Jump to content

Premium and Gold members please go to this thread:

 

http://forums.boxofficetheory.com/topic/24403-paid-perks/

 

Copper and Silver Accounts please PM me if you have paid past August 1st and care about the "Custom Avatar" (or really larger avatar) perk.

George Parr

Free Account
  • Content count

    490
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,195 Likes

About George Parr

  • Rank
    Indie Sensation

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  1. Dunkirk | NOLANNNNN!!!!

    And how is that? The content still needs to appeal to the audience. Just because there is little dialogue doesn't mean the audience will automatically love it. If you made a docu-drama about a completely boring story with next to no dialogue in it, it wouldn't be considered a masterpiece either. So no, it being based on a true story and having little dialogue does not mean that it would have to be astonishingly bad to go below 90%.
  2. Dunkirk | NOLANNNNN!!!!

    A movie being based on a historic event doesn't automatically make it great. The story itself could be boring, you could have failed completely at translating the story into a proper script or failed at bringing it to the screen in an interesting way. The actors could screw up or simply not be good actors in the first place. The characters could fall flat, either because they aren't interesting to begin with, or because they were portrayed in a bad way. The editing could turn the movie into a mess. The list goes on and on. There is nothing in a "historical story" that requires the movie to be astonishingly bad to go below 90%.
  3. I don't see how that is supposed to be the case. TFA was huge in the markets Star Wars was already huge in before. And it did not match other franchises in areas where Star Wars was not that popular before. The odds of increasing further in the markets it was already big in are close to none, unless the Dollar collapses in the next few months. The markets were it was not all that big do not really have the potential to bring in a lot more money, apart from China. TFA had the perfect storm in terms of getting the audience in its established markets to go and see it. Such a thing usually does not happen again for the next sequel. The only way for TLJ to even have a remote chance of increasing its foreign box office, would be a Furious 7/8 like explosion in China, which couldn't be less likely, seeing how TFA wasn't popular at all in that country. Though come to think of it, even the ~390m or so F7/8 made wouldn't likely be enough to make up for the losses that will come elsewhere, and that is three times as much as TFA made there.
  4. Why would the filmmakers care where the story would eventually head to? They had the books the movies were based upon, something that wasn't in the books but would be of some value later on still is not relevent at that specific point in time. I'm not quite sure where the Ron comment is coming from. The only question was who Hermione would end up with, Harry or Ron. Ron was the original plan, which Rowling stuck to, but after it was finished she thought Harry would have been a better fit. There wasn't even the slightest hint at a gay relationship between Harry and Ron. It would make no sense whatsoever to reboot these movies. The original actors have done well in their roles, and their faces have become associated with their characters. There is no way you are going to find someone who will be a better Snape than Alan Rickman was. There is a reason why Rowling went out of her way to inform him about the fate of his character way before the story was over. You can't ignore the possibility, that some of the later developments in the books were based on character-connections in the movies. It's not like you could just add more and more stuff either. The books got longer and longer, with no possible way of keeping all but the most important stuff in the movies. JK Rowling wasn't exactly disconnected from the development of the movies either. They didn't wander around blindly, hoping that what they were doing was somehow in line with what Rowling would be doing. If they didn't know where something was going to head to, they could either go and ask her, or leave it open. It's not like they needed to imply stuff that didn't exist in the book they were currently filming.
  5. I think the first part could happen, it would be tough, but at this point I wouldn't proclaim that it couldn't possibly happen. But I very much doubt that we will see any increases in the foreign box office. TFA pulled in people that normally wouldn't go and see it, it's unlikely to keep that up for a sequel. The movie made more than 1 billion internationally without even taking China into consideration. That's far bigger than anything we have seen apart from the last two Cameron movies. I'd definately expect it to go down quite a bit basically everywhere. It would need a Furious 7 like performance in China to top TFA internationally, and that's just not going to happen. I think it would already be quite lucky if TLJ would keep the level of TFA in China.
  6. If there had been a new teaser, they would have turned it into a small 'event' of its own, with either a tv-premiere or online-release first, not have it suddenly appear in cinemas without any word of a release. After the recent bad news about the Han Solo movie, they wouldn't just release a new teaser without any fanfare, instead they would have used it to set the news-cycle for the day. I guess the most likely scenario is a behind-the-scenes montage at the Disney Convention, plus another teaser maybe in August. That's when Rogue One had its second trailer as well. The alternative option would be having a trailer instead of a bts-reel at D23, but at this point I don't think that is particularly likely.
  7. Biggest drop for a sequel??

