Is Robert Pattinson’s career in danger after a couple of box-office “flops”?

Robert Pattinson

Over the weekend, Cosmopolis opened in six foreign markets (which, to be entirely fair, are not huge movie markets) to $2.8 million in box-office receipts, and certain publications are claiming that this “flop” is all due to leading actor Robert Pattinson. Never mind that director David Cronenberg, despite all of his talent, is much more of a filmmaker with a cult following than one who can necessarily demand a large, commercial audience for his movies. Last year’s A Dangerous Method finally eeked out $27.4 million after 23 weeks of being open in 30+ markets, and many of his films have made very little (such as $2 million for Crash) and certainly much less than Cosmopolis will eventually pull in.

So it’s kind of unfair to pick on Sparkles for this one movie that hasn’t even fully been released as of yet. Unfortunately, that’s exactly what’s happening, and it’s sure to kill Sparkles, who just can’t stop reading his own press. I hope he’s not going to read this article from The Mail, which gleefully dances on the (alleged) grave of Sparkles’ career after this weekend, and they’re comparing his movies to that of Kristen Stewart. It’s a pretty ugly stance to take, but The Mail does that sometimes:

Kristen Stewart

Robert Pattinson is seeking to break out of the phenomenally successful film franchise Twilight and graduate from a boy vampire into a leading man.

Despite boasting a fine cast (Pattinson romances Uma Thurman, Kristin Scott Thomas and Christina Ricci) and literary pedigree (the film was adapted from Guy de Maupassant’s classic 1885 novel), Bel Ami has been an embarrassing flop in the US.

“In the UK, Bel Ami underperformed but in America, it’s been a commercial catastrophe,” a Hollywood source revealed exclusively to Mail Online. Magnolia Pictures simultaneously released it on Video on Demand but they were hopeful that the film would take off in big cities and get a nationwide cinema release. Yet it has made just over $72,000 which is staggeringly low, little more than one screen’s average for the Twilight movies.”

In London, things don’t appear to be much better. Cosmopolis, in which Pattinson stars as a billionaire who loses his wealth, failed to make the Top 10, making just a measly £s;117,000. So far, the film – which premiered at the Cannes Film Festival and is directed by acclaimed filmmaker David Cronenberg – is proving to be another epic flop for Pattinson.

Daily Mail Film Critic Chris Tookey wrote of Cosmopolis: “Devoid of meaning, dialogue that rings true or plausible drama, this film is the antithesis of entertainment.”

The US source added: “Hollywood is taking notice that outside the Twilight movies, Pattinson has the bankability of Greece. Breaking Dawn: Part 2 will be huge when it is released in November but outside Twilight, it’s just not happening for Robert. Pattinson is finding out that LA can be a cruel town. Increasingly Rob is being referred to as RIP-Patz instead of his nickname R-Patz.”

Apparently he is unfazed by the hiccup as he currently soaks up the party lifestyle in LA with girlfriend Kristen Stewart, claiming they were edgy films that were never going to attract large audiences.

The insider continued: “But his agents at William Morris Endeavor are not so carefree about the situation. Rob has not been terrible in the films but apart from Twilight, he keeps misjudging material. Bel Ami didn’t suit him, Cosmopolis doesn’t appeal to anyone who is not interested in sprawling examinations of time and nobody remembers Remember Me.”

The source added that Pattinson’s career post-Twilight, which exploded him into the limelight in 2008, does not inspire confidence in Tinseltown.

“Rob wants to make a small Australian crime movie called The Rover and team up with Cronenberg again to make a drama about the dirty side of Hollywood entitled Map To The Stars. But both these projects have been thrown into jeopardy as a result of his underwhelming time at the box office. Robert needs to emulate Andrew Garfield and Daniel Radcliffe [who Pattinson starred with in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire] who are examples of young British actors that crossed over to become leading men or risk being out of the game by the time he’s 30.”

In contrast Kristen, 22, was recently named top of Forbes’ annual list of highest paid actresses and new film Snow White and the Huntsman has made over $250,000,000 worldwide.

The source added: “If only Kristen could sprinkle some of her non-Twilight spray over her boyfriend.”

[From Daily Mail]

Okay, so they sort of have a point about Bel Ami, which was pretty awful movie and should have never been made in the first place — with or without Sparkles. Still, he (or his agent) should have known better than to sign onto that mess in the first place, but The Mail is really needlessly bashing Sparkles when, in reality, he’s been making very small-budget movies in an effort to prove his credibility as an actor beyond blockbuster movies. In a way, he’s been successful thus far — both Water for Elephants and Remember Me turned a profit, and Cosmopolis could very well recoup its budget as well.

Also, pitting Sparkles against his girlfriend’s successes is rather unfair. Until the very recent blockbuster success of Snow White and the Huntsman, Kristen’s non-Twilight fare has pretty much been a commercial disaster. In just the past few years, Welcome to the Rileys, The Runaways, and The Yellow Handkerchief all lost money in theaters. Sure, the takeoff of SWATH makes her look very good to producers, but most of the people who watched that movie went to see Charlize Theron, Chris Hemsworth, and some cool-looking special effects, right? Let’s not take one lucky movie on K-Stew’s behalf and say it makes Sparkles look bad in comparison.

Robert Pattinson

Robert Pattinson

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

162 Responses to “Is Robert Pattinson’s career in danger after a couple of box-office “flops”?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Bite me aka aniston says:

    Swath hasn’t even broken even yet, correct me if am wrong

    • StopItLuke says:

      It had a budget of $160,000,000 (that’s crazy right? lol) and it’s so far made $261,700,000.

      • aquarius64 says:

        The production budget is 170 million. The adverstising and distribution costs are seperate, not included in the production cost. A guesstimate has been SWATH needs to make 500 million at the box office to break even. It probably would have made it if Universal did not cast a polarizing figure such as Stewart in the title role.

    • Emma says:

      Between theatrical, VOD and the eventual DVD sales, the $11m Bel Ami would have made a profit. So far ALL Robert Pattinson movies since his Twilight fame have been profitable for his studios. Remember Me and Water for Elephants were particularly great because they both made 3 times the budget. This is probably the reason for this hit piece from DM. Robert Pattinson is being successful while still taking an unconventional route. He doesn’t have a PR agent, loves but doesn’t pander to his Twilight audience and is trying to do movies he wants to do and not the easy to sell Romantic Comedies and Superhero movies.

      I think Rob and Kristen will have different careers so I don’t think there needs to be a comparison. If Taylor Lautner’s Abduction had been successful, they would have tried to send out a hit piece on Rob as well. He’s at the top and he’s the person the media wants to take down.

      I think the love and respect Rob and Kristen have for each other will lead them to both have good careers while they support each other from their fans and media haters. They can be like Leo and Kate. Kristen wants to be a big movie star with a respectful career like Leo and I think she’ll try that route and Rob loves the whole acting part and wants to be a respected actor based on challenging work like Kate. The media will want to pit them against each other both in their personal and professional lives but I’m happy to see that their relationship seems really strong and grounded for 2 people who are so young. I respect the both of them so much and I really hope they are strong enough for all this attention.

    • Emma says:

      Also, how come no one mentions On The Road which had a bigger budget, bigger marketing push mostly because Kristen was also pushing big budget SWATH so OTR benefited from more press, a classic novel and a much more accessible story? It’s sad what the press tries to do to this sweet, down to earth and hardworking couple.

    • vic says:

      Total budget was 225 million, made 266 million so far and the dvd is not even released. Sequel moving forward. You guys want KS to fail so bad you lie or just make up stuff. But she’s thriving. You would think she bullied you in high school.

