“Ali” is a biopic that depicts the life of Cassius Clay, most famously known as Muhammad Ali. The movie was nothing short of promising. So who was to blame for its inadequate box office gross? Well, fingers were definitely pointed at director Michael Mann, who said that he couldn’t manage to make the film on its original $107 million production budget, which was already considered expensive. By the end of its production, the costs rose up to $118 million.
Unlike most of the movies on this list, “Ali” isn’t a bad movie by any means, on the contrary. Will Smith, who played Ali, was nominated for several awards for his outstanding performance, including an Academy Award and a Golden Globe for Best Actor. Supporting actors, like Jamies Foxx and Jon Voight, were also acclaimed for their exceptional execution. Nonetheless, it didn’t manage to compensate for its insane production budget.
Estimated loss: $63 million
Tomorrowland (2015)
They called it "Tomorrowland." Critics say, however, that as a Sci-fi film it veers too much into Fantasyland. Maybe George Clooney and Brad Bird, director of "The Incredibles" and "Ratatouille" could save it? Well, no. "Tomorrowland" is a science fiction adventure where the two heroes, Frank (Clooney), an embittered, former boy-genius, and an optimistic teen partner, Casey (Britt Robertson), must save the world and the fantastical world of Tomorrowland! With the use of a lapel pin with a “T”, space/time warping and shuttling, a robot named Athena, and a staunch faith in science and technology, the task is managed — it’s Disney, don’t forget.
But all the magic didn’t save them from losing $79-$155 million, adjusted for inflation. And it won’t bring back the $180-$190 million budget. It grossed $209.2 million. On the upside, however, Rotten Tomatoes gave it a 50%, so, not too bad.
Estimated loss: $76 - $150 million
R.I.P.D. (2013)
Let’s clear up the frustrated ignorance right away. It stands for Rest in Peace Department, and it comes from the comic book series of the same acronym. Its ripping cast includes Jeff Bridges, Ryan Reynolds, and Kevin Bacon, and it failed commercially and critically. Add it to the ‘books are better than the movie’ pile. Critics liked the cast but not much else.
The massive production budget cost Universal $130 - $154 million, leaving box office cumulative sales infinitesimally dwarfed at $78.3 million. And, finally, the total loss was also massive: $96-$121 million.
Estimated loss: $91-$115 million
Look Who's Talking Now (1993)
"Look Who's Talking" is a romantic comedy featuring John Travolta and the late Kirstie Alley, with a voice-over from Bruce Willis as the child of Kirstie's character. The film received mixed reviews but made an incredible amount of money at the box office. It managed to rake in almost $300 million against a relatively tiny budget of $7.5 million, making it one of the most profitable low-budget films of all time.
This sudden surprise of profitability obviously caused studios to try and capitalize on the success of the film, as it received a sequel, "Look Who's Talking Too," which made less than 15% of what the original made. The studio wanted to try one last time to make a sequel, with the third film being called "Look Who's Talking Now." The third movie was a box office disaster, losing more than $12 million due to low box office sales.
Estimated loss: $9.7 million
Battlefield Earth: A Saga of the Year 3000 (2000)
This movie is definitely Travolta’s worst film of his entire acting career. The guy with the long braids that you can see on the right is none other than Travolta, who plays an alien in the convoluted sci-fi film, "Battlefield Earth: A Saga of the Year 3000." The movie is based on the novel of the same name by L. Ron Hubbard — the creator and leader of the Church of Scientology.
"Battlefield Earth: A Saga of the Year 3000" was an absolute mess of a film. Travolta starred in the film as a tribute to Hubbard, due to the actor being a long-time Scientologist. The film received lost $14.3 million and got a 3% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. The critical consensus called it: "Ugly, campy, and poorly acted, Battlefield Earth is a stunningly misguided, aggressively bad sci-fi folly."