|
Bartimaeus series was better anyway.
|
# ? Nov 9, 2020 14:43 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 05:55 |
Desperado Bones posted:I've seen a lot of Harry Potter fans saying they are gonna boycott the new movie. They seem to be hardcore stans of Johnny Depp. To be honest, I wonder it they will stand to their word. I really want to see that franchise flop and Rowling have a bigot meltdown and then vanish in to obscurity. Boycotting over this and not the Rowling poo poo is certainly an interesting look, but hey, whatever gets less people giving Rowling and WB money over the franchise is fine by me.
|
|
# ? Nov 9, 2020 14:47 |
|
Wasn't the last one already a flop?
|
# ? Nov 9, 2020 15:10 |
John Wick of Dogs posted:Wasn't the last one already a flop? Flop is probably putting it too strongly. It cost more than the first to make, and made less, though. The original had a budget of $180 million and made $814 million worldwide. The sequel had a budget of $200 million and made $654 million world wide. So more than 3 times it's budget back, and hard to call a "flop", but considerably less than the original, so I can see WB starting to see the potential for diminishing returns. And domestically the second one only made $159 million, which is less than it's budget, and never a good sign, and actually kind of a disaster. I actually just assumed it did better than that before I looked it up. That's definitely not good. thrawn527 fucked around with this message at 15:53 on Nov 9, 2020 |
|
# ? Nov 9, 2020 15:50 |
|
I only tolerate Rowling's work continuing to be made so long as it gets ragged on by commentators like Jenny Nicholson.
|
# ? Nov 9, 2020 15:59 |
|
Alhazred posted:The movies are poo poo anyway, so nobody is losing much by boycotting them. I was gonna say, does it count as a boycott if I wasn't going to watch it anyways?
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 07:25 |
|
I thought the first FB was pretty good and essentially carried by Dan Fogler in what should have been a breakout role. All of that and more was ruined by Queenie becoming an insane mind-rapey Nazi dumbass in the second movie.
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 07:54 |
|
Sorry if this is derailing, but I cannot help but share this related news: https://twitter.com/CultureCrave/status/1325894891159707648 EIGHT. FIGURES.
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 08:31 |
AceOfFlames posted:Sorry if this is derailing, but I cannot help but share this related news: I would have quit, too.
|
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 13:21 |
|
That's a lot of fancy wine.
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 14:38 |
|
Getting paid for doing nothing is great
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 14:44 |
|
thrawn527 posted:Flop is probably putting it too strongly. It cost more than the first to make, and made less, though. The original had a budget of $180 million and made $814 million worldwide. The sequel had a budget of $200 million and made $654 million world wide. So more than 3 times it's budget back, and hard to call a "flop", but considerably less than the original, so I can see WB starting to see the potential for diminishing returns. And domestically the second one only made $159 million, which is less than it's budget, and never a good sign, and actually kind of a disaster. I was about to joke that for a kid franchise with diminishing returns on #2 maybe Fox can take #3 like how they got Voyage of the Dawn Treader from Disney years ago before Disney owned Fox.
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 15:01 |
|
thrawn527 posted:I would have quit, too. He didn't quit, he got fired.
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 19:48 |
Skwirl posted:He didn't quit, he got fired. Well, he was asked to quit, and he agreed to. He could have said no and forced them to fire him. But if he had filmed one scene, but would be paid his entire paycheck, yeah, I would have agreed to quit, too, was my point. Easy money.
|
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 20:09 |
|
thrawn527 posted:Well, he was asked to quit, and he agreed to. He could have said no and forced them to fire him. But if he had filmed one scene, but would be paid his entire paycheck, yeah, I would have agreed to quit, too, was my point. Easy money. I don't think he'd be getting the 8 figures if he'd quit without being asked. It was probably something like "quit now and we'll still pay you, make us fire you and there will be litigation."
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 20:18 |
Skwirl posted:I don't think he'd be getting the 8 figures if he'd quit without being asked. It was probably something like "quit now and we'll still pay you, make us fire you and there will be litigation." I'm not disagreeing with any of this.
|
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 20:26 |
|
Didn’t WB have to do the same thing with Matt Smith? I’m pretty sure he was originally signed as the lead for the three movies but then didn’t do it for whatever reason but still got paid for it.
