Why Waterworld and The Postman flopped at the box office

nimblemarlin6 said:Costner is the real deal—honestly, better than Cage. Take "Open Range," for instance. Who even makes movies like that anymore? It feels like in "The Postman," Costner’s sense of patriotism—all that sentimentality and waving the American flag at the end—was actually completely sincere. I could totally see a movie starring Costner alongside John Wayne. 🙂Costner just missed the mark on the era a little bit.

There's definitely something there... 😉

Let Costner wave that American flag around all he wants... I'm just completely fed up with these fake patriots back home who robbed us blind, only to force us to sit through movies about people getting rich off the very things they stole from us.

swiftcobra15 said:I think those of us who used to sail under completely different stars experience movies quite differently than everyone else.

I think those of us who used to sail under completely different circumstances perceive movies quite differently than everyone else.

I’ll leave the obvious realities of the film industry and its marketing machine to speak for themselves regarding how much the masses actually decide for themselves when it comes to buying tickets, and how nobody can truly dictate whether something becomes a hit or a flop.

Karen Smith9 said:Let Costner wave that American flag around all he wants... I'm just completely fed up with these fake patriots back home who robbed us blind, only to force us to sit through movies about people getting rich off the very things they stole from us.

Costner is as genuine as it gets in "The Postman."
That final scene where they uncover the statue... when the guy standing by the monument has that flashback to being a kid in a field, and The Postman comes galloping up to hand him that package, all set to that sweeping, instrumental patriotic score... you just feel it. You can tell Costner actually believes America is this beacon of freedom and democracy. He isn't some fake patriot—he's the real deal.

I was reading an article in the defunct issue of Hollywood magazine today. It mentioned a local proverb from that very city: "Never make movies involving water, children, or animals..."

Whoever penned that advice clearly hasn't a clue what they're talking about.
Water equals Pirates of the Caribbean.
Children equals Harry Potter animal style cartoons like Nemo.
Animals equals various cartoons like Nemo.

bluebison8 said:

I was reading an article in the defunct issue of Hollywood magazine today. It mentioned a local proverb from that very city: "Never make movies involving water, children, or animals..."

Whoever penned that advice clearly hasn't a clue what they're talking about.
Water equals Pirates of the Caribbean.
Children equals Harry Potter animal style cartoons like Nemo.
Animals equals various cartoons like Nemo.

I'm with you on that, but that number is probably from like 2000, I can't recall exactly right now, but it definitely came out before those other movies...

bluebison8 said:

I was reading an article in the defunct issue of Hollywood magazine today. It mentioned a local proverb from that very city: "Never make movies involving water, children, or animals..."

Whoever penned that advice clearly hasn't a clue what they're talking about.
Water equals Pirates of the Caribbean.
Children equals Harry Potter animal style cartoons like Nemo.
Animals equals various cartoons like Nemo.

I think when people talk about animal movies, they mean stuff like Babe, not animated films.

Honestly, 🙂
Donnie Darko is way better than both those movies, which is probably why they flopped so hard at the box office...

Richard Wilson4 said:Look, man, personally I really dig Costner, but unfortunately, you just can't today say he's part of that A-list American actor crowd... 👎

Have you actually sat down and watched Mr. Brooks???

slyeagle13 said:Honestly, 🙂
Donnie Darko is way better than both those movies, which is probably why they flopped so hard at the box office...

Well, Donnie Darko is one of those films that really divides people... calling it just a "good" movie feels like a bit of a stretch, doesn't it? It’s definitely one of those polarizing ones where you either love it or you hate it... though, I suppose it's still one of those flicks you really ought to see at least once, which isn't quite the case for something like Waterworld, for sure...

I haven't actually sat down to watch The Postman yet, but I have to say, I really enjoyed Waterworld! Honestly, though, I think it would have been an even stronger film if it hadn't been rated PG-13. Don't you think?

Someone actually called this movie stupid over in another thread—can you believe that? Yet, here I am, stumbling upon an incredibly high rating of 9.2 for it:

http://tvprofil.net/show/2082/waterworld

To be honest, I used to have a pretty low opinion of this one too, but I actually changed my mind just a few days ago. It turns out—and maybe I just wasn't paying enough attention the first time around—that if you actually sit down and watch the whole thing properly, it hits differently.

maybe it’s just because they’re shitty Mad Max knockoffs?

I hear you, but that’s really just our specific perspective—we’re looking at it through a certain lens because we saw one movie first and then the sequel. We went in knowing full well that this one was basically a polished, over-produced retread of the original. But that isn't how the majority of people on sites like Rotten Tomatoes viewed it—which explains why they gave it such a high rating. Honestly, most of them probably weren't even born back when *Beyond Thunderdome* failed to live up to the original *Mad Max*. My point is simply this: even if the movie is a bit weaker, it isn't a "dumb" film by any stretch. You shouldn't look at it through that lens—nothing more, nothing less.

Back then, Costner was stuck in that same phase Cage is in now—that stage where he just gets under everyone's skin.

His biggest setbacks were *The Bodyguard* and *Robin Hood*, which actually preceded those other two.

