Tom Cruise’s ‘Edge of Tomorrow’ Gets Repositioned as ‘Live Die Repeat’ on Home Video

Edge of Tomorrow

Studios often lament the fact they have to remarket a movie when it’s about to hit home entertainment platforms, costing them millions in extra advertising dollars.

But in “Edge of Tomorrow’s” case, Warner Bros. Home Entertainment appears to be embracing the chance for a redo and is touting the film’s “Live Die Repeat” slogan over the film’s actual title (see below). The original source material for the time-looping Doug Liman-directed sci-fi actioner was “All You Need is Kill.”

On the film’s DVD and Blu-ray disc packaging, available for purchase Oct. 7, the title doesn’t even appear until Cruise and co-star Emily Blunt in the same line.

And on many video-on-demand services, the title is actually is listed as: “Live Die Repeat: Edge of Tomorrow.”

SEE ALSO: Why ‘The Fault in Our Stars’ Could Get Teens to Buy More Movies on Digital Platforms

“Edge of Tomorrow,” although well received by critics, stumbled at the box office, earning $364 million worldwide, and just $99 million in the U.S.

That’s not to say “Live Die Repeat” wasn’t prominent in the film’s original marketing campaign.

The slogan was front and center in the film’s posters and billboards, creating potential over the film’s title, as well. But on a smaller box cover — and its final design — the words stand out even more.

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 40

Leave a Reply

40 Comments

Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. Fred says:

    Could of Called it Groundhog zero Day.

  2. rdbvideo says:

    I’ve always had problems remembering the original title. The way it was marketed, “Live Die Repeat” kept jumping in my face, and that’s all I could remember. It should have been titled LDR from the beginning.
    Edge of Tomorrow sounds like a soap opera.
    BTW – thoroughly enjoyed the film. One of the very few this year I didn’t wait for the DVD.

    • Tyler says:

      100% agree, I loved this movie but I can never remember its name! What’s worse is that when someone SAYS its name, I don’t know what movie they’re talking about.

  3. dave says:

    stumbled?? its kinda sad when $364 million is considered a flop. i bet if it had made $200 million in the US and $100 worldwide then it would have been considered a success despite being a lower total. americans need to realise that the US box office isnt the only one that matters. anyway, damn good movie. highly recommended. its a shame that people avoided watching it based on their opinion of Cruise. theyre missing out on one of the top movies of the year so far.

  4. Alex says:

    THey only do that with films that didn’t perform or weren’t supposed to do well.

    I didn’t get to see it, but I looks better than something like that. “Live. Die. Repeat.” Well, atleast it tells you what it is about.

  5. john says:

    Timing is all- if that had come out ten years ago it would have been a classic. Now its just appreciated.

  6. The best movie of the summer finally got a deserving title!

  7. That’s a much better title. You can tell the edge of tomorrow title was thought up by some lame executive, “it sounds so scifi”

  8. Cath says:

    That is a better title. Movie was very good.

  9. fluffo says:

    Talk about schizophrenic marketing. They should have stuck with Live Die Repeat from the get-go. Another great, semi-original Tom Cruise summer sci-fi flick that brain-dead America rejected. File next to fellow non-sequels/remakes Ender’s Game, Pacific Rim, Elysium, and Oblivion, all of which were good.

  10. Merryl rothman says:

    Wow no wonder it crashed.It was a repeat of jake gehenhalls movie

  11. L.B. Graham says:

    Yeah, cause that’s totally the same thing. No difference at all in the historicity or veracity of those claims…

  12. carlb says:

    well that sounds as confusing as the original.try to turn a turkey into a swan. good luck

  13. arrival7û says:

    awesome movie

  14. pl says:

    dead before again

  15. L.B. Graham says:

    “Edge of Tomorrow” was a really good movie. All the rest of this stuff is ancillary. Whether Cruise is overrated or washed up or too much in the spotlight… all irrelevant. Movie = Good.

  16. Keith White says:

    Perhaps it should simply be rebranded as “Another Tom Cruise Flop.”

  17. Deidra says:

    We haven’t gone to a Tom Cruise movie in ages, he just turned us off after jumping on Oprah’s couch. Also, some of the crazy things he has said in interviews. He seems to be playing the same person in movies. Also like Will Smith, it’s another movie but it’s still Will Smith.

  18. Frank W says:

    I liked the movie.

  19. Jesse capileri says:

    Great movie. Terribly marketed. One of the worst tag lines in recent memory. Big mistake.

  20. Never liked that catch-phrase. It is a damn shame that Edge of Tomorrow didn’t catch on since it was my favorite movie of the summer (though Guardians of the Galaxy was damn close), but not crazy about the marketing.

    Also, obligatory go to hell Scientology remark.