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 20:56 |
wizardofloneliness posted:Didn’t WB have to do the same thing with Matt Smith? I’m pretty sure he was originally signed as the lead for the three movies but then didn’t do it for whatever reason but still got paid for it. If that's true, WB is being hilariously bad at managing the budget for these movies when it comes to the cast.
|
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 21:18 |
|
That happens all the time in Hollywood, and not only for scandalous reasons. Marlon Wayans was cast as Robin in Batman Returns, but the character was dropped from the script. He still got paid and still gets residual checks. They even made an action figure of him with a high-top hairstyle that they recolored to be white once he was written out of the movie.
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 21:30 |
|
Didn't Nic Cage and Tim Burton both get 8 figures for Superman Lives?
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 22:24 |
Groovelord Neato posted:Didn't Nic Cage and Tim Burton both get 8 figures for Superman Lives? I mean, probably, but that movie is a legend in the halls of "movies that hosed it up".
|
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 22:45 |
|
Groovelord Neato posted:Didn't Nic Cage and Tim Burton both get 8 figures for Superman Lives? i love that a movie that never happened most likely funded his pyramid
|
# ? Nov 10, 2020 23:05 |
|
wizardofloneliness posted:Didn’t WB have to do the same thing with Matt Smith? I’m pretty sure he was originally signed as the lead for the three movies but then didn’t do it for whatever reason but still got paid for it. I think that was Terminator: Genesys not Fantastic Beasts. They cut like 95% of his screen time but still paid him like he was a lead.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2020 02:35 |
|
Human Tornada posted:That happens all the time in Hollywood, and not only for scandalous reasons. Marlon Wayans was cast as Robin in Batman Returns, but the character was dropped from the script. He still got paid and still gets residual checks. They even made an action figure of him with a high-top hairstyle that they recolored to be white once he was written out of the movie. I don't really have anything against Chris O'Donnell, but I really would have preferred Wayans. Also hosed up the recast black actor with white ones twice for Batman Forever.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2020 03:35 |
Macdeo Lurjtux posted:I think that was Terminator: Genesys not Fantastic Beasts. They cut like 95% of his screen time but still paid him like he was a lead. This apparently has happened to matt smith several times since leaving Who, which is kind of hilarious. Apparently he was supposed to be sheev jr in Star Wars!
|
|
# ? Nov 11, 2020 03:46 |
|
Completely unrelated with this thread and I'm sorry, this is will be my last post about Johnny Depp!! : There are rumors that Mad Mikkelsen will take Johnny Depp's place, and it irks me because they are clearly trying not to lose the fans and to latch on Mads' fanbase, which is quite loyal (Fannibals still exist and are quite active, and they still keep making their small Hannibal Con -not this year of course-). Anyways, that's all I'm gonna post for now. We should get back to this thread's subject.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2020 05:45 |
|
The annoying thing about the whole franchise is that Grindelwald was a better villain as the guy that he was pretending to be - they should have just stuck with that guy and said Grindelwald was using a fake name or something. When he revealed as a much more generic looking evil guy that was much less interesting, as the disguise had everyone fooled and could have been a more realistic that "Hey, maybe someone can be a manipulative narcissist and he won't look obviously evil so people will trust him"
|
# ? Nov 11, 2020 08:44 |
|
BioEnchanted posted:The annoying thing about the whole franchise is that Grindelwald was a better villain as the guy that he was pretending to be - they should have just stuck with that guy and said Grindelwald was using a fake name or something. When he revealed as a much more generic looking evil guy that was much less interesting, as the disguise had everyone fooled and could have been a more realistic that "Hey, maybe someone can be a manipulative narcissist and he won't look obviously evil so people will trust him" But then you'd have a Harry Potter thing where you can't tell someone is evil just by looking at them and we know in that universe the only thing more important than magic is phrenology.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2020 08:48 |
|
Any series where the main villain vapes the holocaust should probably be put out to pasture.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2020 14:14 |
|
