Yandereprime101189
-
Posts
2,859 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Annual Subscriptions
Media Demo
Posts posted by Yandereprime101189
-
-
2 hours ago, Firepower said:
I noticed double standards about CGI. Prison break scene in Venom 2 or that infamous CGI fight in Black Panther look even worse than bad CGI monsters here, some of the worst CGI of a decade, but for whatever reason people ignore that in those 100-200 mln budget comic book movies with high profile people behind them where it should be just unacceptable, but in 5-6 times cheaper film without any star team they suddenly destroy the entire movie based on a couple of bad CG shots in a trailer and complain only about that. C'mon, people, be consistent. It can't be acceptable in a much much more expensive movie with Oscar nominated team, but suddenly very very bad in a small-mid budget horror movie without any prestige behind it.
No
Even the worst CGI in Black Panther is a billion times better than any of the CG monsters in this film's trailer. The same goes with Venom 2. Hell, Jungle Cruise looks to have better CGI than what this film has.
At least with Black Panther, people got invested in what was going on that they didn't care about the CGI (it also helps that that fight moment is in a fully CGI background (and transition between them fairly well) compared to Resident Evil's placement of CG in live action plates..
With Resident Evil, the monsters are MEANT to elict fright, and they don't.
I mean, look at this goddamn monstrosity.
.
It looks like it belongs with those cut-out aliens in Men in Black that were used as target practice. This thing is supposed to be a serious fright moment. Syfy and Roger Corman would be like "damn, let's go to the drawing board."
League of Extraorinary Gentlemen has better CGI and it's almost TWENTY YEARS OLD. And EVERYONE shit on this moment from that film. This moment looks better than ANYTHING CGI from the Resident Evil reboot.
https://youtu.be/l1SZ4ccagFQ?t=24
The previous Resident Evil films have better CG. This same director had better CGI in his 47 Meters Down movies.
-
1
-
-
But will it last the full 100 if it's not a hit?
This is just supposed to be a standard biography or is Nolan twisting it?
-
I'm typtically easy on CGI, but Goddamn that's some bad CGI on some of the monsters.
Overall thing looks like it belongs on Tubi or Crackle.
-
1 hour ago, Assassin said:
Y I K E S
I guess no one wanted to see a Sopranos prequel after all.
-
Apparently people liked the first Venom a hell of a lot more than they liked the first Suicide Squad.
-
5
-
-
Disney buying out Marvel Studios killed Paramount.
-
2 hours ago, CJ Sarandos said:
50/125 is where I see it landing right now.
Reviews will kill any hype it might have next Thursday.
They didn't kill the first
-
3
-
-
On 7/30/2021 at 10:25 PM, Yandereprime101189 said:
Paramount+ it is. . .
Considering I was half right, as a former writer for Deadline box office used to say
TOLDJA!!!
-
It's totally a Rothman movie for this to be 90 minutes. He doesn't like movies over 2 hours apparently. . . at least he was that way during the Fox days.
-
Going by the release window, doing the rough math that means Shang-chi will either
Debut on digital services, Tuesday October 19th or Disney+ Wednesday October 20th or Friday October 22nd.
-
Using the 45 day window, doing the rough math, Eternals will either
Come out on digital services Tuesday December 21st, or come on Disney+ Wednesday December 22nd or Friday December 24th.
-
2 hours ago, PNF2187 said:
If I'm impatient enough then I'll make an attempt to catch this in theatres like I did with Shang-Chi. But since this seems to be free on D+ by Christmas (it would be cruel of them to charge extra for a "gift"), it's going to be interesting to see how big this gets on D+.
Curious to see how this legs out in theatres though. Most WDAS Thanksgiving releases still had a fair bit left in the tank after day 30, but the current December slate is so crowded it was probably going to cut into the gross regardless, but we'll see.
It just has to be good and gel with the audience, Frozen (which was still doing strong in my theater up till it's Blu release in March 2014), Frozen 2 and Moana all did great because they hit well with the general audience. Encanto looks like it will too - it also has the multiple female leads hook that Frozen had.
Make the Disney Princess crossover Disney. It would literally be the animated equivalent of The Avengers.
