TServo2049
-
Posts
3,471 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Annual Subscriptions
Media Demo
Posts posted by TServo2049
-
-
4 minutes ago, Jonwo said:
Titanic was the best of both worlds, it has the romantic sub plot to appeal to one demographic and the sinking which attracts another.
I remember that the sinking really looked like it was happening for real, at least for 1997. Again, I think it used lots of models and full-scale sets.
-
1 minute ago, Clouseau said:
Yes, it was an achievement effects-wise, but really only incrementally better than what had come before, nothing as completely new and revolutionary as photo-real dinosaurs or a convincing immersive 3D environment. I think audiences were driven to Titanic more by the story and drama than the undeniable spectacle.
Like Titanic, Endgame has brilliantly executed effects, but it's really nothing we aren't used to (Thanos being the stand-out achievement effects-wise), and it's certainly not what's pulling such huge numbers of people to the cinema. The story and characters are driving this juggernaut, which is really quite pleasing. Although I'm happy to see the next technological revolution when it comes along.
Anyway.....
I noticed earlier on Box Office Mojo that the adjusted ticket prices for last year are actually higher than prices this year. Endgame has to perform 1% better just to match Infinity War! 😁
This quarter will bump the average up. The first quarter usually has the lowest average because fewer big films with pricier tickets do business.
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, stealthyfrog said:
Titanic was also a technical achievement, though not to the same extent as the other films you listed
Titanic’s effects were used to serve the story, like that famous George Lucas quote. Also, they are not meant to call intention to themselves as effects. Even Star Wars and Jurassic Park had scenes where the effects were clearly the “star” of the shot, but in Titanic it all blends in. You know that real X-wings and dinosaurs can’t be put in front of a camera, but everything in Titanic is meant to look like it’s filmed on location.
-
1
-
-
Hey, hey, don’t knock second unit directors. A lot of CBMs have used John Mahaffie, who directed a ton of action scenes for Lord of the Rings that Jackson couldn’t do because he had to film other stuff at the same time. All that Helm’s Deep battle stuff that the Internet (rightly) loves to gush over? Most of that was Mahaffie, not Jackson.
-
2
-
-
7 minutes ago, HeadShot said:
It was surpassed by both TFA and IW. James Cameron was desperate and re-released it so that he could maintain the top spots.
Whaaaaat? That’s not what happened. The Avengers wasn’t even out when Titanic re-released. It was for the 15th anniversary+Titanic centennial. At the time, nobody really thought The Avengers was going to hit $600 million, either.
Making fun of Cameron is all well and good, but that’s just incorrect history.
-
Can we just agree that EG is the record for the sprint but Titanic and Avatar are still the marathon champions?
I will always remember the sheer excitement in the theater seeing EG on the first Thursday. I will also always remember that everyone was talking about Titanic. Late night monologues, political cartoons, comic strips, cartoons, for weeks and months. Cultural penetration on a level not seen since the first Star Wars, and not matched by anything since. One does not negate the other for me.
-
2
-
-
16 minutes ago, Mr Terrific said:
Avatar and Titanic have done incredible things. If you love those movies, you don’t need any permission to do so. Please don’t act like the guy at the barber who wants to talk about Rocky Marciano.
I understood that Coming to America reference.
Yeah, that scene is this thread right now.
-
9 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:
Yes though where it made most of it's money were early re-releases which were about a week apart. They only had so many prints so it couldn't stay in cities that long, so the early re-releases were basically circling around back to meet demand for years.
I’m reading a book about the history of re-releases, so I’ll get back to you on that.
-
10 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:
It's no Gone With The Wind though is it. Try making those admission numbers during the start of WWII with a fraction of the O/S market we have today - and about 1/3rd the US population.
It didn’t, though. It did really well, but those estimated 200 million tickets sold added up over multiple re-releases. The 1967 re-release in particular doesn’t get enough credit - it outgrossed everything that year except The Graduate. (And that beautiful lush romance-novel poster everyone knows? That’s from 1967.)
