Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

What movies do you think had great potential but fell face first due to whatever reason?

X-men 3 and Spider-man 3. Both films failed to live up to the hype mostly due to studio inference.

X-men 3 due to Fox wanting to rush production to have it out in Summer 2006. They didn't even have a director until weeks before filming was to begin. And when a director is finally on board, it's Brett Ratner who had grown a reputation for being a hack, douchbag, MTV music video, action director. They also didn't wanna wait for several actors to take care of prior engagements before filming.(Marsden, Romijn, and Paquin) As a result several characters were either "killed off" or had very little screentime.

SM3 was the studio not wanting to wait until Raimi was done with the goblin storyline and cramming in Venom a character he didn't understand and had no place in the established storyline. The story arc had been set up for two films was for Harry to be come the big bad, not some alien symbiote who hadn't even had any foreshadowing. (except for that line in SM1 about "Eddie's" pictures, which seems to have been ignored). Venom overshadowed Harry and was put in to get symbiote fanboys in theaters.

Instead of going with Raimi's original plan which was setting up Vulture as a criminal previously busted by Spidey and out for revenge and whose storyline would have been actually connected to Sandman, they opted for a much more complex story involving an alien symbiote and a grudge that should've been brewing for at least two movies but was forced into half of one.

And Halo. Peter Jackson and Neil Blomkamp showed interest and no one wanted to make this movie? WTF?

Originally posted by KCJ506
X-men 3 due to Fox wanting to rush production to have it out in Summer 2006. They didn't even have a director until weeks before filming was to begin. And when a director is finally on board, it's Brett Ratner who had grown a reputation for being a hack, douchbag, MTV music video, action director. They also didn't wanna wait for several actors to take care of prior engagements before filming.(Marsden, Romijn, and Paquin) As a result several characters were either "killed off" or had very little screentime.



Aside from the Cyclops thing and the casting of Vinnie Jones I felt it was a fun movie. Wolverine was still sensitive and caring but they had to continue that angle from the previous films so it didn't bother me anymore.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Aside from the Cyclops thing and the casting of Vinnie Jones I felt it was a fun movie. Wolverine was still sensitive and caring but they had to continue that angle from the previous films so it didn't bother me anymore.

Well another issue I had(along with a lot of other people) was they crammed in so many characters and the movie was less than two hours. It felt rushed. I mean Angel barely got any screentime.

I think I heard that Singer originially wanted to shoot part 3 and 4 back to back.

Xmen2 for not having toad.
Xmen3 for not having nightcrawler

superman returns and transformers.. hey, michael bay, do you know what made the transformers animated movie good? it was about the f*cking robots, not a teenager with relationship problems..

pretty much anything written and/or directed by MKS. the guy really knows how to tell a story, but then bones it within an inch of it's life 'cause he constantly tries to one-up himself.

I think alot of comedies fail to live up to their potential these days.

I personally don't get the humour in Superbad, Pineapple Express, Get Him To The Greek or The Hangover...

I saw Hall Pass the other night, excited that it was written & directed by the Farrely Brothers....what a disappointment!
They've fallen a long way from There's Something ABout Mary.

Tron: Legacy springs to mind. After watching that 5 minute trailer and then watching the film. WTF.

Hancock, to me, was very good 2/3 of the way through but then fell flat on its face in the 3rd act.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
I think alot of comedies fail to live up to their potential these days.

I personally don't get the humour in Superbad, Pineapple Express, Get Him To The Greek or The Hangover...

I saw Hall Pass the other night, excited that it was written & directed by the Farrely Brothers....what a disappointment!
They've fallen a long way from There's Something ABout Mary. me neither superbad, pineapple express, & the hangover.
were not funny at all...
the characters just felt retarded.

Dragonball Evolution
Transformers Trilogy
Godzilla (1998)
Daredevil
League of Extremely Ordinary Gentlemen
Rocky 5
Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow
Matrix Sequels
Clash of the Titans (remake)
Madagascar/Madagascar 2
Shrek the Third
Fantastic Four/Rise of the Silver Surfer
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
I Am Legend
Super 8
The Wolfman
Sorcerer's Apprentice
Observe and Report

nothing was wrong with the matrix sequels -_-

Originally posted by 0mega Spawn
Xmen2 for not having toad.
Xmen3 for not having nightcrawler
Pretty sure Toad died in the 1st film. Sabretooth should've come back in one of those two sequels though (albeit, with someone who could actually act like how Liev Schreiber played Sabretooth in Wolverine Origins). Getting knocked onto that boat by Cyclops's optic blast in the 1st movie shouldn't of killed him since he's got a healing factor too (not as potent as Wolverine's, but it's still there).

