Emma1420

For me it's Christian Slater. He was in the same league as Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise in the late 80's and early 90's. And now, he's basically a tv series worst nightmare. His last three tv series have been cancelled within the first season. I don't know what happened to him. I tend to think that 10 years from now Orlando Bloom will be in the same position as Slater. Actors who got a break on an ensemble movie (like the LOTR actors), I didn't expect to become big breakout stars. I think Orlando Bloom only managed it because he was also in the Pirates movies.

It isn't really, but I understand why the perception is that it is disappointing. In 2012 and 2013, Ithere have been 6 movies that opened over 100 million. It seems to becoming more common. We are now seeing openings over 150 million on a more regular basis. I think when you start to see those kind of figures more regularly then seeing an opening weekend for a big budget blockbuster in the 70 million or 80 million range does appear disappointing.

I think Clooney's quote in that article kind of sums it up “There has to be a reason for it, and there’s a reason for the 3D in this film,” I don't understand why analysts don't get that upcoming releases like Thor, The Hobbit, aren't going to do better at the 3D box office simply because Gravity did well. They are making a correlation where none exists. Gravity only reinforces that audiences will pay the extra premium for 3D if they feel like the 3D really makes a significant difference in the movie watching experience, and when it doesn't they won't.

I will be curious about the Sunday numbers for Gravity, because my showing this morning was packed, which is atypical during football season.The movie was excellent. The special effects were amazing, but the story and script were excellent, and Sandra Bullock's performance was top notch. So it's great to see such a well deserving movie do well at the box office.

I'm disappointed that PR isn't doing better. It's not a good film, but I thought it was a fun entertaining one. I thought the character development was lousy, and that the focus on the film should have been on some of the supporting characters as their backstories were the most interesting. However, most big summer blockbusters have the same problems. The biggest problem that PR had was that it had piss poor marketing. Because the film did have a human element that I think would have appealed to the GA if it had been advertised appropriately. Glad to see that DM2 is still going strong though.

I am assuming that 1.5-1.6 for TLR wouldn't be such a great start?

I think he'll be much better off if he does some roles where he gets a lot of critical praise and perhaps an Oscar nod. I think he will do better long-term. And he seems to be doing that with Foxcatcher, not putting all his eggs in one basket. Which is smart.

I'm looking forward to seeing WHD's numbers. Or at least see how dismal they are.

I also think that the studios marketed the differences pretty well, because the asteroid was the only thing they had in common. They also both had really strong casts. The few people I know who have seen it basically said WHD was a fun movie, but was trying way too hard to be like Die Hard.I also think that there is a probably some action movie fatigue with GA. Afterall, action movies of one sort or another have dominated the BO since May. So that probably contributed as well.

I do as well. Its great when everything is performing as expected or better, not so much if that doesn't happen. It is no wonder Sony released dates for the next two Spider-Man sequels, it seems to be the only guaranteed money maker they have at this point.

Depp, Downey, and Pitt aren't only A listers because they have had multiple 100m movies, but they have also all received multiple academy award nominations, and have been around for decades to develop that sort of status. While, I have no doubt that CT is a box office draw, he's still new to Hollywood. He's been around a few years. It remains to be seen if he'll become the next Depp or if he'll become the next Josh Harnett.

I think 45m is probably being a bit too generous with the Heat, but given it's production budget I think any opening over 30m would be fine.

I only ever pay to see a 3D version of a movie if it's available in IMAX, and even then I prefer the 2D format most of the time. Especially when the majority of movies don't really offer much more in terms of viewing experience when they are in 3D.

For me...STID 6/10IM3 7/10MoS 7/10WWZ 5/10IM3 would have ranked higher if they had gotten rid of a lot of stuff in the middle of the movie. That bored me to tears. STID I really wanted to like, but I had major issues when the last third of that film.

I think it has to be more than just Lex, and I have zero interest to see Lex obsessed with land.

TDKR was better than TDK for me because Rachel Dawes was no where to be found in it. I think technically TDK is a better film, but as it contained Rachel I enjoyed it less.

I really like ZS. I like that he has a clear vision of what he wants, even when there are times I disagree with that vision. But for Superman, I feel like he needs a really strong and talented EP and script to keep him in check. All I do know is that audiences will only hang on for a franchise for so long if the movies aren't up to par. So the next movie has to be much better. Everyone involved can't look at the box office total for MOS and think that everything went perfectly, not with huge drops, lackluster reception with the critics, and mixed WOM. And if they do, then I think the next movie will be a disaster and probably kill the franchise for another 5-10 years.

If I had to bet on one of those movies slipping it would be WHD. The last 6-7 weeks (between IM3, STiD, FF6, MOS, and now WWZ) have been dominated by action movies. I could the audience wanting a break from that. And WHD does look like a pretty generic action movie, so I could see it being the casualty.

I will be very curious to see how WWZ holds up. At least with my friends it's been a mixed bag, some loved if, and others found it boring and unsatisfying, so I will be curious to see what WOM is like with WWZ.

I agree, I think going for a psychological threat is a much better strategy. It's going to be difficult to top the threaf of fhe first movie, so they shouldn't even try. I think one of the reasons the Joker worked so well in the DK was that he was unpredictable and enjoyed torturing his victims psychologically. MOS didn't really require Superman to use his brain, which was fine for me given the circumstances, but I want to see more the next go around.

ICAM, however, MOS 2 has to be better, it has to have a more enthusiastic reception with the critics, because if it doesn't then I think that a sequel makes less money. The biggest advantage that MOS had over SR in terms of a sequel was never the box office anyway, it was that it had a story that wasn't dragged down by 2 other movies, and an asthmatic brat.

It is. But, I'm just glad that the majority of the audience won't see that. They will see that MOS earned more money in its second weekend that most movies earn in their first. IMO, the worst thing to happen to any movie is for it be deemed as a failure by the press. Well, and I'm relieved at all the commercial partners MOS has, at least that is another revenue stream, which WB may need.

I think that is all about the critics expectations though. They thought that WWZ was going to be a mess and so were relieved when it wasn't, and they thought MOS was going to be fantastic and it wasn't.And it remains to be seen how WWZ holds up after this weekend.

I thought that the trailers for WWZ did a good job of promoting BPs character as a family man and releculant hero. I will be interested in what the men/women split is on the movie, because I bet that attracted quite a few women.And as someone completely new and a total novice, I don't pay attention to shows like ET that claim some movie production is in trouble, because it often feels like they say that about all movies. So I really don't think that is bad press to the general audience.

I don't think it's bad WOM, rather luke warm WOM, and stronger than anticipated competition. Not to mention, I have several friends with kids in the 6-8 range who have opted to skip MOS because they feel like it's too violent (granted they also won't be taking their kids to see WWZ either). These are people who took their kids to IM3. I was hoping all 3 films could top the 50 million mark. That is probably a pipe dream now. I think what will be important is what the drops are like this next week and next weekend. If it performed the same way GL did, then I think a sequel is in serious jeopardy.