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, DAJK said:
Sure, it beat Titanic (in 2 weeks, an amazing feat) but we can’t sell titanic short as “a movie endgame could beat in 10 days”. The thing came out 22 years ago with inflation sending it to a level Endgame will not reach.
Both films had/have spectacular runs going for them. Just goes to show that every box office record will eventually fall due to inflation.
Agreed. This is not Highlander. There can be more than one box office legend.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Thanos Legion said:
There’s an interesting point to be made somewhere along those same lines imo, but that article didn’t make it remotely well. It was hyperbolic, overagendized drivel.
True, it felt like it was ghost-written by Scott Mendelson or something.
Also, didn’t female-driven rom-coms have a string of flops around the same time of the Apatow brom-com ascendancy? Or am I misremembering?
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, Darth Lehnsherr said:
I wonder if we'll see more distinction between Disney Animation and Pixar now that separate people are in charge of them.
I was just going to bring that up, too. I hope so. I’m not on the whole “Boo, all of the Disney/Pixar films are exactly the same and it’s all Lasseter’s fault because his undeniably reprehensible personal actions somehow also prove he was creatively bankrupt, because of what happened with Brave” train, but I grew up when Disney and Pixar were distinct and it’d be nice to see them reassert their unique identities again.
-
4 minutes ago, KJsooner said:
lolwut.
Pixar is Disney. Lmao.
I’m old enough to remember when they weren’t actually part of Disney, so I guess I just still separate them in my brain.
-
6 minutes ago, KJsooner said:
Toy story 2 or 3? I’d put Funding dory in the discussion as well, although I found Nemo to be better.
I said Disney, not Pixar. Disney has only had three true made-for-theaters sequels: The Rescuers Down Under, Ralph Breaks the Internet, and this. (Four if you count Fantasia 2000.)
Sure, saying it’s the best since Rescuers Down Under would be from a small pool, but that would also mean “better than Ralph Breaks the Internet” (which I did not hate, but again, middle of the road. And not enough Jack McBrayer and Jane Lynch.)
-
Frozen 2 has the potential to be the best Disney animated sequel since The Rescuers Down Under (though hopefully it’s much more successful). I only say this in theory, since I don’t want to look things up and get spoiled, I want to go in and be surprised.
But seriously, I loved The Rescuers Down Under as a kid. The eagle flight scenes are up there with The Iron Giant and How to Train Your Dragon in terms of sheer awe. It just had the misfortune of being an outlier in the fairy tale musical Renaissance (and getting absolutely curb-stomped by Macaulay Culkin).
-
1 hour ago, Brainbug said:
I like to call it "unsocial media" often because thats what it is unfortunately.
Anti-social media.
I’ve always preferred message boards. At least in places like these, everyone gets to know each other and actually discusses.
-
2
-
-
36 minutes ago, darthdevidem01 said:
Yes the term SJW makes no sense, never did to me as any time I ever saw people use it was so they can be sexist/racist/homophobic & not feel guilty. And using it unironically in 2019 is ridiculous lol
Which I did not intend to do. I shouldn’t have used it at all, and I apologize for giving the wrong impression. I just meant “the things that pissed off the people who throw that term around all the time, didn’t piss me off, but at the same time I’m not a stan for the movie either.” I was trying to say I’ve been ignoring the whole political flame-fest over CM just like with TLJ, I certainly did not want to give the impression that I agreed with the CM bashers. (They would almost certainly consider me a “shill” for my own independently-formed opinion, based solely on watching the movie and ignoring pre-release caterwauling the same as I do with every other movie, that I do not hate Brie Larson and that there was nothing wrong with her performance, the same way they downvote me for being merely middle-of-the-road on TLJ.)
My whole point is that I don’t fall on a side, but it seems like even when trying to communicate that I put my foot in it and say things that make me appear like I’m on the “other” side.
QuoteCaptain Marvel was okay. Love Brie. But I am just over origin stories now. Was better than Wonder Woman though. Aquaman was the best of the stand alone comic book movies for me in the past year
Agreed on Aquaman. Wonder Woman vs. CM, I’d give WW the edge but probably because it reminded me a bit of The First Avenger and I love that one.
