The history of Hollywood is littered with movies so bad and misguided that they've sunk studios, ended careers, and metaphorically set fire to millions and millions of dollars.
But what if I told you the term "box office bomb" doesn't always mean the film in question is a bad one?
Sometimes movies lose tens of millions of dollars because of a mix of weird misfortunes, marketing missteps, and other external and internal forces — not because the film itself is bad.
Calculating the size of these losses is tricky.
Studios release production budgets, but rarely disclose marketing and distribution budgets, which are estimated to be anywhere between half the production budget again, or even equivalent to the amount spent making the film in the first place.
As a result, the financial figures we've used (which are taken from Wikipedia, Filmsite.org, and Box Office Mojo) are the best estimates.
Here's a list of some of the biggest box office flops in history that are well worth checking out, including some films you might be surprised are on the list.
John Carter (2012)
Considered the biggest flop of all time, this adaptation of Edgar Rice Burroughs' century-old sci-fi series cost about $US350m to make, but tanked hard, losing as much as $US225m in today's money.
Disney did a $US200m writedown within days of the film opening, scrapped two sequels, and accepted the resignation of Disney studio head Rich Ross.
But unlike other megaflops like Battleship (also starring Taylor Kitsch) and Mortal Engines, John Carter wasn't savaged by critics.
On critic aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, 52 per cent of reviews are positive, while its audience score on IMDb is a healthy 6.6 out of 10.
It's far from perfect, but this tale of a Civil War veteran transported to Mars is a fun adventure filled with sumptuous visual effects to match its over-the-top budget.
According to the book John Carter and the Gods Of Hollywood and a recent analysis by The Wrap, the majority of the blame for the film's failure lay in "a flawed and confounding marketing campaign" that ignored Burroughs and his story's influence on sci-fi, and ultimately failed to sell it as the next Star Wars-scale franchise.
Even changing the name to John Carter of Mars would have surely helped.
Onward (2020)
Pixar is usually a safe bet (more on that later) but its poignant and heartfelt storytelling was no match for the COVID-19 pandemic.
This magical tale of two elven brothers trying to reconnect with their late father was released just two weeks before cinemas across the world began closing their doors in March 2020.
Onward ultimately lost about $US131m but it's more than likely it would have been a profitable film had good word of mouth and positive reviews been allowed to do their thing.
The family fantasy is rated 88 per cent on Rotten Tomatoes, which is low for Pixar, but a great result.
The film was one of the first to be rushed to streaming platforms in the pandemic's early days, where it has found some fans, if not tens of millions of box office dollars.
It was also nominated for an Oscar for best animated feature, but lost out to fellow Pixar feature Soul.
Ali (2001)
This biopic of boxing legend Muhammad Ali gave Will Smith his first Oscar nomination.
It also gave him his third consecutive box office bomb in a row following on from Wild Wild West and The Legend Of Bagger Vance.
Those latter two films bombed because they weren't great, but it's hard to fathom why Ali tanked at the box office.
Director Michael Mann was on a hot streak after Heat and The Insider, Smith's performance lived up to its hype, and Ali was and is a beloved sporting figure around the world.
The film's two-and-a-half-hour run time may have put off some people, but its shortcomings at the box office are largely attributed to being in direct competition with The Lord Of The Rings: The Fellowship Of The Ring (and that's three hours long).
Either way, Ali only earned back about half its cost, which put the losses around $US90m in today's money.
The BFG (2016)
Steven Spielberg has made movies that brought home less box office bacon than this Roald Dahl adaptation, but those movies didn't cost between $US250m–$US280m to make and promote.
In fact, the films often regarded as Spielberg's bombs — his war-comedy Misfire 1941, the 1989 fantasy Always, and slavery drama Amistad — actually made their money back and then some at the box office.
The BFG did not, however, falling short by somewhere in the vicinity of $US87m–$US107m.
This was despite being a whimsical reminder of how great it is when Spielberg makes one of his all-too-infrequent family films, how clever the late Roald Dahl was with words and how much fun it was to discover the works of both Spielberg and Dahl for the first time as a child.
So why did it fail? It's hard to say, especially given the size of Dahl and Spielberg's respective fanbases, though it did find itself in competition with the hugely successful Finding Dory.
The critics and audiences largely liked it (74 per cent on Rotten Tomatoes, 6.4 out of 10 on IMDb) but, for some reason, the film did poorly in the massive US and China markets.
Hugo (2011)
The name Martin Scorsese usually conjures up visceral images of violence and gangsters — think Raging Bull, Goodfellas, Casino, The Irishman, The Departed and Taxi Driver.
We don't typically associate him with family entertainment, which may have been why audiences failed to show up for his magical, child-friendly adaptation Hugo.
This love letter to the birth of cinema and pioneering director George Melies cost about $US150m to make, with another estimated $US120m spent on promotion.
It was Scorsese's most expensive movie to date and shooting in 3D contributed to that significantly.
Perhaps on a tighter budget it wouldn't have lost in excess of $US100m in today's money.
But a smaller budget might have sold short Scorsese's stunning vision, which earned the film five Oscars from 11 nominations, including wins for cinematography, art direction, and visual effects.