      • another nina says:

        @vic it made $133 mil if you discount for distribution costs. So, until it makes around $450 mil, it’s a flop.

      • Amelia says:

        “You guys want KS to fail so bad you lie or just make up stuff”
        …seriously? You actually think like that? There’s a rather large difference between critiquing box office results and wishing failure on someone.
        Kristen is not a particularly marvellous actress and I don’t hate her but I definitely cannot be counted as fan either. I’m indifferent. I can appreciate she works hard at her job but really only Twilight can be counted as a box office success. SWATH needs to make a minimum of 500m to break even when you add on advertising expenditure. And I don’t write this cackling behind my keyboard gleefully wishing failure on her. It’s a simple fact.

      • court says:

        In no way is SWATH considered a flop by anyone. Certainly not by anyone in the industry. And it’s legs are great right now.

      • another nina says:

        @ court – could you tell me where I can read those positive predictions? it’s not a snark, just general interest…thanks in advance

      • EmmaV1 says:

        I don’t like K stewart either but lets be fair to her…no way in hell is it’s total costs $500 million….it probably is around 250 million…

        remember AJ’s SALT? Online peole were saying it needed 300 million to break even (on a budget of 110 million) but it made 295 million worldwide and the studio greenlit a sequel, so obviouly it was very profitable..

        That said, I’ve heard that AJ marketing costs are really low because she goes to tens of big cities in differet countris (Moscow, Seoul, London, Paris, Berlin, etc.) to promote, so they spend very little on marketing her movies.

    • Prim says:

      People care too much about box office these days. Why? Your job isn’t depending on whether SWATH breaks even. In the eyes of Hollywood, it’s seen as a hit. Not a flop, sorry.

    • corny says:

      has he heard from LIFETIME? That’s the true test that its pretty much over

  2. Hoby says:

    SWATH is a bigger flop. It cost close to 250 mill and has only made 137 mill domestically.
    Many of my friends refused to watch it because of Stewart.

    Pattinson can’t act and neither can the Lipbiter. The Twilight Saga is giving them the momentum but in two years both will be completely done. The Hunger Games has taken over.

    • StopItLuke says:

      SWATH cost $170m to make and has made $261m ww it isn’t a flop.

      • Hoby says:

        That’s just the production costs, the marketing alone was 80 to 100 mill, that’s why it has to make over 500 mill to break even.

        Multiply the budget with 2.5 and you’ll get the close number.

        Also the foreign box office only returns 55% of the money back to the studios.

      • TheOriginalTiffany says:

        Wait. Crash made that little money Oscar winners all around?
        Hard to believe.

        Poor Cedric. Does his character actually sparkle in the twitpics? Can I get a link, must see why he gets the name.

      • TheOriginalTiffany says:

        Wait. Crash made that little money Oscar winners all around?
        Hard to believe.

        Poor Cedric. Does his character actually sparkle in the twitpics? Can I get a link, must see why he gets the name.

        Damn, bitchy again, another five hours of sleep night. That’s what I get for having some beers. And going to the after party. Cirque scored us all fix to the red sox game tonight. Our singer is doing the anthem.
        Hubs is going to do it at one of the DC games. I’ll let you know in case anyone wants to see it.
        Btw, you can always see our cool trailer on the cirque site.

        Links to sparklingly please!

      • Minty says:

        @TheOriginalTiffany:

        Crash (2004) was co-written and directed by ex-Scientologist Paul Haggis. It won Academy Awards for Best Picture, Best Original Screenplay, and Best Editing.

        Crash (1996) was directed by David Cronenberg and is based on a novel about people who are sexually aroused by car accidents.

      • StopItLuke says:

        @Hoby, Marketing costs are included in the films overall budget.

      • TheOriginalTiffany says:

        Thanks for the clarification. That was confusing.
        Couldn’t imagine that such a high profile movie made no money.

        The other Crash just sounds weird. I wouldn’t pay to see that storyline.

      • the original bellaluna says:

        OTiff – He sparkles in the movies (though I’ve only seen the first one – after that, I couldn’t take any more). I’ll see if I can find you a link!

      • Mia 4S says:

        Not to come down on Snow White specifically(it has done well) but actually no, most studios do not include marketing costs in the announced budgets (they would have to be crazy!). Also I don’t get how people can forget that a good percentage of a film’s announced box office take goes to the cinemas and distributors! They may have made $260 million or so but it doesn’t mean they keep all of that. Smoke and mirrors folks, smoke and mirrors. While I hate to defend Sparkles, crediting Stewart with making Snow White a hit makes as much sense as crediting Shia LaBouef for Transformers. It could have been anyone. Sparkles tried edgy, his girl went the safe route, that’s all.

      • Mia 4S says:

        Not to come down on Snow White specifically (it has done well) but actually no, most studios do not include marketing costs in the announced budgets (they would have to be crazy!). Also I don’t get how people can forget that a good percentage of a film’s announced box office take goes to the cinemas and distributors! They may have made $260 million or so but it doesn’t mean they keep all of that. Smoke and mirrors folks, smoke and mirrors. While I hate to defend Sparkles, crediting Stewart with making Snow White a hit makes as much sense as crediting Shia LaBouef for Transformers. It could have been anyone. Sparkles tried edgy, his girl went the safe route, that’s all.

      • Minty says:

        No problem, OrigTiff.

        Definitely skip it. Saw some of Cronenberg’s film because of James Spader and Holly Hunter. What were they thinking when they agreed to sign up for that weird crap? I’m not into mixing violence/carnage with sex. That’s too sick.

      • Janet says:

        Marketing and promotion costs are not included in production costs.

        Box office receipts are split 50/50 between the studio and the theater owners. So if the production cost was $170 million, the box office totals have to be at least $340 million for the studio to break even on production costs.

        Marketing and promotion — which are counted separately — can cost the studio anywhere from $20 to $50 million. SWATH was very heavily promoted. So tack on another $50 mil to the overall cost of the film, and SWATH has to make at least $390 mil before the studio will see a profit.

      • Belle says:

        Come on…let’s be fair. He only sparkles in the SUN, and even then, I didn’t find him THAT sparkly! LOL

        On a side note… I think that last photo is the best one of him that I’ve seen in a looooong time. Pretty sure it was used in another post recently, but I didn’t comment on it then and will now(; I loved RP in his Harry Potter, ‘Cedric’ role, and thought his looks seemed to tank after that. The last photo shows that he has a wee bit of Cedric still in him!

    • vic says:

      Wishing won’t make it so. And the sequel on its way.

  3. marie says:

    “Pattinson has the bankability of Greece”.. wow, harsh..

    Comparing the 2 isn’t really fair considering Kristen has been doing it a lot longer. Plus, indie films rarely perform well at the box office so that’s not a mark against either one of them imo.

    And in the picture, Kristen looks like a really pissed off troll doll..

  4. lisa2 says:

    I think for him and Kristen the test will be after the Twilight Saga is over. as it is their very HUGE fanbase only wants to see them in that particular movie. the test for both is will that fanbase support them outside of Bella and Edward. Taylor L found that the won’t in his case. Roberts seem a more interesting actor. He seems to be trying to do roles that take him away from Edward. But Kristen seems to be doing some interesting movie choices.
    I have never seen the Twilight films. tried to watch the first and just could
    not.

    regarding SWATH that film is still working to break even. And Kristen was not really praised in the role. So considering that she has still not carried a film outside of Twilight. But neither has Charlize. So nothing bad to say on that score. SWATH had a lot of hype and considering all the marketing and promoting the film did not live up to the hype. I know many people liked it but a lot thought it feel short. better than Mirror Mirror but is that saying much.

