Current Events > Borderlands movie made $16.5 million in opening weekend, budget was $145 million

(+) Yeah! (+)

The movie, which we completely forgot was even a thing, to be honest, launched on 9th August 2024 and scored a pitiful $8.8 million domestically on its opening weekend. Add to that a rather palty $7.7 million overseas and you've got the $16.5 million total.

Given Borderlands' $145 million budget, we can't imagine Lionsgate is best pleased with its performance so far.

https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2024/08/critically-panned-borderlands-movie-flops-at-the-box-office

Is the Sonic movie the only videogame movie where the creators actually listened to everyone when the first trailer was universally panned? How many more massive flops will it take until studios realize the entire internet going "this looks like shit" at your first trailer is a sign you screwed up and should probably cut your losses?

...so 9 more weeks and they start earning cash?

Foppe posted...

...so 9 more weeks and they start earning cash?

Nah, $16.5 million in your opening weekend means the second weekend makes half the first, and that trends for each weekend after.

So after nine weeks, I project it'll make $32.9 million.

I saw it last night, there were only 6 people in the theatre and it was one of the larger theatres. It was pretty terrible though maybe not as bad as I thought it was going to be.

Did an actual person write that? Do editors exist anymore or is it all AI bullshit?

I guess it's fitting that such a low-quality movie is being covered by such low-quality "journalism."

Even if it got decent or even good reviews, nobody asked for this. The movie's coming out close to a decade after the series was popular.

Upd: okay, looked it up, five years after the series was popular. My bad. But still, this was a pre-Covid IP that might've had an audience, the ship for it had clearly sailed in 2024.

El_Marsh posted...

Did an actual person write that? Do editors exist anymore or is it all AI bullshit?

I guess it's fitting that such a low-quality movie is being covered by such low-quality "journalism."

Actually yeah, wtf is that wording?

Deadpool's not doing it any favors either.

It's almost like casting the leads based on how much "star power" you think they have won't make up for complete miscasting or lack of faithfulness to the source material or its tone, especially when your primary target audience would be the people who actually played the games and enjoyed them enough to want a movie.

This is the 1993 Super Mario Bros. movie all over again.

Best pleased is proper grammar, it's just uncommon these days.

TMOG posted...

It's almost like casting the leads based on how much "star power" you think they have won't make up for complete miscasting or lack of faithfulness to the source material or its tone, especially when your primary target audience would be the people who actually played the games and enjoyed them enough to want a movie.

This is the 1993 Super Mario Bros. movie all over again.

That's an insult to the Mario movie. The vision of a cyberpunk city covered in a giant fungus alone is a unique creative vision whereas Borderlands looks like bland focus driven garbage.

Sure all the ideas in the Mario movie were so so bad, but that gives it a cult weirdo film charm.

Seriously though, if someone can tell me it has the kind of train wreck charm the Mario film does I may actually be interested. Jack Black as Claptrap at least had potential for that.

What we need is a new movie, or TV series, faithful to the games and call it Real Borderlands.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


My guess would be because they spent $145 million on it and needed to try getting some of it back. Sonic benefited from a CGI update. That's a relatively easy fix. CGI swaps wouldn't fix Borderlands. Scrapping everything and doing it over would mean throwing away what they invested already and getting $0 back. I guess a few tens of millions is better than nothing.

I question why this movie was even made. Who asked for this?

There are infinitely better sources for a comedy movie, there are infinitely better sources for a shooty action flick. Borderlands accomplishes neither

Hey, they did spend 2 weeks of reshots, so things could have been worse...

mystic_belmont posted...

Nah, $16.5 million in your opening weekend means the second weekend makes half the first, and that trends for each weekend after.

So after nine weeks, I project it'll make $32.9 million.

Maybe it'll be like The Greatest Showman which had a horrible first weekend and then went on to make a shitload of money because the few people who did see it that first weekend told everyone how amazing it was

Oh wait, that was for an actual good movie

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


The writing was on the walls when Eli Roth was selected to write and direct it.

Did anyone actually want a live action Borderlands movie?

They'll make a little bit whoring it out to all of the streaming services

As the Borderlands movie opens to overwhelmingly negative reviews, the film is shaping up for a disappointing return this weekend. However, Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick has come to its defence, saying that a "lot of people worked really hard on" the project.

Speaking to IGN, Zelnick also says that we should "give the film a chance" before writing it off, and even defends the casting decisions made for the movie. He describes the cast as "amazing", and adds that the "the look and feel" of the movie is "really terrific" - a sentiment that many fans are disagreeing with online.

"Let's give the film a chance", says Strauss Zelnick. "A lot of people worked really hard on it. The underlying intellectual property is phenomenal, the cast is amazing, I think the look and feel is really terrific. So let's see what audiences have to say."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/borderlands-movie-team-worked-really-hard-says-take-two-boss/ar-AA1oCW6u

LOL!

KFHEWUI posted...

So let's see what audiences have to say."

They're telling you, dumbass.

Who could have ever imagined that a bunch of people who give no fucks about the source material, who only cast superstars with blank regard for if they're right for the role, to make a movie about a mindless loot shooter game that's almost 15 years old, would have resulted in an abysmal showing.

Pikachu would be absolutely shocked if he were here to see this.

LonelyStoner posted...

Did anyone actually want a live action Borderlands movie?

A decade ago perhaps.

mystic_belmont posted...

Nah, $16.5 million in your opening weekend means the second weekend makes half the first, and that trends for each weekend after.

So after nine weeks, I project it'll make $32.9 million.

No way will it actually be in theaters that long

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/6/60f24e82.jpg

Theyve got plenty of money its just a long ad

An ad for what? They're currently in the red for this aren't they?

Foppe posted...

Hey, they did spend 2 weeks of reshots, so things could have been worse...

Supposedly the reshoots were to tone it down to get a pg-13 rating. Originally they were going for an R so they had a lot of violence and gore

Umbreon posted...

An ad for what? They're currently in the red for this aren't they?

An ad to watch it at home, no one cares about box office anymore

Avi Arad, net worth 300million
ari arad net worth 20 million

You all owe Madame Web an apology.