Come on, its ok; we can admit it, at some point weve all bought into the massive hype surrounding a major release. I know I myself am most certainly guilty of getting a little too excited about a film that ends up being a complete waste of both my time and my precious pennies! Some of the most successful films at the box office throughout Hollywoods long history have basically been epic train wrecks we could have done without seeing. But its fair to say that when the studios get the ball rolling and inject our society with lavish helpings of propaganda, we like fools buy straight into it. I mean if legendary producer
Jerry Wald could convince the Academy to give
Joan Crawford an Oscar for her role as
Mildred Pierce in 1945, by insisting she was giving the best performance of her life during shooting, how are we the humble audience supposed to ignore similar superfluous tactics to get our behinds in cinema seats? Now there are some out there who are sensible enough to avoid anything that has been talked up far too much, but for most of us we just cant help being suckered in What follows is a list of ten films that really didnt live up to the huge amounts of generated hype that surrounded them before their release!
10. Cleopatra (1963)
Following the life, loves and turmoil of Egypts most glamorous queen, Cleopatra VII (although lets be honest, she probably wasnt anywhere near as glamorous as
Elizabeth Taylor!), this film was the 1960s biggest epic. Twentieth Century Fox was under economic difficulties in the late 1950s and looked for a subject that had proved to be box office gold previously.
Theda Baras Cleopatra from 1917 was chosen due to its immense popularity all those years ago. Originally envisioned as a modest $2 million drama that would be a vehicle for
Joan Collins, the production quickly spiralled out of control when Taylor jokingly told original producer
Walter Wagner that shed play the infamous queen for a cool million. What was meant to be Foxs saviour soon turned into the straw that almost broke the camels back, nearly bankrupting the studio. The budget skyrocketed to a total of $44million, was set back due to Taylors serious case of pneumonia, went through three directors and countless other problems. Filming began in 1960, but the film was not ready for release until 1963. Within those three years enough hype was generated to make Cleopatra the most highly anticipated production of the early sixties. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGDyZHlHklo During filming Taylors love affair with
Richard Burton began and the initial scandal was quickly replaced with a media frenzy that sent the world in a spin. Of course, this revelation put untold amounts of expectation into the pairs work. Unfortunately for audiences, although the sparks are definitely there on screen, they had to wait close to two hours to see them. In the meantime they were subject to laborious dialogue, some pretty impressive scenery and Taylor in about 75000 costumes not quite as gripping in all honesty. The original tagline for the film read The motion picture the world has been waiting for! Unfortunately for Fox, the wait had been too long and the sword and sandal epics so popular in the 1950s proved to be less so in 1963. This, however, was not as big a flop as has been notoriously reported since its release. Although the film did not make a profit from its original theatrical release, by the late sixties after a lucrative $5 million dollar television deal, Cleopatra finally put Fox back in the black. Since then, the profits generated by the film have been closely guarded (possibly to prevent Taylor from requesting even more than the original $7million she eventually agreed upon bagging from the role!). Thus we may never know how much the film netted for the studio, what we do know is it never really lived up to the colossal expectations the hype surrounding it generated. They dont make them like this anymore and perhaps this is the reason why?
09. Jennifers Body (2009)
In 2009
Megan Fox was Hollywoods hottest leading lady (in all honestly, shes still pretty fine despite her box office blunders!) and as such
Jennifers Body a high school set horror flick was eagerly anticipated. And boy did audiences end up s*** creek without a paddle! The plot is contrived, convoluted and just plain stupid. The normally stunning Fox spends a lot of her time looking rank like a cheap prostitue if Im honest and co-star
Amanda Seyfreid simply looks lost in her role. Written by
Diablo Cody, the comic genius behind
Juno (2007), we expected more. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCSzYioSeT0 Many have stated that the film is not as bad as its critical reception and it is undoubtedly on a higher level than some of the tripe thats been offered in the horror/comedy in the past few years, but in the hands of lets face it pretty dreary director
Karyn Kusama, the film lacks any real suspense or scary moments. The film is watchable enough if you like to sit back and switch off, but if you like a horror with a bit of bite (or stab!) Im sure you agree that the hype was far more impressive than the film itself.