Critics loved it, as did the audiences who bothered to see it, making Hugo a welcome yet surprising left-turn (and flop) from one of cinema's great filmmakers.
The Adventures Of Baron Munchausen (1988)
Notoriously unlucky and chaotic director Terry Gilliam was reportedly already $US2m over budget before shooting even began on this brilliant and bizarre fantasy.
It's no surprise then that the production cost twice what was budgeted.
The cost overrun meant Robin Williams went unpaid for his last-minute cameo because there was no money left.
Needing a strong box office performance to recoup its costs, the heads of Columbia Pictures effectively buried it with a limited release.
"There were only 117 prints made for America, so it was never really released," Gilliam said in a 2000 interview.
"An art film gets 400 (prints)."
This was done by Columbia's new heads allegedly as revenge against the outgoing regime, which had greenlit the film, and against Gilliam himself who'd had the "gall" to publicly criticise Universal Studios for re-editing his previous film Brazil.
As a result, Baron Munchausen made about a fifth of its budget as audiences struggled to find a cinema to see it in, and for a few years it was considered the biggest flop of all time.
Despite this, it won favourable reviews, was nominated for four Academy Awards and is one of the many weird and wonderful films in Gilliam's catalogue.
Rise Of The Guardians (2012)
Despite costing about $US145m to make and taking over $US300m at the box office, Dreamworks Animation took a $US87m writedown on this film, which goes to show the crazy amounts studios spend on marketing and distribution.
It's a shame more people didn't see Rise Of The Guardians, because it is a great family adventure.
Its plot about an Avengers-type team comprising Santa, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy and other characters sounds silly on paper, which may have contributed to its disappointing box office, but it's actually awesome all-ages fun.
Jude Law voices a memorable boogeyman-style villain Pitch Black and Hugh Jackman is the Easter Bunny, which is one of the strangest sentences I've ever written.
The film did well on DVD, selling more than three million copies, but that hasn't stopped the film from qualifying for flop status.
The Good Dinosaur (2015)
There are only two bad Pixar movies — Cars 2 and Cars 3 (fight me) — yet the first one to achieve flop status was this charming, bizarre world tale of a dinosaur and a caveboy trying to get back to their respective families.
It pales in comparison to the remarkable layered storytelling of Pixar classics such as Toy Story, Inside Out, Wall-E and Finding Nemo, and boasts a more simplistic and childish storyline, which led to critics damning it with faint praise.
Pixar's own high bar for quality meant that if any other studio had released The Good Dinosaur, it might have been a success as opposed to the first stumble in the Pixar catalogue.
Like Rise Of The Guardians, this passed the $US300m mark at the worldwide box office, but high production costs meant it lost around $US85m.
The Man From U.N.C.L.E. (2015)
Guy Ritchie has had some pretty big bombs in his time such as Swept Away, Revolver, King Arthur: Legend Of The Sword — and The Man From U.N.C.L.E.
The first three of those films are horrendous and should be thrown into a volcano, but The Man From U.N.C.L.E is actually pretty good.
Based on the classic '60s spy show, it starred Henry Cavill (fresh from being Superman) and the now-cancelled Armie Hammer as rival spies working together to foil a Cold War plot.
The result is a genuinely fun spy-thriller throwback, with oodles of cool and a canny ability to not take itself too seriously, but it bombed, even against its mid-range production budget of $US75m.
Its actual losses were about that amount, possibly because no-one was clamouring for a reboot of the nearly forgotten TV series, and because audiences at the time were more excited to see Straight Outta Compton.
Blade Runner 2049 (2017)
The original Blade Runner wasn't a huge box office success, nor was it the critical darling it is now.
Released amid a sea of high-profile sci-fi and fantasy films (The Thing, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Conan the Barbarian, and E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial), Ridley Scott's futuristic noir cult classic was hugely under-appreciated and under-watched back in 1982.
So it's not really surprising that this 35-years-later sequel tanked too.
It was a long shot to expect a belated and very long follow-up to a cult classic to make the $US400m needed to meet marketing and production costs, even with Harrison Ford returning and Ryan Gosling starring.
In the end, the film fell short by about $80m making it a bona fide box office bomb but, much like the original, Blade Runner 2049 is a visual masterpiece, filled with deep themes and intriguing ideas.
Best of all, it understands why the original film worked and lovingly imitates those strengths while finding its own path in a dark future.
Ghostbusters (2016)
The announcement of a reboot of the iconic 1984 comedy-sci-fi brought out the worst in the internet.
The first trailer was downvoted so much it became the first movie trailer to pass one million dislikes on YouTube, while male IMDb users tanked the film's rating on the website in what appeared to be a co-ordinated effort.
This was apparently because director Paul Feig dared to make a movie in which the ghostbusters were women.
Data from IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes showed three quarters of female audiences and critics liked the film, but male IMDb users didn't. In droves.
Shorn of the so-called controversy around whether women can or can't bust ghosts, this reboot is actually good.
It's funny and stands on its own, plus the cast of Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig, Kate McKinnon, and Leslie Jones have great chemistry.
