Sunshine, Light, and Joy


This is a post that I've been thinking about for awhile. Recently, I opened up the discussion to other members of the staff to get their feelings on the matter, and their opinions generally matched mine, which is this:

Within the last year or so, there's been a steady increase of negative posts in movie threads. We've always had some heated discussions for some movies, but recently things have not only gotten more histrionic in those threads (generally speaking, the CBM ones), but they've started to spread to other franchises and other movies as well. I'm not talking about out-and-out trolling, I'm talking about members feeling they have to consistently shit on a movie (or studio, or star) simply because they aren't interested in the current project or projects. With every piece of news about a movie, it's now a virtual guarantee that there's a flood of people rushing to say they think it sucks, they don't like the current trailer/tv spot/actor/actress/director/concept. And I get it -- we all have movies we don't like, movies which we think are bad ideas, industry people that just don't appeal to us. But there's a fine line between expressing your opinion about this and doing it so often, with such consistency, that the collective emphasis of all of it basically brings down the entire thread and thus the entire forum.

There's no easy answer to this. We don't want to crush freedom of expression here. But at the same time, the spirit of this forum is for people to have fun talking about the movies they love and the box-office runs they love.

To have fun.

And while it may be fun -- in a sense -- to personally vent about a movie, or to vent at people who dare to enjoy something you don't, it doesn't bring fun to our community. In fact, it generally drags down the overall fun for everyone else. We've had people repeatedly mention to us over the last several months or so that in some cases they don't even bother going into some threads -- even for movies they're curious about! -- because they just don't want to deal with the overall mess those threads contain. And frankly, that matches the personal opinion of most of the staff as well.

So this post is both a request and a warning. 

The request: Next time you feel like taking a dump on a movie (or a topic) for the dozenth time, take a moment to consider whether it's really worth it. People probably already have a good idea of what your attitude about the project is. Maybe just put your posting energy into a movie that you enjoy and love or are excited about.

The warning: The staff is going to be taking a closer look at some of these threads and we'll be more active with temp thread-bans if we think it'll help the overall vibe of the forum. I'd rather we don't have to, but it's not going to constrain any of you too much if you aren't allowed to post about a movie you supposedly don't care about anyway.

Remember the words of Bill and Ted: "Be Excellent to Each Other".

They're just movies, guys. It's about having fun.

Welcome to The Box Office Theory — Forums

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.


Premium Account
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation


Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

3,188 profile views
  1. The movie is good. Possibly really good. It's executed with an amazing precision. It's less of a comedy than Wright's previous films, but there are numerous funny bits. The standout bit, though, is the sound design. It's one of the best aural experiences ever in a film.
  2. 400m could happen with a push, if it gets to 395 or a bit more. Over Spidey probably needs it to just get there, though. WB won't push it if it's a couple million short.
  3. 15-20 years ago, Whedon's work was pretty revolutionary, in terms of portrayal of women in media. Unfortunately, since then it doesn't seem like he's made any advancements in his views, and in some cases may have regressed. The depiction of Black Widow in AoU was a nadir point for his career. Meanwhile, the general social views of entertainment have advanced, making him look like an artifact of a different era. It's possible that this isn't entirely Whedon. The dictates of the MCU mean that there are a lot of quips, which get writers to go into perhaps not great areas because of the volume of jokes needed. Taking away that pressure of that might allow his work to progress again. On the other hand, Whedon himself has something of a philosophy in his writing of going to dark places, breaking characters and doing damage, but making sure to finish it off with a joke for a moment of levity. His work can be tremendously entertaining, and he's got a really good ear for dialogue... but there are valid reasons to be concerned about him doing Batgirl.
  4. Is it actually going to air on the big screen? Because if it's actually going to play in IMAX, oof! Without the appropriate VFX budget to go with the cameras, it'll look so cheap. ... not that the costumes are going to do them any favors.
  5. I don't think you hire Joss Whedon for a lower budget superhero film. It might be based on Simone's run, sure, but that doesn't mean a small budget is necessarily in the offering. Put in this way: Nolan's three Batman films were all pretty grounded, without any of the mysticism and such, and they still all had $150m budgets. Also, it's been a while since I read anything from Simone's run, but I'm pretty sure the first villain she fights in it has superpowers.
  6. I kinda doubt Batgirl will be an $80m production. I could see it in the WW range of $150m, though. GCS could probably be in that same range, same with Suicide Squad 2. Nightwing I could see as the lower budget experiment, though.
  7. Relative to most superhero films, Wonder Woman actually kinda is lower budget. I could see WB trying out more films in the 100-150m range. And maybe a one-off experiment at something in the under-100m Deadpool range, just to see if they can make it work.
  8. I just read Greg Rucka and Nicola Scott's Wonder Woman: Year One today (volume 2 of the new Wonder Woman series). And holy hell it is GOOD. Rucka and Scott are firing on all cylinders and nicely update the character's origin for the present day. Also, it (along with the other half of the series which is Rucka and Liam Sharp) really sets up Barbara Minerva/Cheetah as a fully realized character. If they could, I'd really like them reach out to Rucka to work on the second film with her as the antagonist. Mostly, if you want to see three different but great takes on Wonder Woman's origin, you have the movie, Year One, and Renae De Liz's The Legend of Wonder Woman. (The latter, sadly, was canceled, so we won't get a volume 2... unless people go out and buy it, which they should, because it fucking rocks.)
  9. That's not inevitable. There are 8 other films that did less business and were in over 1000 theaters this past weekend. All of them can be cut. Five of them were doing a third or less of WW's per theater business. it's basically the last film that's going to get the ax, if theaters can swing it. It'll lose a few hundred from normal attrition, sure, but it should still be in about 3500 or more.
  10. I'm predicting a $114,844,116 OW for Homecoming.