    • Gayle says:

      Re: SWATH. So many people who pretend to understand box office business but obviously have no clue. Why don’t you just read Deadline and accept their expert opinion about what is a flop and what is a success. Hint: if a sequel is already being planned, the studio is happy!

      Re: Patt’s bankability based on WfE and whatever other dreck he’s turned out. There is a big difference between ‘turning a profit’ and box-office ‘success.’ Studios do not invest in a movie to make a 5% return. The article is right to say he has not had a real BO success.

      Re: Charlize not being able to ‘carry’ a film. Probably verifiably untrue, but even if it is, who cares? The woman can act miles around either of these two kids. She has made real art, not a bunch of garbage.

  5. StopItLuke says:

    Daily Mail is almost as big a stirrer as Irrelevantez Flopton. Anybody with half a brain wouldn’t compare a small budget film to something that cost $160m to make…

  6. Mia says:

    They all are one franchize wonder “stars”. Let’s be honest.

  7. hmmmm says:

    can’t help it. Still love him and want him to do well.

  8. eb says:

    Hollywood is about mostly about making money. Picking winners. A little about winning oscars.

    Robert Pattinson is beautiful and charming, and has another money-making Twilight film coming out. That should buy him a few more years to get another winner, or display some amazing oscar worthy performance.

    If he does one or the other, then he can continue to experiment with his craft in other projects.

    Otherwise…Well what happens to young stars who fail to turn a profit and arn’t considered oscar caliber? Pro-Active spokesperson? Corporate Speech Circuit?… Porn? (Hey, it happened to Mark Hamill. Ah… Mark Hamill, the R-Patz of his day.)

    • another nina says:

      I’d say that Mark Hamill’s is a happy-ending story. Below is one of the comments from guardian:

      Mark Hamill is still married to his first (and only) wife since 1978, has three children and has done very well from voice over work for animation and computer games. Many consider him the voice of the definite Joker from Batman.

      He has been steadily acting in live action productions, even if they are lower key than Star Wars (then again, what isn’t?). I also hear he did get some very good licencing deals from a lot of the projects he has worked on which provide an excellent ongoing income.

      Yes, you could say Mark Hamill is doing all right.

  9. Micki says:

    KStew looks like a pissed off wrestler in this photo above.
    Pattinson had a fair chance to prove himself so far and his performance was underwhelming.

  10. Monkey Jim says:

    The Mail is shit-stirring as per usual, but I’m curious to see how Cosmopolis fares in the US as its SUCH a strange film. I didn’t enjoy it much – really abstract, didn’t hang together well, some bits I just didn’t get at all (& I don’t think I’m a dimwit!) so it’ll be hard to market on the chat show circuit. His acting was good though, so he’ll walk away with his head held high regardless & all will be forgiven by the time the last Twi film comes out.

    As for Kristen, I think she’ll prob stick to indies anyway, with maybe the odd studio film every few years. I actually got around to watching the trailer for Breaking Dawn at the weekend &I wouldn’t be surprised if both of them would be quite happy to spend a year in obscurity to give everyone time to forget that atrocity, though… Crinngggggge.

  11. Anne says:

    People make stinkers sometimes. It happens to everyone. Bel Ami is Rob’s only flop…Remember Me and Water for Elephants turned a profit, and Cosmopolis hasn’t even come out in the US yet…sooo…

  12. Flora says:

    I think it’s admirable that Patterson is taking chances with these small and edgy indy films, but he’s not leading man material. He simply lacks the acting chops for it. Both his performances in Bel Ami and Cosmopolis are horrible and it’s all the more apparent when he’s sharing the screen with actors who do have talent. R-Patz needs to go to drama school asap. Same goes for his girlfriend.

    • Anname says:

      Please clarify that it is your opinion that his acting is horrible. His reviews are overwhelmingly positive for Cosmopolis, even from critics who didn’t like the movie. Cosmopolis was hugely important for him because it is bringing him the critical success he needs. This movie was never supposed to make huge numbers, and for the article to compare it to SWATH is ridiculous.

      • dee says:

        Does it really need to be clarified that when someone says “He’s a bad actor”, they are expressing an opinion? I would not have thought so. It’s tiresome to read “IMO” when something can possibly be nothing but an opinion. IMO, anyway.

    • Bored suburbanhousewife says:

      You are so correct drama school would have done wonders for him. Alan Rickman & other greats have all said that years if rep theater give you the time to make your mistakes & figure out what works.

  13. the original bellaluna says:

    He’s just trying to find his post-Sparkles niche. Either he will, or he won’t.

  14. another nina says:

    I’d say his 2nd movie with Cronenberg is in danger.
    I hope he only reads critics’ reviews these days. If he reads all his press, then he’ll end up in a loony house ahead of time.

    • Anname says:

      This is a very premature statement to make! Cronenberg films don’t make lots of money, they never have. And nobody is pointing to Pattinson saying “it’s his fault”. Cosmopolis appeals to a small segment of people, by design. I would think that by the time it gets released in the US, and factoring in DVD sales etc, it won’t lose money.

      Cronenberg has said how difficult it is to get funding now, and the second movie may never happen. The story is weird and difficult, regardless of who stars in it.

      • another nina says:

        Well, Cosm. needs to make around $50 mil to be in the black, so I exercise my right to reiterate that it will be very difficult to get funding for the second movie.
        I tend to think that Remember me made only around $11 Mil in the US, and the remaining $48 Mil came from foreign markets. So, low performance in foreign markets serves as an early indicator.

      • Anname says:

        Where are you getting $50 million? It had a $20 million budget, and most of the promotion is piggybacked on Cannes. They didn’t spend $30 million on promotion…?

      • another nina says:

        I’m discounting distribution costs, which are estimated at 50% domestically, and much higher percentage at foreign markets. Meaning that you should multiply production costs 2.5x to come at breakeven.

      • Anname says:

        Ok, I thought the rule of thumb was double the budget to break even.
        Either way, Cosmopolis will have a tough road to be profitable. But I think you have to give Pattinson some credit for bringing an audience to Cronenberg that he never had before.

      • Janet says:

        The rule of thumb is double the production costs plus the marketing and promotion costs, which aren’t counted in the production costs. So a film that cost $20 mil to make will have to gross north of $50 mil to break even.

  15. birdie says:

    I am personally not interested in watching a movie with him. Isn’t it funny that he eclipsed (oh yeah, I went there) Zac Efrons’s career? Zac was the new hot High School Musical star and Twilight comes along and I went downhill for him from there.

  16. Chatcat says:

    Headline – my answer = yes.

  17. Sorella says:

    I think Kristen will have an easier time getting roles for a little while than RP will. But her star will likely fade too as she’s not the best actress and the window for famel actresses in HOllywood is very small before they are considered harder to cast. She’s got a while to go yet, but I have no doubt with her lipbitting actress, she will be doing all small movies by the time she hits her mid-30s, her extreme success won’t last, too many other actresses nipping at her heals and many of them will have more talent. So tick-tock for both of them at some point (they will NEVER recapture the Twi-fame they currenlty have).

    • Jillian says:

      KStew has too much competition, the other actresses can act rings around her. She can do okay with a fantasy story and a hottie male lead but without those she comes out the same as Sparkles. I give them 2 years before their time is over.

  18. Sorella says:

    the window for *female* actresses

  19. Jade says:

    This isn’t the end of rob’s career. Males in Hollywood usually start hitting their stride in there 30s. He has time. It’s great that he doing small movies, building cred and making alliances with talented directors. It will all pay off In the end.

  20. leana says:

    This is a stupid article. Why are people so obsessed with his and Kristen’s box office performances these days? Most actors don’t face this much scrutinity. And if they did, many actors’ flops would be pointed out (and everyone has a few atleast).

