Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



MariusLecter posted:

Heard people we're upset about the budget for Wonder Woman being lower than what Deadpool got. What's that about?

That sounds like people just looking for something to get upset about. "A superhero movie starring a woman gets less money! :argh:" ignores that they're from different studios, that films are budgeted individually, and that they have to decide on a budget based on expected performance. Could there be some Hollywood sexism mixed in? Sure, but Wonder Woman's $100 million budget is closer to what tentpoles should be budgeted with based on how things have been performing lately.

greatn posted:

Well it certainly doesn't look it. Every photo shows a lot of production value.

The budget is not cheap. This isn't a $20 million film where they're scraping by.

I just wish they'd spend a bit of it on giving her a new theme instead of that god awful one they used for her in Superman vs. Batman.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



greatn posted:

It was 100 million?

I thought Deadpool was something paltry like $35 million.

I don't know if that's accurate. I did a quick google search for Wonder Woman's budget and that's what turned up, but the financials for the production won't really come out until next year, most likely.

Improbable Lobster posted:

Oh gee, I wonder why they might be think that Wonder Woman is going to preform worse than BvS or Suicide Squad. They sure as hell aren't adjusting for BvS and SS's failure.

Honestly, if I was a studio trying to launch a superhero franchise that would face off against a juggernaut (not the Juggernaut), that's the budget I'd go for with the second tier films. In WB's case this would be anything other than Batman, Superman, and Justice League.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



FreudianSlippers posted:

Exactly. In a post-American Pie world where all sex comedies have tits galore and everybody openly swears like a sailor being coy and beating around the bush with innuendo is pointless.

"Beating around the bush", you say? Nudge nudge, wink wink.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



21 Muns posted:

I personally really enjoyed it, but would it be fair to label Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them a flop? It's made considerably less money than anything else in the Harry Potter franchise, and it had four sequels greenlit before it was even released, so expectations were clearly high.

I don't think it's losing money, but it's definitely softer than WB would like.

Skwirl posted:

I think most of the recent blockbuster "failures" post are only failures because the studios expected to do better than the most successful movies ever made, not on par with, better.

If you're an accountant from outer space and looked at BvS with zero cultural context you'd say, "do this more."

I guess that accountant from outer space would know nothing about film distribution and theater operations so they might mistake the gross as a positive thing.

It's always worth mentioning that the box office gross is nowhere near what the studio gets and the production budget is way under what the studio actually spent. And when your production budget is $250 million then you pretty much need a billion dollar gross to be solidly profitable.

Snowglobe of Doom posted:

Fantastic Beasts also went up against Dr Strange and Trolls and then lost ground to Moana and Rogue One, it did pretty well for what it had to work with. But it still fell way short of all the other Harry Potter films and it had a pretty hefty production budget of $180 million so I'm guessing they were expecting it to do somewhat better. It certainly didn't set the world on fire.

The problem for WB is that a lot of people left those theaters saying, "I don't know if I want to see a sequel." We might have another Divergent situation where they're committed to keep making these films that are going to wind up sinking lower and lower with each movie.

Random Stranger fucked around with this message at 04:48 on Jan 3, 2017

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



The MSJ posted:

Last year, people in CD were making fun of people who thought that BvS did bad financially also saying that "people who say this obviously have no idea how Hollywood finances work". Maybe it's different now that's it Hollyweed?

BvS almost definitely made money. But at the same time they spent so much that I'm sure they're also sweating bullets over its performance.

So both are kind of true. It did very well in that it needed to sell a shitton of tickets in order to just break even. And it also did poorly enough that the studio isn't going to be happy with the return on the extreme amounts of cash they dumped into it.

Vince MechMahon posted:

The next one is going to have Dumbledore though, right? That'll probably get some people back.

The second film is generally the make or break moment for a franchise. Sometimes you gain momentum after the first movie has reached saturation (which has been happening a lot lately) and sometimes you lose as people go, "Eh, I'll wait for Netflix."

Random Stranger fucked around with this message at 05:40 on Jan 3, 2017

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



Powaqoatse posted:

Spoiler for the first movie: the aliens suck out people's brains to use for their alien tech or something, I forgot the details. But I guess they can't suck brains through a motorcycle helmet

E: Oh yeah there's bright lights too

I was thinking Skyline was two different movies and trying to sort out the incredibly stupid people watching stuff from an apartment alien invasion movie from the incredibly stupid couple runs from aliens and he turns into a superhero in the last shot movie (I'm not using spoilers for a seven year old bad movie). Then I realized they were the same film.

