King Arthur: Legend of the Sword | Guy Ritchie | May 12, 2017 | Charlie Hunnam

[a2k]

This looks good. May not do great but 90 dom and 150-175 os could happen for 250+ ww.

Which considering that the budget is close to 100, would be a better performance than LOT.

[TalismanRing]

10 minutes ago, 4815162342 said:

Now that Immigrant Song has gotten the forum wet for Thor, they should take a second look at the trailers for this. Zeppelin power.

 

Merlin's Theme

 

 

Morgan's Theme

 

 

[TalismanRing]

2 minutes ago, a2knet said:

This looks good. May not do great but 90 dom and 150-175 os could happen for 250+ ww.

Which considering that the budget is close to 100, would be a better performance than LOT.

 

Was that budget before or after Ritchie's usual re-shoots?

 

Weren't they supposed to be extensive on this, hence the delay of a year?

[The Futurist]

The 100m budget is a joke right  ?

 

A super VFX heavy fantasy movie with a very big scope, shot in 2014/2015/2016 ?

 

Twice ?

 

170m minimum and probably close to 200M.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 11, 2017 by The Futurist

[a2k]

7 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

 

Was that budget before or after Ritchie's usual re-shoots?

 

Weren't they supposed to be extensive on this, hence the delay of a year?

 

Yeah, it could be revised upwards according to Forbes.

 

Quote

Nonetheless, while Pan cost $150 million and The Legend of Tarzan cost $180m, King Arthur allegedly cost just $102m. That’s a number from IMDB and Wikipedia, so I imagine it will be revised upwards closer to release.

But if that’s anywhere near the truth, then Warner Bros. should get Ritchie onto a DC Comics movie stat, as the guy can clearly deliver a blockbuster movie without a blockbuster budget. Man from U.N.C.L.E. cost $75 million while the Sherlock Holmes movies cost $90m and $120m respectively. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2016/07/23/king-arthur-legend-of-the-sword-trailer-retells-the-excalibur-legend-to-the-extreme/#6da181557640

 

Even so, a 20% bump in the reported budget makes it ~120m. A 90-100 dom and 175 os would leave it in good stead in the long run. May not justify a sequel though.

Edited April 11, 2017 by a2knet

[Barnack]

21 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

The 100m budget is a joke right  ?

 

A super VFX heavy fantasy movie with a very big scope, shot in 2014/2015/2016 ?

 

Twice ?

 

170m minimum and probably close to 200M.

 

Well if the expense were all in Pounds, it was getting cheaper and cheaper as time advanced.

 

It does sound at a really good price if that number is close to the truth thought.

[kowhite]

Yeah if that budget is real...three things...

 

One Guy Ritchie delivers spectacle at a good price...doesn't mean it's good...I don't think this does particularly well but at that budget, whatever!  

 

Thing is, you shoot in the U.K...your dollars really do go further.  

Edited April 11, 2017 by kowhite

[grim22]

Nationwide screenings on April 27th. Over 50 of them

 

http://www.amckingforaday.com/

[franfar]

This movie still makes no sense to me

[Jay Beezy]

4 minutes ago, grim22 said:

Nationwide screenings on April 27th. Over 50 of them

 

http://www.amckingforaday.com/

 

I got a notice for that.

 

Not really interested, though.

Edited April 18, 2017 by Jay Beezy

[grim22]

With the ultra wide free screenings, WB definitely not attempting to hide the movie for sure. Screening to a somewhat wide audience 2 weeks before release to build word of mouth is a good idea for sure, they did something similar with Kong as well. Must be pretty confident in the movie.

[aabattery]

I think this ones gonna surprise people. It's not gonna set the world on fire or anything, but I can see it doing Tarzan numbers.

[John Marston]

1 minute ago, aabattery said:

I think this ones gonna surprise people. It's not gonna set the world on fire or anything, but I can see it doing Tarzan numbers.

 

 

Tarzan had more advantages though with summer days, better known character, and shirtless guy 

[franfar]

Just now, John Marston said:

 

 

Tarzan had more advantages though with summer days, better known character, and shirtless guy 

And the trailers seemed less muddled

[franfar]

Prediction: 

 

Under 100m DOM.

 

75m. 

 

I don't know who this movie is trying to appeal to, and at this point, I'm too afraid to ask.

[WrathOfHan]

Ugh, I would've gone if my AMC was doing it  

[Jay Beezy]

14 minutes ago, John Marston said:

 

 

Tarzan had more advantages though with summer days, better known character, and shirtless guy 

 

Less direct and meaningful competition as well.

[angeldelmito]

is charlie gonna be shirtless in this

 

[grim22]

5 minutes ago, angeldelmito said:

is charlie gonna be shirtless in this

 

 

 

 

[Plain Old Tele]

Guy Ritchie's SNATCH: "Let's make a movie where Brad Pitt plays a bare-knuckle boxer!"

Guy Ritchie's SHERLOCK HOLMES: "Let's make a movie where Sherlock Holmes is a bare-knuckle boxer!"

Guy Ritchie's KING ARTHUR: "Let's make a movie where King Arthur is a bare-knuckle boxer!"