People got sick of hearing the same two songs from each movie played on loop—it led to total saturation.

On top of that, there was all this noise claiming he wasn't even that good an actor and that his *Oscar* for *Dances with Wolves* was a complete mistake.

I remember those days; it felt like the "cool" thing to do back then was to mock him and his films. It’s the exact same thing happening to Nicolas Cage right now, with people labeling him one of the worst actors ever. You see the same kind of hype surrounding Samuel L. Jackson too. Even Willis faced it during the *Hudson Hawk* era—people were calling him the worst actor around. Later, he changed his approach; he used to rely heavily on facial expressions... eventually, his acting just turned into the same single expression every time.

Then again, *Waterworld* ended up at number 12 at the box office that year, while something like *Braveheart* sat at number 18.

Patrick Martin said:maybe it’s just because they’re shitty Mad Max knockoffs?

Ah, so you're one of those people who doesn't actually read books?

Fine, I'll be merciful; I know how much you struggle with basic literacy.

The Postman isn't some cheap rip-off of Mad Max, not by a long shot. It was adapted from an excellent, award-winning novel by David Brin and stands as a pretty solid film—aside from that absolutely moronic scene where Costner charges like a lunatic to grab a letter from a 🤦)

Waterworld, on the other hand, is complete garbage. It’s an insult to your intelligence, and I will concede that the movie definitely tries too hard to channel Mad Max.

Morgan Vaughn10 said:Back then, Costner was stuck in that same phase Cage is in now—that stage where he just gets under everyone's skin.

His biggest setbacks were *The Bodyguard* and *Robin Hood*, which actually preceded those other two.

People got sick of hearing the same two songs from each movie played on loop—it led to total saturation.

On top of that, there was all this noise claiming he wasn't even that good an actor and that his *Oscar* for *Dances with Wolves* was a complete mistake.

I remember those days; it felt like the "cool" thing to do back then was to mock him and his films. It’s the exact same thing happening to Nicolas Cage right now, with people labeling him one of the worst actors ever. You see the same kind of hype surrounding Samuel L. Jackson too. Even Willis faced it during the *Hudson Hawk* era—people were calling him the worst actor around. Later, he changed his approach; he used to rely heavily on facial expressions... eventually, his acting just turned into the same single expression every time.

Then again, *Waterworld* ended up at number 12 at the box office that year, while something like *Braveheart* sat at number 18.

Now this is a fantastic post! 👍

To be honest, I have to admit that I reached my limit with Robin Williams; I simply couldn't stand looking at him on screen anymore.

Morgan Vaughn10 said:Back then, Costner was stuck in that same phase Cage is in now—that stage where he just gets under everyone's skin.

His biggest setbacks were *The Bodyguard* and *Robin Hood*, which actually preceded those other two.

People got sick of hearing the same two songs from each movie played on loop—it led to total saturation.

On top of that, there was all this noise claiming he wasn't even that good an actor and that his *Oscar* for *Dances with Wolves* was a complete mistake.

I remember those days; it felt like the "cool" thing to do back then was to mock him and his films. It’s the exact same thing happening to Nicolas Cage right now, with people labeling him one of the worst actors ever. You see the same kind of hype surrounding Samuel L. Jackson too. Even Willis faced it during the *Hudson Hawk* era—people were calling him the worst actor around. Later, he changed his approach; he used to rely heavily on facial expressions... eventually, his acting just turned into the same single expression every time.

Then again, *Waterworld* ended up at number 12 at the box office that year, while something like *Braveheart* sat at number 18.

Or, to put it better, he never really had the DNA to carry a character like that in the first place. Those massive blockbusters just aren't his lane—just look at MOS.

He's much more suited for grounded, low-key roles. ☕

Waterworld is on TV every single day
honestly, the casting and the acting feel a little half-baked—just slightly off

meanwhile, The Postman drags on way too long

bluecyclist64 said:Ah, so you're one of those people who doesn't actually read books?

Fine, I'll be merciful; I know how much you struggle with basic literacy.

The Postman isn't some cheap rip-off of Mad Max, not by a long shot. It was adapted from an excellent, award-winning novel by David Brin and stands as a pretty solid film—aside from that absolutely moronic scene where Costner charges like a lunatic to grab a letter from a 🤦)

Waterworld, on the other hand, is complete garbage. It’s an insult to your intelligence, and I will concede that the movie definitely tries too hard to channel Mad Max.

Now this is a fantastic post! 👍

To be honest, I have to admit that I reached my limit with Robin Williams; I simply couldn't stand looking at him on screen anymore.

And then there's me, supposedly "struggling" with my reading skills 🙏

Must've mixed him up with the guy from Book of Eli, but honestly, who cares.☕

Hey guys. Thanks for the suggestion on what to watch next; it’s been a while since I sat down with "Waterworld." I remember back when I was a kid, people were totally bashing it in advance, mostly just talking about those massive production budgets (back then, $200 million was a huge deal for one movie, whereas nowadays it seems like every mediocre flick costs that much). From the last time I saw it, I recall it being a pretty interesting piece of work.