8 Lessons Studios Must Learn To Avoid Making Box-Office Duds

One of the reasons why a lot of blockbusters are underperforming is because their budgets are ridiculously high. Most of the flops we've discussed would be considered successes if they'd been made for a little less, and overspending is the habit that Hollywood just can't shake.

Again, let's look at King Arthur: Legend Of The Sword. Its lead actor isn't a proven box-office draw, its director hasn't had a financial hit in six years, and it falls within a genre that's having a rough time lately. This should be an $80 - $90 million movie, right?

It cost $175 million. Before marketing. That's absolutely astonishing. Who greenlit this thing, and who said that budget was okay? The movie was set to be a flop as soon as that giant cheque was signed.

Valerian And The City Of A Thousand Planets is another great example. It's based on a niche comic-book series, with two unproven stars as the leads. Again, this seems like a sub-$100 million movie, or $110 - $120 million at the absolute best.

It was made for around $177 million. That's ridiculous. Why is Hollywood spending so much on these risky movies, then acting all surprised when they die a death at multiplexes around the world?

Look at Deadpool. That was definitely a risky project, and as such, it was given an appropriate $58 million budget. If it did flop, it wouldn't be a huge loss, and if it was good, it wouldn't have far to go to make its money back.

Well, it was good, and it made almost $800 million worldwide. The risk paid off, but even if it didn't, it wouldn't have been a big deal. There's a fundamental issue with the way studios assign budgets to projects, and something has to change.

Why do you think the summer of 2017 was a lousy one at the box-office? Let us know in the comments below!