TServo2049

The running time thing is an interesting difference. Martian has no IMAX and a much smaller 3D share (though it has PLF - are PLF showings usually 3D? My Regal location always puts 2D on the RPX screen, though it may be an exception), and it has a longer runtime, and my (near-sellout in a 400-seat auditorium) Saturday afternoon showing had plenty of kids, while my opening Saturday showing of Gravity was perhaps the oldest audience I've ever seen for a #1 $50M+ opening. In short, Martian had to sell more tickets, with fewer showtimes, to get to an almost equal number. Even with the advantage of two fewer years of inflation (I paid $13 for a 2D adult evening ticket of Martian), Gravity almost certainly sold fewer tickets per showing than Martian. (I actually wonder if Gravity could be the lowest number of tickets ever sold for an opening weekend over $50M - though I'm not sure if it or Avatar has the highest average *ticket price* for an over-$50M OW...) This also could say something about Gravity's WOM. The fact that it had such an amazing hold probably attests to the fact that it did not reach as large a portion of the moviegoing public as other over-$50M openers. This is not meant to undercut either film's success at all, I was just thinking about all this stuff.

Yeah, I meant that. Zemeckis didn't have his own mocap studio for this, I assumed he went somewhere else?

This is true IMO. Some of us are already forgetting how big it was, just because it might not hold up on the small screen.

I thought the whole studio shut down?

Please let it be Suffragette City. I love how we have multiple relatively-grounded (RELATIVELY!) "twenty minutes into the future" non-franchise sci-fi movies, and multiple sci-fi movies with 70s jukebox soundtracks. You can really connect Gravity, GOTG, Interstellar, The Martian and Passengers together by a few links. Gravity <-same weekend in October as-> The Martian The Martian <-Matt Damon, Jessica Chastain->Interstellar The Martian <-use of David Bowie-> GOTG GOTG <-Chris Pratt-> Passengers GOTG <-Footloose references-> Kevin Bacon

Yeah, that blows Moonage Daydream in GOTG out of the water. And I loved the GOTG soundtrack. This is a great companion piece to GOTG in terms of soundtracks (I will not make a call on which of the two is "better").

CJohn, I like you exactly the way you are.

I love that we've gotten two movies in the past two years with awesome 70s jukebox soundtracks.

The Fifth Element is one of those movies where I was surprised to find out there was a big contingent of people who hate it. I was never turned off by its weirdness, that's part of its charm for me. I can even stand Chris Tucker. OK, he's pushing it when he screams like a woman, but even that amuses me now.

I like both. I'm just saying, The Fifth Element feels way more French than the actual Heavy Metal movie...

The Fifth Element may be a better Heavy Metal movie than the actual Heavy Metal movie.

I knew they were unfunny when I was in high school

And China will love it. These movies could make zero dollars anywhere else, and China could keep this franchise going with their grosses alone. Nobody better make fun of Americans' tastes anymore. The TF movies' grosses are consistently dropping here, we're actually starting to catch on... I know I shouldn't bad mouth China, they put Interstellar into the black, they made How to Train Your Dragon 2 an actual hit, and they ALMOST saved Pacific Rim. But still...unless they change course, China is the only reason this franchise will actually MAKE it to film 8. Mind you, I don't care enough to even hate these movies. Just stating the facts here.

Come on, you all knew this was going to happen. Paramount is not going to let its only billion-dollar franchise go. Though I do wish we'd just get a reboot to get something more like G1, something where they are distinguishable from one another, don't have 50 billion moving parts, etc. This is one series where I would welcome a reboot, because the Bay version NEVER caught my interest. I don't hate it, never saw more than 5 minutes total out of the entire series, but I am colossally indifferent.

Yeah, the "closest" will be the inevitable Disney live-action reimagining of the 1953 film some time in the next decade. Because they will do it. They definitely will. (They had a Peter and the Starcatchers adaptation in development too, but I feel like this could poison the Pan-prequel well, meaning they'll probably directly mine the 1953 version instead...)

I actually heard the 2003 movie was better than people say, and gets a bad rap. But I've also heard people say no, it really was awful. I only remember seeing the trailers with that Coldplay song that was effing everywhere in 2003, and I was too enthralled by ROTK to care. This could be the least divisive of the live-action Peter Pan movies, in that it may end up having the fewest defenders. But who knows?

This just looked generic from the trailers, but everything coming from the reviews makes it really feels like it's going to be epically, hilariously stupid. This year's 47 Ronin?

Oh, I thought the book and play were still under copyright in the UK. But apparently not? It says it expired in 1987, was reinstated in 1995 and expired again in 2007? There is specific language in UK copyright law entitling Great Ormond Street Hospital to royalties for every performance and adaptation of Peter Pan (though not creative control, or right to refuse permission). In the U.S., the play is under copyright, but the book is not. If it's not public domain, it is still incredibly easy to adapt. I think the fact that we haven't heard of more studios trying is down to the fact that we haven't had a successful live-action Peter Pan-related movie since Hook, and even that was regarded as a disappointment. As I said before, Disney is probably the only studio that could do a live-action Peter Pan and have it be a basically guaranteed success.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_and_Wendy#Copyright_status It's confusing.

Peter Pan isn't public domain, at least not everywhere. It's under copyright in the UK; in the U.S., the book is public domain (but not the play?) but most adaptations still get permission from Great Ormond Street Hospital and give them royalties. It's in a confusing limbo where it's public domain but not public domain. I have no idea if WB got official permission or not. The irony is that if this film tanks and people forget about it quickly, Disney can do their own live-action film and nobody will confuse it for this movie. Disney is the only studio who would ever have any success making a live-action Peter Pan movie.

Hey, one plus: They all look more like teenagers than any of the original actors did.

I would rather watch Superman IV again than either of them. Or at least Superman III.

Alvin 2007 is simply OK/mediocre. When I saw it on an airplane flight, it did not make me want to claw my eyes out. But the few clips I've seen of the sequels DO. Apparently, the sequels are exactly what I feared the original would be. (I Whip My Tail Back and Forth. I WHIP MY TAIL BACK AND FORTH!!!)

Also, the theater count page for Spy week 3 is fixed, it now says -157 change.

Sure, I liked Pacific Rim, but I still know PR2 is most likely not gonna happen.