For the past two weeks, The Jungle Book has been at the top of the North American box office. I would not have predicted that, but I’m from a generation that grew up on the cartoon. I guess parents are just desperate to find quality, family-friendly movies for their kids. But this was the opening weekend for The Huntsman: Winter’s War, a film which looked utterly nonsensical (I said that repeatedly). And as it turns out, American audiences couldn’t be bothered to try to figure it out, or even care one way or the other. The Huntsman has “flopped.” Per THR:
Without Kristen Stewart as Snow White, Universal’s The Huntsman: Winter’s War flopped at the North American box office over the weekend, grossing $20.1 million from 3,792 theaters despite a net budget of $115 million…. The Huntsman took in $32.1 million from 64 markets for a sluggish foreign total of $80.2 million (it began rolling out internationally two weeks ago) and global cume of $100.3 million. The Huntsman debuted in China to $11.1 million, behind The Jungle Book and a local film.
In the 2012 film Snow White and the Huntsman, Stewart starred as Snow White. Instead of making a sequel to that pic, Universal decided to go in a different direction, banking on Chris Hemsworth’s star power, as well as that of Charlize Theron, Emily Blunt and Jessica Chastain. The move didn’t pay off. The Huntsman came in more than 64 percent behind the domestic debut of Snow White and the Huntsman ($56.2 million), and marks the latest disappointment for Hemsworth, who, outside of playing Thor, hasn’t clicked as a leading man. Both Blackhat and In the Heart of the Sea were big-budget misses, while Rush stalled in the U.S.
I kind of love that Chris Hemsworth is getting most of the blame for this. I would not have predicted that either, but it seems like Chris Hemsworth is NOT the movie star Hollywood thinks he is. The only character he’s played that anyone cares about is Thor and even Chris is starting to realize that. That being said, Chris didn’t do a ton of promotion for this film. He did his job, for sure (no “largely absent Hemsworth” this time around), but it felt like Charlize Theron was the face of this movie, especially since she made a high-profile move to be paid the same as Hemsworth for the film. I’m just saying, just because THR is taking a swipe at Chris Hemsworth’s leading man status, doesn’t mean Hollywood executives won’t put the blame on Charlize. And Jessica Chastain and Emily Blunt. Like, I would imagine there’s a meeting happening somewhere in LA right now where someone is saying, “See? I told you we shouldn’t make a movie with three women, it was a recipe for disaster! Let’s greenlight another Chris Hemsworth-led movie!”
Photos courtesy of WENN.
I could have told them Chris Hemsworth couldn’t open a movie 3 Chris Hemsworth movies ago.
I could AND have told them the first time i Heard him speak like he was a boy made out of wood that just learned how language works way back in the wig commercial known as Thor
… But we know hollywood will continue to take on mediocre but pretty white dudes tho!
True. But it’s a shame that Rush didn’t do well; as a biopic and a film about F1 racing, it was pretty good.
Rush had a great performance from Daniel Bruhl and a good one from Hemsworth. It was a good film. Opening the same weekend as Gravity probably did not help it.
I thought it was widely understood that people went to see Thor for Loki anyways?
I totally agree. Loki was FAR more popular!
I agree. Without Loki, Thor is a snoozefest.
I saw the film a few weeks ago and I wasn’t impressed. Christ Hemsworth is pretty good in it, unlike Jessica Chastain. The script is actually the biggest problem. It reminded me of the Hobbit films, which I hated! They should have focused on the witches.
And if Charlize got paid the same as Hemsworth than she is just as much to blame for this flop as he is. Granted, that she has very little screen time.
Isn’t Thor one of the lowest grossing Marvel franchises — down there with The Hulk and Ant-Man?
The naughty little step-brother is the one people are most interested in watching, which is both sad and amusing.
I love Loki the naughty, mischievous little brother! That’s the reason I went to see both the Thor movies. I’d prefer if they just made a Loki movie! Technically he’s adopted, not a step brother. =)
But Nutty, isn’t it kind of funny that the main character of the movie isn’t as popular as the brother? I find that quite amusing and still Hemsworth seems to be far more known than Hiddleston. Why that? Your thoughts?
It is funny, isn’t it, to be upstaged by the little bro. I’m not sure if CHemboy is better known in the mainstream, but he’s been typecast as the action-hero and given a number of high-paying roles that have bombed at the box office. Tom, in contrast, has been doing more interesting low-budget independent work, which has probably paid quarters on the dollar of CHemboy’s millions, but will lead to a longer career with more critical acclaim.
I think Tom’s in a better place career-wise, even if he’s not getting paid the same or been in high-profile films outside of Marvel. That’s why i’m really curious to see how the monkey movie does — the question remains if Hiddles can carry a big-budget film or not.
Crimson Peak didn’t do so well, though? Hiddleston’s not a box-office draw either. But he’s definitely the better actor and will probably have better roles to choose from.
And Loki is so-so with fans. I think he’s the best part abut the Thor movies but quite many complain there’s too much of him.