Originally posted by Darth Martin
Tron: Legacy springs to mind. After watching that 5 minute trailer and then watching the film. WTF.


I guess it was only you then

because i enjoyed the sequel.

Originally posted by Ridley_Prime
Pretty sure Toad died in the 1st film. Sabretooth should've come back in one of those two sequels though (albeit, with someone who could actually act like how Liev Schreiber played Sabretooth in Wolverine Origins). Getting knocked onto that boat by Cyclops's optic blast in the 1st movie shouldn't of killed him since he's got a healing factor too (not as potent as Wolverine's, but it's still there). well he supposed to be in the sequel but ray park couldn't make it or something so IMO that means he survived

I liked how liev played him but didn't like liev i'd like it if that guy from the first film came back & portrayed sabes the liev way

Superbad, Hangover and Pineapple Express weren't funny?...

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lfjlc6xLOB1qdlkgg.gif

I disagree with The Matrix Reloaded being labeled a failed movie. I thought it did a great job of expanding the world first concieved upon in the original. The problem was is that it doesn't stand alone like The Dark Knight or Terminator 2; it infact ends on a cliffhanger. That cliffhanger is expanded upon in the third film that is dramatically lesser than the first two.

The Matrix Reloaded is dope and a very underrated sequel IMO.

I loved the 3rd Matrix more than the 2nd personally, but I see where you're coming from.

I wasn't really into Reloaded as well, until Revolution came out . Now I love the second movie

plus the Highway Chase is dope 131

Starship Troopers.

Failed big time in terms of acting and whatnot, but it could've been a great movie. The 2nd and 3rd movie had a chance to make things right but they made things oh so wrong, borrow too much from other movies. 2 borrow too much from Alien, and 3 borrowed too much from the Riddick movies.

Most M Night Shyamalan movies would be classed as having potential but being disappointing.

Unbreakable being an exception...I think that's a great movie.

Incidentally...Great thread for some good discussion...It gets the thumbs up from me.

Originally posted by marwash22
Superbad, Hangover and Pineapple Express weren't funny?...

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lfjlc6xLOB1qdlkgg.gif


"You got period blood on yer pants." -INSERT LAUGH TRACK

"Where did that tiger come from!?!" -INSERT LAUGH TRACK

"OH We're sooooo stoned!"- INSERT LAUGH TRACK

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
"You got period blood on yer pants." -INSERT LAUGH TRACK

"Where did that tiger come from!?!" -INSERT LAUGH TRACK

"OH We're sooooo stoned!"- INSERT LAUGH TRACK
I'm with you on Superbad, but the other two were great. Not Anchorman quality mind you, but still solid.
My number one movie let down would probably be "The Last Airbender" though, with other most other shitty movies I knew they would be shitty, M. Night tricked me into thinking it would be great.

Kickass. This is my opinion mind you, most would probably disagree.

The first half was pretty good: funny and entertaining. It was an at times affectionate and at times downright vicious satire of the superhero genre as a whole and a mostly faithful homage to the original comic.

But the second half failed because it totally lost its self-awareness and became a rather straight superhero/action movie with a lot of the tired action movie tropes. Additionally it deviated greatly from the comic.

The level of realism in the first half makes it difficult to willingly suspend disbelief when Hitgirl starts kicking ass or when Kickass arrives to save the day with the jetpack.

Both of those things are difficult to explain in a world that seems to strive so hard for some semblance of realism. Hitgirl in particular. Are we to believe that a ten year old girl can become a one-person army simply by training for a while with an (admittedly quite skilled) ex-police officer? Hitgirl in the comic was actually semi believable because she didn't just gun down a small army of goons singlehandedly while hopping from place to place like Spider-Man Lite.

