Sunday, August 15, 2010

Brandon Routh: Franchise Killer?



Well, well, well.... BJ is so dull he's putting HIMSELF to sleep...

The weekend box office numbers are in, and what do you know? ANOTHER film franchise is DOA with BJ Routh attached.

http://www.seattlepi.com/movies/425121_tvgmovies15.html

Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World came in a dismal FIFTH in the box office tallies, totaling a paltry $10.5 million for it's opening weekend. FAR behind the Sylvester Stallone action extravaganza The Expendables, opening at #1 with $35 million. Who would have predicted THIS would happen? I mean, there are just SO MANY "people" out there that want BJ to strap on his Fruit Roll-Up cape again isn't there?

Obviously not. The ugly, overweight Apologist virgins couldn't even tally a DECENT number for BJ's latest FLOP.

I took a look at a few message boards these last few weeks, gauging the Apologists "predictions" for the two films listed above. I read things about how "Scott Pilgrim will easily beat The Expendables", and how "amazing Routh will be". Amazing is right. Amazing that this box office cancer was even included in the cast. Not only did The Expendables destroy Scott Pilgrim, but so did Eat, Pray, Love and TWO films in their second to FIFTH week of release! The Other Guys and Inception also placed well ahead of Pilgrim.

Anyone wondering if BJ's "Dylan Is A Dog" will get a US theatrical run? I am not going out on much of a limb when I think NO. The guy just isn't a box office draw, and anything his name is attached to will sink faster than his career projections.

Start filling out those applications at the local bowling alley, BJ. No one is going to be paying you $65 for a picture at a 'con for long....

21 comments:

Save Superman Campaign said...

How big is his part in Scott Pilgrim? I only just found out he was even in it so excuse my ignorance here. Is it a small cameo like his Zack & Miri thing or is he more of a supporting character?

Frankly, I'm sick and tired of superstar metrosexuals in movies. The success of the Expendables should prove to Hollywood that there's a market out there that has nothing to do with prettyboy teenage vampires.

Frankly, I can't see any of this as a bad thing, esp since any hope BJ ever had of coming back should be effectively gone by this point.

ApologistPuncher said...

He has a more "prominent" role than he did in Kevin Smith's snoozefest.

Apparently there are "7 ex's" that Scott Pilgrim has to face, and he is one of them. I'll never see the movie, so I don't know how much screen-time he actually has. But reading the FEW Apologists out there, and their "predictions" made this oh so VERY sweet...

And I agree. As much as I enjoyed the Bourne movies, I still do NOT see Matt Damon as an "action star". Don't even get me started on "the Rock". The dude had potential as a 00's action hero, but decided to be a Disney BITCH instead.

Jason Statham is the MAN though. I hope he sticks with Stallone and launches himself into the #1 seat in "Action Hero Land".

As of right now, only one man sits atop the pile:

Sylvester Stallone.

non_amos said...

http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/105857-international-trailer-for-dylan-dog-dead-of-night

Check out ol' BJ in THIS dud! Looks like a cheap 'B' horror flick. But hey! He's got 'Jimmy Olsen' from Singerman Sucks in the film with him.Maybe 'Jimmy' really IS baking him a cake after all?! ;)

Anonymous said...

I visited this site awhile back. I hated SR, but the pure vitriol directed at Singer was so over the top I lost interest(and FWIW, I really wanted to smack Singer upside the head when he gave the comment that boiled down to "You can't hurt Superman physically, so you have to do it emotionally" Helloooo? Darkseid? Braniac? MEtallo? Parasite? Doomsday? Mongul?). Then SP bombed, and I wondered if this site would be so ridiculous that they would rejoice it bombing because an actor who is guilty of nothing more than taking a lead part as an unknown and trusting the direction of the director of the Oscar winning Usual Suspects has a 10 minute scene. Surely not, I thought to myself. Singer's out, Routh's contract expired, and Nolan's onboard to reboot the franchise. Surely they've moved on.

Lo and behold, I find I sadly underestimated you.

Answer me this, AP: "I took a look at a few message boards these last few weeks, gauging the Apologists "predictions" for the two films listed above. I read things about how "Scott Pilgrim will easily beat The Expendables", and how "amazing Routh will be". Amazing is right. Amazing that this box office cancer was even included in the cast."

Question: were they REALLY talking all about Routh, or were you simply projecting the positive buzz this film has been getting since the beginning onto him? This is a lot like Kick-Ass- a lot of great buzz with a great director, a lot of fanboy love, but it couldn't muster a BO to match the buzz. But it seems to me people were so up on this movie that by virtue of association people had great expectations for the whole cast. So even if there were people singling out Routh-SFW? There were groups singling out every actor like that. There were a lot more people excited about Chris Evans' part, which is about the same, because he has an established history as a comedic actor.

And don't you think it's a little absurd to call Routh "Box office poison" when he's only been in one major theatrical release before this? To be BOP, people have to know who you are!