I think Tom Hiddleston is going to have a much longer career then Chris Hemsworth. Crimson Peak probably isn’t the best representation of Hiddleston’s box office draw because it’s more a niche film. Hiddleston is a MUCH better actor and I think it will pay off
The Thor films may not do as well as some of the other, better known MCU franchises but TDW was still in the top 15 highest grossing films of 2013 and that is despite being released in November when Marvel had never released a comic book movie. That’s the season for more serious, Oscar contending fare and Feige was using it to test whether they could expand into the season. And it exceeded their expectations.
Crocuta, I didn’t consider Crimson Peak a big-budget film, so Tom really hasn’t had a chance to prove that he can carry that kind of film. Kong: Skull Island will be his first shot at it.
I think Loki’s the primary draw to the Thor films, however. I’m not sure what you meant about Loki being overexposed; I don’t think he is within the Marvel Universe. Tom is thought to be overexposed here on CB because he’s click-worthy. But he’s had four projects released within a seven month period so we’ve had more than a normal amount of Hiddles posts the past year. It’ll slow down again next month when the promo run ends.
Crimson Peak cost 55 million. So while it’s not a blockbuster amount of money, it’s not a cheap film either (I’m used to good, theatre-released films to have a budget around 25 mil). It also had a wide release on a “horror” date. It was obviously counting on Del Toro fans (like myself) and fans of the cast to make its money back. Also on fans of the genre, but wrong advertising killed that part of the profit.
So basicly: While I’m sure some people went to see CP for Hiddleston, it was not enough of them to make a 55 million film a success. Kong: Skull Island has a budget of 190 million (says Wiki). I sincerely hope they’re not counting on Hiddles to carry that movie, eventhough it will be – unlike CP – appropriate for younger audiences as well.
Look, I like Hiddleston, and I agree he is a hundred times better actor than Hemsworth, but I have my doubts of his popularity outside of certain internet circles. And I don’t think he can carry a 190 million film on his shoulders (I’m not throwing shade at Hiddleston, it’s just that nowadays even Johnny Depp, RDJ etc. films flop).
Smutballs, check IMDB topics of Marvel films. People complain all the time about Loki’s overexposure. They usually say they like him but Thor should get new villains (they like to count Loki as the villain of Thor: The Dark World because he completely overshadowed Malekith anyway). When rumours hit that he will cameo in Age of Ultron, A LOT of people disliked the idea.
@ I’ve been saying that too. I recently said it on the Charlize Theron post wit Chastain, Blunt and Charlize at the premier of The Huntsman
In the preview for this movie, Chris Hemsworth is in like10 seconds (at most) of it. Charlize was clearly the lead actor.
Quite the opposite. Apparently she has only 15 minutes of screen time or so. I LOVE that she got so much money out of the studio.
I actually wonder if the studio was actively minimizing Hemsworth since away from Thor he’s box office poison?
Time for Hemsworth to go supporting for awhile. He’s a medium actor at best but he will work, just not on the level it appears he wanted.
I had no interest in the movie so I didn’t see it, but the previews on TV show only a couple of shots of Hemsworth and a lot of Charlize. I agree that he’s a better supporting actor. It can be argued that even in the Thor movies, Hiddleston was the bigger draw. I know the Loki character is A LOT more popular than the Thor character.
I wonder who gets the blame here, Hemsworth is the star of the film and the film is named after his character but Charlize was used as the face of the promotion in trailers and interviews. But apparently even Emily and Jessica had more screen time than her. So hopefully the blame will be placed pretty equally but more than anyone on Hemsworth if a actor needs to be blamed. They are all pretty talented actors in my opinion (I know people do not like Hemsworth here but I think he is always good in the roles he plays). But actors do not draw much audiences these days and these actors are not among those who are real draws, Emily is as much box office poison as Hemsworth. And people just were not interested in this film,
I saw it unfortunately. My daughter and I were out of town this weekend and wanted to see a movie. This seemed like the best option for us (couldn’t go see Jungle Book because my other daughter wasn’t with us and we all want to go)
The movie was horrible!!!!! I didn’t love the first one either but this one was crap. And Charlize was in it for like a total of 10-15 min while Chris was in most scenes. Emily Blunt was a dead fish and Jessica did the best she could in a crap movie. Chris was embarrassingly bad. Bad, bad, bad.
That’s really interesting to hear, because it was heavily advertised with Charlize and Emily. I was interested in checking it out despite the terrible reviews because I like both of them, but if they’re barely in it, I’ll wait.
Charlize was the best thing about the first movie, and she looks to have been the best thing about this one. Hollywood needs to get over its weird belief that men are automatically the stars and let Furiosa rule!
It’s called The Huntsman. If it were called The Evil Queen or something like that I think it would’ve done a lot better. They focused on the wrong character.
I also saw this movie without intending to. My sister wanted to go, even offered to pay.
I actually liked it. I didn’t like the first one but it may have to do with Kirsten.
The movie is a prequel and a sequel in one. Which I found clever. Chris was funny, there were quite a few laughs. Kind of a mild Chris Pratt.
Charlize was barely in it. I’m surprised she made bank! The story and acting were fine and entertaining. Not an award winner but worth watching if nothing else is on.
The biggest problem is that the original SW&tH was an okay but forgettable movie that came out years ago. A prequel was really unnecessary.
