|
computer parts posted:It's a trilogy, so maybe only the first movie. At one point the studio was saying that it would be "at least a trilogy" so there could be even more! So we're pretty much set to get one Harry Potter film, one Star Wars film and several MCU + DC films every year from next year onward, right?
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 15:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 17:13 |
|
|
It's not like this is a new thing, look at the 80s and you'll see a couple of franchises that were putting out around a movie a year. Police Academy was a movie a year for 6 years, while Friday the 13th did something similar where they put out 9 movies in 13 years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 15:30
|
|
|
Universal Orlando is going to need to expand the park section between Jurassic Park and Hogwarts/Hogsmeade to cash in on the Jurassic World and HP:FBAWTFT money train.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:Come to think of it, I wonder what's the longest gap between any teaser/trailer and the actual movie. The original LOTR teaser had dates for all 3, right? Dunno what the longest deliberate gap was but some films get held back for a crazy long time. Here's a trailer for All The Boys Love Mandy Lane, a 2006 film which didn't get a theatrical release in the US until 2013 after the Weinsteins sold the distribution rights to a company called Senator Entertainment who then went bankrupt and the film was left in limbo for seven years until the Weinsteins bought it back. And after all those years and years of waiting it apparently turned out that the film wasn't so great anyway. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:Batman v Superman has roughly a year between teaser and movie (release date got moved a bit). There was a poster for Batman vs Superman in the background of I Am Legend (2007). I think it had a 2012 date on it though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:It's not like this is a new thing, look at the 80s and you'll see a couple of franchises that were putting out around a movie a year. Police Academy was a movie a year for 6 years, while Friday the 13th did something similar where they put out 9 movies in 13 years. There were also five Nightmare On Elm Street movies in six years and the first ten Star Trek films were released roughly every two years. But did they produce all those films one by one or did they announce a block of sequels all at once like the upcoming MCU/DC/Star Wars films? Please tell me there's footage of the Warners Bros bigwigs holding a press conference announcing the titles and release dates of the next five Police Academy films to rapturous applause. (I know that the two Back To The Future sequels were filmed together and I seem to recall that they were announced at the same time.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 16:05
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:It's not like this is a new thing, look at the 80s and you'll see a couple of franchises that were putting out around a movie a year. Police Academy was a movie a year for 6 years, while Friday the 13th did something similar where they put out 9 movies in 13 years. This is true, but it's still fun to see visualized:   (It's a little out of date.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 16:23
|
|
|
morestuff posted:This is true, but it's still fun to see visualized:  Edit: gently caress, I just noticed that they had a 2016 Sandman film listed and it looks like that might be accurate. Has there been any news on who the screenwriter might be? Snowglobe of Doom fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Dec 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
it's weird that the nut job and puss in boots get sequels. Are they that popular?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 16:55
|
|
|
Well, at least there's a new Matt Damon/Paul Greengrass Bourne movie for me to look forward to. Everything else, though... I can't summon up any enthusiasm whatever. Seriously, nine loving superhero movies next year?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
Payndz posted:Well, at least there's a new Matt Damon/Paul Greengrass Bourne movie for me to look forward to. Everything else, though... I can't summon up any enthusiasm whatever. Seriously, nine loving superhero movies next year? Sinister Six at least got axed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:HP is huge and this will get the hype train rolling nicely. Episode 7'a first teaser was thanksgiving last year so year+ teasers are nothing new. Last Starfighter was almost two and a half years between trailer and release.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
I like that list. I like superhero movies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
