|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jun 11, 2018 14:21:39 GMT -5
I don't see any irony at all.
If you want to listen to their opinions on the quality of something, that's fine. Caveat emptor.
If you think you can extrapolate business models in mass media from a few hundred people on the internet you have some serious thinking errors.
|
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Jun 11, 2018 15:31:02 GMT -5
Fans and Hollywood are all screwed up with making motion pictures. In the good old days (yes I sound like one of those old farts, because I am one) Hollywood knew that in-between every big/giant/colossal very expensive movie which might fail that they should cushion the expenditure with some lesser costing movie or movies. Used to be a time when small budget movies were the filler for slow months or weeks in theaters. Anymore all Hollywood can see are the immediate financial rewards for a movie instantly the opening weekend or it is a failure. Even when the studio said go ahead and spend a shitload of dollars on effects or cast because if it says Star Wars it MUST be a cash cow.
Universal learned the hard way. The Tom Cruise Mummy sunk faster than the Titanic did. Same will happen eventually to a MARVEL branded movie as well. There is no guarantee with making a movie that it will recoup the cost of it's own making. That is the hope but not necessarily what will occur because the FANS are fickle, self indulgent and feel entitled anymore and want what they want, when they want and a studio cannot be certain exactly it is that a FAN wants anymore. Movie sales are a crap shot at best, hoping you come up a winner. I don't need or want EVERY movie to be a big budgeted special effects monster of a movie every weekend of the year. Give me some breathing space please so I can watch a smaller intimate movie or enjoy a quick B Western or hokey comedy or cheaply made horror (remember those days?) and I can then go back and see the big movie for a 2nd or 3rd time. Now the returns are measured in days or even the opening day expecting spontaneous pay off.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jun 12, 2018 21:35:51 GMT -5
I strongly suspect that movie will be Captain Marvel.. I just don't think enough people care about her. Anyway, Solo.. saw it today. It was definitely a fun movie for what it was. It's hard to have a really good movie when there's a very defined plot path, but they did pretty good with it. Beckett was very entertaining, and a great mentor figure. I appreciated the Easter Eggs, which didn't mess anything up really, just fun shout outs (the dancing god, the death head thing from the Brian Daley novel. Beckett wearing Lando's Jabba's palace disguise from RoTJ, etc). The nerd in me did freak out at a few things, though... -What's up with not having a proper crawler opening? They spent a gazillion dollars on this movie... they couldn't spring for the traditional opening? - the Sabacc cards drove me nuts... why not make they shiftable like they're supposed to be? I mean , they sorta implied that the cards do shift, as they are supposed to, but the were clearly just regular cards. I mean, all you need is a bunch of ipods dressed up.. come on! - They kinda broke the timeline with Chewey being 196 years old... he was a teenager in his appearance in the Clone Wars cartoon... unless we're to believe that it takes Wookies 150 years to get to our teen-equilvalent. If that was the case, though they'd like like 1000 years. I know, it's all pretend, but it lacks a certain internal logic that annoys me. There were a couple other plot things that are spoiler-y, that I will refrain from mentioning right for a bit  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2018 6:53:26 GMT -5
After seeing Solo I didn't think it was a very good film. It did have some funny moments but it seems a rather pointless addition to the Star Wars franchise to me. Well, it'll make Disney plenty of $$$ so maybe it's not that pointless to them... but it's not a film any Star Wars fan would lose sleep over if they didn't get to watch it. Bland (with a capital B) aptly describes this film for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Captain on Jun 13, 2018 10:02:53 GMT -5
I strongly suspect that movie will be Captain Marvel.. I just don't think enough people care about her I disagree that it will be Captain Marvel. She's going to be integral to the resolution of the Thanos storyline, and even though her solo movie seems to be a weird 1980s period piece out of step with the rest of the MCU, there's going to be something in it that explains how she is critical to defeating Thanos. The letdown Marvel movie is going to happen in the first wave of films after Avengers 4. Maybe Guardians 3 or Dr. Strange 2 or the first Bucky-Cap movie, but unless they're clearly building to another huge event movie like Infinity War going forward, the next phase of films are going to be seen as disposable like Solo seemingly has been and even middling reviews might be enough to sink one (although they will still make a crapload of money, just not a ridiculous crapton of it). |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,201 
|
Post by Confessor on Jun 14, 2018 7:02:25 GMT -5
-What's up with not having a proper crawler opening? They spent a gazillion dollars on this movie... they couldn't spring for the traditional opening? It would appear that the spin off films don't have the iconic opening crawl. Rogue One also began without one. |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jun 14, 2018 7:42:30 GMT -5
-What's up with not having a proper crawler opening? They spent a gazillion dollars on this movie... they couldn't spring for the traditional opening? It would appear that the spin off films don't have the iconic opening crawl. Rogue One also began without one. I don't recall Rogue One not having it, so I guess I got over it quickly |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jun 14, 2018 7:44:46 GMT -5