    Cosmopolis is performing well in Europe. So I don’t get the criticism.

  21. Rory says:

    Bel Ami was not a good fit for Pattinson. Hopefully he’ll choose a quirky independent comedy in the next year or so. I will say the he definitely needs further training as an actor. Now that he can afford the best teachers there is no excuse for putting off the work. Anname, please don’t hurt me for saying this.

    • Anname says:

      ?? Ok, weird shout-out to me. I am a fan, but I never said he was the world’s best actor. I think he’s good, but certainly not perfect. And I certainly believe everyone is entitled to their opinions.
      What I do hate are the unfair criticisms and unjustified hate from people who don’t know anything about him other than he sparkles in Twilight.

  22. Hanna says:

    My prediction is that they’ll both be gone in 2 years time (max). Pheew, part of me screams “finally”.

  23. hairball says:

    Totally agree with you on comparing to KS. I went to see Snow White IN SPITE of the fact she was in it and thought she should never have been cast as it. She is a HORRIBLE actress.

    • poppy says:

      Yeah but for every person who saw snow in spite of Kstew there were 3 or 4 fans who saw it bc of her.

      I think her star image is so over prowering that if she won the the all might Oscar people would be say it was rigged voting.

      • another nina says:

        Achtung-Achtung – stew in the same sentence with oscars!

      • vic says:

        Agree. I can’t for the life of me understand the level of hostility towards KS. It’s irrational and quite pathetic.

      • Janet says:

        She doesn’t have a star image, she has a Bella image. Once the final Twilight movie is done with, it remains to be seen if she has real star power or if it was solely due to starring in a film series based on some fantastically successful books.

        I know a lot of people who went to see SWATH, and none of them went to see it for her.

        If you look at the Harry Potter films, none of the three leads have made the jump to real stardom yet, with the possible exception of Dan Radcliffe, and I’m not so sure about him.

      • Jade says:

        “she has a bella image” that’s what a star image is. A star image is a combination of memorable character and personal life. Johnny Depp, Leo D, Julia R, Gwen, Angie , George and Brad all their star images are part mix of their most popular character and a dash of reality.

    • geekychick says:

      I went to see SWATH because of Stewart; if she were not in it, I’d probably watch it on a DVD night someday-as it was, I was interested because she was marketing herself as “edgy” so I wanted to see why she chose this movie.
      I liked her in “Adventureland”, I loved her performance in Runaways (although the film was AWFUL-I hope that director and writer never work again).
      Twilight movies are good for girls night drinking games, nothing else.

  24. Theresa says:

    I hope that Pattinson eventually embraces his British roots and hooks up with some of the stellar talent making films over there. Not sure if people in North America are familiar with the films of Mike Leigh, just as examples. Simple plots, no fancy effects or gratuitous sex, but great character work! Even Hugh Grant made mostly British films (I am trying to remember one film where he affected an American accent) I have only seen a couple of RP’s performances, playing Americans, but he comes across quite self conscious and awkward. I think if he embraced his homeland, gave us that juicy accent of his in some quirky, but still accessible Brit comedy/dramedy, I think he may find his niche! I can totally see him working opposite Bill Nighy, Jim Broadbent, even Hugh… he should aspire to those careers!

  25. bns says:

    If they weren’t so pretentious and full of themselves I’d feel a little sorry for them because they both desperately want to be taken seriously, but it’ll never happen because that requires talent and they both suck. I give them both another 5 years before they fizzle out completely.

    And yes, I’ve seen Stewart in Panic Room, Into the Wild and Adventureland and she was the worst part of all 3.

  26. RobN says:

    It’s not usually about whether something is officially a flop, it’s about how it did in comparison to what it was expected to do.

    The expectation was that Twilight fans would follow him to other projects and they haven’t.

    He needs to save the money and work on an indie career; Twilight fans will grow up and he doesn’t appeal to male fans at all. That doesn’t equal bankable.

  27. carly says:

    how the hell are they pretentious?? they’re one of the most humble people in hollywood, even with all the fame and money they’re still the same humble, shy people.

    His career is not over by a long shot, he wants to do smaller films, those films rarely make money, how about people disscuss the bad bo from Cloney, Pitt, or Cruise?? are their careers over too?

    Comparing his movie with SWATH is pathetic, and to the Kristen haters, the movie just passed the 300 mil international bo,SWATH is not a failure as much as you wanted to be, Charlize has never carried a movie on her own, Chris is just starting, so yes Kristen had a lot to do with the success of the movie,she has a big fanbase, this was the first movie since TW that her fans could actually go see, I bet that if the movie did horrible at the bo it would’ve been all Kristen’s fault right??

    Rob & Kristen are being smart chossing their next projects, they don’t need the money, or fame, they’re going to be more than fine

  28. Jenna says:

    I actually hope SWATH does well if only for Hemsworth, because let’s be serious. That’s the only reason why I saw it.

    BUT, even actors who are box-office bombs still get work. Look at Bosworth. And even still, I could see Sparkles sticking with Indie films. I’m sure he’ll be fine.

  29. aud says:

    meh I saw SWATH for Charlize and Chris Hemsworth, not kristen. I dreaded seeing her(though she wasn’t that bad in the end)

  30. jess says:

    Rob said before that hes not really interested in making blockbusters anymore. Kristen wants to do both. Both of them have enough money to take that kind of gamble. Besides, blockbusters arent all their cracked up to be. Like someone posted earlier everyone in their career at some point make a couple of flops. Julia Roberts and Reese Witherspoon come to mind.

  31. mery says:

    well a lot of people saw it for Kristen too, why is it so hard to admit that she does have some pull and many people went to see the movie for her?? She has a bigger fanbase than Chris &and Charlize, specially overseas, most of her films have been indie, small distrubution, rated R films, SWATH was her first wide distribution movie and is doing good, it didn’t bombed like Taylors movie.

    I get people not liking her, but the extremes they go to proof she is failure are ridiculous, Im happy swath did good for all the people involved, but mostly for Kristen, she doesn’t deserve the hate she gets, and it’s true that if swath did poorly all of the blame would’ve been put on her shoulders, none on Charlize or Chris.

    There is so much pressure put on these two and almost nothing on their peers, does Dan Radcliffe or Emma Watson have people looking to see how they do after HP? or how about Jen Lawrence, does she have any pull besided HG?? why so much focus on Rob ∧ Kristen and not on others

    • miriam says:

      Yes, actually, the HP stars also get scrutinised. Dan Radcliffe has managed to have a successful box office hit and proved himself a theatre star too, so he’s ahead of his HP alumni so far. It’s expected for Robert and Kristen to also have their careers (both critical and box office) be examined because of the success they have already had.

      What all these stars have in common is that they have made enough money to be a little more picky about the projects they decide to take on. Hence Robert deciding to do Cosmopolis rather than some action film. However, if they continue to lose money then they won’t be considered relevant in the industry and therefore less likely to be invested in.

    • aquarius64 says:

      Why do people find them off-putting? “Robsten” are in the gossip press-a lot, whether for foul mouths, bird flipping or alleged cheating. The Harry Potter and Hunger Games crews are not in the press for the wrong reasons like the Twilight 3 are. Off-the-wall fans makes it easy to not take the the Twilight 3′s acting skills seriously – they’re popular because of an accent, abs, and a hot off-screen romance that fits into the Edward/Bella love story in their minds. They collected $25 million dollars for the last 2 installments of the franchise yet they have never been in a wildly successful non-Twilight project to justified to be paid so much. They, along with Lautner, will have to prove they deserve those kind of paychecks when Twilight leaves the theaters. Their projects will always be scrutized because show business is that…a business.

