Some people use box office numbers as a barometer to judge a movie, but there are plenty of classics that started out as commercial failures. Box office success is rarely a good indicator of a movie’s quality, since there are so many external factors at play. Marketing, industry trends, timing and sheer luck can severely affect how a movie performs, which means that some great movies fall short of expectations while someterrible movies are huge successes.
Some of the best movies ever made struggled at the box office. Sometimes, this is merely a coincidence, but it’s often the case that the things which make these movies so special are also what make them such big box office bombs. Experimental movies, or those which subvert audience expectations, generally struggle to reach big audiences in theaters, but they can be reappraised soon after and recognized as the masterpieces that they are.
The Shawshank Redemptionis now considered one of thebest movies ever made, but it flew under the radar when it first came out. The Stephen King adaptation follows two prisoners who form an unlikely bond behind bars, sharing their dreams of one day being free. Thanks to an outstanding script and two compelling lead performances from Morgan Freeman and Tim Robbins,The Shawshank Redemptionnow gets the credit it deserves. It’s the kind of powerful movie that can make audiences cry, think, and ultimately leave with a deeper appreciation of life.
10 Box Office Flops That Deserve To Be Remade
These major box office flops should be remade when the previous movie wasted its potential; most have great premises and casts but poor execution.
In 1994,The Shawshank Redemptionfaced stiff competition at the box office.It came out whilePulp FictionandForrest Gumpwere attracting much more attention. It probably didn’t help that Columbia Pictures decided to omit Stephen King’s name from any marketing, fearing a negative association with his popular horror movies likeCarrieandThe Shining.WhileThe Shawshank Redemptionis certainly a different kind of story, King’s name still could have helped it stand out. The movie gradually gained traction among critics and awards-season voters, and it eventually turned a profit on its $25 million budget after a re-release.
Blade Runnerhas shaped the sci-fi genre for decades, so it’s a little surprising to think that it was originally viewed as a commercial flop. Ridley Scott’s neo-noir dystopian thriller masterfully blends different genres. While the visuals are captivating throughout, inviting viewers into a spectacular, dark world,Blade Runneris a detective movie at its heart. Like so many film noir classics, it delves into some fascinating philosophical themes, leaving one or two lingering mysteries for the audience to mull over. This weighty, cerebral mixture ultimately didn’t draw audiences to seeBlade Runner,and its $30 million budget started to look like a mistake.
$108 million
$630.6 million
$110 million
$465.5 million
$210 million
$462.2 million
$120-130 million
$403.4 million
$87 million
$351.6 million
1982 was a bumper year for sci-fi, and it’s possible thatBlade Runnersimply came out at the wrong time. Audiences were spoiled for choice, with movies likeThe Thing, E.T. the Extra-TerrestrialandStar Trek II: The Wrath of Khanall coming out in the same year.Blade Runneris much slower and more thoughtful than the kinds of sci-fi blockbusters which do well at the box office, so it initially struggled to find its audience. The long-awaited sequel,Blade Runner 2049,was also a mild box office disappointment when it came out in 2017. It remains to be seen how the spinoff TV show,Blade Runner 2099,will fare.
Fight Clubwasn’t a complete commercial disaster, butwith a budget of $65 million, it still fell well below expectations. Since then, it has come to be recognized as a true cult classic, and one ofDavid Fincher’s best movies. His exploration into the darkest reaches of human psychology has been a constant theme throughout his career, andFight Clubis no different. With a charismatic performance from Brad Pitt and an immensely satisfying twist,Fight Clubis now much more popular than it was when it was first released.
20th Century Fox didn’t quite know how to marketFight Club.
One ofFight Club’s greatest strengths is the way that Fincher manages to blend so many different genres. There are elements of action, crime and psychological drama, but there are also moments whenFight Clubresembles a pitch-black buddy comedy about two mismatched friends committing heinous acts of violence together. This singular approach meant that 20th Century Fox didn’t quite know how to marketFight Club,with some of the marketing material selling it as a bare-knuckled action thriller. The truth toFight Clubis much more interesting.
Scott Pilgrim vs. the Worldwas Edgar Wright’s first movie outside the UK, and he kicked up his stylistic indulgences to the extreme for his adaptation of a popular series of graphic novels. The aesthetics of comic books run throughoutScott Pilgrim vs. the World,with unusual framing choices, snappy camera movements and moments when text or colorful images appear superimposed on-screen beside the characters. Another obvious inspiration is arcade games, which also shapes the structure of the narrative as Scott battles through seven levels.
10 Box Office Flops From The 2010s That Everyone Now Loves
Box office figures can only tell you so much about a movie, but there are plenty of classics from the 2010s which were classed as commercial failures.
Scott Pilgrim vs. the World’s unique quirks have helped it become a cult classic, but this unusual style also contributed to the movie’s underwhelming box office performance. With a budget of $85 million,Scott Pilgrim vs. the Worldwould have needed to make triple its box office total to even stand a chance of breaking even. The animated TV reboot in 2023 showed that there’s still a lot of love for Wright’s movie, even if this wasn’t apparent when it first came out. The movie doesn’t have mainstream appeal, so its budget was always a huge hurdle.
Alfonso Cuarón’s best moviesshow that he can master any genre that he turns his attention toward, andChildren of Menshows signs of a much more experienced action and sci-fi director. The dystopian thriller takes place in a near-future where humanity has mysteriously lost the ability to procreate, which leads to widespread chaos and panic. Although it was a box office disappointment,Children of Menhas now been recognized as one of the best and most influential sci-fi movies of the 21st century, with many other filmmakers imitating Cuarón’s intelligent worldbuilding and his use of long takes to enhance the action.
Children of Menfailed to recoup its $76 million budget, although this was partially caused by its strangely limited release.
Children of Menfailed to recoup its $76 million budget, although this was partially caused by its strangely limited release. Due to a lack of recognizable stars, long stretches between the sporadic action scenes and a bleak tone,Children of Menwas seen as a big risk by Universal Pictures, who decided to mitigate their losses by releasing the movie in fewer theaters. People who did get to seeChildren of Menwere largely positive about the movie, which explains how a movie with such a stellar critical reputation could still constitute a flop.
Orson Welles was already a well-respected name before he made his directorial debut, so there was a lot of anticipation forCitizen Kane.However, it would have been hard to predict that the first-time director would immediately produce one of the best movies ever.Citizen Kaneis endlessly entertaining, but it also contains hidden depths that have fascinated audiences for decades. It’s a stunning character portrait that works as an indictment of a whole society, and one of its biggest strengths is that it still feels relevant.
Citizen Kaneis a satirical roman á clef about William Randolph Hearst, one of the biggest newspaper magnates of the time.When Hearst caught wind of the movie, he did everything within his power to destroy it.Although he couldn’t stop it from being released, he exerted his influence to scare distributors away, and he refused to allow any marketing for the movie in any of his newspapers or on any of his radio networks. This proved effective for a while, asCitizen Kanemade a loss of around $150,000, but Hearst’s actions did nothing to affect the movie’s positive critical response.
