Jump to content

dudalb

Free Account+
  • Posts

    25,102
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by dudalb

  1. STX is going to take the brunt of the losses for Valarien in the US. Europacorps covered itself pretty well with distribution pre sales. Most estimates are that because of p resales,Europacorps will probably not take more then a 40 million dollar loss on Valarein, but the real problem will be that Besson will have a hard time raising money and making pre sales for his next 200 Million plus project. it's back to modestly budgeted thrillers for Luc for quite a while to come.
  2. Prayiing for a bad film to succeed? I think your God has other things to worry about. And Atomic guy as your model is not a good one.
  3. SONY was the first studio to realize if you kept the budgets low,the built in audience an faith oriented film has would almost guarantee a profit regardless of quality.They backed low budget faith films much earlier then other studios did. One would think a devout Christian would want to deliver a quality product that might actually attract some non believers, but that does not seem to be the case. They seem satisfied making low quality films that the GA avoids.
  4. Sorry, but this film looks so bad I doubt God will get much glory of this. It might work in favor of the other guy..... BTW if you are bemoaning the fact that so many "faith based" films are crappy movies, you have no one to blame but your fellow Christians. If they would exercise a little judgement and show some good taste,and not give the studios their money, they might get better films.
  5. It was the only plot idea for a Barbie movie I have seen that might have made a decent film. if it is gone, the chances of suckitude for this film is 90%. And from all the confusion ,I think it iclear SONY does not know what the hell to do with this project.
  6. I hate to keep saying this, but this was a niche "Faith audience" film from the beginning. AS to that trailer.....Father, Forgive Them They Know Not What They Do...or maybe they did.....
  7. I think it now clear this was never intended to compete with other animated films for the GA. it's just another low budget film aimed at the niche "faith" audience.Only difference is "The Star" is animated
  8. I don't use the term "Box Office Poison" very often, but I think it might well apply to Dehaan. He might be OK in supporting roles, but casting him in a leading role seems to be a sure fire way of turning off audeinces.
  9. yeah, but the writers and directors were French, and it is based on a French comic book. And Luc Besson style as a director is definently French. It is all about the style,guy.
  10. If it id true that Marvel studios is not involved with Venom the way they are with the Spidey films,my hopes for Venom are not high.
  11. And the Barbie movie ,with it constant changes in casting and writers, looks like a mess,a project Sony does not know what to do with. Yes,SONY new management had the brains to team up with Marvel Studios for the Spidey movie, but I have yet to see any other sign the new management can turn that studio around.
  12. For the plot idea of a Barbie being kicked out of Barbieland for not being perfect enough, Schumer was a better choice then Hathaway. Hathaway is, well, too pretty for that role. They have probably thrown the imperfect Barbie plot out the window, and God knows what they will come up to replacement. if the story that there are a number of different scripts making the rounds at Sony is true, it is a sign Sony does not know what the hell to do with this movie. Sounds like another film that was greenlit in a hurry without much thought in desperate search for a franchise,and will probably end up a total mess. And yeah, I am afraid they will go for another "makeover movie" a la Princess Diaries or to name the grandmother of all makeover movies "My Fair Lady". Too bad, the imperfect Barbie in exile idea had some real comic potential.
  13. The WTF about the release of Valarien for me is not the July 21st release date...questionable as it might be...but why Besson insisted on opening the film in the US instead of France. It the film was going to be a huge hit and critical success anywhere it would be in France. Then it would have gone into the US and other countries with some momentum. But now it has the albaratross of having flopped in the UD around it's neck;maybe not fatal but it won't help any. And it's underperforming in Germany is a big red flag.
  14. And why was Besson so obsssed with A: The July 21st opening date and B. Opening the film in the US first? particularly point B. Besson should have opened the film in France;if this film was going to be a big hit anywhere it would be there. It would then have gone into the US with some momentum.but now it has a huge headwind with having bombed in the US. And it's doing not very well in Germany is a huge red flag;it might mean the film is weaker in worldwide then we thought.
  15. Yes, but that does not excuse Besson handling it like a 16 year old kid. he jusr made things worse.
  16. He also seems intent on making the box office fail in the US of "Valarien" into an "artistic,brilliant French vs crude,tasteless Americans" issue;sad to say, there is a large audience in France for that sort of crap...though, to be fair, every country seems to have a sizable audience for that sort of crap.
  17. Oh I agree, I really liked La La Land,but agree it is not quite as "Original" as some of it's fans say. Of course you have a bunch of people who have never watched a movie made before they were born;I remember when Gladiator came out people saying how"innovative" a Epic Spectical set in Ancient Rome was......
  18. Not to mention his statement that none of his films did well in the US; he has already forgotten about "Lucy"? And although not a big hit,"Fifth Element" did fairly well in the US. God, that rant is almost Trumpian in it's lack of reality.
  19. God,for once we agree. IMHO the worst BP misfire in history. Of course that was also the year that Roberto Bergnini won best actor....1998 was a good year for bad Oscar choices.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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