« The Flying Scotsman gets worldwide release! | Filmstalker | Hot Fuzz Q&A session online »


A Good Year is officially a flop

RussellCrowe.jpgRupert Murdoch stoood up at a shareholders meeting and announced that his studio, 20th Century Fox, was set to lose a whopping US$20million (GB£10.5million) on Ridley Scott's A Good Year, and that's despite it just being released in the US last week.

According to his comments through The Guardian, The Devil Wears Prada was set to make a profit of over US$100million. Prada was produced for somewhere around US£17m with Year costing around US$35million. Murdoch said:

"You've got to take the rough with the smooth," he said, adding that the movie business was "a bit of a lottery"

Well lottery it may be sometimes, but most of us saw by the trailer what the film was made of and how it was treading all too familiar and worn ground. Some reviewers have been slightly harsher though. The Guardian's Peter Bradshaw had this to say about the film:

"a humourless slice of tourist gastro-porn" and claimed that Crowe was hopelessly miscast in the role. "Anyone would have been better in this part," he wrote. "Steven Seagal would have been better. Janette Krankie would have been better."

Wow, I think that's incredibly attacking and I'm sure it could have been put much more pleasantly, but he does point out the obvious. Something that was obvious from the trailer too. Crowe was not suited for this film, indeed Ridley Scott was not suited for this film either. One wonders what either of them were thinking, or Mr Murdoch for bankrolling the tired old idea in the first place.



My belief is that Ridley Scott saw an opportunity to ease Rusell Crowe back into the hearts of the movie going audience with a lighthearted comedy after all the bad press he recieved last year.

Obviously hasn't worked, and has done little for Crowe, even maybe done more harm than good.

Yeah I saw this film on opening weekend and wrote a review of it in my blog, gave it a *1/2.

Let's just say this film is one of his career lows, even the greatest actors are allowed one or two. Cant wait to see him in American Gangster.

What were they thinking? Probably that reuniting the star and director of Gladiator in another film, whatever that film might be, would produce similar box office to the earlier film. I really suspect that's all the decision to make this film came down to.


Add a comment


Site Navigation

Latest Stories



Vidahost image

Latest Reviews


Filmstalker Poll


Subscribe with...

AddThis Feed Button

Windows Live Alerts

Site Feeds

Subscribe to Filmstalker:

Filmstalker's FeedAll articles

Filmstalker's Reviews FeedReviews only

Filmstalker's Reviews FeedAudiocasts only

Subscribe to the Filmstalker Audiocast on iTunesAudiocasts on iTunes

Feed by email:


My Skype status


Help Out


Site Information

Creative Commons License
© www.filmstalker.co.uk

Give credit to your sources. Quote and credit, don't steal

Movable Type 3.34