  21. Jimmy Green says:

    Cruise lost me when he associated with the cult…Scientology.

    • RAClements says:

      Pfft! That’s nothing! I know someone who believes a carpenter came back to life 2000 years ago! Can you imagine that? Crazy..!

    • Don says:

      I personally don’t care about Tom Cruises personal life. I never met him so I can’t judge.
      Tell me,jimmy… whats he like?

    • James says:

      Yeah, why judge a film on its merits when you can write it off based on its star’s personal beliefs? Bravo.

      • TomsBodyThetans says:

        Scientology is toxic. When Cruise started pushing Scientology nonsense in public what happened? He made a fool of himself with the Matt Lauer and Brooke Shields incidents with his bizarre, sick, and insane Scientology babble. The Tom Cruise Scientologist video will forever brand him as a nut. Of course these incidents made millions aware of his Scientology beliefs. The public hates Scientology and with good reason. There is a penalty to be paid with public consumers when someone foolishly associates themselves with Scientology.

  22. Dwerkin says:

    Please no more Tom Cruise action movies! So tired of him! Ditto for Will Smith. Are there no other actors in Hollywood?! No, not Morgan Freeman either, somebody ELSE. I’d literally rather watch a blank screen.

    • carlb says:

      both had turkeys based on scientology beliefs.to smith’s after earth to cruises edge of tomorrow or the new name for dvd’s both screamed scientology. read the book beyond belief. why they were not charged with child abuse and forced labor on children is a disgrace. they should even charge the parents for allowing it!

  23. Hadel says:

    Reblogged this on Hadel.

  24. frankie342 says:

    more like rinse was and repeat to me speaking of the 80’s
    do anyone remember that Canadian police academy rip off
    movie called RECRUITS about a bunch of clichéd characters
    like an mayors daughter an mascot an drunkard an prostitute
    an Rockstar biker two misfit pranksters an clint eastwood
    wannabe an rich girl and lastly an perverted boat cleaner
    all enrolled into an police motorbike academy with an scheming
    captain mcgruder with an sarcastic sergeant stonewall and
    and an sexpot German lieutenant schicklegruber in which the film
    bombed but just like today but lives up to it’s hopes and fails it’s
    expectations .

    FRANKIE LOVE ROCK SMALES

    SMALES TV UK.

  25. toodles says:

    I saw this movie 2 x in the theatre and it was great there. Probably one of Cruise’s better films IMO. I’m in my 40’s now and remember the whole top gun era. Teens, tweens and young adults won’t know Cruise in the same way as in my generation – and I don’t think he’s doing so great selling himself to the younger audience – they’re values are different.

  26. Appalled By ROCK OF AGES says:

    Good reviews aside, they can (superficially) re-direct the lame-sounding title/identity of the flick to grab home viewers who didn’t trek to the cinemas to catch it…but one thing they cannot change is the film’s star…and that is Tom Cruise who, it increasingly seems, is no longer much of a box office attraction.

    • leeash says:

      to is not the greatest actor in the world, but he is amoungst the most charming. ive never seen him take on any roles he wasnt capable of pulling off. he is relevent now as he was then. im excited to see this film only because he is in it.

    • mayannk says:

      what do u mean by he is not a big box office draw…364 millions worldwide is not bad at all….

      • arrival7û says:

        @TomsBodyThetans

        Do you care to share the 500 million to break even source?

        Edge of Tomorrow, a non-sequel and new property appears to have had only a $178 million dollar budget.

      • TomsBodyThetans says:

        It needed over 500 million to break even. It lost a lot of money. Tom Cruise is old, old news. Perhaps he should drop the insane cult schtick.

      • Leigh says:

        I agree. It would not be referred to as being a box office disappointment if it made 200 million in U.S. and 162 million foreign, even though the total would be the same. Pull your head out of your domestic centered arsehole. 370 million for a non-sequel (also, remember it’s not based on a young adult novel, it’s not a remake/reboot, and it’s not even from well-known source material, among other things) is pretty good, and it will make a lot more money in all the other non-theatrical markets, especially thanks to the fact that it’s actually a good movie (and not some shit movie that critics have to pretend to like in order to try to maintain a relevancy to disinterested millenials).

  27. therealeverton says:

    Should have just called the film All You Need Is Kill in the first place. A very good film that had crappy release dates all over the planet, but still managed to make a decent amount of money, albeit not a profit. I have a feeling people will “find” this much more oat home and release they missed a “must see” this year.

    • Keith White says:

      Studios tend to exaggerate global box office figures to pump up a film’s gross. They receive only about 50% of the total box office, and also spend an average of about $180-200 million marketing a
      movie. This did not make money for Warner Bros.

More Film News from Variety

Loading