-
Venom's runtime without credits was 92 minutes. If you don't count the Spiderverse preview, with credits it's 107 minutes.
The 109 minute time makes more sense. It would still be 90+ minutes without credits (likely 95 minutes), but it's better than just altogether 90 minutes (that means it would be anywhere from 78-82 minutes without credits).
Could be worst, this could be Winnie the Pooh all over again. 53 minutes without credits.
-
3 hours ago, wildphantom said:
The Mouse has finally seen sense. Better late than never.
We still don’t know for sure how they’re going to distribute their movies, post 45 day window? Or do we?
I think they’d be crazy to put them on Disney+ without any PVOD window or digital retail revenue to precede it.
Their press note only said Encanto was coming to Disney+ as a holiday treat (a bit like they said for Soul) but surely not the others?
one thing seems certain. Disney will lead the way for how distribution and windows will shake out going into the new normal.
Chapek's words with Shang-Chi made it seem like it's gonna show up on the service after the 45 day window is up. But they'll likely release it on digital and 4K BR too. And with how they worded Encanto, yeah, they're definitely gonna go that path.
Now the Fox films will be released on digital services first before HBO Max due to the HBO deal.
-
4
-
-
Disney's currently in experiment mode with Disney+. They're successful enough that they could release the movies for free on the service.
But yes, I'd pay the Premier Access fee for Shang-chi, Eternals and Encanto without question.
-
Note the theatrical window press release doesn't mention anything about Antlers. I'm sensing a Hulu release incoming.
Rosaline (and very likely Predator 5) are Hulu releases too.
-
Mhm, they usually release their monthly content update between the 15th-17th
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:
It's been rated by the MPAA so it's run time is set and theaters should already know it.
Godzilla vs Kong was initially 140 minutes on AMC and that was with it being rated PG-13 almost a year in advance before it's actual runtime was revealed. Justice League was 150 minutes briefly on some theater sites before it's 120 minute runtime was revealed.
90 minutes is the standard placeholder time for Fandango. It's not impossible, when you compare it to similar Sony horror-tinge franchises like it's Screen Gem films, Resident Evil and Underworld. . .but it's 50/50
-
1
-
-
It's not even a bit scary but I'll be damned if that third act isn't nuts.
-
Pretty sure that's the standard placeholder time and the movie will probably be about the same length as the first.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, CJohn said:
It seems like it depends movie to movie. Escape Room 2 still isn't available on VOD. However, Don't Breathe 2 already is since last Friday.
Plus, if Sony follows the original Venom's release cycle, it'll be out on Blu/digital by December to get that holiday season dough.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:
I am.
Kek, alright.
-
1
-
-
37 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:
so there's not gonna be anyone left to see Newark...
Is anyone really clamoring for a Soprano prequel?
-
3 hours ago, Nerfy said:
"from Marvel Studios"
You SOB, I'm in!
-
1
-
Resident Evil: Welcome to Raccoon City | November 24, 2021 | Kaya Scodelario as Claire, Robbie Amell as Chris, Hannah John-Kamen as Jill, Avan Jogia as Leon
in Box Office Discussion
Posted · Edited by Yandereprime101189
Going to extremes? I'm being nice to this new Resident Evil. The director previously directed 47 Meters Down 1-2. The first film cost just over 5 million while the second cost 12 million. They cost less than this new Resident Evil and BOTH of them have far better CGI. The Underworld film series and previous Resident Evil series has similar budgets to this one. Again, better CG, better prosthetics too. Deep Blue Sea 3, a direct to video film from last year that has a budget of probably 2-5 million, has better CG.
This film's 40 million.
The only people that care and argue about CGI are forum users - which is what we are. The mass audience that makes Black Panther (aside from that one moment and the rhinos, Black Panther's CGI ain't that bad), Venom (red is a notorious color to animate and at least Carnage looks like he belongs in the enviornment) and all those big 100-200 million productions apparently don't care - a lot of people will overlook bad CGI if the rest of the film is good - so you might as well argue your point to a wall.
But who knows, Viewer Anon says there's people that have seen it and liked it, so maybe, like Venom and Black Panther, there's more to like in the film that makes up for CG.