|
Codependent Poster posted:They should just fold MASK into GI Joe anyway. The bad guys were VENOM, for crying out loud. Make MASK some unit of GI Joe and VENOM a unit of Cobra. Considering that they've established in the Transformers movies that the humans are already reverse-engineering the Transformers technology, a MASK movie would work as a bridge between the two franchises.
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 01:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:11 |
|
|
Young Freud posted:Considering that they've established in the Transformers movies that the humans are already reverse-engineering the Transformers technology, a MASK movie would work as a bridge between the two franchises. I think Hasbro did merge GI Joe and MASK too. There were GI Joe toys featuring MASK characters and vehicles.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 01:46
|
|
|
I feel that with Valerian, everyone knew they were making a movie that was a little ambitious and outside the comfort zone for most audiences, but had high hopes it would stick and become a blockbuster. With The Mummy I think they came in with a solid, known property, the most well recognized actor in history and an audience that seems to love reboots and were just blindsided by absolutely how horrible it did. The Mummy is last years bigger disaster.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 01:50
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:I haven't seen Valerian but my impression was that it was a movie people were disappointed had failed rather than a disaster on every level like The Mummy or King Arthur. Valerian was good. The reason it flopped was because everyone agreed it was gonna suck before it came out for ??? reasons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 01:56
|
|
|
I am the ideal demo for Valerian (18-34, fan of the comic, fan of Luc Besson’s sci-fi films) and I couldn’t have cared less about what I was watching, aside from the admittedly excellent opening sequence. The film just kind of trudged along from plot point to plot point, hoping the visuals would keep you entertained enough that you wouldn’t notice the nonsensical script or the flat acting from both leads. Cara Delevingne was decent at best, but Dane DeHaan was truly awful and I do not understand the thought process behind his casting or how the film made it all the way to release without someone piping up and going “Uh, hey, maybe the audience shouldn’t hate the lead characters?”. It was a chore to watch and I was relieved when the film mercifully ended.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 02:16
|
|
|
I've had high hopes for Dane dehaan since chronicle but his performances in amazing Spiderman 2 and valerian were terrible
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 02:28
|
|
|
The opening was the best part about Valerian. Since it just ends up being Gov Bad War Bad cover-up bad the visuals help keep you engaged though. Also some dumb "I am a SOLDIER I can't do this" stuff that is never an issue outside of 5 minutes of plottime
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 02:35
|
|
|
Delevigne and DeHaan aren't hatable, they're playing characters who are insulated in a naive, erotic bubble that contrasts with a much franker understanding of what their job is, which is to be imperialist thugs. The film obviously takes cues from the Valerian comics, Barbarella, and that whole subgenre of French fantasy-comedy/erotic serials; but tonally it's a lot more similar to Starship Troopers. The plot makes perfect sense, and, if anything, is brutally straightforward and simplistic, but therein lies the satire. You get stuff like a scene of Delevigne holding aloft this lizard-gerbil like it's this beautiful, transcendent fetish, but then it's literally just diarrhea-making GBS threads pearls all over the place. Later on, despite working to make reparations for a genocide, Valerian has a moment where he casually admits that he could sympathize with someone who takes the security of the Federation over justice for the oppressed. It's like what Vincent Canby said about Shaft, which is to say that Besson makes political overtones, but really this is just straightforwardly the story of a jaded power-couple trying to spice up their sex lives. Aside from Starship Troopers, Valerian and Laureline's relationship is overtly similar to the protagonists of another episodic, satiric, dystopian future film: Death Race 2000.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 02:40
|
|
|
So despite not being advertised as such it turns out the Netflix animated Godzilla movie is just the first part.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 03:11
|
|
|
muscles like this! posted:So despite not being advertised as such it turns out the Netflix animated Godzilla movie is just the first part. They announced awhile ago it was a trilogy and when you go to watch it Netflix calls it Part 1. Fingers crossed the other two aren't as bad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 03:15
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:I haven't seen Valerian but my impression was that it was a movie people were disappointed had failed rather than a disaster on every level like The Mummy or King Arthur. Well, I was using the word "bomb" in the context of "movies that lost a lot of money." I don't know if Valerian is good, maybe it is, I didn't see it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 06:20
|
|
|
Den of Thieves was awful. It was thoroughly mediocre throughout and then tried to pull a The Usual Suspects twist in the last 5 minutes. I wasn't expecting much, but was still disappointed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 06:32
|
|
|
Peanut President posted:Valerian was good. The reason it flopped was because everyone agreed it was gonna suck before it came out for ??? reasons. Counterpoint: I was sure it would be good, and I thought it was not.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 06:58