-
18 minutes ago, Deja23 said:
People would come after you for the way you use that term. Not sure why people still legitimize such a ridiculous term/complaint.
I put it in quotes for a reason, the point is that I meant the stuff alleged to be “SJW” by others. And really, I just thought the “there’s a reason why they call it the cockpit” line was kind of stupid and cartoonishly dickish. But I get what they were going for and it did not make me actually mad in any way.
My biggest “issue” with CM was just that it felt middle-of-the-road, but I feel the same way about something like Doctor Strange (I can’t remember a single thing about that movie off the top of my head other than “Dormammu, I’ve come to bargain.”)
I may have stated my feelings poorly. My point is that I am not pro- or anti-, it was just an OK movie to me and I just can’t bring myself to care about all the fuss on either side - just like with TLJ, or the DC films, or any of the other things which fuel the ongoing geek-blockbuster flame wars.
-
1
-
-
Yeah, I have no real ordering for my “bottom half of the MCU”, it’s just the movies not in my top half (which aren’t in a clear order either, I just know that I put GOTG1 and the not-Ultron Avengers movies at the top, I enjoy IM3 more than most, I consider CA:TFA underrated, I probably rank GOTG2 higher than most, and I don’t really hate any of them.)
-
If I try to say I found TLJ merely okay, that the stuff that bothered people only mildly annoyed me, that I basically enjoyed the movie on initial watch but still had no urge to watch it again, I get downvoted on Reddit as if I’m shilling for TLJ.
Also, I’m an MCU fan but I’ve actually been more a fan of the DC characters over the years, I loved The Dark Knight, liked Wonder Woman/Aquaman/Shazam, didn’t care for Man of Steel/Batman v Superman/Suicide Squad/Justice League, but still see DC’s films in the theater. This also tends to get me downvoted, presumably for being an MCU shill (though it doesn’t get me downvoted as much as not fully coming down against TLJ).
I’m afraid to admit there how I thought Captain Marvel was OK and enjoyed Shazam just a bit more, that the supposed “SJW” stuff in CM only slightly irritated me for feeling too “on the nose” but it didn’t anger me, I liked the Fury/Coulson stuff more than the main story (seriously, Marvel, a “Fury and Coulson, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.” animated series on Disney+ with both Jackson and Gregg reprising the voices, make it happen) but that I thought Brie Larson did a perfectly fine job and in no way actually hate the movie even if I’m not itching to see it again. Both factions could come at me.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, John Marston said:
what you mean? Have people have seen it?
No, I just felt like that was begging for the Arrested Development narrator meme.
As I said, in reality I have no expectations, good or bad. This one’s a giant question mark for me, which will only be answered once I actually see it.
-
7 minutes ago, John Marston said:
don't underestimate Toy Story 4. Especially if it ends up as good as the other movies
Ron Howard: “It didn’t.”
I love the original trilogy so I’m still going to see it, but I have zero expectations.
-
1 minute ago, WrathOfHan said:
It still burns so much.
-
2
-
-
58 minutes ago, tawasal said:
The movie that opened the following weekend is probable the single best Star Trek ever.
This genetically enhanced superman would have a word with you.
-
1
-
Weekend Thread: Endgame 40.6M Friday, 61-62.5m Sat (per Asgard p.49)
in Numbers and Data
Posted · Edited by TServo2049
I’m watching behind the scenes stuff right now. There really are plenty of “invisible” effects shots in that movie. You’d have no idea that the underwater shots of the wreck are only partially the famous footage they shot of the real ship, and the rest are miniatures, filmed dry with lots of smoke and filters, and intercut with the real stuff.
For the most part, Titanic is one of those films like Blade Runner or ID4 (or Endgame, now that I think about it) that didn’t necessarily pioneer new VFX techniques, so much as take what was already available and use it really really well.
We all marveled at stuff like the White House blowing up or the Titanic breaking in two, but those were just tried-and-true miniature shots executed flawlessly. I’d give some examples of “not innovative, just damn good” VFX from Endgame but they’d go into spoiler territory.