Whatever else happens, there is no way that Beyond Skyline is as terrible as the first movie.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



Corek posted:

Hey Hbomberguy: Rob Liefeld's Extreme Universe has been optioned for SEVEN movies by Akiva Goldsman.

http://deadline.com/2017/01/deadpool-rob-liefeld-extreme-universe-movie-deal-fundamental-films-graham-king-akiva-goldsman-1201877766/

lollll

Well, if there was any doubt we're entering the era of 90's nostalgia they're gone now.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



Electromax posted:

The trick is to just pay yourself to be distributor and promoter via cross-industry synergy.

While they can be the distributor in the US, studios often cannot be overseas distributors by law. It's one of the major reasons that international gross only gives back a small amount to the studio.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



Peanut President posted:

Man my english teacher showed Monty Python's Holy Grail, I feel robbed now. There's no tits in that movie whatsoever!

Same, though as a good nerd I already had it memorized.

The movie I was shown the most in school was Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves. I hated that movie even before I had to watch it four more times.


Could have been worse, though. In elementary school they showed us Pete's Dragon repeatedly.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



got any sevens posted:

I'm surprised there isnt a modernish version of Beauty and the Beast, like set during ww1 or 2 with french girl/german officer, or like israel/palestine kids, or something halfway to romeo/juliet.

Have your heard of the film Beastly. :v:

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



TF2 HAT MINING RIG posted:

Given the success of Underworld and Resident Evil, I wonder how well the Matrix series would have done if they had just started pumping out steadily dumber sequels instead of stopping after two.

If the films had come out six or seven years later, we'd be talking about how Matrix 8 was a return to form for the series.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



LORD OF BOOTY posted:

I kind of agree? My expectations were in the absolute toilet and it was a decently enjoyable, if super clunky and flawed, movie.

And my response to Suicide Squad was a fantastic concept completely squandered every step of the way and utter garbage.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



Davros1 posted:

And my response was "At least it was better than MoS and BvS"

You know, I'm genuinely having difficulty deciding if Suicide Squad was worse than Snyder's movies. I think I'm landing on the "it was worse" side entirely on the basis that at least Snyder was actually trying to say something. He did a terrible job of it and his choice of messages was god awful, but it wasn't a completely soulless mess.

Tars Tarkas posted:

Which famous ape movie gets remade next? If you had Every Which Way But Loose, be sure to mark your bingo square!

I literally said aloud, "What? Why?" when I read that. There's not even name recognition to go with it. You could just make any orangutan buddy movie, call it whatever you like, and it would have the exact same impact.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



Maxwell Lord posted:

This is officially the part of nerd movies that even I don't give a poo poo about.

If a movie I like makes money and that means they make more movies like it, good. If not, too bad.

I'm really interested in the business side of the industry, but even I didn't read that mess.

Casimir Radon posted:

Is the DC franchise going to fail this early?

Probably not. It's sputtering, but not in a way that marks it as immediately doomed. They'll keep trying since it has a built in return for each film, though they might start getting cheaper.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



Pesky Splinter posted:

That said, Suicide Squad did very well, despite the fact it was a) about relatively unknown characters, sans the Joker, Harley Quinn and Will Smith, and b) complete trash, so what do I know. :shrug:

As much as Suicide Squad was justifiably reviled around here, I've heard a lot of people talking about how "awesome" it was. Naturally, these are all people with awful taste in films, but if there's one thing that the blockbuster model has taught us it's that there's a lot of people with bad taste in movies and they're willing to spend lots of money on them.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



The Saddest Rhino posted:

Suicide Squad is groundbreaking for featuring a superhero team which has to fix a disaster they created themselves (Age of Ultron arguably also does this, although at least there are the non mutant siblings to gently caress things up to complicate the disaster) , just like the Trump administration so far.

I think you'll find that superheroes fixing a disaster they created was themselves was one of the very few "action" scenes in the 2005 Fantastic Four movie.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



MisterBibs posted:

But your average person literally wouldn't know what Green Lantern is if a real one came down from up high and slapped a ring on them. When it comes to DC, their public attention is probably just Superman and Batman. Green Lantern has no Q score, or whatever it's called.

I'd include Wonder Woman in that since she's had a place in the public consciousness much wider than her popularity in comics ever was.

Kind of an interesting aside here, but Wonder Woman comics were a black hole of quality for decades and were notoriously poor selling. The thing is that when the rights to make Wonder Woman comics went to DC, part of the deal was that they had to keep publishing Wonder Woman comics or the rights would revert. So they kept the character in print but for long stretches of time it was the dumping ground for the bottom of the barrel creative people. There were a few bright spots where some innovative newcomer got on the book for a short time or when some editor decided to try to change the situation, but in general they were awful. Eventually the contract was renegotiated so now DC owns the rights to Wonder Woman outright and without the obligation to keep it going there's been a lot more incentive to make good Wonder Woman comics.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



Baronash posted:

Gettysburg.