I get so fucking sick of people using BO as some sort of argument of quality. Would you have bothered to make this blog is SR had made another $100 mil, guaranteeing more Singer and Routh? Would you have held your tongue because the people had spoken? I wouldn't, and I doubt you would. If you saw a film opening weekend, loved it, and it bombed, would you think you have to reconsider your feelings about it? Hell no!

BTW- there is no dead franchise. This movie encompasses all of the books and wraps them up, leaving no room for a sequel. Even if it was a franchise, it would be a Michael Cera franchise- Routh gets head-butted and turned into coins like all the exes.

ApologistPuncher said...

I'll boil that long-winded, shit-filled post into a few words:

"I loved Scott Pilgrim and BJ Routh, so YOU are a poo-poo head!!!!"

Seriously, get fucking therapy kid. Pretend to NOT be an Apologist all you want, but your true colors shine thru.

"Then SP bombed, and I wondered if this site would be so ridiculous that they would rejoice it bombing because an actor who is guilty of nothing more than taking a lead part as an unknown and trusting the direction of the director of the Oscar winning Usual Suspects has a 10 minute scene."

Sounds like the typical "Blame Singer, NOT BJ for his lack of acting ability" to ME. How about you guys?

You have a man-crush on BJ Routh. I get it. You saw me pointing out one of his MANY flaws and failures, and it got your panties riding up into your well-fucked asshole. Ok. But don't think you are somehow "fooling" me into thinking you aren't what you so clearly are.

Fucking Apologist douchebag.

Save Superman Campaign said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Save Superman Campaign said...

"Sounds like the typical "Blame Singer, NOT BJ for his lack of acting ability" to ME. How about you guys?"
Well, I guess my main problem with that line is that it all owes back to this idea that we Realists need to "be more moderate" when discussing Singerman/Routh/Singer/whatever or "not be sore winners" when the subject of the long overdue reboot comes up.

I mean, it's okay for the Apologists to ban the fuck out of us on other forums, bash on [[insert non-Singerman adaptation here]], whine and cry that Singerman 2: Man of Pleather will never happen, so on and so forth, but somehow WE'RE the assholes if we point out how ill-suited Singer and BJ were for the character from Day One, how a total reboot should've been WB's move back in 2004, etc, on our own forums and blogs.

This toolbag is one of those guys who signs on, claims to be anti-Singerman this or anti Singerman that but at every step of the way he does nothing but whine about other people "going too far" or make excuses for Singerman's suckitude.

As for the box office thing, I'd like to think I have a unique perspective. Would I still bash on Singerman if it had made $350 mill domestic? Betcher ass I would! I think The Dark Knight is the most overrated, overhyped, overblown, fucking retarded comic book movie there's ever been, and that sum bitch made, what, a billion at the box office? I bash the fuck out of TDK every chance I get so do you really think Singerman would've somehow fared better under that scenario? Hell no! Shit, I'd even go so far that I'd probably have even more venom for it since it just might've gotten a sequel if it had made $350 mill.

As it is, probably the one positive thing I can say about Singerman is that it's one and done, and we'll never have to put up with that bullshit ever again.

ApologistPuncher said...

"Would you have bothered to make this blog is SR had made another $100 mil, guaranteeing more Singer and Routh? Would you have held your tongue because the people had spoken? I wouldn't, and I doubt you would. If you saw a film opening weekend, loved it, and it bombed, would you think you have to reconsider your feelings about it? Hell no!"

Would you have still sucked penis if you were born a female? Would BJ Routh still be giving out handjobs at that North Hollywood bowling alley if he hadn't slept with Singer to get his role in Singerman Peeps?

Box Office goes a lllooonnnggg way when it comes to sequels, shithead. This site was put together to try and make sure one NEVER saw the light of day. Fortunately for those of us with TASTE, one is never, EVER going to happen.

And as for your last comment, I will say this: If I liked a movie that flopped at the box office, I wouldn't have such a delusional sense of reality that I go around internet message boards "Apologizing" for the shit-pile and trying to act like it was the "Second Coming" like you and your brood did.

I DARE YOU to deny this happened, fuckwit.

ApologistPuncher said...

"This toolbag is one of those guys who signs on, claims to be anti-Singerman this or anti Singerman that but at every step of the way he does nothing but whine about other people "going too far" or make excuses for Singerman's suckitude."

Oh, we are definitely right about this part. Here's the proof:

"If you saw a film opening weekend, loved it, and it bombed, would you think you have to reconsider your feelings about it? Hell no!"

Read between the lines.

Anonymous said...

I decided to keep going. I'm on a roll.

Look, complain all you want about me being a secret apologist simply because you're acting like a Routh cameo is a starring role, but I've gotten kind of fired up, and I want to continue on the SR subject- you can continue to rage at me, but I guess you won't argue my logic: Why the fuck couldn't Singer do what he did with X-Men? With X-Men he knew nothing about it when he signed up, but he familiarized himself enough to put in a ton of cool Easter Eggs for the fans. There was nothing like that with SR, except for old actor cameos, and I think its all due to the fact that all he knew and wanted to know about Supers was the Donner movie.

