Sphinx (1981) — Inside the $10M Disaster That Bombed at the Box Office

A Costly Gamble in the Desert

In 1981, director Franklin J. Schaffner — the Academy Award–winning filmmaker behind Patton — turned to pulp adventure with Sphinx. Adapted from Robin Cook’s bestselling novel, the film seemed poised to cash in on the public’s appetite for archaeological thrillers. Instead, it became one of Hollywood’s most memorable flops.

With a reported production budget exceeding $10 million, Sphinx returned only about $2 million worldwide. The gap was catastrophic, especially in an era when even modest hits could recoup their costs on U.S. box office alone. For MGM and Schaffner, it was a humiliating defeat.

⸻

Lavish Locations and Expensive Sets

Much of the film’s budget was eaten up by location shooting and set construction. Sphinx was filmed in Egypt, with key sequences in Cairo and Luxor, and interior work completed at Mafilm Studios in Budapest. The production spared little expense in pursuit of authenticity.

Most infamously, a massive tomb set was built at a cost of around $1 million — an astronomical sum at the time. Additional interiors ran into the millions, quickly ballooning the budget beyond any reasonable chance of profitability.

On paper, these decisions gave the project prestige. In practice, they became cautionary examples of how overspending on spectacle can doom a movie when the story isn’t strong enough to match. This bad decision was further compounded by a lack of star power. Leslie Ann Down and Frank Langella led a cast that audiences simply were not going to turn out for.

⸻

The Creative Weakness at Its Core

The film’s troubles weren’t just financial. Critics savaged Sphinx upon release, pointing to a flat screenplay, stilted performances, and a sluggish pace.

Despite its exotic backdrop, the movie never delivered the thrills of its source material. Reviewers noted that the film was oddly talky, weighed down by exposition, and failed to generate real suspense. One critic memorably complained that the Egyptian settings were “badly and tackily used,” undercutting what should have been Sphinx’s greatest strength.

For audiences expecting an adventure in the spirit of Raiders of the Lost Ark (released the same year), the result was a disappointment.

⸻

Box Office Breakdown: When the Math Doesn’t Add Up

The financial math was brutally simple.

• Budget: Over $10 million

• Worldwide gross: Roughly $2 million

• Losses: Tens of millions once marketing and distribution costs are factored in

Without positive reviews or word-of-mouth, Sphinx had no chance to build momentum at the box office. MGM’s marketing campaign tried to sell it as a thrilling archaeological mystery, but audiences quickly learned that the movie lacked the excitement its ads promised.

The result: one of the year’s most conspicuous failures.

⸻

Why Sphinx Failed

Several interlocking factors doomed the film:

• Misallocated budget: The producers spent heavily on sets and locations, but the core script remained weak.

• Ill-fitting adaptation: Robin Cook’s novel had plenty of exposition, which the screenplay failed to streamline. The movie ended up bogged down instead of energized.

• Poor timing: Released just months after Raiders of the Lost Ark, Sphinx suffered by comparison to a vastly superior archaeological adventure.

• Critical drubbing: With reviews labeling it dull, awkward, and forgettable, the movie couldn’t count on repeat audiences.

⸻

A Hollywood Lesson in Style vs. Substance

For Hollywood historians, Sphinx is a reminder that money alone cannot buy cinematic success. Big budgets and elaborate sets may impress investors, but audiences respond to story, character, and pacing first.

Schaffner’s film had the resources to be a grand spectacle, but it never found its narrative pulse. The result is a movie remembered less for its thrills than for its costly missteps.

More than four decades later, Sphinx endures not as a hidden treasure but as a cinematic cautionary tale — proof that even the grandest tomb can be empty.