    The number for Empire strikes Back is also a bit misleading. That difference is the post-SE number, not the drop at the time of release. The original Star Wars made 221m in its original release, adding around 44m in its first re-release that may or may not have started when the first run hadn't even been entirely over, before making another 22.5m in another re-release in 1979. So depending on how you count, ANH stood at 221m, 265m or 288m. ESB, meanwhile, reached 181m in its first release. ANH added another 17m in 1981 and 18m in 1982, ESB added 27m in 1981 and 14.5m in 1982. After this, ANH was basically exactly 100m ahead of ESB. The next and only further re-release for both was the Special Edition in 1997, with ANH adding 138m and ESB ~68m. So while it is technically true that ESB stands at 170m below ANH, it would be kind of odd to count that as the drop from one to the other, seeing how a sizeable part of that only came 15-20 years after release, and you wouldn't really want to wait 20 years to find out how much a movie dropped from its predecessor. Looking at the drops in terms of percentages is a better way to judge it anyway. If TLJ would finish with "only" 725m it would be a drop of over 200m, yet a normal drop in terms of percentage. Have a movie that made 220m drop to 20m with its sequel is a whole lot harsher. The whole thing gets worse the lower the numbers of the original are.
  8. I don't see how that is the case. The text talks about what Alan Parrish left behind in the Jungle, a Jungle he spend most of his life in. Do you really think he didn't do anything there or didn't try to escape? He was experienced in dealing with all sorts of things from that jungle, he knew what was in there, which means he most definately didn't sit around on his rear waiting for the time to pass. "Leaving something behind" doesn't imply in any way that he had these things with him when he entered the game. The text matches what a sequel is perfectly. It has a new story that connects to what happened earlier. A sequel doesn't define itself through following the exact same characters, nor does it matter how close it is in time to what came earlier. All a sequel is, is a follow up to a story that came before. A reboot, on the other hand, takes the same story and tells it in a different way. Spiderman got rebooted two times in the recent past. These movies didn't follow up on the prior Maguire-Spiderman movies, hence they weren't sequels to them. The new Star Trek movies are a reboot as well, as they take already existing characters and give them a new interpretation (in part due to using new actors), with the later new movies obviously being sequels to the first new movie. There are some rare cases where the line between a sequel and a reboot/reinterpretaton can be blurred, El Mariachi and Desperado for example, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.
  9. How does the buzz look pitiful compared to TFA though? No one really talked about TFA at the same point in type, and just like this current discussion, there were quite a few people who feared about the movie not having any hype. You shouldn't look at the hype that TFA had at the point of its release, you need to look at the hype it had in early July 2015, and there wasn't a whole lot of talk about it at that point. The second teaser came out in April, and there was nothing to talk about afterwards. In fact, there were quite a few people who were quite sure that TFA desperately needed a new trailer by July/August, as they feared that there was no hype for it. I doubt that. TFA had three trailers, the first teaser in late 2014, the second teaser in April and the final trailer in October. Rogue One had three trailers as well, its first teaser in April, another one in the summer, plus the final trailer in October or so. I would be very surprised if they went with just two trailers for this movie.
  10. Why would you expect a lot of buzz for TLJ at this point? July has just started, the movie is still months away, with plenty of big movies starting before it and the last real news about it being from April. I don't see any reason why there would be lots of talk about it at this point. There was little talk about TFA at the same stage and there were enough people who still didn't see any huge hype when news of the early presales came out. If reactions to the next trailers are tepid, or if news of rather lackluster presales come in, that's when one can talk about there not being much hype, but there is no reason to do so now.
  11. Why do some people think that this trailer is just a shorter version of the already existing one? That simply makes no sense. There is nothing to be gained by releasing a trailer that shows nothing new, and in fact shows even less than the last one. This is even more true when you consider that recent news about Star Wars have been rather negative, and they need something to create some excitement again, which certainly doesn't happen by releasing an old trailer again. If anything, this would lead to a backlash. I haven't seen anything that would suggest that these two trailers are the same. The only thing we know is the trailer classification in the UK, that's it. This being trailer B doesn't say anything about how similar it is to the first one. TFA also had trailer A and B, and they had nothing in common.
  12. I don't really see the point of that. "Star Wars fans" didn't do anything. There is a ton of them, and they don't all share the same opinion. Just because some complained about this firing or wanted Trevorrow to be fired, doesn't mean that this is the consensus among Star Wars fans, because such a consensus doesn't exist. You won't even get a comment about these things from most Star Wars fans, just from a tiny fraction that thinks it needs to be vocal about a certain issue.
  13. That's not really how it happened either. Lucas got Brackett to write a first draft of ESB. She died soon after finishing it. It wasn't really what Lucas wanted at all, so he wrote some drafts on his own. That was what he handed over to Kasdan to polish it. Most of what is in ESB already came from Lucas. What Kasdan managed to do, was take passages that were written in a rather convoluted way and turn them into something straight to the point. ROTJ went similar, Lucas wrote the early drafts, then Kasdan got to take over. Kasdan's role in Star Wars does often get overstated, especially compared to Lucas. Way too many people talk about the scripts while having no idea who actually wrote what. That being said, he's definately an important figure in terms of the Star Wars franchise, and he does 'get' the characters. If you can get a script from Kasdan, it wouldn't be particularly wise to not take advantage of that.
  14. Not really though. Your answer amounts to: "If you take away all the movies where she worked with talented people, there aren't a whole lot left", which is true for basically everyone involved in Hollywood. Kennedy has been Spielberg's right-hand woman for ages. She didn't get that job because Spielberg enjoyed her company or liked her as a lucky charm. You don't get to produce or executive produce all these movies unless you happen to do the job just like your boss wants you to. Which means that she was good at her job.
  15. And? That's still part of it. It doesn't take a whole lot of effort to get such a detail right. I have no bias against Wonder Woman. And why should I? If anything, I'd prefer it to most super-hero movies. Not to mention that Gal Gadot is as charming as a person can be. Doesn't change the fact that using WW1 was n idiotic idea. Sounds more like you can't handle it if someone else dares to offer an ounce of criticism against something you like...
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.