OncomingStorm93
-
Posts
1,961 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Annual Subscriptions
Media Demo
Posts posted by OncomingStorm93
-
-
If WW84 ends up below WW, all hell will break loose at WB.
I cant imagine that’s going to happen. WW84 looks incredible based on the teaser. I think it will hit $1b. 80s nostalgia will drive it there. No comic book film has tapped into that era yet (although several recent MCU films are steeped in 80s culture)
-
1
-
1
-
-
I haven't seen the movie, but plan to in the coming weeks. My main question right now is why did this have to be rated R? Were drugs and cursing that essential to the film, that the film couldn't have survived without those elements?
-
Is it too early to start a New Mutants > BoP club?
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Eric Sionis said:
The lack of advanced screenings wasn't the main thing, more the straw that broke the camel's back. You were using it as another excuse to be ultra-negative and poison the well for the movie, which you have done for months. Think of it as a threadban for your continuous behavior. And I'm sorry I didn't respond to you earlier. In hindsight, that was a mistake on my part. I felt as if since Grim was the guy who doled out the threadban, he should have explained why. I promise to do better in the future.
I didn't even receive any kind of warning about my supposed continued negativity. You'd think that if it were such an issue (over months no less), a staff member would advise me well before it reached the point of threadban, and even then give an explanation. I don't blame you. I blame Grim.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Eric Sionis said:
@OncomingStorm93 I understand you are upset over your threadban, but from what I've seen from your posts, and other people on the staff will likely agree with me on this, your consistent negativity in the BOP thread wasn't constructive and either derailed the thread or made people annoyed. Saying you have reservations on the film's potential or saying it looks bad once or twice? That's great. Even doing a brief discussion or argument with another guy? Totally cool, so long as it doesn't go too far. But you did go too far, with constant negativity, which just doesn't lead to anything constructive. As much as we encourage discussion, we have limits when it becomes too toxic, and I, and the staff, feel you crossed that line.
I understand you may not like that answer, but that's all I gotta say on the matter.
I really wish I heard that three weeks ago from grim (who decided I was trolling) like I requested... I still don’t appreciate being blatantly ignored by an admin when requesting a threadban explanation. I didn’t even attempt to refute the accusation, I clearly asked you and grim how to avoid the perception of trolling moving forward. No response.
Because apparently pointing out the lack of advanced screenings compared to other recent DC films was crossing the line.... Even though it was 100% factually accurate. Riddle me that.
-
1
-
-
Whoever thought it was a good idea to have this film title be 30 words long should not be in this industry.
When this film was being promoted in the NFL playoffs, commentators referred to it as “Harley Quinn in Birds of Prey”. That would have been a phenomenally better title.
-
5
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, DAJK said:
I can’t comment on your posts itself because I never read them (maybe they were trollish, maybe not) but I think this should be a lesson that we can’t shut down opinions that are “against the grain” on this forum by dismissing them as trolling. If someone legitimately thinks Tenet is going to bomb this summer, they should be free to express that opinion. While we think we can, box office isn’t always predictable.
I think my observations were considered trollish in the eyes of 5-month old users who can’t stand to hear a word of negativity about [insert cinema franchise here]. One user in the TROS thread called me a troll because I had the gall to discuss the films box office performance in a thread he apparently throughly was exclusively to praise the film.... I know The Chad DC complained about my “bias” against BoP in that thread repeatedly instead of actually listening to what I had to say.
-
1
-
-
If I was threadbanned from the BoP thread for my insistence that there was minimal audience demand for this film, I accept my vindication.
-
9
-
-
BoP's marketing campaign was horrible. Absolutely horrendous.
Too loud (visually). Too late. Too incoherent. Too safe.
I think it can be best summed up in the second trailer, when (where a film would normally highlight the actors involved) they call out the character names on screen.
I don't think putting the words "Cassandra Cain" on screen in big, bold yellow letters for half a second convinced a single person to see this film.
I just don't know what WB marketing was thinking on this one.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, grey ghost said:
This is an interesting take.
It's true. Based on the marketing, I couldn't tell this was R vs PG-13.
Why on earth didn't DC release a Red Band trailer?!?!?!
-
3
-
1
-
-
The issue isn't the R rating.
The issue is that the marketing campaign didn't capitalize on how gung-ho R this film appears to be, like Deadpool's campaign.
-
16 minutes ago, SpiderByte said:
Does this mean the takes about "Marvel was TOO SCARED to do a REAL HORROR movie" takes will finally shut the fuck up now that they got the weirdest fucking horror guy they could find
Yes, but perhaps more significantly, no.
Derrickson's sense of horror is far less inspired than Raimi's. It's lowest common denominator horror.
Sam Raimi is fun and playful when it comes to horror. Never taking himself 100% seriously, and visually innovative. He's also a much better director of actors.
-
5
-
-
2 minutes ago, Jay Beezy said:
I've been getting the sense this was the case since Comic Con, when Scarlet Witch was promoted as the sequel's female lead, and McAdams was not mentioned or seen among all the Endgame festivities.