My views

-Superman Returns
-Ang Lee's Hulk
-Quantum of Solace
-Sunshine
-The Beach
-The Game
-Death Proof
-The Wolfman (2010)
-The Lovely Bones
-Hannibal

I think that The Town is a good example of a failed movie with potential that it failed to live up to. Since I've already posted a couple of posts on the reasons why, I won't go into it here, however.

Originally posted by 0mega Spawn
nothing was wrong with the matrix sequels -_-

EVERYTHING was wrong with the Matrix sequels.

I argee ^ Hollywood is making way too much sequels which ruins alot of movies and you get tired of it after awhile. I know I am.

Originally posted by Mr. Rhythmic
EVERYTHING was wrong with the Matrix sequels.

Reloaded is good, Revolutions is a bit 'meh', but I can still watch it sometimes. I just love the martial arts from all the movies - really good choreography.

Though every time I see the Zion battle from Revolutions I sit there in a confused daze as to why there's no armour protecting the humans inside the mechs.

Dragonball Z: Evolution.


Probably the worst movie I have watched to date.
It's like the writer just watched a few Dragonball episodes and didn't bother to know more about the whole story.
I mean, Shenron was Piccolo's pet? ROFLWTF!

I AM LEGEND.

The movie's first half was excellent. However, the film was too short, and as a result, the final third had to be horribly rushed to a half-@ss conclusion.

Another hour would have made that movie very good.

By definition, this category only applies to films that were box office failures or flops, because that takes away any hope of sequels continuing the story and establishing a franchise, which is generally the goal. Almost always, critical failure is part of it.
Fans can argue all day and long about the merits of films like Spider Man 3 and X-Men 3 - claiming they didn't realize their 'potential' - but both were the highest grossing films in their series, so that trumps everything. Same for the useless arguing about Michael Bay's Transformers series - $2.5 billion in worldwide box office can't be ignored.
Not realizing potential means missed opportunities. That means films like Dune in 1984, Judge Dredd in 1995 (Sly Stallone himself now calls that films a missed opportunity) and Green Lantern this year.

Others:

The Matrix Revolutions - failed to wrap up the series in a way that made fans and critics happy (lowest grossing one too.)

Heaven's Gate (1980) - while some swear there is a masterpiece buried in there, it can't be ignored as the disaster that brought down a studio.

Chronicles Of Riddick (2004) - supersizing Riddick from a cult film (Pitch Black) backfired big time.

And two popular Marvel Comics characters that can't seem to get figured out for the big screen - Hulk and Punisher.

Originally posted by super pr*xy
superman returns and transformers.. hey, michael bay, do you know what made the transformers animated movie good? it was about the f*cking robots, not a teenager with relationship problems..

Highlander. The fist movie is okay, but the concept is much stronger then any of the movies / television shows based off of it.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
"You got period blood on yer pants." -INSERT LAUGH TRACK

"Where did that tiger come from!?!" -INSERT LAUGH TRACK

"OH We're sooooo stoned!"- INSERT LAUGH TRACK

From the hangover

-It's not illegal it's frowned upon like....masturbating on an airplane
-Pretty sure thats illegal to
-Yeah maybe after 9/11 when everybody go so sensitive....thanks a lot Bin Laden

Personally that was the funniest part of the movie for me with the rest also being funny, Hangover is one of the best and funniest movies ever. Sure not all of it was, like the tiger part that you just mentioned but it was still a great movie.

To each their own eh...I'm actually more annoyed at falling for the marketing hype & wondering why I'm constantly disappointed.

Originally posted by roughrider
And two popular Marvel Comics characters that can't seem to get figured out for the big screen - Hulk and Punisher.

With Hulk, I think it's the transformation angle/actor ego combination that either gives one or the other more screen time which then unbalances the film and the character.

With Punisher I think it's because there is nothing really to set him apart from a generic action character but his iconic look and so its a case of 'seen it all before'.

Thats how I see it.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z


With Punisher I think it's because there is nothing really to set him apart from a generic action character but his iconic look and so its a case of 'seen it all before'.

Thats how I see it.

It's not so much Punisher being a generic action character but more to the point that he's one of the most violent characters that marvel has.

How do you make a movie that's loyal & faithful to the amount of violence he portrays that kids wouldn't be allowed to see & THEN market a range of toys & merchandise to the younger comic book fan base?

