The Biggest Sci-Fi Flops Of 2022 So Far

The year 2022 has seen a box office of many highs and lows, dominated by the record-breaking success of "Top Gun: Maverick." Although the film was originally scheduled for release in the summer of 2020, it had to be pushed back several times due to concerns about the COVID-19 pandemic. The wait was worth it, and "Maverick" became the second film since the beginning of the pandemic to cross $1 billion at the worldwide box office. Hopefully, the film's success will be rewarded at the end of this year during awards season. Paramount Pictures, Tom Cruise, and director Joseph Kosinski deserve credit for inspiring movie fans to head back to theaters.

Universal Pictures was also a big winner this summer thanks to the success of "Jurassic World Dominion" and "Minions: The Rise of Gru." While these sequels might not have been among the most critically acclaimed films of the year, they certainly found an audience who was willing to support them. The Marvel Cinematic Universe also continues to reign supreme, as last year's "Spider-Man: No Way Home" continued to break records by grossing over $1.9 million globally. Although they didn't match the dominance of "Spider-Man: No Way Home," both "Thor: Love and Thunder" and "Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness" performed well. Unfortunately, this year also had a few major box office disappointments, particularly in the same sci-fi realm that Marvel and Universal mined so successfully. Here are the biggest sci-fi flops of 2022 so far.

It's Morbin' time! "Morbius" has been the laughing stock of the superhero era for several years. Originally slated for release on July 10, 2020, "Morbius" was pushed back several times due to reshoots, concerns about the COVID-19 pandemic, and the box office success of "Spider-Man: No Way Home." The film is set within Sony's Spider-Man Universe (SSU), which also includes 2018's "Venom" and 2021's "Venom: Let There Be Carnage." While the two "Venom" films were surprisingly entertaining, the same could not be said about "Morbius."

The film follows the blood scientist Dr. Michael Morbius (Jared Leto) as he attempts to cure a rare disease that he's come into contact with. Although Morbius is able to cure himself by capturing vampire bats from Costa Rica, he is accidentally transformed into a vampire. This curses him with an unquenchable thirst for blood. Morbius must become a hero when his surrogate brother Lucien (Matt Smith) gains the same powers. Sounds fun? Unfortunately, it's a boring slog that doesn't distinguish itself from other comic book adaptations. Even though the film ties into the "Venom" and "Spider-Man" franchises, audiences couldn't be bothered to give the film a shot. With an estimated budget of over $75 million, "Morbius" only grossed around $164 million at the global box office. Following the tepid response, "Morbius" memes swept the Internet. Leto tried to take ownership of the film's reputation by teasing a potential sequel. A re-release in theaters didn't pan out, and "Morbius" bombed a second time.

Stephen King fans have had an embarrassment of riches in the last decade. Between "It," "Doctor Sleep," "1922," "Gerald's Game," and "Castle Rock," King's novels and short stories have inspired some amazing adaptations. Still, there are some King screen experiences we'd rather forget about: Even though it was an adaptation of one of King's most beloved novels, "The Dark Tower" failed to live up to the potential of its source material.

The same can be said of this year's "Firestarter." Keith Thomas' 2022 film is inspired by both King's original novel and the 1984 film adaptation of the same name. The original "Firestarter" landed with a thud, and sadly the remake did not fare any better. Released simultaneously in theaters and on Universal's streaming service Peacock, the $12 million dollar "Firestarter" made just under $15 million at the worldwide box office. The critical response was unanimous: "Firestarter" wasn't a film that was worth remaking in the first place. The original novel isn't one of King's best works, and the new film commits the crime of being dull. While critically reviled King adaptations like "Maximum Overdrive" and "The Lawnmower Man" are at least inadvertently hilarious, "Firestarter" isn't ridiculous enough to be entertaining. It feels like a pale imitation of the other horror and superhero films that are popular right now. Although the possibility of a sequel, prequel, or spinoff project has been teased, it may be best to let this flame die out.

Writer/director Alex Garland is one of the most important creative figures in modern science fiction. After working as a screenwriter on such sci-fi films as "28 Days Later," "Sunshine," and "Never Let Me Go," Garland made his directorial debut with the surprise hit "Ex Machina" in 2015. Garland's follow-up, "Annihilation," was a financial disaster that was even released directly on Netflix in some territories. Sadly, his new horror film "Men" didn't perform any better.

While an estimated budget for "Men" has not been revealed, the film grossed just under $11 million worldwide. "Men" fell short of the box office precedent that A24 set earlier this year when "Everything Everywhere All At Once" became the first film in the studio's history to gross over $100 million. Audiences are willing to take a chance on original science fiction films if they are compelling, but it was clear after the early reviews that "Men" was unlikely to be a crossover hit. With an audience Cinemascore of "D+, "Men" was a little too austere and ambiguous for the general public. Audiences may have been confused by the initial teaser trailer, which suggested a more straightforward horror film. They may not have expected an existential commentary on gender roles. While both "Ex Machina" and "Annihilation" are both definitely "arthouse" films, they still have a sense of humor and engaging characters. That touch of humanity is almost completely absent from this film. "Men" is certainly ambitious, but that does not mean it's good.

Australia has produced some of the most beloved science fiction films of all time. We have George Miller to thank for reinventing the dystopian premise with his 1979 Australian sci-fi western "Mad Max." That film inspired a fruitful franchise, and expectations are high for the next installment "Furiosa." Outside of "Mad Max," recent films like "The Rover" proved that Miller isn't the only filmmaker capable of mastering the subgenre.

Unfortunately, this year's "Gold" failed to capitalize on the anticipation for "Furiosa." Anthony Hayes' dystopian western didn't even hit the $200,000 mark at the global box office. The film follows the drifter Virgil (Zac Efron), who discovers a piece of gold in the Australian wasteland. Virgil must fight for his survival as thieves and wild dogs attempt to steal his treasure. Two weeks after the film's initial theatrical release, it was made available on the Australian streaming service Stan. "Gold" signifies another interesting career move by Efron, best known by a certain generation as Troy Bolton from the "High School Musical" franchise. Efron has taken chances on strange genre films over the past decade with the trashy murder mystery "The Paperboy," the stoner comedy "The Beach Bum," and the true crime biopic "Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile." Those may not be among the most critically acclaimed films, but they signify that Efron is willing to shed his inherent charisma. "Gold" could have launched Efron as a sci-fi lead, and hopefully he'll try the genre again.