15 Terrible Looking 2016 Movies That Will Shockingly Make A Profit

4. Rings

Ghostbusters 2016.jpg
Universal Pictures

The Premise: A student finds out that her boyfriend watched the infamous Samara tape six-and-a-half days ago, and so the pair desperately attempt to avoid the fate that awaits him.

Why It Looks Awful: Where to begin? It's a belated sequel nobody asked for, coming 11 years after the critically-reviled The Ring Two, it's got a nobody cast except for Johnny Galecki in a supporting role, and it's co-written by Akiva Goldsman, the man responsible for Batman and Robin. 'Nuff said.

Why It'll Make A Profit: It's fairly low-budget at $33 million, and considering that it's pretty much a glorified reboot, it'll no doubt re-ignite the terror of the original for a whole new generation, regardless of whether it's actually any good or not. 

The first two movies made $249 million and $161 million respectively, so it probably doesn't need to work too hard to be a success: it's not like Naomi Watts was exactly a household name when the original came out.

In this post: 
ghostbusters
 
Posted On: 
Contributor
Contributor

Stay at home dad who spends as much time teaching his kids the merits of Martin Scorsese as possible (against the missus' wishes). General video game, TV and film nut. Occasional sports fan. Full time loon.