And I argue this on forums, and I actually get people when I say that SInger only knows the Donner film arguing shit like "Here's a panel from the comic where he lifts an island that kind of sort of looks like the one in the movie. Not to mention the shot where he holds a car like the cover of Action Comics # 1 that I can assure you only the most hardcore Supes fan has ever seen- no one pays attention to the first few minutes of the 78 movie, after all." Pffffft. If I can't convince you I'm really not a fan of that movie, fine. Just don't lump me in with those 'tards- people who can't see what's in front of their faces, that Singer didn't bother to do in a Superman movie what he did in 2 X-Men movies.

And to be honest, I'm still a little nervous about Nolan. I know it will probably be a pretty good movie, but if a guy is reluctant to have an Immortal R'as al Ghul and a bleached skin Joker, what does that say about his approach to Superman? The same way I know we'd never see the Shi'ar Empire, Apocalypse, or Cable in the Singer X-Men verse. I'm a little sick of film makers being afraid to embrace the more fantastical elements of the comics; thankfully, Thor might be the movie that tests the waters in that regard.

Anonymous said...

CRAP. I accidentally deleted half of my post. Let me just boil it down to this: I have a long long history of trying to convince people I agree with them on certain subjects because I still argue with them about said subjects. Now SR is one of them. I was down on that movie from the first quote from Singer about it, and the stupid Singer quote that topped it all off was the one I quoted above about him saying you can't hurt Superman physically so you have to hurt him emotionally, showing he knows nothing about the comics and thus was not suited for this movie.

And my WHOLE POINT was that: If you're saying Brandon Routh is a franchise killer in this regard, you're obviously not informed about this movie because he was only in it for 10 minutes and the movie leaves no room for a sequel. you would have a good point if Routh played Scott Pilgrim. I personally found him to be very lacking as Superman- and I think the fact that I can't summon enough strong feelings for him, good or bad, kind of says a lot because I have more of an opinion about every other Superman actor. He's bland. Forgettable is a lot worse than "bad" to me. And I liked Scott Pilgrim, but ROuth seemed out of place among the evil exes, even though he had the craziest powers. Take from that what you will.

If I still count as an "Apologist" because I'm not as extreme as you, fine. Just remember- I've been coming here a long time, off and on. You've cracked on Routh quite a bit. It was only what I considered to be a factual error that made me post here(and I swear this was my first time replying). Sincerely- I'm just weird that way. And if I can get a serious answer- I said I was worried from the beginning. When did YOU start to worry about SR?

Anonymous said...

So, this has basically become a Routh bashing site? Sad

Save Superman Campaign said...

As far as the sci-fi/fantasy stuff in superhero movies goes, that much I actually agree with. For as good the Reeve Superman films were, it kinda sucks knowing that in order to bring in, say, Brainiac, you'd either have to "retool" the character beyond recognition or else betray the realism-lite Donner set up in STM.

Same thing goes for Nolan's Batman films. Can you picture Clayface, Mr. Freeze, Bane and the rest ever popping up? Because I sure as hell can't.

Annoying

Anonymous said...

I mentioned Thor; there's also
Green Lantern in the "Not afraid to be a COMIC BOOK movie" camp that we have to look forward to.

And the sad part is that a realistic approach like Nolan's actually suits the bizarre villains given his themes of escalation; a realistic Gotham would make Bane or the Killer Croc even more of a contrast.

Anonymous said...

Singer is a FAG and Superman Returns was gay.

ApologistPuncher said...

"I said I was worried from the beginning. When did YOU start to worry about SR?"

How about back when I saw a "conceptual painting" of the potential Singerman costume on the old "Superman V" website? Was that "soon enough" for YOU?

It's obvious you are a "young"-er fan, if you are indeed a Superman fan. Those of us who have been the most vocal waited 19 YEARS for a new movie, and we were assaulted with that piece of shit? Fuck THAT.

BJ Routh is as much to blame as Singer is in MY book. You don't go around pretending to be a fan of the character, then AGREE to destroy everything that came before. You don't say "Well, Superman doesn't usually peep on Lois Lane, but what the hell! No one will mind!". Or "A bastard kid? BRILLIANT!". The guy has even less integrity than he does "acting ability".

ApologistPuncher said...

"So, this has basically become a Routh bashing site? Sad"

Not as sad as your momma must have been when she realized what she gave birth to....

And to those too stupid to realize, this article was to poke at you Apologist REtards who want to come HERE and tout how BJ is "defuntlay cumin bax!!". Take a look at the comment section for the story right below if you need to see for yourselves.

Morons.

The Man From Krypton said...

So I guess that answers that! Rambo can kick Singermans ass!

Seriously who didn't see this coming? Brandon "Can't act" Routh is not a box office draw, and yes he's become a boxoffice cancer, and I guess some will say it's the Superman curse... Hogwash I say! It's just that he's a horrible actor!

He should never even be looked at for any super hero role ever!

The Man From Krypton said...

Sylvester Stallone rules the action movie world period!!!

Sylvester Stallone 4 President! :)

Anonymous said...

ApologistPuncher is a fag and Superman Returns was gay.
^^^
4 years later both statements are still true.

Pancho martin de fernandez said...

Pff, typical eugenic TALL douchebag scum