I wonder who'd know it better, a guy, who heard from a guy or a guy, who has actually lived there.

Rocky IV was not banned in Russia. It was not released in the Soviet Union, which is not Russia, BTW, but then again, very few Western films have been, so it was not specifically excluded. Once the Soviet Union fell, Rocky IV was available. It was shown on TV, when I was there, around 1996. So much for that. The thing is that the Rocky films have always been rather obscure in Russia, whereas Rambo was VERY beloved, including Rambo III, which the Soviets/Russians had as much of a reason to dislike as Rocky IV, but they still loved it. Though I believe the second was the most beloved in Russia. So, please, no statements like this if you don't know it

This. Movie theatres post-Soviet Union were dead until the late 1990s. The VHS market boomed, but obviously there are no numbers.

There isn't much to tell there...

I have some international data, and the totals.

What were they, I've always wondered.

And I apologize Lecter, so use to just linking the two of them together. He was from Georgia I believe. Just saying what he told me. How are the other Expendables in Germany today, like Ford, Gibson, Banderas, and Li.

Cobra: $110m
Tango & Cash: $57m

I once read that Tango and Cash did over 100 million OS. If it was only 125 WW I guess it makes sense a sequel never materialized. It cost 55 (Thanks to the multiple re edits) vs. Lethal Weapon making the same on a 15 million budget. Also Stallone really tried to change his image from 89-92, and by the time he went back to action Russell was arguably a more consistent draw.

That's great for Cobra though, really makes up for the lackluster domestic gross.

I think reading something like "Tango & Cash made over $100m overseas" could easily be misconstrued by the author for a worldwide total.

But yeah, Cobra did fantastically well. It was a hard-R in 1986 and he was coming off Rambo First Blood Part II and Rocky IV...he could have released pretty much anything and it would have been huge! Thankfully he released a bad ass action thriller. If we were able to adjust overseas grosses nowadays, considering the expansion of some markets since the 1980s, Cobra would probably be in the $300-$400m range for overseas alone.

I read 100 in foreign, but I'm sorry Cobra was terrible and it was basically the most frontloaded film of all time when it came out. Stallone kind of sucked as a result box office wise for another 3 years. Rocky and Rambo made it open super huge though, no doubt about that

I think Cobra is great, and it being frontloaded is just testament to how huge Stallone was at the time. The pent up excitement was so big that the openings were record-breaking, but it couldn't be sustained.

I don't think Cobra was the reason for Over the Top's mediocre box office (the film just looked too family-friendly), and it totally depends where you look. For example, in Japan, Cobra and Over the Top did very well. Then Rambo III set the international box office ablaze with $190m worldwide. If you just stick to the US market, then it's understandable that you think his grosses sucked, but he was a true international star, so sticking to one market shows you nothing. US audiences, as we know, are not loyal in the slightest, they are very much an audience of fads and short-term popularities, so it's no wonder that no box office star can sustain a level of success.

Iam surprised Tango & Cash didn't do way better worldwide and downright shocked that Cobra did that much better worldwide.

Look at the preceding Stallone film(s) in each case and it kind of makes sense.

I guess it makes perfect sense when you Cobra followed Rocky 4 and Rambo 2. Meanwhile Tango and Cash followed Cobra, over the top, lock up and Rambo 3. I mean I love Stallone but that is easily his shittiest time period. Algren what did over the top make. It was a definite flop in the us, as was Rambo 3 and lock up.

Well, none of them were flops at all, actually. In the US, sure, maybe, but since when does any entity for sale only consider one sales stream when determining its profit/loss status? Worldwide sales is what matters.

Over the Top was budgeted at $25m and made $60m worldwide. Rambo III was budgeted at $63m and made $190m worldwide. Lock Up made $31m worldwide, and I don't have a budget for it. In fact, just $31m for Lock Up is either incorrect or just plain awful. It's such an underrated film and it's actually an easy sell (Stallone kicking ass in prison, which he hadn't done before).

That is his best time period.

His worst time period was the 3 years from Rocky V to Stop! or My Mom will Shoot (1990-1992) or from 1983-1984 with Staying Alive and Rhinestone.

I meant quality wise. In fact outside of Oscar and Tango, Rocky 4 to cliffhanger was abysmal film wise, and probably the reason why American audiences stopped paying Attention to him. And Stallone got 15 million for both lock up and over the top. Paying 15 million for someone in an arm wrestling film is an awful idea. In 1986 it's even worse cause it would be like 30 million today.

I meant quality-wise too, and I think it's an awesome phase in his career. He got paid $12m for Over the Top, which was a record at the time. He got paid $15m for Lock Up. He could get those amounts because his films were so, so, so huge and successful.