I actually think the opposite! Maybe not a prequel, but something like this concerning magic and fighting, etc. I will totally agree that the first SW&tH was terrible. But this…I think it actually had the potential to be good – Charlize Theron, Jessica Chastain, and Emily Blunt are a formidable group of strong, talented women who can kick ass! – but the screenwriting/direction totally failed them. The new director was the guy who originally did the visual effects on SW&tH, from what I can recall.
I also think the market is there – look at how well Alice in Wonderland/Maleficent/The Jungle Book did. Live action fairytale movies are a huge moneymaker in Hollywood right now. Game of Thrones is huge on TV. The audience is there. A fantasy action movie has great potential at the box office. But I’m glad people didn’t go out to support a stinker like this movie actually turned out to be. Hopefully Hollywood just wakes up and realizes that they just need to make quality movies. Movies stuffed with white men =/= moneymaker.
I agree with you that a market for this type of movie is there, but the fact that this was tied in to SW&tH was the mistake. They could have written a new property with those elements and Charlize, Jessica and Emily instead of trying to tie it into a mediocre movie that most people don’t even remember!
Basically, the first one was a bad choice for trying to launch a franchise! It doomed this one from the beginning.
I agree this movie was completely unnecessary and no one asked for it! There was nothing about the first that made people say “I hope there is another one!”. Sometimes movies can stop with just the one movie, everything doesn’t need a sequel or prequel. It looked like a hot mess in the trailers with no actual point. Not surprised.
So true. My cousin asked my niece to see this and they forgot who Chris was lol. Who… No recognition. The first one was forgettable, they fired Kristen, more forgettable and totally forget this film benefitted from Thor just released pre Swath and Twilight was coming after so it had built in hype with that other Princess movie. I don’t think Kristen would’ve helped this disaster but I’d be glad to not be assc. Lol DOA. Chris never did it for me… beyond muscles he’s not much to offer. Rupert Sanders didn’t bring much to miss about this either. This film was tainted by old relics. This films biggest prob, trying to chase away affair history, the story really never resonated. Also the big elephant in the room no one talks about: The first film cost $170M they spent almost exactly that on Marketing for the first one. This film cost $115M and i think they spent $70M on mktg… they should have spent more on script. Weak story – no need to see this but this film less money was put into buying tickets from aud.
On a different note: YES to the confusing part.
It’s a prequel but so much of the film looks like it should logically take place after the first film.
Chris’s character acted like he’d never met the evil queen in the first movie but now in the sequel we see all these extended scenes between them. Confusing.
I still want to see the movie though, just not in theaters.
It’s not really a prequel. There’s an extended flashback of The Huntsman’s origin and some stuff with the Queens in the beginning, but the majority of the movie takes place after Snow White.
I’m confused on why this move got made in the first place. Was the first film a huge success? I only remember it from the Kristen Stewart/movie director guy affair. Going by some of the reviews, they say it’s bad, but in a fun, campy kind of way. So many a good cable movie to watch on a rainy afternoon.
As for Chris Hemsworth, he’s got the movie star looks, but he just seems so bland. Never put him and Henry Cavill in a movie together. But I am looking forward to seeing him in Ghostbusters. He was funny in the small part he played in Vacation.
The box office part of this fascinates me. No the first one was not a huge success, not at all. It made “enough”. That makes it a bubble movie. If you can grow in the sequel you might have a franchise (which is all studios care about now)…or you fall on your face.
The prime success in this model was Nolan’s Batman. The first one had to erase the awful memory of Batman and Robin. It made “enough”. DVD was super strong though and unlike Snow White, word of mouth and reviews were great. A few years later Dark Knight increases by $700 million!!
The problem is here they only looked at box office, not actual reaction. Yes people saw the first one and the primary feedback I heard was “meh”. No one cared. Lesson learned?
Great example, and the box office and budgets were similar. You’re totally right that the reactions make all the difference. I left Snow White thinking it was mediocre but Charlize looked amazing. I left Batman DYING to see the next one (and I think I saw it twice, and bought it the series later.)
The first movie was flat out bad. And the previews for the 2nd one made absolutely no sense. So I can see why the movie didn’t do well, independent of the fact that Chris Hemsworth isn’t a huge draw on his own.
Honest question, have any of the Avengers besides RDJ and Scarlett Johansson, been able to successfully carry a movie by themselves? I mean box office success with non Marvel movies.
Mark Ruffalo was amazing in Spotlight
ScarJo actually seems to be more of a draw than RDJ outside of Marvel these days.
Mark Ruffallo has a long track record of amazing films, critically and box office.
Ditto Don Cheadle, Terence Howard and Samuel L Jackson.
Critically, absolutely. But what box-office wise? And my bad for not clarifying, I meant the main cast.
It’ s not just Marvel, it’ s difficult for every actor who can open their franchise movies to carry non-franchise movies by themselves. RDJ and Scarlett Johansson included. RDJ does fine as long as he’ s Iron Man or Sherlock Holmes, but the only movie he has made in the past years outside of these two franchises that received some attention was The Judge, and it flopped… hard.
SJ’ s only truly successfull movie was Her, but she wasn- t even on screen and I doubt people went to see that movie for her.
Mark Ruffalo has been successfull, but he mostly plays secondary characters, not the lead, so whether the movie flops or not is not directly on him.