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:Unfortunately fat Muggle, the best character, won't be there. *sigh* Whaaat. I thought all the core cast of the first one were coming back, and him and his love interest were the only part of that movie I really liked.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 08:07
|
|
|
davidspackage posted:Whaaat. I thought all the core cast of the first one were coming back, and him and his love interest were the only part of that movie I really liked. He's coming back. He's in the big cast photo they put out several months back.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 08:19
|
|
|
Dexie posted:He's coming back. He's in the big cast photo they put out several months back. My interest has raised to the "I'll watch if my friends are going to" level.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 10:51
|
|
|
I’m going to go out on a slight limb and say that JW2 and Solo will probably both underperform. Solo in particular is wedged between a lot of other movies that will be tough competition.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 15:40
|
|
|
If they manage to put together a kick rear end trailer, Solo will be just fine. If they whiff on that, though, all bets are off.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 15:42
|
|
|
They've got a Superbowl commercial ready to go real soon that's just Ron Howard sitting in a chair saying they'll have a trailer for you real soon and it's gonna be great. Harrison Ford is there and says "I've seen a lot of it and it's great you're all really going to like it" and Ron Howard hands him a bag of money. The official trailer will debut in front of Solo. They're going to attract people to see it who maybe aren't interested in Solo but really want to see the trailer for Solo
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 15:47
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:With The Mummy I think they came in with a solid, known property, the most well recognized actor in history and an audience that seems to love reboots and were just blindsided by absolutely how horrible it did. I'm pretty sure that Lionsgate were similarly blindsided by Power Rangers doing so badly. I was in a toy store last week and was surprised to find half an aisle stuffed with unsold tie-in toys, it looks like they shipped a LOT of merch which has been gathering dust for 10 months now. Edit: I was so surprised I actually took some photos. Huh, turns out that no one wanted to buy an Interactive Alpha 5 for $45, who would have thought.   I'm guessing that we won't be seeing that six movie arc that Haim Saban was talking up before the movie premiered.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 17:22
|
|
|
There is a netflix horror film that just dropped called Open House that is making a lot of people on my timeline very mad at how bad it is
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 17:24
|
|
|
Power Rangers wasn't bad, but would have been better if they weren't ashamed they were making a power rangers movie. Like maybe more people would buy action figures if they had actually fought a monster at some point, or spent more than a minute in the suits for an action sequence. Maybe the morphers would have sold if the characters in the film actually had morphers and there was actually a morphing sequence.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 17:31
|
|
|
The main legacy of The Mummy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 17:32
|
|
|
This is so dumb, I love it. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 17:36
|
|
|
Al Borland Corp. posted:Probably a wrinkle in Time. I think it looks cool personally, but based on a children's fiction book from close to two generations ago that the target audience has never heard of isn't a good formula. Believe it or not I know several people in their mid 20s who have mentioned wanting to see that to me. With one friend, first time I basically pointed out what you did and the response was "I read it when I was a kid." So I guess it survived. Also, it has Oprah.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 18:00
|
|
|
Yeah, my wife (who's 34) said she really wants to see it after the trailer was in front of Star Wars ... to which I said that's fine, but she can take our 14-year-old niece.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 18:09
|
|
|
My favorite thing about Valarian is Luc Besson tone-deafly assuring fans that due to how the financing is structured if it bombs his studio wouldn't personally lose money. And then being surprised later when it bombs and he can't find investors for his next project.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
muscles like this! posted:So despite not being advertised as such it turns out the Netflix animated Godzilla movie is just the first part. Hm, good to know. Maybe I'll wait until at least one more part is out. Al Borland Corp. posted:Power Rangers wasn't bad, but would have been better if they weren't ashamed they were making a power rangers movie. Might have done better if all the Power Rangers action wasn't all squished into the end of the movie. They first put on the suits and first use the Zords and first combine into Megazord all within the same battle. There's so much drat time spent on making them worthy and training. The movie is two hours. By contrast, I started watching the Netflix Voltron series last year and two hours could be the equivalent of the first six episodes, which features intros and backstory for all the team members, intros and training for their suits and weapons, time spent in their mechs, forming Voltron multiple times (and with early focus on them learning to be a team in order to form Voltron voluntarily) and multiple monsters tied to a bigger, central villain.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 19:05
|
|
|