08. Sex and the City 2 (2010)
As a dutiful boyfriend, I have spent the past few years enduring the rampant sex lives of four middle-aged women (although
Kim Catrall is clearly still do-able!). Surprisingly, Ive unfortunately come to enjoy itsorry, one moment; I just have to wave goodbye to my masculinity All over the world, the second big screen offering from the gang was this summers hottest offering for female cinemagoers (and yes, their ill-fated partners too). What a shame it doesnt hold a candle to the TV series, or even the first big screen adaptation. Many critics correctly pointed out that by taking the 'sex' out of the city it meant taking the charm out of the movie. For die-hard fans (my girlfriend included) it was heaven. For me not so much a die-hard fan, more of a try-hard for my girlfriend fan it had its moments of hilarity, but ultimately was a letdown. I laughed during the first viewing, but on the second (yes, I had to see it again!) it became apparent that it was a one viewing only type of film. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5-aOpznm44 Months before the film was released my girlfriend spent hours trawling the internet looking for leaked pictures, watching trailers, downloading wallpapers you name it, she did it! Then the time came for her to don her Manolos she is such a fan she simply had to buy those blue ones from the first film! for the preview screening. With fans like her already demanding a third theatrical instalment, as someone who will undoubtedly be dragged to see it, I only hope that a little more pleasure can come from the sex, hopefully back in the city this time. With the amount of hype that will surely be generated if it gets a green light, Im not even convinced its possible for the next episode to live up to such immense expectations?
07. Speed 2: Cruise Control (1997)
Think back to 1994 and the action packed bliss of
Speed. Then try hard not to think back to 1997 and the immense disappointment of
Speed 2: Cruise Control. The second instalment of the explosive franchise was hotly awaited, despite the fact that
Keanu Reeves had not signed on to reprise his role as Jack Traven. With
Sandra Bullock returning as Annie Porter and the legendary
Willem Defoe attached to play the villain, surely it couldnt go wrong? Well unfortunately, yet again, the film did not live up to the pre-release hype http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVsHrIEIlbs Its easy to see where it went wrong:
Jason Patric as the male lead,
Cuba Gooding Jr as the comic relief. The film was plagued with second-rate talent. The script is also incredibly inept. Where Bullocks Annie had been nervous, but ultimately gutsy in the original film, she became whiny and irritating here. Willem Defoe, perhaps sensing the impending doom, hams up his role as the diabolical Geiger. All in all, its simply a waste of time. When the original is such a success Im sure its easy for producers to let the prospect of an easy buck (i.e. sequel) overshadow the desire to make a genuinely entertaining film. As the years go by Speed will undoubtedly be fondly remembered as an action classic from the 90s. Hopefully Speed 2 will slip further into obscurity, another victim of hype over substance.
06. King Kong (2005)
Fresh off completing the final chapter of his
Lord of the Rings trilogy,
Peter Jackson delved straight into the pre-production on his next epic,
King Kong. Understandably, given the trilogy he had just delivered, this lead to this particular remake being one of the most highly anticipated films of the century. Despite generally favourable critical reviews, the film did not initially perform as well at the box office as expected. Eventually this did pick up however and the film went on to be a big hit for Universal. I do not dislike the film; in fact I didnt think it was too bad when I saw it at the cinema. However, the runtime is far too long and the narrative is laced with wholly unnecessary moments (the length of the sea journey and elements of the arduous hunt for Ann, for instance). Due to this, the film did not live up to my, or many other peoples expectations of an action packed adventure, complete with a strong social commentary running throughout the narrative. Indeed, the action scenes are few and far between, with the intermediate scenes being heavy on dialogue and unnecessary plot devices. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5j_2sRUTbU As an ardent admirer of the original film, this version also lacks a certain charm that the 1933 movie exudes. The heavy reliance on CGI special effects, for me, unfortunately distances the audience from the action. The model work in the original film may look incredibly dated by todays standards, but theres something in knowing Kong is physically there which makes it that little bit more believable. Dont get me wrong; Jacksons special effects are impressive, but can a computer-generated image ever rival the hand-made magic of a model? Im not convinced, and therefore King Kong was unable to live up to the hype simply because it could not live up to the awe-inspiring craftsmanship of the original.
05. Alice in Wonderland (2010)
Disney,
Tim Burton,
Johnny Depp: a recipe for success, surely? Well, no! Despite being Burtons highest grossing film, plus one of the years most financially successful films, its a really uninspired piece from all of the aforementioned. On paper, the continued adventure of
Alice in Wonderland is a tantalizing prospect. Unfortunately the film is fundamentally hindered by its reliance on CGI. Wonderland lacks its wonder. The computer-generated imagery is flawless however, it is this polished look that does not ring true of the original image, as presented in Lewis Carrolls novel. It is also another reason the film seems uninspired. The reliance on CGI means less physical props and costumes, which is what a fantasy film spectacle such as this requiresin abundance. (Think Disneys own Chronicles of Narnia franchise as an example). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjMkNrX60mA Depps portrayal of The Mad Hatter leaves much to be desired too. His insipid turn as Alices ally is definitely no Jack Sparrow or Willy Wonka. Whether this is down to the screenplay or simply his acting is open to debate. What is a given, is that audiences suspected more from Hollywoods most versatile star. Perhaps the Burton/Depp partnership is in need of a break and this is simply a minor hiccup in the catalogue of two of Hollywoods greatest talents?