BioEnchanted posted:The annoying thing about the whole franchise is that Grindelwald was a better villain as the guy that he was pretending to be - they should have just stuck with that guy and said Grindelwald was using a fake name or something. When he revealed as a much more generic looking evil guy that was much less interesting, as the disguise had everyone fooled and could have been a more realistic that "Hey, maybe someone can be a manipulative narcissist and he won't look obviously evil so people will trust him" Maybe I wasn't paying attention, but is there anywhere in that movie where they show what Grindelwald looks like before the big reveal? Because when they undid the disguise all I could think of was the Scooby gang going "It was Johnny Depp all along!". And that really undercut the dramatic tension. Because I was laughing my rear end off.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2020 18:35 |
|
MacheteZombie posted:Depp lost his libel suit and it was ruled a pet likely pooped in his bed*, not Amber Heard. Adding to this - apparently in UK law, the side accused of libel has to prove their truthfulness. The Sun did so, overwhelmingly. But no, Depp stans, please do continue to insist Amber Heard is the literal Hitlerstalin based on an audio snippet released by Depp.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2020 01:03 |
|
Vagabundo posted:Adding to this - apparently in UK law, the side accused of libel has to prove their truthfulness. The Sun did so, overwhelmingly. If you want to defend Amber Heard go ahead, but The Sun is a poo poo paper: https://www.quora.com/Why-is-The-Sun-newspaper-so-disliked-in-the-UK-is-there-a-specific-reason
|
# ? Nov 12, 2020 01:09 |
|
British libel laws are incredibly stupid.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2020 01:14 |
|
Yeah...you kinda don't want to hold The Sun has a bastion of journalism.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2020 01:14 |
|
Vagabundo posted:Adding to this - apparently in UK law, the side accused of libel has to prove their truthfulness. The Sun did so, overwhelmingly. You're getting an awful lot of mileage out of the word "apparently" there. The UK libel laws are loving bad in all the worst ways and The Sun is so bad you can't even find newsagents willing to sell it in certain parts of the country.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2020 01:18 |
|
The Sun told lies so awful about the victims of the Hillsborough Stadium Disaster the entirety of the city of Liverpool still boycott it today, decades later. That said, people rigidly defending either party in this case are probably dumb.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2020 01:36 |
|
It does seem strange that Heard's sister recanting her testimony didn't sink the case, unless I'm missing something. Either the judge got a lot of information that didn't make it out to the public or he took a really weird stance on it. And yeah, I was wondering about the judgment since it's usually really easy to win a libel case in England.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2020 01:43 |
As was said earlier in this thread by someone else, I’ve legit lost the plot in the Depp v Heard story. I have no idea who to believe or blame here. Which is why I’m largely not taking a side, because it’s impossible to know what the gently caress is going on (other than to know that WB is doing the worst damage control possible by making Depp quit). So maybe calm the gently caress down? (Not everyone needs to, but still) thrawn527 fucked around with this message at 01:54 on Nov 12, 2020 |
|
# ? Nov 12, 2020 01:50 |
|
thrawn527 posted:As was said earlier in this thread by someone else, I’ve legit lost the plot in the Depp v Heard story. I have no idea who to believe or blame here. Which is why I’m largely not taking a side, because it’s impossible to know what the gently caress is going on. This is basically the goal in aggregate with the public of this dog and pony show involving releasing things to the press and libel trials and so on. Depp leaving FB is probably a good move on his part because between Rowling's TERFiness and the general stink of the second one in particular, the third one is probably going to fail, and then what will people think? "Should've kept Depp!"
|
# ? Nov 12, 2020 02:04 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 05:55 |
|
All I have disagreed with about the Depp case in here is a person saying "Depp never hit Heard," despite a judge ruling that yes, he did. That doesn't exclude Heard from hitting or otherwise abusing him in return, but you have to understand that just as Heard released information to the press to discredit Depp or paint him in a particular light, that tape recording was released by Depp and his lawyers to discredit Heard, and should be assessed in that light. It is clearly a very messy case.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2020 02:22 |