It’ s the franchise that sells, not the people who act in it.
I think you’re forgetting about Lucy.
Lucy wasn’ t exactly a great success. It was big, but not THAT big. However, even counting that, it’ s still the one exception.
Lucy was very important. It was a new character, without a book, without a following and a female driven action movie. It didn’t have the promotion that a film like Salt would have and it still did really well. If you read the analysis when it came out, it was huge in terms of what it meant for female driven action movies.
Lucy made 465 million from 40 million budget – that not big?
We’ re talking about box office and critical acclaim here, not social advancements. Lucy did well at the box office but not to the point of being a miracle, and the critical reception was mixed at best. It’ s not the first action movie with a female lead that was made, and it didn’ t jumpstart a trend at all, so no matter how important that review thought it was for female lead action movies, it was still not enough to convince producers to make more of the same.
And anyway, as I said, let’ s count it as something that it was important and only thanks to Scarlett Johansson, even though I’ m pretty sure that the people who watched it didn’ t pay for it because SJ was the lead, but because they were interested in the movie… it’ s still the only film she managed to make successfull, while the rest of the things she did in the past years were either flops or she was a secondary actor and not the lead, and as such, not directly responsible for the box office.
I think Lucy did very well, and though I thought it was kind of a bad movie, I think it was very good for Scarlett’s career.
Yeah Lucy is perceived as a success. It definitely made Scarlett look like a draw. Now does this mean she can open any film she stars in? I doubt it, but it’s hard for most stars.
Jeremy renner, gag, did well with the borne movie
But Jeremy Renner’s kill the messenger flop miserably, and it cost $10 millions!! It’s Box office was like $2.5 millions in 9 weeks. This movie was on its own, no Bourne franchise to back it.
He also has the MI movies and works with very good directors ( it pained me to say this )
And he stepped into both of those franchises, so it’s not as if he launched them himself/was the box office draw.
I hate to tell you this, but Hansel and Gretel was a financial success with a x4.5 return on its budget. Kill the Messenger was given a marketing budget of about $10 and was totally screwed over by a change of management at Focus so it was killed, it didn’t just die. I saw it in the UK with no advertising at all and just a couple of shows at really odd times. It didn’t have a chance. Renner was also in The Immigrant which got similar treatment, supposedly because Harvey Weinstein was punishing the director for not making the changes he wanted. The immigrant had a respected director and Joaquim Phoenix and Marion Coultard in the lead roles, but that didn’t save it from being screwed over. Marion even put in an oscar worthy performance, but Harvey was pushing another film so tough luck.
According to this article (which I agree with at every level), not even Robert Downey Jr can open a movie on his own. Only ScarJo can and yet she doesn’t get the respect she deserves in the Marvel universe, which is so frustrating: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/05/avengers-age-of-ultron-s-black-widow-disgrace.html
Yeah, RDJ couldn’t even break even with The Judge (84 mil $ or so return on a 50 mil $ budget), although movies like Tropic Thunder or Due Date performed well at the box office, but that happened quite a while back. Scarlett had a hit out of nowhere – Lucy – so I do think that if they were to go head to head right now, she would have the upper hand, although Ghost in the Shell might be a major turkey for her.
As I said below , the only movie that Scarlett open by herself is “Lucy” she not the main character in the Jungle so you can’t count that as her opening it. All the other movies she been in she ether not to the main character or have been Marvel movies.
So I’m not sure how people are saying she can, when she really only opened 1 big movie open by herself.
What about Sherlock Holmes?
Also RDJ hadn’t opened another movie on his own than Marvel franchises as well
Exactly. Even Sherlock Holmes is because that’s a built in brand already. ScarJo was able to take Lucy – which had no built in audience – and open it on her name alone. She is the only one of the Marvel stars who can do that. And it was an action movie no less. Yet Hollywood still loves to be hard on its leading ladies and give bland, nice looking white guys chance after chance.
It’s not peculiar to RDJ and Marvel, I can’t really think (though maybe i have forgotten) of a big film opened by Daniel Craig outside the massively successful Bond franchise. Btw, Scarjo was excellent in the off the wall Under the Skin around the same time as Lucy and Her, a small film but a good one.
RDJ is also no BO draw outside of Marvel
I think the ones who were movie stars before (RDJ, ScarJo) are just still movie stars and the ones who weren’t (Hemsworth, Evans) still aren’t.
They are digging at Chris because he was the star of this film. Remember Charlize had to fight for equal pay on this film. God knows what Jessica got. The promotion has been built around Chris, he is more prominent on the trailers and he got all the major interviews (sometimes paired with Jessica). This was his movie and had it done well, Jessica and Charlize would have had no credit. It is only fair he take the fall.
Also, Chris has never sold a movie. Thor sells because it is a Marvel film not because he is attached to it.
Thor sells because of Loki, not because of Thor
A good portion of the Marvel male actors are just doing well inside Marvel because Marel has made their IP so bankable
I don’t think the promotion was built around Chris at all. Charlize has been the face of the film. I think she should share in the negative about the BO.. she got paid the same. Which to me was ridiculous considering how little people say she was in the film. None of the people in this move have ever had a BO success on their own. With them in the lead. so that being the case none of them were able to pull in an audience to see this.