04. Paranormal Activity (2009)
One of last years most eagerly awaited features was the independently produced mockumentary
Paranormal Activity. The film split fans and critics alike: some stating it was the scariest film released for years (thus feeding into the hype) and others claiming it was a festering pile of crap! I fall firmly into the latter group The film is certainly not the scariest film for years: in fact its not even one of the scariest, falling well out of a top ten rundown. For me, the film borders on the verge of the laughable, before free falling firmly into hilarity! It probably didnt help that a few days before watching it my parents had told me that they had sat down with my 14-year-old brother to watch it. He of course, being an impressionable teenager, totally bought into it to the point of potential pant-wetting fear. My parents simply laughed. And so did I. Its not that the film is void of original idea or hindered by terrible performances from its cast. Its just that its so unbelievable! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_UxLEqd074 I guess Paranormal Activitys final effect is dependent on what instils fear into your mind. I love psychological horror thrillers and Im always open to supernatural tales if its presented in a truly smart way. However, Paranormal Activity was a disappointment due to its inability to petrify me.
03. Star Wars: Episode One The Phantom Menace (1999)
As someone who really doesnt like the
Star Wars movies it would be easy for many of the franchises fans to simply scoff my opinion as that of an imbecile. However, Episode One is definitely the black sheep of the intergalactic series. When
George Lucas announced his intentions to revamp the franchise with a succession of prequels, fans around the world rejoiced. From the initial announcement in Variety (plus a number of other publications) way back in 1993, anticipation mounted as the decade progressed. With six years hype behind it, its needless to say that
Phantom Menace had a LOT to live up to. Its equally unnecessary to say that it didnt! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6hOlI9cg4o With an ensemble of capable stars and a canon of hot new talent, Lucass first prequel should have been one of cinemas greatest successes. However, plagued by a distinct lack of plot and severely underdeveloped characters, Episode One left a distinctly bitter taste in the mouths of loyal fans. The movie also features one of the most annoying characters ever committed to film: Jar Jar Binks! There it seems simply to annoy, you cant help but think what was Lucas thinking!? Whereas C3PO and R2D2 in the original trilogy had a certain charm, the irritating Jar Jar lacks any narrative justification: a pointless pain in the head that no amount of popcorn can medicate. With its only redeeming features being the impressive visual effects and the energetically choreographed fight sequences, Phantom Menace shaped up to be one of the nineties biggest disappointments. However, to give credit where credits due is it ever possible to live up to that much hype?
02. Titanic (1997)
I admit it, when I was 10/11 years old in 1997 I was amazed by this film and became pretty obsessed with the whole tragic affair, even to the extent that I read the novella
The Wreck of the Titan by
Morgan Robertson, which was written in 1898 and spookily predicted the events of 1912. It was the first real epic I saw on the big screen and as such, is my excuse for getting caught up with the hype. However, on subsequent viewings Ive realised that apart from
Kate Winslet in the buff and the actual sinking, its simply an overblown love story and a bunch of fancy costumes. In essence its predominantly aesthetic a sort of surface-veneer with the narrative being of little real substance. I can already hear hordes of women screaming, Nooooooo, its amazing!! But is it, reallyI mean, when you actually think about it? Basically, its bloody boring up until the ill-fated liner hits the damn iceberg and really that could have been much earlier in the run-time! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCy5WQ9S4c0 I remember the build up to the films release and my thoughts that it looked like the most amazing thing ever committed to celluloid. In all honesty the cast is solid and for the time the special effects were certainly impressive. My gripe is that it hasnt stood up in the years following its release its no classic! With the identically named 1953 version and 1958s
A Night to Remember remaining classics for very different reasons,
James Camerons extravagant opus is not really the masterpiece it was expected to be
01. The Blair Witch Project (1999)
The team behind
The Blair Witch Project were quite simply geniuses! The use of the internet to promote the micro-budget, independent horror feature meant it was one of the most highly anticipated films of the late nineties. Its position at the top of this poll will undoubtedly be controversial, but for me it definitely didnt live up to the hype! Whilst many argue that the mockumentary/ hand-held home video style of the film is what enhances the horror, for me I think it simply detracts. The amateur camera work is extremely irritating and ends up being what the viewer focuses on, rather than the intended suspense generated by the lack of any real horror on screen. Im an advocate of off-screen horror Val Lewtons
Cat People (1942) is an excellent film that doesnt show any on screen horror at all but during Blair Witch nothing happens! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D51QgOHrCj0 Despite the passing of time and the masses of exposure the film received even after its dwell in the cinema, I still knew nothing about it. Once Id watched it for the first time I understood why: nobody knows whats going on! With a firm love of all types of horror film, the implied horror of the off screen witch was lost on me and I found it totally unscary, in fact, a complete letdown! From everything I have subsequently read on the film literally hundreds of positive reviews and articles citing critical acclaim I wonder if I missed something upon that first viewing? However, subsequent watches have done nothing to convince me of its accomplishment as a genuinely unsettling horror. My apologies to its devoted fans, but come on, lets be honestits pretty s***!