IGN.com: Was Prince of Persia a Flop?

[weber_dubois22]

How did the expensive videogame movie fare critically and commercially against other adaptations?



The live-action, $200+ million feature film adaptation of Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time opened in second place with a disappointing take of $37.8 million. Among critics, the Disney flick currently has a woeful 41% fresh rating at Rotten Tomatoes. Obviously, this is neither the commercial nor critical success that Disney or gamers had been hoping for with the film, the most expensive and ambitious game-to-film adaptation to date. But failure, sadly, is nothing new for the genre.

Prince of Persia currently sits at No. 12 on Box Office Mojo's listing of highest-grossing videogame adaptations. According to the site, the highest-grossing game-to-film is 2001's Lara Croft: Tomb Raider, which grossed $274.7 million worldwide despite its 19% rating at Rotten Tomatoes. Certainly, that should bode well for Prince of Persia ... except that Tomb Raider made $47 million in its opening weekend and that was almost a decade ago. But with an international debut of $97.7 million, Prince of Persia will need to continue to be a money-printing machine overseas if it wants to topple Tomb Raider from the top spot.



Box Office Mojo says that the other top ten highest-grossing videogame adaptations (domestically) include:

• Pokemon: The First Movie ($$85.7 million, 15% RT)
• Mortal Kombat ($70.5 million, 35% RT)
• Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life ($65.7 million, 24% RT)
• Resident Evil: Apocalypse ($51.2 million, 20% RT)
• Resident Evil: Extinction ($50.6 million, 23% RT)
• Silent Hill ($47 million, 30% RT)
• Pokemon: The Movie 2000 ($43.8 million, 16% RT)
• Max Payne ($40.7 million, 17% RT), and the first Resident Evil ($40.1 million, 34% RT)

Falling just outside of the top ten domestic releases based on videogames is Hitman ($39.7 million, 14% RT).

2005's Doom cost $65 million and raked in about $56 million worldwide. Super Mario Bros. cost $48 million to make back in 1992, but grossed only $$20.9 million. Uwe Boll's BloodRayne, which reportedly cost $25 million and only made $3.6 million worldwide; it later made enough on home video to beget two direct-to-DVD sequels. The 1994 Street Fighter movie cost $35 million to make, and earned $99.4 million worldwide; we don't have any production costs for its 2009 reboot Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li, but it's safe to assume it cost a helluva lot more than its $12.7 million global cume. Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within cost a whopping $137 million to produce, yet raked in only $85.1 million worldwide.

So as you can tell, bad reviews didn't prevent these movies from making a bit of money. But what paints a big ol' target sign on Prince of Persia's back is its price tag. With a production budget of over $200 million (let alone prints & advertising costs), is Prince of Persia poised to become the biggest money loser of all videogame-to-film adaptations? Probably not. We'll have to wait and see how it continues to perform abroad and on home video. But it sure didn't break the "bad videogame movie" streak the way everyone had been hoping.

SOURCE

Comments

[nymphonik.livejournal.com]

I really liked this movie, and saw it twice in the cinema.

[miverel.livejournal.com]

I think that it's a habit, whenever comes out a game based movie, to bash it into pieces by critiques. I don't think that 'Silent Hill' adaptation was bad. I found the 'Resident Evils' and 'Mortal Kombat' entertaining... And I don't think my movie taste is bad! ;)
'Prince of Persia' is a good movie. It has awesome special effects, good plot, beautiful landscapes, costumes and of course handsome Jake Gyllenhaal! :P I hope it won't be a financial disaster! I wish it all best because this movie is worth it! :)

[wickedground.livejournal.com]

at least it does well overseas. It's sad that it doesn't count if a movie does well overseas, but not so well domestically. And it has a higher RT rating than the other ones mentioned in this post.

[mariantherogue.livejournal.com]

Well, I don't like so much this movie.
I mean, I'm a big fan of the sands of time trilogy, and this movie really disappointed me. I know, I'm a geek.
I think Jake Gyllenhaal is a good actor, but...he isn't persian. I really love Gemma Arterton but...she isn't persian. This movie is "Prince of Hollywood in Persia" XD
BTW, I think is a good movie for a family night. But it doesn't have the charm of the Pirate of the Caribbean trilogy.

[okmewriting.livejournal.com]

Jeez, you'd think they'd give it a chance. It's barely been open. Anyway checking that box office mojo place it is now number 3!!! http://boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=videogameadaptation.htm
And it's now taken $262.5m worldwide. I'd say it's on course to beat Lara Croft.

[hpgryffin.livejournal.com]

I have no complaints except I really want the movie to end now or at least be completely taken away from the cinemas because I am so broke! I've seen it 13 times and climbing #14. But this kind of hurt pays off though. My family loves it too. Do you know that my mom and a friend have watched it with me those 13 times? Talk about fanaticism. *LOL* I really hope we get a sequel!