These franchises bring in big money. But the people acting in then are not the draw. Especially when you think that in a few years; all of them are going to be replaced.
I’m not sure if I agree in the article when they say that it can’t work without the professional lip-biter. I think it was an ok movie in the beginning (as Samtha says, ok but forgettable) and no one asked for this prequel anyway … so, unless they do something absolutely amazing with it, which I’m pretty sure they didn’t, it was doomed for failure.
As for Thor … doesn’t really seem like he gives a crap, does he?
Does anyone really think this sequel would have done better box office if Kristen Stewart were in it? I know her fans like to think she is the key factor here, but I don’t think that is true at all. Like others have said, the first one was average and did decent box office because it was the year of the fairy tale movies. Now the unwanted sequel is just plain bad. Chris Hemsworth was contractually obligated to do it, I don’t think it was his choice. I think it is unfair to dump the failure of this on him too. There is only so much you can do with a bad movie.
I cannot understand how Blunt and Chastain got involved in this, because it sounds like the script was a mess from the start, and they lost the first director in pre production.
I think if Kristen Stewart was in this movie, it’d be a totally different type of movie (not necessarily better). At the end of SWatH, they teased the whole love triangle between Snow, Huntsman, and the Prince. It probably would have turned into a sequel focusing on that love triangle versus this weird prequel/sequel.
I liked the first movie for everything except Kristen Stewart. It visually was gorgeous and I thought Charlize owned that movie. I wanted to see this because it looked beautiful. Story-wise, it sounded really weird. Because it was a prequel (sort of) to Snow White, you knew certain things had to happen in order for it not to conflict with SWatH (ex. needs to be an evil queen, huntsman needed to be available, etc.). I agree that the movie could have been stronger with the cast if it was completely separate from the Snow White world. I’ll just wait til it’s on DVD.
I think its funny her media supporters want people to buy if Kstew were in this train wreck it would be better. It wasn’t that memorable of a story to begin with and against Jungle Book… did anyone have any doubt it would lose to JB. lol No way. JB is a much better movie of the first and second. I think the narrative from “some” media outlets. Very much slanderous. lol
I think the days of the all star leading man doing are over. Hollywood hasn’t got that memo yet, it seems. There will be no more Tom Cruises and Will Smiths and Brad Pitts. It’s all about franchises now.
Even Robert Downey Jr couldn’t open a film outside of Marvel and Sherlock Holmes. The Judge was a flop and it was actually a decent film.
And it’s seems like people have collectively made a decision to stop giving their money to bad movies. Aside from BvS, I can’t remember the last time a really horrible movie opened big..
I think it’s also because movies cost so much to see (in Switzerland a night out at the movies for 2 can easily go into 70 dollars or more …), so people only go to see the high action ones – lots of CGI or whatever, that make it worth paying so much money, vs watching it at home on TV.
as much as i dislike the movie star thing franchises also suck. movie stars at least meant original movies…
So true, but sadly 9 out of 10 times those sucky franchise movies make money, because of the franchise fan base.
It’ll make bank in rental and sales. So there’s that.
Somewhere out there, kristen Stewart has a lip- biting smile on her face.
Well, duh. He’s utterly bland.
But Charlize can’t open a movie, either. She’s not a Jolie.
Well, even Jolie couldn’t open a movie, with Brad Pitt. So I’m not sure who can anymore.
Maybe Melissa McCarthy and Sandra Bullock?
I agree with that. Plus Universal is betting on her for more movies, like the Fast and Furious, so watch out.
She opened Mad Max with no promotion and took the action movie to Oscars so lets not.
What are you talking about Mad Max had a tone of promotion from Charlize and the guy in the movie. Those two were everywhere promoting Mad Max as was Zoe Kravitz.
Production Budget: $150 million
Total Lifetime Grosses Worldwide: $378,436,354
Not that great. And take a look at her Box Office Mojo profile, please.
MMFR got killed by Pitch Perfect and barely made its money back. God forbid poor health strikes George Miller upon the next installment.
Charlize with Dark Places was a bust.
@familad it got killed by Pitch Perfect in the first weekend lol and not in total gross.
@Dana It is not the greatest yes but it is a genre hard r movie that was not even shown in China so I will take that as a win for her
I don’t think Charlize is a box office draw. But who is these days? She’s a great actress and that’s all I care about. The Fast and the Furious film she’s doing will make a fortune and only increase her visibility and reputation as a bad ass action star after her instantly iconic Furiosa performance in Mad Max Fury Road. She’s playing it smart with going between big films and small ones. Could she open a big film on her own though? No I don’t think so.
Chris is a nothingburger. His “talent” is that some people find him physically appealing. He also can’t enunciate-he sounds like his mouth is full of marbles. Any time I’m forced to watch a film He’s in, I have to request that the subtitles be turned on.
The movie was called The Huntsman. No one wants to see a movie called that. A movie called Snow White would sell no matter who was playing Snow White, so Kristen Stewart fans shouldn’t get too smug about this.
Charlize is the smart one. She used the Sony leaks to negotiate her pay and got paid 10 mil for a short screen time just having fun as the evil queen.