Which you should definitely watch. In general it's one of the greatest war films ever made and that scene in the screenshot is the most memorable moment in the film (and the line is what he actually said). The character in the shot is General Pickett and if you know even a tiny bit of Civil War history then you know what has happened.

The sequel, OTOH, you can ignore.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



I'll have you all know that I am blue/gray color blind and you are all oppressing me by pointing out that shameful error.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



Cacator posted:

They still use fax machines and those old paper credit card copiers.

That's because Japan is pretty much anti-credit card due to some really terrible banking laws. The Japanese banking system is essentially stuck in the 19th century with everything that implies.

Well, no debtor's prisons. But they will prevent their employees from adding extra coal to the fires warming their offices!

Random Stranger fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Feb 8, 2017

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



TF2 HAT MINING RIG posted:

Spaceballs is pretty bad imo.

You are correct, though since it was Mel Brooks he fit in several really good bits that almost save the film even if 80% of it sucked (or blew).

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



well why not posted:

This one looks interesting. It's probably high time he picked some less-demanding roles as he's pushing 70 this year. Scoot McNairy is quite good, too.

I hope Arnold gets an Oscar one day. A real one - he's probably a shoe-in for a lifetime achievement at this stage. I also liked his drama beard.

I don't think he's good enough to even get the standard career appreciation Oscar. He just can't carry a dramatic role very well and that's what the academy looks for when they toss someone a "Best Supporting" for their career rather than the actual role. But an honorary award would be cool given the scope of his career.

I can't say I think very much of any of his films since he left government. Even in Maggie which is probably the best film he's done in the past few years, I thought he was a bit lost in the role.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



muscles like this! posted:

Everything about the alien stuff was so bizarre.

Also in the first movie its pretty clear that the "holy ground" thing isn't tradition seeing as even the Kurgen follows it and he's a guy who doesn't seem to care about anything like that.

I thought there was a bit of a shake or at least scary noise when it looked like violence was about to break out in the church, but it's been a while since I watched the film.

As bad as Zeist was, the Renegade Cut doesn't improve Highlander 2 by cutting it out. Mainly because it just makes the whole film even less coherent than it was.


Anyway, I'm definitely pro-Highlander reboot since it's a perfect example of great concept that wasn't executed as well as it could have been. But if the soundtrack isn't heavy with Queen then they've definitely hosed it up. Yeah, it's obvious and on the nose, but the music was such a significant part of the film that just having a generic score with a reprise of Princes of the Universe over the end credits it'll feel wrong.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



21 Muns posted:

What if the movie's soundtrack is made entirely of Queen songs that weren't written for Highlander

Then I applaud them for sheer audacity and recognize it as the greatest artistic achievement of mankind.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



Snowglobe of Doom posted:

100% guaranteed that at least the teaser will have a slow piano cover of Princes of the Universe.

I'm going to bet that the teaser uses the slow version of "Everybody Wants to Rule the World" because some studio exec figures they're the same song.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



Lobok posted:

Wasn't meant as a rebuttal! I remembered that shot too so I went to go find it so that others could enjoy it. Also there's a dude that he *snaps* in half. Oddly enough reading up on it my memory wasn't jogged about the rest of the movie. My memory is just the surgery and Kong killing people.

I saw King Kong Lives in theaters as a child as well (which I guess means nearly half of all the people who saw it are posting in this thread :v: ) and the only thing I remember is the surgery scene. I've thought about trying to dig up copies of those Kong movies just to check them out again, but there's no way I'm paying to watch them.

I kind of liked the grimy King Kong ride they had at Universal Studios. Much like the Jaws ride, it was cheesy and straight out of the 1970's but I was still amused by it.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



Gonz posted:

Yeah, The Fifth Element cost 90 mil and made almost 300 mil.

In 1997 dollars.

And it had legs after the fact so in the end it did pretty well.

Though I am expecting Valarian to be about the same as Fifth Element: great visual design and absolutely terrible everything else. That would match the original comics pretty well. I will also predict that even though it will be a lovely movie, it will be defended by nerds on the Internet for years.

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009



Rageaholic Monkey posted:

I'm very excited for this because I loved Force Awakens, but I can absolutely see why you wouldn't be. Still, though, it's not Colin Trevorrow, so that's a big win for everyone.

The Force Awakens was perfectly adequate, which is pretty much high praise these days for a tentpole release.

Electromax posted:

e: plus a sprinkle of "SA is very jaded and cynical to begin with"

We are the hipsters of nerds.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Random Stranger
Nov 27, 2009




"Jays shall not replace us!"

  • Locked thread