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
It's not so much Punisher being a generic action character but more to the point that he's one of the most violent characters that marvel has.

How do you make a movie that's loyal & faithful to the amount of violence he portrays that kids wouldn't be allowed to see & THEN market a range of toys & merchandise to the younger comic book fan base?

Not sure, because there are a lot of violent characters out there that kids go nuts over so his violent nature I don't think it is holding him back. His story is fairly generic though (not meaning to cause offence to Punisher fans) and is somewhat of a staple among action characters who just walk around avenging a wrong committed in their past.

That of course could be said of a lot of heroes, including Batman but most of the others have a lot of eccentricities (looks, abilities, rules etc.) which might serve to make them more interesting, or palatable. There's no denying that the Punisher is iconic, but how do you make a movie with him that doesn't appear to be similar to a standard actioner?

I think any of the movies that went longer then three or six of them failed since it is like beating a dead horse.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Not sure, because there are a lot of violent characters out there that kids go nuts over so his violent nature I don't think it is holding him back. His story is fairly generic though (not meaning to cause offence to Punisher fans) and is somewhat of a staple among action characters who just walk around avenging a wrong committed in their past.

That of course could be said of a lot of heroes, including Batman but most of the others have a lot of eccentricities (looks, abilities, rules etc.) which might serve to make them more interesting, or palatable. There's no denying that the Punisher is iconic, but how do you make a movie with him that doesn't appear to be similar to a standard actioner?

What I'm talking about is the spin-of of merchandise, aimed at children.

It's one thing buying your kid a Batman or Superman costume to dress up in...but would you buy a Punisher outfit complete with a (fake) gun & knife?

Considering the cost of one toy can be equivalent to the cost of 3 movie tickets or more...the obvious profit would be in the merchandise.
I simply think that The Punisher is one marvel character that doesn't lend itself to be marketed to children. Even the comp games have an Adult rating to them.

Originally posted by KCJ506
What movies do you think had great potential but fell face first due to whatever reason?

X-men 3 and Spider-man 3. Both films failed to live up to the hype mostly due to studio inference.

X-men 3 due to Fox wanting to rush production to have it out in Summer 2006. They didn't even have a director until weeks before filming was to begin. And when a director is finally on board, it's Brett Ratner who had grown a reputation for being a hack, douchbag, MTV music video, action director. They also didn't wanna wait for several actors to take care of prior engagements before filming.(Marsden, Romijn, and Paquin) As a result several characters were either "killed off" or had very little screentime.

SM3 was the studio not wanting to wait until Raimi was done with the goblin storyline and cramming in Venom a character he didn't understand and had no place in the established storyline. The story arc had been set up for two films was for Harry to be come the big bad, not some alien symbiote who hadn't even had any foreshadowing. (except for that line in SM1 about "Eddie's" pictures, which seems to have been ignored). Venom overshadowed Harry and was put in to get symbiote fanboys in theaters.

Instead of going with Raimi's original plan which was setting up Vulture as a criminal previously busted by Spidey and out for revenge and whose storyline would have been actually connected to Sandman, they opted for a much more complex story involving an alien symbiote and a grudge that should've been brewing for at least two movies but was forced into half of one.

And Halo. Peter Jackson and Neil Blomkamp showed interest and no one wanted to make this movie? WTF?

actually all the spiderman films failed to live up to its hype.I hope they can redeem themselves with the new one.

Originally posted by mplo
I think that The Town is a good example of a failed movie with potential that it failed to live up to. Since I've already posted a couple of posts on the reasons why, I won't go into it here, however.

yeah I agree.The town really failed.Not that good a movie at all.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
What I'm talking about is the spin-of of merchandise, aimed at children.

It's one thing buying your kid a Batman or Superman costume to dress up in...but would you buy a Punisher outfit complete with a (fake) gun & knife?

Considering the cost of one toy can be equivalent to the cost of 3 movie tickets or more...the obvious profit would be in the merchandise.
I simply think that The Punisher is one marvel character that doesn't lend itself to be marketed to children. Even the comp games have an Adult rating to them.

Why not? Toy weapons have been marketed at kids for years as well as Action Man dolls and other deriatives either before or after. Kids buy them and they promote violence, or themes to that effect. I see no reason why Punisher wouldn't hit that market just because of his violent nature, if that was the case then there wouldn't be any reason for him to be a comic character - because its not like the shops can regulate who ends up with them.