The last line in the article is utterly hilarious. ‘Like, I would imagine there’s a meeting happening somewhere in LA right now where someone is saying, “See? I told you we shouldn’t make a movie with three women, it was a recipe for disaster! Let’s greenlight another Chris Hemsworth-led movie!”’ Aw, you girls get blamed for everything (no sarcasm).
Good for Kristen Stewart’s ego, but her blockbuster days seem to be over, for the time being. She likes smaller movies now.
Why is that good for her ego? Her small movie flop as well so the Success of this movie vie had nothing to do with her or her fan.
For what I been hearing the script was bad and Chris is not a big draw outside of having a hammer in his hand. Not to mention the original film was tanted Stewart’s and the directors public affair, that what people manly remember about the original. In the end it should have never gotten made because like Tarzan, and Pan there was no market for the film.
Kristen picks smaller smarter movies now and its paying off. She has become a darling of the critics. An Oscar nom is just one more role away for her at this rate.
Most of those smaller movie aren’t box office hits by any level, this movie being a flop would do nothing for her ego. As for an Oscar nom I would say it’s one movie away or anything close to that.
I know people hate Kristen Stewart but she was totally the draw for the first movie. It was when Twilight was still a thing and Twihards went and saw it.
I don’t hate Kristen, but the success of the first film was not because of her. Disputed that Twilight following she has not been able to draw that attention to any of her other films.
The first film did better because the live action take on Snow White, and the strong female leads, but sadly for most it didn’t live up to the hype so there was no interest in a sequel about the Huntsman.
Snow White is what sells not Kristen Stewart. If this movie had Snow White in the title and film it would have done better.
I think Chris Hemsworth is a really good actor. He’s always embodied his characters and he was especially great in Rush. So I’m disappointed that he’s not getting the raves he deserves.
Despite the unfortunate title, the trailers made clear this was a Charlize Theron movie. If we want women to have more opportunities, we should also hold them accountable for what’s theirs/ours. Here, it seems that the story was mostly the problem, not any of the actors. But it wouldn’t be right to have Chris Hemsworth carry its failure. If any actor, it should fall to Charlize. I don’t like her – mostly because of her bitchy reputation and haughty attitude – but I see her movies if the movie looks good (Mad Max, Prometheus). In contrast, I’d see a Chris Hemsworth movie even if it doesn’t seem that good because he’s riveting as an actor. I didn’t see Huntsman/Winter’s War. It wasn’t his movie; it was hers.
She was not even in the movie for half of the actual running time. What do you ant to hold Charlize accountable for ??? Also Chris Hemsworth is not a good actor.. hell he is not even an average actor … and he should rightfully be getting the blame for this considering he commanded the same money as Carlize when Charlize is far far more established and an actual Oscar Winner.
People didn’t know that going into the movie. She promoted it a lot and it looked like she was in a lot of the movie.
I don’t know that a different actor than Chris would have made a difference. I think people weren’t all that interested in this movie, bottom line. It’s not really the actors’ fault if the reviews aren’t good, unless it’s about the acting. I haven’t read the reviews, so don’t know if Chris was mentioned.
I’ve never thought his name would open a movie, though. But these days, even other youngish actors don’t open movies unless the movies are great, besides Jake Gyllenhaal, who is developing a real following.
If your employer is willing to give you $10, you’re not going to say, “No, please give me only $3.” I’m glad Charlize demanded and got equal pay, and even more glad that it was publicized so much. But the problem is not the co-worker, it’s the employer. And that’s what women like Charlize and Jennifer Lawrence are changing.
I think another problem with he movie is that it was marketed wrong. All the the advertisements and promote was focused on Charlize and Emily instead of Chris. I was in the mall yesterday and there was a big 3 floors hight poster of Charlize and Emily and all the commercials I saw focused on those two, Chris was shown for a second with no speaking lines.
Flowerchild, I think we saw the same marketing – all Charlize and Emily, very little Chris.
It sounds like the movie wasn’t what was promoted, there was no huge desire for this sequel or whatever it is, and it got panned in reviews. Perfect storm for weak box office.
As I said above, Charlize had 15 minutes of screen time…tops. It’s Hemsworth who carries the film (also, it’s called the Huntsman!) so the terrible reviews are also largely on him. The previews were not selling Charlize, they were looking for a little Frozen (two sisters, ice powers) bump because I think they figured out too late that box office poison Hemsworth doesn’t sell without his hammer.
Chris Hemsworth is riveting as an actor? Since when? It called the Huntsman with Hemsworth’s name at the top. It was his film even though the commercials made it look like a Theron Blunt film.
People will jump thru any hoops to protect the white male lol
CHemboy is not a great actor and has no emotional range. He certainly hasn’t been worth the millions that studios have been paying him.
@CornyBlue
You took the words right out of my mouth.
Dont worry Hemsworth fans, this wont kill his career. Hell he could threaten to murder his wife and still score roles. Hollywood always has a second chance for a cute white boy.
Right. And the reason it failed was because it was called the Huntsman. If the movie had Snow White in the title and Charlize somehow still returned as the Evil Queen, it would have been a bigger success.
This movie freaking tricked me . I went to see all three of these ladies kick ass but no ?? It was mostly the bland white male ??? Like why deceive your audience ??
The studio thought women would go see the three actresses, so marketing put the focus on them. But none of those three can draw a dime.
