Photo 46
Despite generally excellent reviews — 73% fresh on Rotten TomatoesSTARDUST was a non-starter at this weekend’s box office:

The weekend’s other significant new release, Stardust, crash-landed, conjuring an estimated $9 million at 2,540 venues. Reportedly carrying a $70 million production budget, the fantasy adventure’s presentation was more akin to the genre’s flops of the 1980s than the recent kid-oriented hits and blockbusters based on literary phenomena.

Around town, the line is that Paramount muffed the marketing on this film. and indeed they don’t seem to have known what to do with a movie that was most often compared to THE PRINCESS BRIDE which is a shame.


  1. when they compared it to PRINCESS BRIDE, I don’t think they meant how it failed at the box office and only became a cult classic later on video.

    Those who fail to learn from history….

  2. I went and saw this yesterday, and it was fantastic.
    I think De Niro was miscast, but over all I haven’t enjoyed a movie this mch in a while.
    It was clever, and charming, and fun.
    Michelle Pfeiffer stole the show.
    if you like fantasy, if you like Gaiman, go see this movie.

    I think it’s sort of crazy that movies are expected to make their budget back the first weekend any way. Hollywood wants everyone to go see the hypefest quick before word gets out that the movie sucks.
    Stardust is the kind of movie I would expect to pick up steam as it goes, as more and more people rave about how much fun it was.

    In ten years this will be seen as a classic.
    The Princess Bride bombed at the box office too.

  3. I dunno, I didn’t like it. granted, it’s been years since I have read the novel, but I remember loving it. The film, to me, felt disjointed, with abrupt cuts and some , honestly, bad acting. But beyond bad was DeNiro in this movie. I felt irritated every time he made his patented “Deniro faces” and pulled me out every time from the movie. I felt that it was a much worse movie, directed with way less skill, than matthew Vaughn’s first effort.

  4. I saw it with my wife and a group of friends yesterday. I was the only one of the group who had read the novel, but we all enjoyed it a lot. A few minor quibbles, but a great ride.

    I’d certainly see it again, and I’ll definitely be buying the DVD when it comes out.

  5. I’d go along with the muffed marketing idea–I only saw a promo for this two days before it opened and hadn’t heard of it before.

    It wouldn’t have made any money from me this weekend anyway–I’m a Netflix girl these days, since going to the theater has become a Russian-Roulette experience kinda thing (allegorically speaking.)

  6. Yeah, it’s a shame that Paramount messed up the marketing of the movie. Yet according to Neil Gaiman’s blog it had a huge opening weekend in Russia and that Paramount is currently projecting Stardust to make over $100 million internationally. Which raises the question was the marketing that much better over seas, or was it just the attraction of big Hollywood names of Michelle Pfeiffer and Robert DeNiro have more impact internationally?