For example I walk into a shop like Forbidden Planet I see a lot of horror characters who are a hell of a lot more violent than Punisher and they have 5+ films and have a lot of merchandise. In fact you could say some of them are so ingrained in our culture that anyone growing up would have to be quite ignorant not to know these characters.

You take any action hero that vaguely looks like Castle (John Spartan, Marion Cobretti) and slap a Punisher skull on his chest and it wouldn't look out of place. I think you need to do the Punisher as a team-up movie with an outlandish superhero next to him to really sell him as a character in a fantastical setting.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Why not? Toy weapons have been marketed at kids for years as well as Action Man dolls and other deriatives either before or after. Kids buy them and they promote violence, or themes to that effect. I see no reason why Punisher wouldn't hit that market just because of his violent nature, if that was the case then there wouldn't be any reason for him to be a comic character - because its not like the shops can regulate who ends up with them.

For example I walk into a shop like Forbidden Planet I see a lot of horror characters who are a hell of a lot more violent than Punisher and they have 5+ films and have a lot of merchandise. In fact you could say some of them are so ingrained in our culture that anyone growing up would have to be quite ignorant not to know these characters.


Besides they've marketed toys for kids when Robocop and Rambo got released back in the day and those were R 18+ movies.

Dragonball evolution was really disappointing. Goku played by HIM? Where is Krillin? Yamcha's constant sidekick cat, Puar, Oolong the list goes on... I'll be mourning the death of this franchise for ages.
Goku's uniform looked like pajamas from the ninety-nine cents only stores. What part of great ape didn't they understand? They're supposed to be thirty feet tall. Where was shao and why was Mai hanging out with king Picollo?
I could go on and on, but I'll wrap this up. Why didn't they stick with the manga storyline at least?

"2 fast too furious" or 2 fast too stupid"
This film had nowhere near the amount of class of its prequel. Near the end, I actually hoped they'd miss the boat and end up in the water. I simply could not find it in me to root for these childish prankster so-called-heroes. There were no technical references to the cars themselves, unless you count the idea of a nos-bottle-ejector-seat.
"We hungry" has since remained one of my top ten least favorite movie quotes of all time, if that wasn't bad enough, even the female lead called them babies at the brunch table. That alone should have been a hint, but still, I watched (albeit somewhat gleefully when the Mustang was crushed) patiently slogging through the second-rate plot. (I rented this on DVD, mind you, so I had to watch the special features that made a big deal of the movie that made me laugh for the wrong reasons)
this movie was too adult for a child and too childish for an adult. I cannot - will not call it a sequel: where was Vin Deisel!?!

Originally posted by Kazenji
Besides they've marketed toys for kids when Robocop and Rambo got released back in the day and those were R 18+ movies.

Exactly, Robocop being an excellent example ; a character who suffers a tragedy (his own body blasted to hell and back), seeks revenge on criminals and is not completely merciless but he is violent. Judge Dredd, doesn't have a tragedy but is in the same anti-hero mould as Castle, same with Blade with the only exception being he kills vampires.

A lot of action movies follow the same patterns as Frank's backstory and mission and he faces competition from these as well as other anti-heroes in any comic book universe. There's nothing new in cinema in picking up a gun and killing people, thats why I think there's not much interest in an expanded Punisher film universe. You ask me, you have to put him with a powerful character or you have to up his own abilities to break out from the norm.

Like John Preston for example, what made him different from the other variants was the Gun Kata, his athleticism and his cold precision to turn any situation on his opponent.

I remember when they released the toys for The Mummy Returns here and most of the parents wen't off and complained about them all.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z

For example I walk into a shop like Forbidden Planet I see a lot of horror characters who are a hell of a lot more violent than Punisher and they have 5+ films and have a lot of merchandise. In fact you could say some of them are so ingrained in our culture that anyone growing up would have to be quite ignorant not to know these characters.

You take any action hero that vaguely looks like Castle (John Spartan, Marion Cobretti) and slap a Punisher skull on his chest and it wouldn't look out of place. I think you need to do the Punisher as a team-up movie with an outlandish superhero next to him to really sell him as a character in a fantastical setting.