Okay, the best you can do, however, is that that we don't know whether it was a flop or not. That's the best. You cannot say that it wasn't and I'll tell you why:

1. You don't know its marketing budget
2. From its US gross, the studio got roughly 55%
3. We don't know whatsoever, how much it earned for the studio worldwide because the studio didn't directly earn from it in all countries. The studio was Cannon. It released the film in the US. However, in Germany, it was a different distributor that just purchased distribution rights. So while the film did get a rather terrific 1+ million admissions in Germany, the money didn't go to the studio. The studio just got a certain sum of money from the local distributor. I am pretty sure that applies to many other territories. So while $60 million vs. a $25 million budget looks good to you on paper, it very well might have not to the studio.
4. To say something positive, though: of course we also don't know exactly how much it earned on V/H/S.

But you see my point. If I had to guess, I'd say that it, at best, broke even while in theatres, but maybe not that. Fact is that you and I lack significant amount of information to judge its worldwide theatrical performance correctly. The worldwide market was smaller back then, but in a way also more complex to assess.

You know better than to use reason Lecter.

Stallone was also a huge dick during this period as well. I love him and I love that he has gotten very humble over the years. Since you am I are the only ones in this thread what are your thoughts on films post rocky 4 pre Cliffhanger

If we don't know, then there's nothing wrong with just using the data we do have. $25m vs. $60m is very good. The only reason you are bringing up all that info is because you want to find a way to call it a flop. But because you can't (lack of data), you just use the technical route and start spouting crap about percentages to the studio etc.

Since we do not know any of that, the best thing is to make a conclusion on the data we have available. From the available data, it was a success.

In fact, I don't care if Canon made a profit or a loss on the film. I just care that knowing how much it cost, it was able to successfully earn more. It's about knowing that a Stallone movie was popular enough to make lots of profit. Whether the behind-the-scenes deals between studios and distributors were not ideal for the studio, that is not my concern.

Making $60m theatrically already makes it a success. It then made lots of money with TV rights and rentals, then VHS sales. There is no way that your "If I had to guess" statement makes sense. You're just being negative because you want to believe that Stallone flopped. Truth is that he was hugely successful and profitable in the 80s, and you just cannot accept that. The facts are there. If a movie today had these types of ratios, you would never ever be saying how they could not be profitable. Your Stallone hatred is tinting your perspective, and I would have expected more from you.

And FYI, I have lots of data on Stallone films. Over the Top made $9m in film rentals from Japan alone. So it was a definite worldwide success.

No, it didn't. Warner Bros were the theatrical distributor in the USA. They made $7.5m from the film.

Canon sold the distribution rights to distributors in all countries worldwide. So, profits all around.

Talking of Over the Top got me interested to see David Mendenhall now:

Stop this nonsense. It's like you didn't even read, what I wrote. Why would I want to believe that Stallone flopped? I don#t care either way. My Stallone hatred? Are you crazy? I don't hate him, why would I?

When discussing box-office I am very well able to separate any feelings for actors/actreses from fact and wishes anyway. You compare it with nowadays, but you can't. Nowadayxs, most big films (not all, but most) are being released by the same distributor worldwide anyway, so the question isn't there.

Here is a good example to what I mean:

http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=goldencompass.htm

The Golden Compass made $370+ million worldwide on a $180 million budget. Seems solid, right? Except it wasn't at all. In a pretty well-publicized story, it turned out that New Lime actually sold most (or all?) of the overseas distribution rights for much less than they would have earned, had threy released the film themselves. It made $300+ million overseas, which would have meant around $130-150 million for the studio, but the studio got less because they sold the rights for less. The result: the franchise was not continued.

But mind you, if all you want here is to glorify the box-office of someone you love, them I'll leave you to your own devices and shall refrain from commenting here.

No one cares abot Gibson, Banderas or Ford anymore. Probably Li too, but it is hardto gauge, considering he hasn't realy doe any English-language films recently aside from The Expendables. He used to be pretty popular around the time of omeo Must Die und Cradle 2 the Grave.

You're the one talking nonsense. You don't know anything about the distribution deals and yet you still make your negative "maybe" statements.

But the worldwide rights to Over the Top was sold long before it opened. Stallone was coming off of three worldwide hits. They got good figures for the distribution rights. Cannon Group definitely made a profit on their share of the $25m budget. You see, the $25m was co-financed by Warner Bros., which is why Warner Bros. distributed it in the USA and Canada. So, in fact, it's quite easy to see how the film made a profit for its investors. You just don't want to see it.

But regardless of this, I don't care if the investors got their money back or made a profit. I just care that the film (sold on Stallone's name alone) managed to generate over 2 times its budget in grosses. This is a testament to Stallone's pulling power.

[quote