      • lie detector says:

        LOL. Alleged cheating? Rob and Kristen are boring, press-wise. The stories are made up because there’s nothing scandalous about either of them. Nice try though.

      • aquarius64 says:

        @lie detector – that’s why I said “alleged”, it’s the stories that come out constantly on these two. That’s why they are preceived as trash and unlikeable by some people.

      • jenn says:

        You act like these two are Brad/Angelina/Jen-tabloid level. They are barely in the gossip rags. Only when one of their Twilight movies come out. Aside from people who follow them online, the public knows very little about their personal lives except that they are “maybe” together. If they are not liked, it is because of Twilight and not anything appearing in a gossip magazine.

        I don’t know anyone aside from hardcore haters who would consider either “trash”. Linsday Lohan? Sure. These two? Yeah right!

  32. Prim says:

    Agree with you. Kristen isn’t bankable outside of Twilight either. It only looks that way because of Snow White. People went to see it because it looked like a cool concept and was a big summer move with lots of special effects. Charlize was used in promos more anyway. Kristen as Snow White was a big turn off to many.

    This young is working with David Cronenberg now as his new favorite. I’m sure he’s happy. He can make the big bucks from those twilight movies.

  33. Jenn says:

    Robs quote “if at the end of twilight I stll have one fan watching my movies I would still be happy”I love rob so I will be that fan ..and I don’t need to bash kristen to make a point ..but the article is just plain stupid .

  34. Jenn says:

    Robs quote “if at the end of twilight I stll have one fan watching my movies I would still be happy”I love rob so I will be that fan ..and I don’t need to bash kristen to make a point ..but the article is just plain stupi d .

  35. Jenn says:

    Robs quote “if at the end of twilight I stll have one fan watching my movies I would still be happy” i love rob so I will be that fan ..and I don’t need to bas h kristen to make a point ..but the article is just plain st upi d .

  36. Jenn says:

    Rob’s quote “if at the end of twilight I stll have one fan watching my movies I would still be happy” i love rob so I will be that fan ..and I don’t need to bas h kristen to make a point ..but the article is just plain st upi d .

  37. A says:

    Ugh, this article is just as unfair to Kristen Stewart as the Mail is to Rob Pattinson. I find it a bit funny that Bedhead is calling out the Mail, but turning around and doing it herself. Fact 1. Both Stewart and Pattinson have had films that make more money than most of you think. I see the 50 percent number being tossed around above. That’s the old method, and plenty of film critics have called out other people for using that number. Theaters take in 10 to 80 percent of what a film makes, depending on how long it is in the theater and what rate the studio negotiates. Hence, The Avengers will stay in the theaters for four or five months because people will keep seeing it and 5 months in the theater will be taking 80 percent. When it first started, the theater was probably taking in 10 to 20 percent. I’ve explained it better before, but if anyone is interested I would read an legit article on economics and film or pick up a film studies textbook, not read some random blog like Gawker.

    Fact. 2. Something seemed off with this article, so I did a quick google search. Welcome to the Riley’s was a hard R film about a sexually abused under aged stripper. The Runaways was a R film with an implied sex scene between an under aged Dakota Fanning and KStew. The Yellow Handkerchief was done way before KStew even did Twilight and only got released because Twilight blew up. None of those were easy sells, obviously. People don’t go, let’s go see that film about the abused stripper who is only 16! Also, none of those included a huge star, or even a big name unless you count Dakota Fanning.

    Remember Me and Water for Elephants were rated PG 13 in comparison. Water for Elephants was based on an Oprah’s book club pick and had Reese Witherspoon. Bel Ami had Kristin Scott Thomas, Christina Ricci, and Uma Thurman. Obviously, two PG13 romances, especially one with Reese Witherspoon and based on an Oprah’s book club pick was going to do eons better than KStew’s films.

    Fact 3. I read film criticism, as I had several film studies classes in college and it sparked an interest. There are quite a few articles that attribute Snow White’s success to a combination of Chris Hemsworth and Kristen Stewart. They did a last minute marketing push that emphasized “Bella” and “Thor” in the woods, after it was tracking very poorly. AltFilm Guide and Mendelson are just a few of the people who stated that much of the success can be attributed to Hemsworth and Stewart despite the initial marketing being centered around Charlize.

    Posts like this is just KStew eye-roll worthy. It’s hypocritical, for one. Personally, I like both KStew and RPatz but believe their careers will both fade.

    • twisted says:

      Your post is one of the reasonable here. Maybe you should write the article next time.

      It is quite unfair to compare those 3 indie movies of hers when they where barely shown because of the subject and almost no marketing compare to his Remember Me ( Which Summit spent marketing on) and Water for elephants (With also a big studio marketing)..

      His Current Indies also are being promoted overseas and domestic . And they barely made it. They flopped, so what? Start again…. It is not gonna kill him anyway…

      • Chris says:

        They didn’t flop though. The article lied. Bel Ami will make back the budget which is all it needs to do because there was hardly any promo costs and Cosmopolis has not been released in most areas so the outcome is unknown. Pattinson’s studio movies have also made three times their budget. Nothing against Kristen but this article is fos and her fans need to justify her without trying to bring Rob down. I’m sure she would not appreciate it.

    • A says:

      @Chris. His films didn’t flop. All I was pointing out was that her non-Twilight indies were a much harder sell (sexually abused young stripper, R films)…so of course a romantic film with Reese and the other PG13 films were going to do better. Bedhead is (wrongly) trashing KStew to elevate RPatz, which is just dumb and hypocritical because she’s calling out The Daily Fail for doing the reverse. Both are fine at the moment.

    • another nina says:

      wonderful, smart, insightful comment, A! you’re one of the reasons I so much like coming to this site these days.
      Now, I took your advice and started looking for a book of film studies but I can’t find anything interesting…I went to Berkeley’s and Wesleyan’s websites, and looked for suggested literature on their courses but still nothing that would give an overview of the filming process, including breakdown of costs, etc (I’m a cpa and cfa, so I’m drooling even while typing it ;) Could you recommend anything?
      Or and I bookmarked mendelson too, thanks so much, again!!!

      • A says:

        Thanks bb :) I enjoy your thoughtful, interesting comments and some of the wonderful regular posters on this blog…still laughing my ass off over Crystal stating that if she was famous, she would be like the black Gwyneth Paltrow and send her haters preserved fruit with handwritten notes.

        If you love numbers, you will love The Hollywood Economist by Epstein.
        This is a link that explains the system, although the numbers are slightly off in my opinion. http://themovieblog.com/2007/economics-of-the-movie-theater-where-the-money-goes-and-why-it-costs-us-so-much/

        One of the main reasons it is difficult to be exact with the financials in the film industry is because a) a lot of stuff is shady and b) studios work out different deals with theaters.

        One of my old professors, and a family member of mine that works in the industry, both have the same rule of thumb: a movie breaks even if it makes twice its production budget worldwide. So, for a film that cost $150 mil it needs to make about $300 mil to break even. A film that barely breaks even at the box office can end up making the studio a 40 or 50 mil profit. DVDs, especially those from big movies, can net 60 to 100 mil. There are also TV rights, etc.

        If you are interested in film studies and want to learn more, I would check out UCLA (go Bruins) and USC’s websites. I went to UCLA for undergrad, and they have a fabulous School of Theater, Film, and Television (where I ended up taking several classes). I believe they offer online classes for people who are interested in learning more about film studies.