I'm assuming Forbidden Planet is a comic book shop that also stocks collectible merchandise, compared to a shop like Toys R Us.

Parents petitioned Toys R Us to remove & not sell the Macfarlane range of action/horror/sci-fi range of action figures because they were deemed too realistic in detail depicting violence & gore.

The Macfarlane Punisher collectible set depicted him smashing a guy into a pinball machine & shoving a grenade in the goon's mouth.

This is clearly not aimed at children but more so teenagers & adults who had read & grown up knowing & appreciating both Macfarlane's work & The Punisher as well.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big Punisher fan (big enough to have him tattooed on me)...I'm just simply saying he is one character that would lose out in being openly marketed to children.

And yes, I know Robocop is just as violent as well & has his own limited range of toys but he also has a cartoon spin-off aimed for kids only...something Frank Castle does not have.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn

And yes, I know Robocop is just as violent as well & has his own limited range of toys but he also has a cartoon spin-off aimed for kids only...something Frank Castle does not have.

I can see one working for Punisher just not it being aimed at kids.

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
I argee ^ Hollywood is making way too much sequels which ruins alot of movies and you get tired of it after awhile. I know I am.

The reason that Hollywood's been making so many sequels as of late is because they've run out of creative ideas, if one gets the drift.

I figure that out already. We need some fresh ideas!

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
I'm assuming Forbidden Planet is a comic book shop that also stocks collectible merchandise, compared to a shop like Toys R Us.

Parents petitioned Toys R Us to remove & not sell the Macfarlane range of action/horror/sci-fi range of action figures because they were deemed too realistic in detail depicting violence & gore.

The Macfarlane Punisher collectible set depicted him smashing a guy into a pinball machine & shoving a grenade in the goon's mouth.

This is clearly not aimed at children but more so teenagers & adults who had read & grown up knowing & appreciating both Macfarlane's work & The Punisher as well.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big Punisher fan (big enough to have him tattooed on me)...I'm just simply saying he is one character that would lose out in being openly marketed to children.

And yes, I know Robocop is just as violent as well & has his own limited range of toys but he also has a cartoon spin-off aimed for kids only...something Frank Castle does not have.

But teens 13-15 are still 'children' and in between that age bracket they still watch violent movies and get off on violent characters. The key thing in your quote was that the parents complained and they can't control everything their kids buy and neither can the shops in all honesty.

When I used to visit Forbidden Planet (yes, you guessed right - sells sci-fi stuff, anime, comics etc.), there were people in there of all ages and they bought all kinds of stuff with nary a glance in their direction. The only things that probably raised flags were the dvd content. The figurines of prominent horror icons Chucky, Krueger, Jason, Myers, were everywhere and if there were any 'parent advisory' labels on them I couldn't see but I would bet against it, because if they were old/mature enough to watch the movies and know the characters then buying a figurine isn't going to hurt.

Well Robocop getting a cartoon aimed for kids is not really surprising... he's still a policeman and in all honesty, he still has rules which they can use to make him more heroic or less dangerous if you will. As for Punisher, he got some episodes in Spider-Man TAS so if that could have given him his own show I would have watched!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Nw_n-lTxso

Avatar: so many resources, so much time and effort, and so much talent wasted on a shallow, cliched, dopey, cynical ploy to pander to the largest possible audience. lazy writing, flat acting (not that there were characters to play), and most surprising of all: lame special effects. Their "groundbreaking" technology was really just stuff andy serkis had done, and done better 8 years earlier. there is really no excuse for that movie to be as bad as it was.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
But teens 13-15 are still 'children' and in between that age bracket they still watch violent movies and get off on violent characters. The key thing in your quote was that the parents complained and they can't control everything their kids buy and neither can the shops in all honesty.



Yes ok, 13-15 year olds can still be considered as "children".
Where do most children get their money to buy stuff?
Their parents.
So yeah, to a degree, parents still control the content of what kids spend their money on.

I mean if I took my son to a dress-up party & all the kids are dressed up as Batmen, Supermen,TMNT's, WonderWomen, Fairies & Hulks...then there's this one lone kid dressed as The Punisher...I seriously wouldn't be enrolling my son in the same school that kid goes too!