The Saddest Rhino posted:it's weird that the nut job and puss in boots get sequels. Are they that popular? The Nut Job didn't do well and got lovely reviews and it's weird that it's getting a sequel. Puss In Boots is part of the Shrek franchise and it earned over half a billion worldwide but didn't perform so well domestically (well, not so well considering its $120m production budget) and at one point they were considering having Shrek make an appearance in the sequel to booster demo appeal but the movie was cycled back into 'development' after the corporate restructuring at DreamWorks Animation. It did get an animated TV series on Netflix recently. The first cracks with the Puss In Boots sequel appeared after they announced November 2 2018 release date but then Marvel and DC both announced they were releasing films around that time so Dreamworks got cold feet and started shuffling the film around. Edit: The Nut Job 2 was reported to have a Jan 15 2016 release as recently as August but they haven't released a trailer and the Box Office Mojo listing has changed the release date to 'TBD'. Snowglobe of Doom fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Dec 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
victorious posted:There was a poster for Batman vs Superman in the background of I Am Legend (2007). I think it had a 2012 date on it though. That's not quite the same because it was for a different Batman vs Superman movie that never got out of pre-production and was scrapped.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
The Saddest Rhino posted:it's weird that the nut job and puss in boots get sequels. Are they that popular? Movies only need to be popular enough to be profitable, then the sequel gets green lit with half to one quarter the budget and away we go.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
morestuff posted:Sinister Six at least got axed. Looks like Gambit is getting pushed back as well http://www.gamespot.com/articles/x-men-spinoff-movie-gambit-release-date-delayed/1100-6432354/ http://www.christianpost.com/news/gambit-movie-news-cast-spoilers-production-wont-start-until-next-spring-150316/
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:HP is huge and this will get the hype train rolling nicely. Episode 7'a first teaser was thanksgiving last year so year+ teasers are nothing new. I guess that'd count. Other than that, the furthest-in-advance examples I can think of are The Incredibles (teaser in front of Finding Nemo in summer 2003; movie released November 2004) and The Peanuts Movie (which got also got a teaser a good 18 or 19 months in advance).
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
morestuff posted:This is true, but it's still fun to see visualized: I hope they keep the title to "Female Superhero Spiderman Spinoff".
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 20:40
|
|
|
Febreeze posted:Star Trek 09 was shallow as hell but man it was fun. Into Darkness is a huge piece of poo poo. These are the only two Star Trek movies I've seen and I liked them both. Are fans frustrated because they wanted pure sci-fi more than well done summer flicks? Because its hard to make either of those.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
commy gun posted:These are the only two Star Trek movies I've seen and I liked them both. Are fans frustrated because they wanted pure sci-fi more than well done summer flicks? It's harder to justify that is what Star Trek "is" to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
commy gun posted:These are the only two Star Trek movies I've seen and I liked them both. Are fans frustrated because they wanted pure sci-fi more than well done summer flicks. I'm a Star Trek fan and I don't watch the movies. Trek nerds bitching about the movies is like Star Wars nerds bitching about the Christmas Special, it's all just stupid cash-ins to get that lucrative "has never heard of star trek" crowd that I'm sure exists.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:That's not quite the same because it was for a different Batman vs Superman movie that never got out of pre-production and was scrapped. It was for superman returns, and you can tell people really liked superman returns. I still hope he returns as an old man shaking his cane at the aliens. Fresh prince old man. His best work. Tenzarin fucked around with this message at 21:57 on Dec 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:It was for superman returns, and you can tell people really liked superman returns. No, it was a reference to the movie Wolfgang Petersen tried to make in the mid 00s. It and I Am Legend were written by Akiva Goldsman, who meant the reference as a joke.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
Hulk (2003) had a teaser before Spider-Man (2002)
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
morestuff posted:This is true, but it's still fun to see visualized: This is the most depressing post I've seen in a long rear end time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 03:07
|
|
|
BeanpolePeckerwood posted:This is the most depressing post I've seen in a long rear end time. I get a little fatigued even just looking at it, but even assuming all this stuff comes to pass before the music stops, they're pretty easy to avoid if they're not your thing. Then no doubt we'll enter the next bubble - probably video game adaptations or something if Assassin's Creed and Warcraft do business.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 03:16
|
|
|
commy gun posted:These are the only two Star Trek movies I've seen and I liked them both. Are fans frustrated because they wanted pure sci-fi more than well done summer flicks? Not big into ST, but 09 was serviceable. Into Darkness though, gently caress my life the plot in that movie reeks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 03:50
