dudalb

Which would make it less appealing for me.

To the surprise of nobody, it is getting ripped by the critics. As a huge MST3K fan, I love a really bad movie of the "so bad it;s good" variety. But so far, this film looks like it's a "Just Plain Bad" film. That it being ripped as being so generic is not a good sign of it's being "So bad,it's Good".

Most studios would kill for a 75 to 80 Million opening. Fact is, SPECTRE is not going to get the kind of hype that Skyfall got because of the Fifieth anniversary of James Bond.Skyfall got tons of free publicity because of that. SPECTRE won;t get that benefit. But SPECTRE,even with it's huge budget, will still be a huge Earner for SONY. What is interesting is that this is the last film under EON's current contract with SONY;EON is free to go to any studio with 007 after SPECTRE. Lots of studios will be interested. If SONY wants to keep Bond,they will have to open up their checkbooks. BTW,Craig's contract is with EON, not SONY.

If you are looking at the story of Hugh Glass as a non stop action film, you are sadly mistaken. It's a survival against Nature story with a few action scenes. Similiar to "The Martian" really. Which is why Fox sending out the trailer with "The Martian" made perfect sense.

There is nothing in the Hugh Glass story that calls for a lot of fancy VFX except maybe for the fight with the Grizzly because that would be hard to do halfway realsitically with practical effects. (They really "cheat" on the scene in the Man In The Wilderness(the 1972 Richard Harris heavily fictionlized version of the Hugh Glass story) by doing it with a lot of very quick shots so you never really see exactlyvwhat is going on). But Five VFX Houses......God, they spent as much on one Grizzly bear as Jackson spens on the siege of Minas Tirith. That's one hell of a expensive Griz....... Look, I think the film looks incredible,but gobsmacked that they spent that kind of money on it.

Nah, more about the weapons they carry,their equipment,the clothing, etc...they are just like Military history buffs.

Be nice if you would explain why this thread is stupid. We are not mind readers, you know.

Jobs will do well;I suspect in the mid to high twenties. The other releases will bomb badly.Last Witch Hunter looks a like totat disaster.

I see one of the film's tie ins is with Red Baron Pizza......

The size problem is nothing that Kong getting a little exposure to some wierd from of radiation cannot fix.....

I would say a good many weekend have one sucessful opening and the rest flops. Not at all unusual.

Agreed. Exodus was a dissapointment,yes, but hardly garbage. I think Prometheus was a bigger fail for Scott. Nice to see him get his Mojo back with "Martian". BTW if the surface of Mars looked familiar it was because the Mars exteriors were shot in Jordan...and on some of the same locations used in Lawrence Of Arabia. And Scott is a HUGE David Lean fan, as his tribute to Lawrence in Prometheus shows.

Glad that it's not making Scully out to be a villian. Fact was that Jobs was running Apple into the ground at the time of his removal . It was 100% justified by any standard of business or good management. Jobs had "Enterperuners disease" ; that a lot of the time people who are great at making a start up company into a huge sucess are not good at running a big company on a day to day basis. It's an old story.

You guys keep forgetting, Steve Jobs open wide next weekend. It will do well. But "The Last Witch Hunter " is going to do a crash and burn.

Jeff Daniels is having some luck this month;An important role in one hit film "The Martian" and another important role in "Steve Jobs" which seems destined to be a box office success also.

And it cost 40 Millon to make....chump change in today's world.ANy studio would sign on for a Hanks/Spielberg movie on any topic with that budget. It just opened at a bad time....The Martian siphoned off a good deal of the "Grown Up" audience this movie was aiming for,and also with SPECTRE a couple of weeks out people are not anxious for a spy movie since they well be going ot see one in a couple of weeks time. But With international box office and ancillerty income, the studio and Spielberg will get their money back.

It's not even interesting as a trainwreck the way that Fantastic Four was.

ANd she was doing recycling her role in "Jane Eyre" a few years ago.

Not with Steve Jobs taking the adult audience next week. But I think you have a point with so many adult oriented movies opening so close to each other this year...more then most A result of December...normally the biggest month for prestige, Oscar bait films..has a 1000 pound gorilla called "Star Wars"The Force Awakens" that studios are reluctant to go against. Narrower then usual window for the Oscar Bait films. And that we have had a plethora of spy based films,with the biggest one of them all destined to open in a couple of weeks, did not help Bridge. I think there is a "We will go see SPECTRE in a few weeks so I am not in the mood for a spy film right now" hurt it. As for Spileberg being "washed up" ,one has to laugh at anyhbody saying that. He has had box office fails before.

We know the budgets for his films sure as hell can't....

I mentioned "Man In the Wilderness"t a few pages ago. And it has been the subject of a novel before also; "Lord Grizzly" by Frederic Manfried that is considered a classic novel about the Fur Trade day, and (having read both) is a better novel then "The Revenent". I agree with the article that "Man In the Wilderness" is not a very good movie. It shows up on Turner CLassic Movies now and then.

No third #1 spot for the Martian, but will still make 200 Million,it will just take a little longer.

I agree. It lacked either humor or charm, and without either a cartoon short is going to suck bigtime. LAVA did. Disney had better damn well hope it has it South Pacfic/Polyneisan act together with "Moana".

As a huge Lovecraft fan, I 100% agree. Nothing in the Lovecraft story screams 200 Million. And that is one of Del Toro's problems; He is a niche filmmaker some of whose projects require budgets that only a major studio can afford. If he does not want to play the Big Studio game, fine;but then don't spend so much time on projects only a Big Studio can afford.

That is because the writers and director Of "Hansle and Gretle" understood the material was stupid and silly,but also that you could have lot of fun with it. The people who made "Last Witch Hunt" seem to haven taken it way,way, too seriously. Any way Hansel and Gretle" had the advantage of some great lines;my own favorite was "whatever you do, don't eat the Fucking Candy"...something I have always wanted a chatecter in a fairy tale to say.