I think they were also trying to make the queens look similar to Frozen. They thought they would get some of that Frozen money. I still like Jessica, Charlize and Emily. They aren’t big draws, but I don’t care because I would rather watch them act than the few stars who are considered big draws today. It’s about talent for me and I think they may have wasted it here, but I don’t Charlize for getting that easy 10 mil.
“…behind Jungle Book and a local film”
What is the Name of the Local Film?
at least mention it by name!
it could be quality film!
eta: Ah so it’s called “Yesterday Once More” (谁的青春不迷茫) a youth drama film. can’t read Chinese, would be interested to know what the story is. its Wikipedia entry has zero info on the plot.
A friend told me how surprised she was that Charlize was hardly in the movie… Just a few minutes in the beginning and the end. The rest seems to be boring and lacking direction.
I think Chris hemsworth is the one actor who can’t find much success outside marvel. His people and his thirsty wife wanted him to be the next action star and it really hasn’t panned out well. Rdj has a few franchises but he knows marvel is his cash cow. Chris Evans has his indies that no one sees but he’s been saying that he really doesn’t want to work unless he finds a script he loves. Mark has his indies that do well. The only one whose career will be a make or break with the next movie is scarjo. I’m really interested to see how all the controversy with ghost in the shell affects her career
ScarJo has long passed making or breaking stage of her career. She can open movies and opens them very very well and is probably the only person outside of RDJ who can do so.
Is that true though? the only movie that Scarlett open by herself is “Lucy” she not the main character in the Jungle so you can’t count that. All the other movies she been in she ether not to the main character ( most which have not been winners ) or are Marvel movies.
Here:
Lucy’s BO gross was 11 times its budget
Match Point’s was 6 times its budget
Scoop’s was 10 times
Vicky Christina Barcelona 8 times
Like among her recent roles the only one that did really poorly was probably Under My Skin which is a damn shame
All thee of the movie you’ve named was not opened by Scarlet herself, like in Lucy she had co-billing in each movie so the success and fail was of the movie was shared and not based on her.
Only with Lucy can we give Scarlett credit. Those Woody Allen films don’t count.
One hit (Lucy) does not a draw make. Bradley Cooper carried American Sniper to success, but did that make him a draw? He had four bombs in 2015. Scarlett certainly didn’t put butts in the seats for Hail, Caesar! earlier this year. She can’t open a movie anymore than that Deadpool guy.
My god, he is an awful actor. And this movie was as necessary as a diamond choker on KK. No one needed it.
Kaiser, we saw the Jungle Book last night & I freaking LOVED it!!!!!
I’m also a huge fan of the cartoon version. The new one attempts to add some details from Kipling’s book that the cartoon version never had.
My hands down favorite live-action adaption of Disney so far.
I liked it a lot too. The scale was bonkers – King Louie was more like King Kong – but it was beautifully realised and very entertaining
He’s not leading man material unless he starts doing Rom Coms with more popular female co-stars.
Or maybe it’s because the movie aka script and direction is just flat out bad? No it couldn’t possibly be that, it must be the actors.
I’m no particular fan of Hemsworth, I think he’s good looking and nice, not a movie star the likes of Tom Cruise, but he’s a decent attractive guy with average acting skills.
But not even Brando or Pacino can save a film when it’s clearly bad.
Maybe Hollywood execs, producers, directors, screenwriters, should look in the mirror if they want someone to blame.
I saw the movie this weekend because I wanted to see Jessica Chastain kick butt. I got to see that! IMO it probably would have been better had they marketed the movie about The Huntsman and his wife (as an action-love story maybe), an action hero herself. What the real problem and who is responsible are the screenwriters and the director. This movie was enjoyable and surprisingly, funny and visually gorgeous…unfortunately, there were 2 or 3 plot holes or continuity issues for me that were difficult to overlook. Not the kind where someone had a blue coat on and now it is red kind of continuity issues…BIG continuity issues. Those are things of which actors cannot do anything about. That being said, I am glad I went to see it. It was a perfectly enjoyable Sat. afternoon with my sister. Hemsworth had good chemistry with Chastain. I found them to be fun to watch their sweet nattering at one another. I will say CH was charming in this movie. His acting Has gotten better and he pulled his own weight in this movie with some heavy hitters. The responsibility lies with the studio on this one.
Me and the Mister are big Marvel fans, so we’ll give any film under that umbrella a whirl, but the truth is (despite his prettiness) Chris Hemsworth can’t act… I mean he was ‘ok’ in Home and Away…
There are very, very few true box office stars these days whose very presence can draw people to the theater and carry a movie. Hemsworth has had a string of box office flops despite the fact that Ron Howard cast him as the lead in Rush and Heart of the Sea. He was decent in Rush. Blackhat his other big movie in-between the Thor and Avenger movies also flopped badly. So it’s not surprising his asking price has dropped from $12M per film to $6M. And it will decline even further once he puts the hammer down for good. Hemsworth has shown a real comedic flair and a willingness to take supporting roles in comedies like the National Lampoon movie (also a flop unfortunately). He did a really nice job hosting SNL last year. And he’s also playing the male secretary in the all female reboot of Ghostbusters and hopefully, that will do better.