I strongly suspect that movie will be Captain Marvel.. I just don't think enough people care about her I disagree that it will be Captain Marvel. She's going to be integral to the resolution of the Thanos storyline, and even though her solo movie seems to be a weird 1980s period piece out of step with the rest of the MCU, there's going to be something in it that explains how she is critical to defeating Thanos. The letdown Marvel movie is going to happen in the first wave of films after Avengers 4. Maybe Guardians 3 or Dr. Strange 2 or the first Bucky-Cap movie, but unless they're clearly building to another huge event movie like Infinity War going forward, the next phase of films are going to be seen as disposable like Solo seemingly has been and even middling reviews might be enough to sink one (although they will still make a crapload of money, just not a ridiculous crapton of it). Maybe, but if you just need a plot point or two, you can get that online easy. It'll depend how it gets marketed, I think. I do think if they did do something stupid like set the sequels before infinity war (like some people are posting on clickbait articles), that would massively flop, but I don't think there's any real chance of that happening... they're just getting that out there people will have a small bit of doubt everyone's coming back. |
|
|
|
Post by aquagoat on Jun 16, 2018 18:03:54 GMT -5
It's clearly fatigue from too many movies. That's why the Marvel movies keep tanking. Oh...wait...they don't. But superhero movies are a vast genre. Let's look at some examples: Captain America is a WWII serial-cliffhanger style movie. Spidey Homecoming is a high school John Hughes style comedy amidst the action scenes. Guardians of the Galaxy is like Red Dwarf with a huge budget. Thor is Norse mythology with laser beams, and by the time you get to Ragnarok it's a crazy comedy as well. Hulk is Jekyll & Hyde meets Frankenstein. Marvel can, and have, combined different genres for their various films. Star Wars can't do that. Star Wars is always <iframe width="22.660000000000082" height="3.0400000000000063" style="position: absolute; width: 22.660000000000082px; height: 3.0400000000000063px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none;left: 15px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_22377130" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="22.660000000000082" height="3.0400000000000063" style="position: absolute; width: 22.66px; height: 3.04px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 1057px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_49964860" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="22.660000000000082" height="3.0400000000000063" style="position: absolute; width: 22.66px; height: 3.04px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 15px; top: 93px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_37326156" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="22.660000000000082" height="3.0400000000000063" style="position: absolute; width: 22.66px; height: 3.04px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 1057px; top: 93px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_24202714" scrolling="no"></iframe> action-adventure space opera. Where's the high-school comedy Star Wars, or the Jekyll & Hyde Star Wars, or the Ragnarok style comedy? Doesn't exist, because you can't do that with Star Wars. And the examples I used are just Marvel films. If you want to go further.... Batman Returns: gothic German expressionist action adventure - can't do that in Star Wars. X-Men (2000): sober, foreboding sci-fi thriller Unbreakable: almost action-less tale of a normal man excepting the incredible And so on. None of this can be done with Star Wars. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jul 1, 2018 10:06:27 GMT -5
After 36 days this movie has made 205K . It looks like a bomb by SW standards. I'm sure it cost about that much just to make it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jul 1, 2018 10:08:00 GMT -5
-What's up with not having a proper crawler opening? They spent a gazillion dollars on this movie... they couldn't spring for the traditional opening? It would appear that the spin off films don't have the iconic opening crawl. Rogue One also began without one. It could also be the reaction to replacing the known actors for unknowns. Nothing you could do because Harrison Ford is pushing 80. |
|
|
|
Post by aquagoat on Jul 4, 2018 15:39:10 GMT -5
In retrospect, it is odd that you'd make a Han Solo film without Harrison Ford. Everything great about the character comes from Ford's performance.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,201
|
Post by Confessor on Jul 4, 2018 15:49:26 GMT -5
In retrospect, it is odd that you'd make a Han Solo film without Harrison Ford. Everything great about the character comes from Ford's performance. Well, problems with Harrison Ford's age aside, I kinda know what you mean. Sometimes I think that everything great about Star Wars comes from Ford's performance. The Force Awakens I'm looking at you! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2018 16:05:22 GMT -5
In retrospect, it is odd that you'd make a Han Solo film without Harrison Ford. Everything great about the character comes from Ford's performance. I am sure people said the same thing about Bond and Connery, but that seemed to work out. I love Ford as Solo (and Indy) but the new kid did okay in the role and aside from TFA Ford himself hasn't been much of a box office draw in over a decade. His films have only done fair to middling at best (including Blade Runner 2049 which was supposedly highly anticipated and critically acclaimed) in recent years, so I don't think the box office receipts would have been much different if ford had been in the role simply on his draw alone. -M |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jul 5, 2018 0:38:08 GMT -5
I agree with MRP, while it would have been fun to have Ford in the movie, that wouldn't have been a draw. I think it's a fact that everyone who was interested in the movie pretty much new what was going to happen... we're past the time when people flock in droves to an origin story because they are sci fi (or Superhero) starved.
You can just toss out a movie from a successful property and roll in the money.. the bar has been raised.. it has to be a GOOD movie now.
|
|
