Wormhole

235 OW 760 DOM 2.2 bil WW

Because pulp-adventure movies are great and there should be more of them. It shouldn't be hard to get a good blockbuster out of the Uncharted games. The characters are well-defined, the stories are interesting even if a bit familiar, the locations are beautiful, and the action set-pieces are pretty much already in place. The Assassin's Creed games are a convoluted, jumbled mess of a story. The original premise is interesting and could make a good, interesting sci-fi, blockbuster, but if not done well... It will be a disaster. Considering the acting talent signed on to the project, I'm optimistic. But it'll be way harder to squeeze a successful blockbuster out of the Assassin's Creed games than it would be with the Uncharted games. If Sony had their shit together, Uncharted would make bank.

This is going to be big

2001 Apollo 13 Interstellar The Martian Contact Gravity

Interstellar wasn't as deathly serious as many make it out to be. It's probably Nolan's funniest film alongside TDK and Inception. Gravity was more of a serious bore than Interstellar. The Martian was easily the funniest of the three but didn't hit as many high notes as Interstellar.

Just saw it. It was enjoyable. Damon was great. Positives were Damon obviously, the humor, the supporting cast (no one really stood out but everyone was serviceable), and the cinematography. A few complaints I had were with the pacing. A bit too much scientific exposition (I find it funny that there was probably more expositional dialogue in this than in Interstellar but no one is mentioning it) and a few needlessly convoluted plot points (China specifically). Overall I'd give it a B+ and say Interstellar > The Martian > Gravity.

Everyone is trashing this already but reviews don't seem as bad as is being made out to be. I'm sure it'll bomb, but, who knows, it might be an enjoyable film.

It's a technical feat, no doubt. But, to me, it's just... Boring. It expects us to care about the fate of a character we barely know and mistakes weird George Clooney dialogue for character development.

Summer movies aren't going for "innovative" though. They're going for fun (usually). Gravity was going for more than that. This film looks to be going for more than that. Gravity, imo (obviously a lot of smart people disagree), was boring empty spectacle. I hope that The Walk is more engaging.

I have a feeling this is going to be one of those empty "experience" movies that hides its narrative flaws with a few innovative set pieces.

Nolan alone can't open a movie. We know that now. Interstellar had mystery box trailers selling pretty much only Nolan's name, and because of that, it had an underwhelming OW but legged its way to a very respectable total. Nolan generally makes good movies that connect with audiences, so saying he's "done" is pretty funny. Alternatively, The Martian has had terrific marketing selling lighter, more relatable fare than Interstellar (not a criticism of Interstellar) with more of a clear hook ("Bring Him Home" vs. "From the Director of the Dark Knight Trilogy and Interstellar: What Else Do You Need to Know?"). It's also an adaptation of a really popular book. Sure, $65M might be a stretch, but this has a lot of things going for it. It should open big.

In. $65M.

Who cares if Gravity is a masterpiece or not? (Quick answer: it isn't). The real question: is it sci-fi?

Gravity is boring. I wasn't invested in Bullock's character and that's a deal breaker in a simple survival movie. It's technically great but hollow and manipulative otherwise. Apollo 13 is so much better.

Interstellar is way better than Gravity tho

LOL

The RT score probably won't affect this one though. This thing is going to be gigantic.

The Mummy is awesome and both the sequels are hot shit.

Special features don't play in front of the movie on the big screen. I'm there to watch the feature film, not the short, so if you're going to play a short in front of the feature film then it should be open to the same kind of criticism as the feature film. I had forgotten how bad Lava was five minutes into IO, but, yes, it was bad. You'd think Pixar would have better concepts for short films than volcanoes falling in love.

And, yes, Lava was horrific. It's hard to believe it came from the same studio as the movie that followed.

Bad movie. The majority of the film is manipulative torture porn. Jolie and/or the Coens should have cut a good thirty minutes from the scenes on the raft and in Japan and fleshed out the redemption/forgiveness aspect. Railway Man does it better and didn't make a dent critically or at the box office. Weird how things work sometimes.

My biggest issue with the film is what tribefan mentioned: the stakes. It never really felt like Joy or Sadness were in any real danger. How could Riley forget something as integral as an entire emotion? It's pretty great elsewhere though. Its emotional beats are executed flawlessly. Bing Bong's sacrifice was gut-wrenching. Docter is the best there is in animation right now at manipulating emotions. Some of the more abstract parts were great too like abstract thought and the dream sequence. A-

Perfectly passable fluff. It's not one of Pixar's best efforts, but it's definitely not bad.

One of Pixar's best. Not many films manage to mix the colorfully zany and the profoundly sad like this one.