Let's see which films seem to have bombed the hardest in 2017! I'm just going to compare the production costs to the domestic box office because the studios only get a tiny chunk of the international box office. Also we can't really take into account the promotional costs (which are often as high as the production budget), or how much they made on merchandising or product placements or home media sales or stuff like that which they usually don't announce. We're pretty much just comparing how much money they pumped into the films versus how many people bothered to turn up to the cinemas to watch them. Films which made the smallest percentage of their production costs: The Promise. Budget = $90m, BO = $8.2m, difference = -90.89% (Starring Christian Bale and Oscar Isaac, opened on over 2,000 screens.) Live By Night. Budget = $90m, BO = $10.4m, difference = -88.9%. (Starring Ben Affleck, limited opening in Dec 2016 but opened on over 2,800 screens in Jan 2017) LBJ. Budget = $21m, BO = $2.5m, difference = -88.2%. (Starring Woody Harrelson, only opened on 659 screens) Rock Dog. Budget = $60m, BO = $9.4m, difference = -84.3%. (Animated film) The Snowman. Budget = $35m, BO = $6.7m, difference = -80.85%. Colossal. Budget = $15m, BO = $3m, difference = -80%. A Cure for Wellness. Budget = $40m, BO = $8.1m, difference = -79.75% King Arthur: Legend of the Sword. Budget = $175m, BO = $39m, difference = -77.6% Suburbicon. Budget = $25m, BO = $5.8m, difference = -76.9% Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets. Budget = $177.2m, BO = $41.2m, difference = -75% Monster Trucks. Budget = $125m, BO = $33.4m, difference = -73.4% GeoStorm. Budget = $120m, BO = $33.7m, difference = -72.5% Films which had the biggest differences between the production costs and their box office Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets. Budget = $177.2m, BO = $41.2m, loss = $136m King Arthur: Legend of the Sword. Budget = $175m, BO = $39.2m, loss = $135.8m Monster Trucks. Budget = $125m, BO = $33.4m, loss = $91.6m Transformers: The Last Knight. Budget = $217m, BO = $130m, loss = $87m GeoStorm. Budget = $120m, BO = $33.7m, loss = $86.3m Ghost in the Shell. Budget = $110m, BO = $40.6m, loss = $69.4m Blade Runner 2049. Budget = $150m, BO = $92m, loss = $58m Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales. Budget = $230m, BO = $172.6m, loss = $57.4m I'd say that Valerian and King Arthur were pretty much neck and neck for the 'Biggest fuckup of 2017' award if we're only looking at the numbers. Edit: Valerian probably nudges slightly ahead because it was a French production and it's box office in France was even lower than its box office in the US. Snowglobe of Doom fucked around with this message at 20:16 on Jan 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 20:13
|
|
|
Wow I totally forgot about live by night (a shame, the trailer looked cool) and that woody threw his hat in the LBJ game (I'm guessing he's one of the lesser portrayals esp compared to Cranston's)
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
I don’t think I’ve even heard of The Promise, which is kind of strange considering who’s in it. That’s kind of disappointing that Colossal made so little, although $15 million is a pretty small budget these days. Oh well, at least we all got a good movie out of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
I'm surprised the budget for A Cure For Wellness was that low. It was an expensive looking movie. Lobok posted:Hm, good to know. Maybe I'll wait until at least one more part is out. It ends on a cliffhanger, so unless you're really champing at the bit I would recommend waiting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 20:27
|
|
|
Dead Men Tell No Tales still made over 700 million worldwide though, which I understand doesn't mean they actually pocketed all of that but still that does drastically change the math.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 20:28
|
|
|
Punkin Spunkin posted:Wow I totally forgot about live by night (a shame, the trailer looked cool)  Dr. S.O. Feelgood posted:I don’t think I’ve even heard of The Promise, which is kind of strange considering who’s in it.  No but really, the producers said their main purpose behind making the film was to bring attention to the story so they weren't all that concerned about the money side of things, Dr. S.O. Feelgood posted:That’s kind of disappointing that Colossal made so little, although $15 million is a pretty small budget these days. Oh well, at least we all got a good movie out of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 20:29
|
|
|
I know you purposely excluded international box offices but at least Valerian did okay internationally, King Arthur tanked world wide.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 20:51
|
|
|
Blade Runner doing badly is depressing but unfortunately not surprising at all. Hopefully it follows the same track as the original and home release helps recoup the cost.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 20:53
|
|
|
Rick posted:I know you purposely excluded international box offices but at least Valerian did okay internationally, King Arthur tanked world wide. Yeah that's a fair point. Also I actually enjoyed Valerian a heck of a lot more than King Arthur so I'm more than happy to let King Arthur take the "Biggest flop of 2017" crown.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 20:57
|
|
|
Oh and Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle is doing such good business that it's now Sony's biggest ever film outside of their Spider-Man and James Bond franchises. The 2009 film 2012 is still a tiny fraction ahead of it in worldwide numbers (that film didn't do too well domestically but it did crazy well overseas) but it'll overtake it momentarily. So I guess that means we can expect a new Jumanji sequel/reboot/prequel/re-boot-quel every 2 years from now until the rest of time!
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 21:11
|
|
|
what about the biggest bomb of all the FAILING last jedi lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:11 |
|
|
The Last Jedi did so bad that including it on the list will cloud out all the other movies so it is best left off
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 21:17
|
|