King Arthur: Legend of the Sword, the latest retelling of one of the most popular mythical tales of the last one thousand years, did not have a good showing during its opening weekend.

The film cost nearly $175 million to make and only raked in an estimated $14.7 million this weekend, its first in theaters. Directed by Guy Ritchie and staring the increasingly busy Charlie Hunnam and the well-respected Jude LawKing Arthur still suffered despite its star power. Warner Bros. distributed the film.

The flop comes despite a major advertising push that cost Warner Bros over $100 million. As part of the advertising ploy, King Arthur had three trailers, TV spots across the world, an online game, and a Snapchat campaign.

While the movie was expensive to make, there was one thing that Warner Bros. did not have to pay for – the rights to tell King Arthur’s story. The legendary British king’s story is public domain. Using public domain stories has become a pattern of Warner Bros. in spite of the fact these films tend to be hit or miss – Sherlock Holmes is an example of a success and was also directed by Ritchie.

King Arthur was expected to be turned into a series but a sequel is most likely out of the question after the film’s financial perils.

“I’m really disappointed,” Jeff Goldstein, Warner Bros.’ president of domestic distribution, told The New York Times. “We had higher hopes.”

While some blame the film’s concept for it’s failure – the legend of King Arthur may be a story that people either are tired of hearing or just don’t have interest in any more – the film has also gotten rather bad reviews.

On the film review aggregator site Rotten Tomatoes, King Arthur holds a rating of 29 percent, based on the reviews of 145 critics. The film has resonated more with audiences, holding a score of 79 percent.

Read more about: