Avatree

man, why did I even click it. yeuch.

Putting aside the amount of gobbledigook and plain bullshit in the article ("the Sith are intended to be gay" is a funny one) and nonsense words, and the actual point of racism: "Shipping white relationships over interracial relationships is evidence of racism". How? How's it racist? Finn and Kylo Ren are completely different characters and if people don't ship Finn and Rey, that is not because he is a black man. Kylo Ren is approximately one million times more interesting than Finn. This is true if Kylo ren was black or Finn was white. Finn is a rubbish character, put it down to writing or whatever, but Finn is totally uninteresting. Add to that, Rey has a lot more interaction and relationship with Kylo Ren than with Finn. Finn and Rey barely see each other for large parts of this trilogy and usually its just they happen to be placed together, rather than having any events occur that connect them both. Also: A lot of people after Force Awakens shipped Finn and Poe. (which i might add IS a interracial relationship) So if Finn is taken, these strange shipper fans will be shipping Rey with another character rtather than Finn or Poe. Kylo Ren is clearly the obvious choice. As for generally speaking why someone might more naturally ship white people than black people for relationships: most people are white. Whether its star wars fans, marvel fans, or americans as a whole. Most people are white. To be attracted to people who look like you (e.g. white people) is normal. Its not racist. If your dating history is all white, or your parents relationship, or other relationships around you, are white - then that is what you may see as an ideal relationship, a white man and white woman. Its not racist and it doesn't make you racist. I know there was some dumb racist comments when that first SW teaser trailer dropped back in 2014. But since these movies have been out I've literally never seen anyone complain about the colour of Finn's skin.

@GraceRandolph can you advise please.

not misinterpreting anything. asking how Frozen 2 would have made more money than it has done? I dont' think it would have made any more. That's the thing with record breakers - because there is no other movies that are comparable, by definition of it being #1. Frozen 2 DID have great reception, but it is a sequel. Sequels and original films are different when the original became a genuine "phenomenon". Frozen created a new amazing brand. Of course Frozen 2 cannot do the same because Frozen already exists. You can't create a phenomenon twice. So no it will not increase to $1.6b or whatever the Dumb Disney Delusionals predictions were for the film.

I have to agree, on paper I should be excited for it, and when it was being made, I was looking forward to it, but the marketing is really horrid and makes me not even want to acknowledge the movie's existence. hope that's just all marketing stuff and nothing to do with the film.

the main problem is that in recent years this website has seen an influx of /r/boxoffice posters who are mentally not quite there, and think that $5 billion is an easy target and if you fail to get $200M opening weekend you're a flop. Some of the expectations on this forum have gotten absolutely ludicrous and a lot of the aforementioned zombie redditors have a distorted view of reality.

troll post?

I didn't say I dislike them, I said it is a legitimate opinion to not like them or anyone else in the cast. Not liking the cast of actors does not make you a racist.

I'm not going to pretend to understand Japanese box office but its biggest OS market was China where it made $123m, which is fantastic given that the first one did not get relased in China. It also had a big increases in Korea and the UK which were the two biggest markets outside Japan for the first film. Yes the drop in japan is big but the first film was such a phenomenon there that a massive drop off was guaranteed. Could it have made more money there, I've no idea, but I do know that what works in some countries, doesn't work in others. If reception had been better in Japan, it may have been worse in America, and so forth. I still think you're nuts.

joking aside, nice list B. I wanted to see Assassination Nation but it only played for 1 week near me. hope it comes to Netflix. it sounds so up my street. Mandy i don't understand everyone's fascination with. it feels like you need to be on Mandy to enjoy it.

Where's Babadook, baumer?

How can it be spoilers if no one has seen the film?

sorry for the repeat posts but can I just say, this whole conversation is dumb. Frozen 2 didn't have a "good" run. It didn't have a "really good" run. It had a PERFECT run. I literally cannot see a situation where it would have grossed more than it has done. It's genuinely unbelievable that it has out-grossed the first film given how insanely huge the first was. In terms of box office it is THE biggest, most successful, most profitable, animated film in the HISTORY OF CINEMA. What more can you want? Why would it have grossed $200M worldwide if audiences had loved it even more than they did already? Where is that money coming from? $200M is what 30 million tickets, who are the 30 million extra people who would have only bought that ticket if frozen 2 was even better than it is?

went to Ely Cineworld the other day, surprisingly decent cineworld. It's one of the few which has ability to play HFR movies (saw gemini man).

I don't have time or enough interest to go and get numbers for you but yes this is generally how sequels work. If a film is not known to people beforehand then they have less interest to see it ASAP. eg if you had little interest in Iron Man and then you saw it in week 9 and you really enjoyed it - then when Iron Man 2 comes out, you will probably not wait until week 9 to see it. See: every sequel ever