|
|
|
commy gun posted:These are the only two Star Trek movies I've seen and I liked them both. Are fans frustrated because they wanted pure sci-fi more than well done summer flicks? Honestly my biggest issue with ID was that it was basically the first movie all over again. Kirk is an rear end in a top hat hothead who needs to learn how to be a leader...again! Spock is a cold emotionless robot man who needs to learn when to embrace his human side...again! Uhura is there simply for a female lead character and ultimately does nothing of value...again! But even less than last time! Hey look, the bad guy is in A REALLY BIG SCARY SHIP..AGAIN! And all of it was worse this go around. The entire excursion to the Klingon homeworld goes nowhere. They just show up, have a little pew pew battle, and it's done. The looming threat of Klingon war is never really touched on once bad ship shows up (maybe it was sequel set up, but Beyond looks to have nothing to do with kingons already). Khan's plot at the beginning is unnecessary and convoluted. The beginning serves no purpose, Kirk does a dumb thing, gets demoted, and is instantly back in the captains chair after Khan attacks. The old spock cameo is hilariously forced. Starfleet headquarters comes under attack...again! It was sort of fun at times but it just felt like a giant boring repeat trying to move too fast to hide it's stupidity. I was willing to watch the Trek stuff as fun action even as a Trek fan and I liked the first movie. My one real complaint as a star trek fan was that they set up this amazing new universe where anything could happen in the first movie...then just spent the entire film ripping off previous star treks instead of trying anything remotely new.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 06:30
|
|
|
BeanpolePeckerwood posted:This is the most depressing post I've seen in a long rear end time. I'm the Friday the 13th Part 2 in 3D, as though that's actually a notable thing to mention in Anno Domini 2015.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
All hands, brace for impact. Ice Age: Collision Course https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPmm1JhygIo
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 08:08
|
|
|
Peanut President posted:I'm a Star Trek fan and I don't watch the movies. Trek nerds bitching about the movies is like Star Wars nerds bitching about the Christmas Special, it's all just stupid cash-ins to get that lucrative "has never heard of star trek" crowd that I'm sure exists. Star Trek fans don't like Star Trek
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 10:17
|
|
|
Peak ST was TNG
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 10:36
|
|
|
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them's first trailer reveals that Magical America has an awful sense of fashion and little else.
QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 12:59 on Dec 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 11:56
|
|
|
The "trailer" for Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them seems to have been put together so quickly, that they didn't even have time to create German graphics for the localised version. They simply put subtitles in there, which is just ridiculous for a major distributor like Warner. Worldwide day & date launches are so common now that something like this must not happen. But hey, they needed to have this one ready for Star Wars. Just like everyone else. A few dubbing and mastering companies we're working with did the math for tomorrow's launch (in Europe) and there's around 50 new trailers available that every distributor wants to have placed before Star Wars. With an average length of 2,5 minutes that's a little over two hours of content. I'm really curious how much theaters are charging for prime placement during the next weeks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 12:23
|
|
|
Wandle Cax posted:Star Trek fans don't like Star Trek nobody likes Star Trek
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 14:44
|
|
|
commy gun posted:These are the only two Star Trek movies I've seen and I liked them both. Are fans frustrated because they wanted pure sci-fi more than well done summer flicks? At least watch the original Wrath of Khan and you might see why fans are frustrated.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 21:49
|
|
|
Wandle Cax posted:Star Trek fans don't like Star Trek Nah I like Star Trek. There are things that exist besides the High Art of Cinema.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
NarkyBark posted:At least watch the original Wrath of Khan and you might see why fans are frustrated. I tried to watch the rifftrax of it, the movie was a boring dole. Top me off on some special effects, this movie is running low.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 17:13 |
|
|
Tenzarin posted:I tried to watch the rifftrax of it, the movie was a boring dole. Okay, but I think he was suggesting watching the movie. Sir Kodiak fucked around with this message at 23:06 on Dec 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 23:02
|
|
