So that’s bad, yeah, but just how bad is it? With help from Google and The Numbers’ movie comparison feature, I can tell you this: It’s really bad.
I present to you…
An Incomplete List of Shitty Videogame Movies That Made More Money Than Borderlands
(in no particular order)
- Warcraft ($439 million)
- Max Payne ($88 million) Doom ($59 million)
- Street Fighter ($99 million)
- Assassin’s Creed ($241 million)
- Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time ($336 million)
- Hitman ($99 million)
- Mortal Kombat (but Mortal Kombat is actually good) ($122 million)
- Need for Speed ($194 million)
- Five Nights at Freddy’s ($297 million)
- Uncharted ($401 million)
One big-budget, big(ish)-cast Hollywood film Borderlands managed to beat, which I bring up only because I paid good money to see it in theaters and I’m still sore about the whole thing, is Wing Commander, an utterly execrable celluloid waste of time and effort that bumbled to $11.5 million globally. Frankly I’m surprised it did that well.
I don’t think the movie was that bad. Sure was predictable, but it was fun.
I never realized any of those were movies.
Crazy that they spent that much on marketing and I still had no idea that movie was coming until I read articles about how badly it bombed. Did they blow the marketing budget on hookers and blow and call it good?? What the hell happened here?!
The FNAF movie is actually not that bad. It surely isn’t masterpiece, but its good movie and also understandable for someone who barely knows anything about fnaf.
Would Valve allow an aperture science/black mesa film?
And I guarantee if Valve allowed it, they’d be involved enough to make sure it didn’t suck
