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.
Is it yet another one of those “our adaptation has barely anything to do with the actual games and that is good!” kinda tone-deaf deals?
I watched it so you dont have to. It is not just a bad Borderlands movie, it’s an utterly terrible movie period. CGI is bad, characters are ill-conceived, the story is a mess, editing is a mess, everything is a mess. I liked the end-credits though.
Abd I say this as not being a fan of Borderlands. I played the first one for a total of a few hours and somewhat liked it but never got invested into it. Someone who is invested into it would of courses mention that it is an utterly terrible adaptation.
The number one reason I had no interest in it was they replaced Claptraps voice with jack fucking black. Ultimate slap in the face to any fan. Everything else was terrible, but that was the worst to me. Pure Hollywood. “We’ll just throw in what we think gamers like and call it a day!”