And yes, Hiddleston’s charismatic, scene stealing performance as Loki is the best reason to see Thor. But to Hemsworth’s credit, he’s been gracious about that even when asked by fans how he feels about Loki being more popular than Thor. The new director of Thor: Ragnarok promises that it will be more comedic and keep the action firmly focused on Thor, the titular character. So God help us!
I really like Chris, admittedly because of the looks too and because I “spotted” him in Home and Away in 2006, when I used to skip the last lecture at Uni to come watch him on TV (reruns). Back then I used to think, “this here boy will grow up to be fantastic”. And I was right… but somewhere along the way, in between changing nappies for his agent’s kids as an aspiring actor and the press tour for the Avengers, something happened that made him stop giving a damn about his craft. In the first interviews, he said he wanted to really be an actor and try different things, but in reality he only ever played super-masculine and super strong white dudes. Even in Blackhat.
I might sound callous, but I think getting married and having children switched his priorities and made him less hungry for recognition. After all, he has a strong marketing team that keep selling him as this super dreamy perfect guy, the money that came until now was excellent… why churn the butter out of himself if people want to pay him for looking hot? Like Deadpool would say, “maxium results, minimum effort!” As far as white dudes go, he’s pretty decent, but he shouldn’t be allowed to ride the privilege wave forever and for free. He has to really show up for work or stay home.
Jessica did not deserve to be dragged into this mess.
He has awful taste in scripts, thats why his films flop. Other than Rush, Cabin in the Woods and Avengers, all his films suck.
Yeah, the scripts he chooses are meh.
He’s actually got a rather sympathetic quality – he’s less wooden than Cavill, IMO, and lord knows other beefcake types have turned into stars, but somehow Hemsworth just hasn’t hit the right non-Marvel vehicle. He was quite decent enough in Black Hat and In the Heart of the Sea, but the vehicles themselves just don’t grab.
Charlize’s films are often flops and I’m not sure why she doesn’t get blamed for them? She isn’t the big leading leading Hollywood seems to think she is. Has she EVER opened a movie? Mad Max was popular, because it is Mad Max and not because it was a “Charlize” film. She wants equal pay, she should share equal blame. She is so pompous and I know it’s mean, but I kind like for her to have ANOTHER bomb and be taken down a few knots in her HUGE ego. Between that an aging out of roles (not her fault, but happens to all in Hollywood), there is a wee part of me who is enjoying seeing the grouchy-face, HUGELY full of herself Charlize stumble down and open poorly. Show it can happen to even those who think it will never happen to them!
It’s petty to root for someone to fail when you have no good reason to. What has Charlize done that is so terrible? Oh so you’re salty over some quotes that were taken completely out of context. You ought to know how the media works when their main goal is to get juicy headlines and as many clicks as possible. You fell for it. Instead of taking sick pleasure out of a woman’s failure and attacking her age we should hope to have more strong, versatile, classy, and talented women like Charlize find success and lead our movies rather than hearing about the Kardashians of the world.
Totally agree.
maybe this is karma for that native american nye party him and elsa threw lol
but i actually liked it it was a vast improvement over the 1st one, chris and jessica had so much chemistry and jessica was 10x badass than kristen haha
I love Hemsworth, granted, he’s not the talent we have all been waiting for but he delivers and he’ a team player. I’ve seen all of his movies several times at the theatre and I have bought most in blu-ray.
I enjoy what he does but he better change his strategy a bit. Maybe doing interesting supporting characters in ward bait movies could help a bit and then start biulding from them. Just like any regular actor
Need to remind you his 1st job was Star trek and then he was cast as Thor, of course he’s only known big projects so I don’t blame him for not knowing better.
I LOVE Chris too! His voice is KILLER and the face and body are easy on the eyes. And his acting doesn’t bother me one bit – but I can agree he is no DeNiro. I only planned to rent this flick as I never saw the first one and don’t go out to the movies very often, and I had read the first one sucked. When does a sequel or prequel ever get better than the first attempt? I don’t think its fair to place all the blame on him.
Yeah I think people are being a little too hard on Hemsworth. I’m a bigger fan of Emily, Jessica, and Charlize and think they are better at acting than he is, but he’s got something appealing to him. He’s just not a draw. But I can name maybe three actors who are draws today. The studio who gave this film the go-ahead needs to blame themselves instead of the actors because at the end of the day Snow White is a brand name that sells, not the Huntsman. They shouldn’t have approved this sequel in the first place.
True, but I’ve never seen a studio exec take the fall for a flop. They always blame the talent!
How stunning does Jessica look? Anyway, the original SW barely had a plot and zero substance. I think Chris is just too bland in interviews. He’s honestly not a bad actor (I found him good in Heart of the Sea, the race car film (also with Ron Howard), and Blackhat) but he needs something to really make him break out into the popular consciousness as an action star or something.
I took my daughter and her friend to see this and we all loved it. I really liked him and Emily Blunt was fabulous. Jessica Chastain was great. Charlize Theron- not so much. People in the theater were like, “her again? I thought she was dead!” It was really neat the way they made it a prequel and a sequel in one.
“People in the theater were like, “her again? I thought she was dead!” ”
Really? They didn’t see the ads or posters?