      • another nina says:

        A, thank you so much for getting back to me! I really really appreciate it. I actually spent my evening thinking which useful thing I can give in return – and turns out I know nothing fun…This is such a great idea about online class, I’ll definitely take one. I’m starting thinking may be I can continue following industry for work purposes too. I’m involved in financing for couple of movie projects but it’s outside of my regular industry (venture capital and lbo.)
        and yes, CB is an incredibly interesting community and it touches the world that was completely unknown to me…And it does not only relate to movies or gossip. Sometimes I read comments about dresses, and they make me re-think my entire style. Seriously, I read comments by “original victoria” and asked for her advice, she referred me to certain vogue issues and couple of collections, and that was like a revelation…
        Again, thank you so much for your kind and informative comment.

  38. twisted says:

    Shesh, so if he has a flop, he has a flop? And bad mouthing his girlfriend is not gonna change that. In regards to Welcome to the Rileys, The Runaways and Yellow Handkerchief, those three did not even get a good promotion let alone a worldwide promotion like Sparkles did. Those 3 did not even get out of the country and some are only showed in less than 20 theaters. These passed under the radar.

    His other movies like Remember Me and Water for Elephants are with great marketing. Why are you all disregarding THIS. It is now Kstew’s chance to have a big studio behind her and some of you will not even credit her. So some of her fans went so Big deal…. If it flops it flops, many are acting like this money comes from their own pocket…

    Others are saying that man are usually seen to emerge when they are 30′s. I agree with this maybe it is not his time yet

  39. Dani says:

    Off topic, but … I really like K-Stew’s dress LOL. Although it would have looked better if she wasn’t standing/looking and closing her fists as if she were about to fight the camera man.

  40. TheOriginalKitten says:

    Cosmopolis is trending rather favorably on rotten tomatoes (at least with critics).

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/cosmopolis/#contentReviews
    I will DEFINITELY be seeing this one in the theater as Cronenberg is one of my faves. I don’t know why they’re coming down on him so hard. I think he’s a decent talent and I expect that he’ll improve..

    EDIT: I know it’s hard to tell by the trailer but it seems like Pattison will be solid in this. I’m getting an American Psycho vibe from this. Can’t wait to see it!

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      “I don’t know why they’re coming down on him so hard”- to clarify, by “him” I mean Pattison.
      Honestly, sometimes I wonder if this Twilight shit was worth it for these kids. Yeah they got their fame and fortune but it seems like they take an inordinate amount of shit from people. There are so many untalented hacks that are more deserving of the criticism. I’m sure from Pattison’s perspective, he’s just psyched to get to work with a legend like Cronenberg. He’s all set financially and I doubt a few flops will completely destroy his bankability.

    • A says:

      Yeah, a regular poster! I see Orly, Nina, and the original Bella luna too. If people hate Kristen Stewart, they hate Kristen Stewart. What’s irritating me is the obvious non-regular posters who come on here to solely trash Stewart. What’s also dumb is the hypocrisy of this post. Getting on the Mail (or Daily Fail) for being unfair to Rob Pattinson, but turning around and doing the same to Kristen Stewart. A romantic film with Reese Witherspoon did better than KStew’s R rated sexually abused 16 year old stripper film with no big names. Big surprise. RPatz will be fine for a while, I’m sure he’s happy to be working with Cronenberg. KStew will be fine too. I get that Bedhead can’t stand KStew, but even if she can’t stand her…I just find it utterly ridiculous that she’s saying nobody went to see Snow White because of her. Both she and Rpatz have a fan base.

      Also, I kind of agree about the Twilight shit. I read ages ago that Paramount originally had the rights, and the studio that did Twilight bought them at a low price because nobody thought the film was going to succeed. It was only after they had cast the characters and started pre-production did they realize they had a potential huge hit. Before the film was even released, I remember people were trashing Rob Pattinson and Kristen Stewart for no reason (before she started flipping off the paps, etc.) Perez was calling her bunny teeth and making fun of her body when she was like 17. The rape comment was pretty abhorrent, but she apologized. Someone once brought up that Natalie Portman, Mila Kunis, and Johnny Depp have all said similar things and yet didn’t get dragged through the press like she did. Natalie also said once in Allure that being famous was like being black. I honestly believe the early stuff is what drove her to be overly defensive. He seems to take it more easily, but the press is pretty damn harsh on him too. Efron’s had more than his fair share of flops, etc, but he’s the one who is being called out.

  41. jaded says:

    *waves hello to the prsten folk visiting* You guys just can’t stop checking for news and blog stories on your former lover, can you? Keep at it. Your blog provides me with endless laughter :)

  42. ernie says:

    Pattinson had a decrease in fans when it became known he was dating Stewart. Sure, their fans now seem loud and numerous, but it is really only the remaining Robsten group (the most extreme and loudest of the bunch). He was much more desirable to women when Twilight first came out and he was working his single, self deprecating British angle. He lost a lot of his fans with the are they/aren’t they games they played and overly precious ‘no personal questions allowed’ attitude.
    Plus, lately it seems to me he’s mistaken maturity and self-confidence for arrogance. Seems like she’s profiting more from this relationship than he is.

    Personally, I don’t think he makes it beyond a handful of films after Twilight. His talent is mediocre at best. I see Orlando Bloom’s future for him. We’ll be seeing him only on daddy duty 10 years from now.

    • lie detector says:

      Well those aren’t really fans then are they? The rumors about him and Kristen were almost immediate. They’ve been together over 3 years now. The only thing that has changed is that some of those die hard delusional folks can no longer deny they are together. So they instead turn on him and want to believe PR theories because it is the only way they can rationalize their relationship. It’s really funny actually.

      Those that are here for Rob and his movies will continue to be. Those that fell in love with Edward and want to mould him into whatever they want him to be will be disappointed.

      • ernie says:

        @lie detector:

        Well those fans or delusional folks, whatever you want to call them, they make a difference when it comes to box office. Which is the subject of this article, no?

        I’m sure their chemistry was an instant thing, it’s why Twilight worked after all. But there was a brief period just after it came out when she was still appearing publicly (not shying away from hand holding) with her then boyfriend Angarano. And Rob was probably boning Reed at the time, but was mostly working the single angle. I’m just saying it was a different fan profile on his tail back then. His following has thinned out since. Whether they’re “real” fans or not is a different discussion.

      • Jane says:

        Im sorry but a very small segment of the twilight fanbase cares about the actors and their dating status. Most of the fans that watch the movies do so because they loved the books. You’d be surprised what small portion know much about the real actors and their personal lives.

    • Lila says:

      The fans who only liked him because he was single were going to ditch him no matter what when he got in a relationship. What he, and she, need are more male fans. I think both benefit from the relationship, perhaps she benefitted more in the beginning. I think the guessing games got old. KStew said something in an interview recently about how’s she’s learned that you have to give a certain amount to the public. She admits he is her boyfriend but does not elaborate now. If he continues to play the game, even after they made out at Cannes and the photos of them afterward…Then, I’ll start getting annoyed.

    • geekychick says:

      I agree with the first part of your comment: he lost a number of fans due to his relations with Kstew-a great number of internet fans did not deem her as a proper choice. (I find it creepy, how can you care so much who he dates? he’s an actor, for god’s sake!:)

  43. sauvage says:

    Let me just tell you that me and my boyfriend frantically hated “Snow White and the Huntsman”.
    The dialogue was weak and dull beyond comatose and the overall impression the film gave me was that its director didn’t know what to do with it, that there was no coherent concept behind it. An Epic Fail in my little black movie book.

  44. Patty Foster says:

    rob fans need to remember that they were highly critical of Kristens indie films so the fact that people are highly critical of Robs indies should come as no surprise. IMO, since Rob is apparently more popular and more talented than Kristen (according to his fans) then, in theory, his films should do better than Kristens.

