No need to explain much. We all know how bad these all did/are doing, but which is the bigger flop or bomb or disaster of the three?

It's clear that the period ensemble isn't what moviegoers want, but I'm torn which is the bigger studio miscalculation.

Right now its Amsterdam, but if Babylon makes less than Amsterdam did overseas then it has a shot.

Nightmare Alley was great, the other two were let down by their marketing and scripts. Babylon never looked like it was going to do more than Hail Caesar, so I’ll go Amsterdam, it’s marketing was the best of the three and Russell (oh man the guy gets creepier every year with those news stories) is the only one that seemed like it could break out

Babylon. They spent $80M to make it and $80M to market it. They thought it would be another The Aviator/Great Gatsby/Wolf of Wall Street type hit about glamor, excess and debauchery. Except they forgot to cast Leo.

I don’t think it has anything to do with the casting, it had a very poor release strategy to get 5 GG noms that they won’t win any. I can’t believe Tobey wasted his return to Spider-Man with probably one of the most unappealing roles of all time.

BABYLON was clearly trying to replicate the success of WOLF OF Wall Street from 9 years ago. While they didn't have Leo, Babylon does have Brad Pitt in the lead role, who is not far behind Leo's drawing power at all. IDK if Margot Robbie has a true fan base, but she is definitely one of the most "popular" actresses working today, even if that isn't saying much.

Why such an epic flop?

-I think the marketing and trailers sucked, first of all. It was not clear at all what the film was about whatsoever. There was no clear hook ala WOWS's "party boy Leo gets rich in 1980s NYC!".

-I think the 1920's setting just doesn't feel fresh to the young adult audiences who flocked to Wolf of Wall Street NINE YEARS AGO. WOWS's setting wasn't THAT long ago, and obviously many moviegoers still actively remembered those times. This is 100 years ago. Conceptually just a bridge too far.

-Reviews make or break these kind of films. If this and Amsterdam are both 80%+ on RT, I bet they do significantly better. But we know this aged audience is not flocking to theaters currently. if the film is targeting them and subpar quality, it will likely be DOA.

Basically a tie but my pick is Babylon, it just felt like the higher potential project from the start with the golden child Chazelle looking to have another Best Picture frontrunner. Amsterdam always felt more muted as the other Robbie movie, I'm guessing they knew the quality wasn't going to be another American Hustle for a long time beforehand and that critics were going to be rough on Russell so they just dumped it on October. Even by those standards though its performance was still incredibly bad.

Crazy in an era where everyone is playing it so safe with these IP films where even if things don't go to plan like Black Adam and Eternals you're still mostly ok with it (close to break even+brought value to streamers), that they had two fuck ups THIS huge. Heads gonna roll!

Nightmare Alley opened to $2.8 million, and made only $11 million total (and only $39 million worldwide). It dropped theatres in its second weekend. It had a budget of $60 million.

Amsterdam opened to $6.4 million, and made $14 million total. It just creeped over $30 million worldwide. Its budget was $80 million.

Babylon's budget was also $80 million, and it hasn't even made $10 million yet. It's been out for nine days...at Christmas!

I might lean Babylon. Like 40-30-30. But international could change things for it.

I think Babylon has a chance at 40-50m+ globally. It’s not much but enough to get it over Amsterdam. Films about Hollywood rarely hit it big so the studio was a bit too optimistic. The Hail Caesar comparison is a good one. I just hope it’s near that film in quality because I love it.

Babylon will make more worldwide on a similar budget. So Amsterdam is a bigger disaster

It's Amsterdam. Not only did it gross less but Babylon also found some degree of audience even if not among the GA so it will probably carve a cult niche. Amsterdam was hated everywhere and will simply be forgotten as a bad flop.

Agree. Babylon has made more globally ($56m vs. $41m) and is actually a good film that while divisive will become a bit of a cult film.

Amsterdam is the bigger dud.

Babylon was too bland, it wasn’t stylish enough. I know you might think it reflects the era it’s trying to recreate, but that’s not necessarily interesting or fresh. Like, why did Ocean’s 12 and 13 decline and “disappoint”? Well of course. Taylor Swift’s “Wildest Dreams” looked a lot better than it.

BTW, the same comparison would also apply to “65” vs “Jurassic Park” or even “Jurassic World”.

Babylon has now made 56 million WW and counting to Amsterdam's 29, it's the type of American bomb that connects in a European country like France. It will probably have its passionate defenders and stick around in some form providing value for a while. I think we have our answer, it's Amsterdam.

I thought you guys might have been able to offer something more than just looking plainly at the numbers. We can all see that Babylon made more, but what about expectations of each? potential of each?

I don't know the answer. Just throwing it out there. Babylon came out in prime awards season, starred Brad Pitt, from prestige director of La La Land and is also heavily music-oriented. It kind of feels like that should have done better than it did relative to how well we expected Amsterdam to do.

I think we expected Amsterdam could do Joy numbers at least before the reviews came in.

Even with great reviews I don’t think Babylon would have ever been a la la land sized hit

Babylon at least has some fans. Nobody will remember Amsterdam by this time next year.

Yeah looks like Babylon will have a niche cult following and it did get a couple Oscar noms. Amsterdam is already forgotten. And it had more star power which makes it look even worse.