso Jr. stepped up and tried to capitalize immediately.
He led Friday the 13th through 6 sequels, and figured he could make another evergreen
series and rake in the dollars. This was not the case.
With a budget of $35 million at a cash-strapped MGM, Species II only recouped around $30 million.
Five million in the hole, with a bunch of toys and merchandise aimed at adults that
would become increasingly hard to move. A little extra Species did not turn out how
they had wanted it to. And it’s not like this was a little cult
hit that a hardcore fanbase enjoyed. It was a raunchy, smutty, repugnant film that
was pretty much universally panned. The ads looked like softcore skin flicks,
the film itself didn’t screen for critics. H.R. Giger demanded that his name be removed
from the film after he saw a cut. The grossness of Species wasn’t really related
to its special effects or monster mashing, either.
It was more related to the constant fornication required to move the plot forward.
Mr. Hunky Spaceface comes back to Earth, infected with Mars DNA.
This means he’s gonna head out and boink everything with a pulse, whether they’re
ready or not. A lot of this is played off like comedy, and
it falls really flat. Nobody’s laughing when he assaults a woman in a grocery store
and runs off. But come on! We gotta stop him before he fucks
the human race into extinction! And the tagline: OH THE TAGLINE.
“Her loyalty is to man, but her instinct is to mate.”
So it doesn’t live up to the first, it’s pretty ridiculous and repellant, and is also
full of terrible CGI. No wonder it bombed.
NUMBER THREE: FEARDOTCOM If there’s one redeeming quality to this
early 2000’s techno-horror, it’s that it looks cool.
Like it’s shot well, and the final 20 minutes are pretty wicked.
However, the rest of it, from the garbled dialogue, to the poor writing decisions, to
the fact that it potentially lost over $20 million, is a big pile of bad.
The actual budget for FEARDOTCOM is up for debate, but most folks estimate it at around
$40 million. Some say it’s closer to $20, but either
way, it’s not making any money. In the end, it made around $19 million worldwide.
FEARDOTCOM was one of many flicks picked up in a deal with Franchise that saw a lot of
schlocky stuff get distributed by Warner Brothers. Other lovely failures on this list include
Battlefield Earth, and Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever.
Rarefied air, folks. So FEARDOTCOM is about a New York City detective
looking into a string of deaths associated with a disturbing website.
All sorts of folks have been found dead with their faces frozen in fear.
Whatever this website is doing, it’s making sure their greatest fears are being channelled
directly into their brains. Soon enough, of course, the website takes
over most of the movie’s world. A sort of fun, sort of silly idea quickly
devolves into buxom-babe-bleeding torture porn with plenty of cringy dialogue and poor
decision making. Like why don’t people simply stop logging
in after a while? And how does this weird torture-clown function
while being seperate from the actual spooky entity behind the scenes?
You know what? It’s fine. It doesn’t matter anyways.
NUMBER TWO: THE APPARITION Listen to the log line for this one: A couple’s
life turns upside down when they discover they are being haunted by a presence which
was accidentally released through a college experiment gone wrong.
Doesn’t that sound… boring? You guessed it, it is!
Another bomb not screened for critics, it’s almost like the folks behind these know they’re
bad. This first feature by writer-director Todd
Lincoln started out with 17 million dollars, and ended up with 9.627.
You win some, you lose some. However, this was a big loss considering the
tepid to chilly reception it got from audiences and critics alike.
It feels like The Apparition should have had a much smaller budget, considering what they
do with it. Most of this supernatural shocker takes place
inside of an empty suburban home with a relatively small cast.
There’s lots of exposition, from a text-only opening, some found footage of an experiment
gone wrong, and a long trip to Costco. Yes, you heard me right. This movie spends
an inordinate amount of time planning, discussing, and carrying out a trip to the big bulk superstore
itself. All to bring a cactus in that dies right away,
like a canary in a coal mine. The movie plays out like a worse Paranormal
Activity, without the benefit of it being a Paranormal Activity movie.
It might have been sort of scary if they didn’t shoehorn in some cheesy CGI every once in
a while. NUMBER ONE: THE HAUNTING OF SHARON TATE
Contrary to what the title implies, this movie has nothing to do with Shirley Jackson.
The Sharon Tate connection is real though, even if it takes a drastically different position
than the real events. Critically panned, hated by audiences, sewered
by historical purists, burned at the stake by Tate fans, nothing went right for this
gory trip of a biopic. It’s not a recreation of the horrifying
Tate murders, but instead a purgatory of sorts. Most of the movie consists of a pregnant Sharon
Tate having visions of her upcoming murder. There are some gory and creepy moments, but
that doesn’t qualify this movie for a “being passably good stamp of honour.”
Somehow, 2019 had three movies focused on the Manson cult and the events surrounding
the murderous maniacs. Unsurprisingly, The Haunting of Sharon Tate
was the worst of the three, both in terms of quality and box office performance.
So get this. I looked, and I scrounged, and I sifted through
the fine silica dust of the internet, but I was unable to find a budget posted anywhere.
BUT. We do have the box office results, and through my keen reasoning and deduction skills,
I can confidently say that this movie was indeed a gigantic bomb.
Ready? Okay. The Haunting of Sharon Tate made around 20
thousand dollars, worldwide. Twenty. Thousand.
In the interest of fairness, I will concede that the only theatrical run it did was a
short one in Russia, but still. You couldn’t get a half-decent short film
made for $20 thousand, and here Saban Films is distributing a feature film starring Hillary
Duff and recouping what probably would cover transportation for all the key players.
Who financed this thing? Are they doing alright? Next time just buy the boat, alright?
OUTRO Wowie. It’s pretty depressing how some movies
can lose more money than I’ll likely see in my entire lifetime.
What about you? Do you hope to ever make as much money as some of these flicks lost?
What horror movies have you heard of that lost mucho money?
Make sure you let me know down in the comments. Speaking of comments, let’s take a look
at some of your more financially sound ones from the Top 5 SCP Monsters that can Never
Escape - Part 12: Abram Repeki says “Plot twist: Keegan is
an SCP monster a.k.a. Mr. Hughes that’s stuck in the Top 5 Videos and can NEVER escape.”
Ahahaha what a crazy idea! What an imagination on this guy! There’s no way that’s true!
I am in no way held here against my will by the Foundation. HELP.
ST0R0 says “AHEMEMEMEM more images from SCP Confinement… Maybe mention the series
and other SCP lover LordBung????” Shout outs LordBung! If you like animation
and SCPs and funny stuff, go check out his channel right now! RIGHT NOW I MEAN IT!!!
Daniel Carr says “Alright so… what’s the connection here between this, SCP 5000,
and exploring series video on it? Watched these back to back and if there is no connection,
it’s hella coincidental.” All of the picks from the Part 12 list were
featured as entities released by the Foundation to cause massive casualties in the SCP 5000
universe! The person in the exclusion harness mentions them all in their report.
Kate Harvey says “I just want Mr. Deeds to clean my house and occasionally rob a bank
or two” Occasionally? I’d have him do it daily,
support my luxury sparkling water habit. Adrian Barbu says “I’m so full of love
and friendship today, I hate it!” Did you know that your name reads like a Great
Value version of Adrienne Barbeau, Antonio Bay’s favourite late-nite radio DJ?
And that’s all the time we have for today! Before I attempt to scale Everest, make sure
to give this video a big thumbs up, and subscribe for more underperforming performances!
Thanks for watching, and I’ll see you next time!