Question is, why?
-
I know his name was floated but I didn't imagine it would be the case.
Immediate upgrade in almost every respect over Scott.
What are the odds we can get another JK Simmons cameo in this one?
-
2
-
-
18 hours ago, aladdino said:
die another day - madonna / american
casino royale - chris cornell / american
another way to die - alicia and jack white / american
My point about this film being Americanized moves beyond the lead singer. It extends to Fukunaga. Then there's Hans Zimmer (I know he's German, but over the past two decades he has defined American action cinema scores). The main villain is an American actor for the first time since License To Kill. And there's rumors the film will approach 3 hours in length.... It all just feels very American for a Bond film.
-
I'm surprised, and indeed very happy to see this film is far from the mess I had anticipated based on the schizophrenic trailers. I'm curious to see how the frantic and absurd imagery fits together.
I believe overwhelming positive reviews will help BoP more than they helped Shazam at the box office, given Shazam was an easier movie to sell to audiences than BoP. Whereas everyone knew what to expect from Shazam, it seems no one knew what the deal with BoP was going to truly be. The marketing never leaned into the R rating, whereas it seems the film is gung-ho R. Word of mouth should be better than Shazam, due to the more surprising nature of BoP.
I wish I could have said all that in the main BoP thread, but alas I was threadbanned for having the gall to point out Warner Bros wasn't holding early screenings like with their previous films. That's unacceptable, but pages of arguments about Star Wars and Jennifer Lawrence are fine and dandy. Lesson learned!
-
Good trailer. I feel like this film would have more box office potential if it weren't connected to Saw. Strip away those connections and you have a film that seems like it can stand on it's own. At least in terms of premise, star-power, and the direction.
-
1
-
-
IMO, the choice of Billie Eilish is emblematic of my overall concern with this film, that it's being Americanized too much.
-
13 hours ago, junkshop36 said:
I’d like them to inject just a little more fun into the movies and not be SOOOO serious. I think they balanced that pretty well in Brosnan’s first two movies.Seems to me that this film is going to balance the fun and dramatic fairly well. There's a real sense of adventure in the marketing for No Time To Die that was missing in the Sam Mendes films (not that lack of adventure was a detriment in Skyfall)
-
4
-
-
FOUR MINUTES?!?!?!
Universal is officially out of control.
-
3 hours ago, tonytr87 said:
As long as it's great and makes enough to greenlight a sequel. I don't really care what it makes.
So if it doesn't make enough money to greenlight a sequel, you wouldn't care what Dune makes?
-
A Detective Pikachu vibe, you say? Hmm... $145m domestic, $432m global. What am I predicting for Dune, again?
On 1/29/2020 at 3:31 PM, OncomingStorm93 said:$150m DOM $450m WW is where I think Dune will end up. Hopefully the budget is reasonable...
Detective Pikachu vibes are fine by me!
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, murphydog said:
And even then, early marketing reactions could be misleading. Do you have a bunch of young MCU fans going apeshit over Thanos, MJ, and Dax in a trailer together (with Aquaman and Poe on top of that) but then don't show up to the movie because they perceive it as "boring" compared to the standard CB formula they've been eating up? Do trailers barely move the needle but then an older fanbase who doesn't use social media as much shows up in droves and WOM propels it to a big phenomenon film?
The argument of MCU fans making an impact because the cast of an unrelated film features MCU stars is a fallacy. I don't even think that reflects in the marketing. And even then, those of us here are generally able to discern legitimate hype from social media fangirling.
Just because any actor can be plugged into the MCU and be made a "star" doesn't mean they can independently draw audiences to an unrelated project. I would point you to the miserable failure of Men In Black International, which coasted on the chemistry that Hemsworth and Tessa Thompson built in Ragnarok. Of course, that film was a complete mess for other reasons, but that goes to show that MCU actors in non-MCU projects doesn't mean squat. MCU actors won't save doomed projects.
Not saying Dune is doomed in the slightest, far from it, but I don't for a second buy into the argument that the fact it has MCU actors will make a real impact on how the film (or it's marketing campaign) are received.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, murphydog said:
I would not be surprised if this bombs, if it is a moderate success, or if it becomes a worldwide phenomenon. This is why it will be so much fun to track.
This will be by far the most interesting film of the year.
Couldn't agree more. This is the biggest box office wildcard of 2020.... at least until we get some concrete marketing (I'm sure that won't be until summer) and can measure the reaction.
Weekend Thread | Birds of Prey $33.25M Weekend
in Numbers and Data
Posted
Just read the last couple pages. Great scott...
Zac Snyder has nothing to do with this flopping. Audience goodwill or lack thereof toward DC has nothing to do with this flopping. The chosen actors have nothing to do.... you get the gist.
BoP is flopping because of one of the worst marketing campaigns for a post-Iron Man comic book film. This marketing campaign was afraid to embrace the film’s R rated nature. The second trailer released less than a month ago. The name of the film was too damn long. And much more.
This was a marketing failure.