    • Chris says:

      His indie films do far better than her indie films so this still holds true. His mainstream films make three times their box office so that still holds true.
      Popularity is not that big a deal because fans by themselves cannot create a successful star. Lindsay Lohan is twice as popular as both Rob and Kristen she couldn’t bring in the box office they do and Sam Worthington is a nobody and Avatar made $2b. People go to see the movies based on genre, hype, quality, etc and fans are the ones to help hype the films. Rob and Kristen will be successful by choosing good projects and not because of any perceived popularity.

      • Patty Foster says:

        His films are more successful than hers? Do you really think anyone is saying “well at least bel ami made more money than Kristens films?” like i said, Pattinson is supposed to be have more fans than Kristen so his BO should reflect that? I mean cosmopolis was the most anticipated film at MTV. at least Kristen can say her indies are more critically accepted than Robs, right? Always a competition with you Pattinson fans. Looks like it is coming back to bite you guys in the ass. SWATH is performing better than xmen first class which opened up the same day last year. Budget was the same and it was successful enough for a sequel. Kristen has critical success and box office success.

      • Chris says:

        @Patty Foster I’m kinda sorry I responded. It’s just that you had inaccurate information and I couldn’t help it. I don’t like this thing where fans try to pit the 2 of them against each other and the media feeds on this. I refuse to be a part of it. They appear to love each other and they each want the other to do well and I want that as well. I respect their decisions. End of story. Not about to nitpick and bring out figures for show. It doesn’t matter.

  45. Theuth says:

    I’ve seen Cosmopolis and…it’s not a good movie. And by Cronenberg stardards, it’s an HORRIBLE movie. And yes, the biggest reason is the fact that Pattinson is a wooden actor who can’t play a part: there were moments in the movie where you could easily see he was saying his lines by memory without understanding them!
    Kristen Stewart leaves me indifferent. She’s one note in every movie, playing the awkward girl in everything, a role which is starting to be very granting at her age.

    • Anname says:

      Almost every critic disagrees with you re his performance in Cosmopolis.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        If you are familiar with Cosmopolis, Pattinson’s character is supposed to be wryly detached and emotionally disengaged on a lot of levels so “wooden” might have been Pattison’s take on “blank”. I seriously doubt a veteran like Cronenberg would approve he casting of Pattinson if he thought he didn’t suit the role.

      • Theuth says:

        The problem I have with him is not that he play a wooden/disconnected character… It’s the fact that you can CLEARY see him talking by memory. He doesn’t understand anything of economy, and he doesn’t bother to mask it – there is a line between playing a “blank” character and not knowing anything about what you are talking about and just blabbing like a robot.
        As a fan of the director, I am disappointed in his choice of Pattinson because he got it wrong. I’ve changed my ming about Keira (she played her part well in Dangerous Method), an actress I hated; I though it could be the same with this movie.

  46. phlyfiremama says:

    My Husband & I went to the movies this weekend & saw Prometheus, which we both liked but didn’t love. Still a solid movie. No way would he watch SWATH, but he/we loved Hunger Games. I wanted to go see The Runaways when it came out at the theater, but in Houston (4th largest city in America) it wasn’t playing ANYWHERE for a really long time after I thought it had opened~only to find out it was “limited release”. I would love to see Cosmopolis, it looks like the special effects alone will be worth it. What I DON’T like these days is the unending agony of premiere after premiere after premiere~just put the doggone movie in the theaters already! The movie should be able to sell itself on its own merits WITHOUT the endless red carpet drudgery. We went to see Hunger Games because of the story, not because of the actors. I DO love Kristen Stewert, I will admit it. I think she is an amazing actress~not necessarily a “bells & whistles” movie star, but totally believable in her roles. Seriously, Hollywood, cut down on the premieres. By the time the movie actually opens, I don’t want to see most of them~the non stop red carpet BS has exhausted me and killed my interest in the movie.

  47. Patty foster says:

    WFE performed as reasonably as SWATH is performing. Making its budget back and then a little something. I mean, let’s face it, compared to the Help, WFE was a wee bit disappointing at the BO, ESP since it was pg, had two Oscar winners and Robert P. I am sure they thought the domestic BO would double the budget.

  48. Crystal says:

    Hold up…where did all you stranger bitches come from??? Most of y’all don’t even go here.

    The Daily Fascist are such fucking trolls and this is just bullshit. I’m actually surprised they’re shading Footface considering the fact that the DM site is a cesspool of sexually repressed twimoms with worse grammar than Rihanna stans.

    Footface will be fine. He’s a white man in Hollywood. What the fuck has he got to worry about??? He’s worse than Kristen in the acting department but he has a penis so the fans/haters are willing to see past that. That breathy thing he does with his voice is so annoying. If it wasn’t for the fact that Hollywood (and the rest of society, let’s be real) salivate over basic white men with no skills, this dude would be serving me at Burger King alongside Channing Tatum and Taylor Kitsch.

    The real flop is Alpaca Lautner. K-Stew and R-Pattz will be biting their lip all the way to the bank for a couple more years at least but Lautner is a joke and should be getting all the shade. At least people show up to watch Rob and Kristen occasionally, who the fuck went to watch ‘Abduction’??? Yeah. That’s what I thought.

    And to those saying Charlize has never opened a film, I suggest you keep the queen’s name out of your mouth. She may have never opened a film alone but the corn on her toe has more talent than Rob and Kristen put together. Don’t shade the queen. I’m not here for that.

  49. Paris Mom says:

    I saw SWATH because I like Kristen Stewart, and also I am not a teenager. I liked it, but did not love it, but I thought Kristen Stewart did as good a job as the other two leads. I know a lot of women who went to the movie mainly for her as well. Also, she did not bite her lips once through the whole movie.

    Also, if you go to Cinesnark, she explains that SWATH should easily clear 200 Million dollars, which is considered a big win for Universal.

  50. mery says:

    and who said Charlize is not talented?? the fact remains that she has NEVER carried a movie by herself, the success of SWATH wasn’t only for her and you know it, the movie got more hype once Kristens name was attached, try to deny it all you want, but Charlize is not the one everyone talks about, that would be Kristen, love her or hate her she brings ATTENTION, after all you always show up on her threads right???

    These two are going to be fine no matter what anyone says

    • Crystal says:

      Ugh…you Kristen stans need to keep Charlize’s name out of your mouth. You’re not worthy. I’m sure Glenn Close has never carried a film by herself either so what’s your point ??? Charlize still has more talent in the nail of her big toe than Kristen and Rob will ever possess. Deal with it. Of course Kristen’s name brings more hype. She was in Twilight. Logic…what is it ??? You think she would have been able to carry this film at 17 before she had twifats(who wouldn’t know a good film if it came glazed on a Krispy Kreme) on her side. Please.

      People show up on Courtney Stodden threads too. Don’t mean s-it. People thought Zac Efron and Vanessa Hudgens’ careers would be fine too but they’re flopping left and right too. Remember the Jonas Brothers??? Their days are over. Fact is, tweens are fickle and move on quicky and if that’s your main demographic then you better save that money ’cause they’ll be on to the next one in no time. Where were all the Hannah Montana fans when ‘LOL’ came out??? Yep. That’s what I thought homie. Fans think Kristen and Rob will be Academy award winners in 5 years (over my dead body, if Gary Oldman hasn’t got one then no way will these trash bags get one), Haters think they’ll be janitors at McDonalds who can’t get acting jobs. No one knows where their careers will be so how ’bout we just wait and see.

      • geekychick says:

        seriously, guys? I like Stewart, but let’s tone down on this-you can’t compare Theron and “BO” and “opening a movie”-her (well earned) reputation at ACTING (and still being a star, while remaining somehow private)…prevents us all from doing so. when the Thatcher came out, it really wasn’t an excellent film, yet nobody did blame Streep.

  51. Bite me aka aniston says:

    Total Lifetime Grosses
    Domestic:  $137,128,350    45.9%
    + Foreign:  $161,488,777    54.1%
    = Worldwide:  $298,617,127  
    Source box office mojo
    Swath production budget $170 million

  52. daisyfly says:

    Robert Pattinson’s choices of film don’t play well with his Twihard fanbase because they’re not the same kind of story that said fanbase are used to.

    Bel Ami might have been a crappy movie, but the story itself doesn’t exactly scream “swoon” either. How many teens have read the book…voluntarily?

    Cosmopolis is another movie with a script that just won’t capture most twihards’ attentions. If he were starring in movies based on books written by Nicholas Sparks and they still bombed, maybe I’d say something about his star power, but let’s face it, not many people are gonna watch K-Stew in “On the Road” either because, as with Bel Ami, how many of her “fans” have read the book?

    Twilight did fantastically well in the theater because it had a built-in fanbase. It’s also why the Hunger Games movie did so well and why so many people know who Jennifer Lawrence is, because it certainly isn’t because they all knew her from Winterbone or the Poker House.

  53. Youdontsay says:

    Actors tend to work with Cronenberg because the subject matter of his films causes discomfort and forces them as actors into uncomfortable territory. I doubt that having a Cronenberg movie do poorly at the box-office will be looked on as a stumble. The industry knows that Cronenberg movies are not big box draws; they are cult movies.

  54. Tom t says:

    The marketing for this movie was pretty small and pretty crappy too. It be a Cronenberg movie too is going to limit the audience.

    Personally weather a film is good or not does not relate to weather it’s a blockbuster movie or a flop.

    Patterson is always getting knocked back he’s definitely not the bad actor that everyone seams to make out he is.

  55. Pete says:

    I like Rob a lot but i don’t think he is the best actor. None of the twilight leads are very good.And you can’t compare him to someone like andrew garfield. Garfield is a classically trained actor from england who spent 3 years improving his skills in a prestigious drama school. He does broadways and west end theatre. Even Daniel Ratcliffe has had the balls to do theatre and work on his craft. Rob is a limited actor who got lucky with a teen franchise. But i command him for wanting to improve. He might end up a good actor one day if he carries on. As for box office i can’t imagine anyone is really surprised a cronenberg movie isn’t a big hit.

  56. Jaxx says:

    Lots of people went to see SWATH expecting a great movie. They didn’t get it. If they had it to do over again, knowing what they know about that movie, they would not go. It was awful and Stewart’s acting is worse.

  57. carly says:

    well Crystal you act like you know whats going to happen with them, is not an insult to say that Charlize has never carried a movie on her own, that’s just the truth, it doesn’t make her less of an actress, you say don’t judge Charlize’ BO but you sure are doing it with Kristen who is more than 10 years younger than her, you don’t know if Rob & Kristen will win or be nominated for an Oscar, after all Jonah Hill got nominated lol

    Keep hating on Kristen, she will be fine, Oscar or not, she is set for life, the same goes for Rob, and please don’t compare them with Zac or Vannessa, Zac is going the easy way with his romance, kids movies, Vanessa please, at least Kristen has a really good indy reputation behind her, and with people like Sean Penn, Walter Salles, Jody Foster, etc who think she is one of the best actresses out there

    • Crystal says:

      Um actually I don’t know what will happen to them in the future so unlike the fans and haters I said I’ll just wait and see. How ’bout you brush up on the reading comprehension before you try to come for me ok??

      I’m not hating on Kristen or Rob I just have standards when it comes to the people I fan girl over and these two aint cutting it for me. If you ever read my comments you’d see that whilst I’m not a fan of either I always point out the misogyny in the way Kristen’s treated over Rob.

      She’s set for life ??? Ok stan, would you like a cookie ???

      Charlize never carrying a film doesn’t make her less of an access just like Kristen carrying films doesn’t mean she has any damn skills other than keeping her mouth open and blinking. I just think that since Kristen/Rob/Twilight fans wouldn’ t know what quality acting/films were if it came in a deep fried Twinkie, they shouldn’t try and shade Charlize.

      Did you even read what I wrote regarding Zac and Vanessa or did you just skim past their names do you could get your hate on. Just because Zac does musicals and romantic comedies it doesn’t mean that he’s worse than Rob. They’re both equally shitty. The point is both of their fanbases consist of tween girls and, occasionally, sexually repressed housewives. Those bitches are fickle and move on fast.

      Mr Blobby could have played Edward and Bella could have been played by a cardboard cutout with a scowl, and people would salivate over them and claim they were the best actors in the whole world. Seriously. These two are adequate at best and stale planks of wood at worst. Sean Penn could call Megan Fox an amazing actress and y’all wouldn’t care but he calls Kristen a good actress and suddenly it’s the most important opinion in the world. If Blake Lively had all these supporters in the industry people would think she’d slept with all of them.

      As for the Oscars…. Sure why not?? In an industry where Beyonce wins journalism awards, Rihanna wins Grammies and Adam Sandler still gets movies made, these two can definitely win Oscars. It’s not like we have any damn standards left.

  58. Anon. says:

    SWATH costed $170 M to make in 3 weeks it has made $300 M. I know you don’t like Kristen, but don’t try in knock her down to build your boy, Sparkles, up. If you want to talk about reviews, why don’t we read some from Bel-Ami?

  59. Laurie says:

    My god, she is so miserable. Just find a tall building already. Ugh.

  60. Kosmos says:

    Charlize is a very good actress. KS has not yet proven herself. I do not count the Twilight series because of the temporary craze. She doesn’t appear to have that much talent, other than getting into show business through her parents. Pattinson may be in the same boat. Time will tell if they float or sink. Popularity alone doesn’t last forever or take the place of real talent.

  61. Willow says:

    I’m so sick of the ignorance of these twi devotees. There are several postings where people are considered liars for trying to explain how a movie is not profitable. Then there are claims that several of Robert’s movies and Kristen’s were profitable when they weren’t. Here’s the rules. You get the production budget add between 35 to 45 percent of that to get the marketing budget. Then when the movie is selling at theaters realize that the studio only makes 50% of the sales in the US the longer the movie is out the less the percentage for the studio.Overseas or foreign box office is closer to 40%. Nowt’s look at SWATH with a budget of 170 million and you can be conservative and add only 40% for marketing. That brings the total cost to 238 million. Currently it has made 139 million in the US/Canada market which you only count 50% of which is 69.5 million. The foreign market has made 168 million which you take 40% of and that’s 67.2 million. Then you can see it has only made 136.7 million for the studio which puts it in the loss column at this point.If you figure it out SWATH needed to make over 475 million for the studio to break even.Now, take this and look at Water For Elephants or Remember Me or any movie Robert or Kristen has done outside of Twi and you will find that little to no profit was made and mostly the studios lost money.You can’t accuse figures of lying. Please if you are to be children throwing tantrums and accusing people of lying get your facts straight because you only hurt Robert and Kristen with your stupidity! Anyone with any intelligence reads these postings and knows that Robert and Kristen’s fans aren’t very smart and on top of that are calling people liars when they aren’t. This only hurts Robert and Kristen because it just makes the more grown up market people dislike Robert and Kristen because their fans are rude and to young to give opinions on subjects they don’t understand.You also need to understand that Robert and Kristen are trying to hit an adult market so that each of them can have a real career. You young fans need to realize that Robert and Kristen want a different fan base than the Twi fan base.The adult market doesn’t want them, because of the nightmare all you young twi fans have put us through since 2008.