OncomingStorm93
-
Posts
1,962 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Annual Subscriptions
Media Demo
Posts posted by OncomingStorm93
-
-
5 hours ago, dudalb said:
I suspect some fanboy anger here at the spoiler, if true, about the multiverse being a fake, a scam since there was a lot of fan wank about that.
I am not sure;a multiers would have been easy to screw up, and am afraid it could become easy out for lazy writers.
Except the Multiverse is already an established concept with Doctor Strange, and will be explored further in that franchise. This version of Spider-Man isn't the right venue for exploring the MCU multiverse. And it makes perfect sense with the character of Mysterio that the multiverse angle is fake.
-
4
-
-
1 minute ago, Damianport1 said:
I hope you are right but There is a reason a guy who gave us the numbers is working for Deadline, one of the biggest hollywood trades and Charlies is posting on BOT forum.
The reason Deadline is posting numbers this early isn't because they know any better than we do. It's it's never to early to get clicks for that sweet sweet ad revenue.
-
1
-
-
Shrek 2 is the best of the series.
Deadline giving estimates this early is hilariously irresponsible.
-
1
-
-
Yeah, how dare studios be held accountable for flooding the market with half-baked sequels
-
3 hours ago, Litio said:
"(...)For the record, the version of the film that Boone turned in was allegedly decent enough, with solid test scores and only a few pick-ups in the works to solidify what worked. The choice to go horror was allegedly first broached by Boone himself from the beginning but was accepted by Fox retroactively only after another studio’s “young kids confront a supernatural monster” flick hit pay dirt. That said, there was value in making the film stand out as an outright horror film so that the X-Men spin-off would be as distinct as Deadpool or the Wolverine movies. (...)"
Source:
As 'Dark Phoenix' Bombs, Should 'The New Mutants' Premiere On Hulu Or Disney+?
BOT's psychic members told us movie is unsaveable and awful.
Also from that article:
"Disney/Fox knows full well that The New Mutants as it exists (or will exist) isn't exactly primed for theatrical breakout even as a full-fledged horror flick, and it may not be worth the theatrical marketing campaign. That said, it will be far more of an event if it pops up as a streaming premiere on Hulu or even Disney+."
"At this point, The New Mutants can either be just one minor theatrical release or a big event by its premiere as a streaming title. It's a matter of being a small fish in a big pond or a big fish in a small pond. Is the X-Men spin-off worth more as a troubled theatrical release or as a significant A-list streaming premiere?"
"Is it more valuable as a theatrical release potentially thriving alongside James Bond 25 and Trolls World Tour next April? The straight-up horror approach will still put it up against March's The Invisible Man and A Quiet Place 2, but that's not an automatic death sentence. Conversely, if Disney is trying to build up the value of their streaming service, there is some weight in offering The New Mutants as the kind of high quality "theater-worthy" content that debuts on Disney+. Yes, assuming it's safely PG-13, I'm guessing even a scary X-Men movie can play on the Disney+ service."
"I do think the critical and commercial reception of Dark Phoenix puts a hurt on The New Mutants in terms of its theatrical potential."
The argument I and many others have been making is that The New Mutants has more value as a D+ property rather than a theatrical release. That still stands.
-
7 hours ago, TimmyRiggins said:
A disconnect? No, just another point of view instead of the rehashed "This film is going to suck, it's a mess, they should dump it on streaming (there's an actual theatrical release date)". If you can't take someone defending the film on a thread that is recycled hate all the time, then I don't know what you're doing here, is there a purpose to your presence here?
Also Kinberg isn't a liar, I'm sure that if you hold him to that level of scrutiny and morality, then there are tons of actors, producers and co who should be called liars. Just because they're not always at liberty to say something, whether it's being cast in a film, or a film's reshoots, doesn't mean they're liars. It's common sense, that's all, Disney could have easily dumped the film earlier, but they're giving a prime theatrical spot, the film cost peanuts, there might be potential there, and you're not behind the scenes anyway, why should you be right and me necessarily wrong?
The reshoots have been planned forever, then the merger, Disney assessing what to do with the film, it's an unusual, difficult situation. Why would Horn, Feige or Iger mention reshoots? It's not their project, they just inherited it, if you want news, it's going to come from the producers of the film or the director man.
1: I don't have a problem at all with people "defending" this film or any film. I do have a problem with untruths.
2: Indeed most of Hollywood is liars and other scum. Including Kinberg. To be fair, part of Kinberg's job as a major Hollywood producer is to lie out of his ass to the press. Just because it's in the job description doesn't make it excusable though.
Here's some of Kinberg's lies:
On why Wolverine isn't in Dark Phoenix: "There was an element of this being Jean’s story. And I was committing so fully to it that I didn’t want to run the risk of pulling away from Jean by going to the well of a fan-favorite character in these movies. I wanted this to be a very different experience of seeing an 'X-Men' movie"
Actually, Wolverine isn't in Dark Phoenix because Hugh Jackman retired from the role, leaving the role vacant. The alternative is you cast a new actor in the role, despite Jackman's Wolverine already being established in this timeline, and knowing this would be his only appearance. LIE.
Here's two lies for the price of one, from May of '18 (after Disney/Fox deal was underway), talking about the upcoming X-Force and Gambit films that were totally on track to be made: “Gambit has a great script and we’re looking to start that movie early next year,” Kinberg said. “Multiple Man, that script’s being worked on right now. [With X-Force] we’re just waiting for Drew Goddard to be done with releasing his film that comes out in a few weeks, and then he’ll get started on that script to direct.”
I'm so glad those Gambit and X-Force films came to fruition. LIES.
Not to mention he's one of the industry's foremost self-promoters. Like when he tried to take credit for the Star Wars Sequel trilogy, of which he is not a credited in any capacity on: "we spent a week with a whiteboard and some pens and were in a conference room all day talking about [movies] VII, VIII, and IX. But it’s a whiteboard covered in our notes. t was the most magical time because we were writing Star Wars movies"
Episode VII, VIII, and IX writer Simon Kinberg? LIES.
Simon Kinberg on the famous trainwreck of a production process that was Fantastic Four, where Josh Trank was known for going crazy on set and eventually removed from the project: "The energy on set is great. Josh Trank is fantastic on set. Really in command, really clear. Just seeing those actors and seeing Josh, the way he’s articulating the tone and the way the actors are executing it gives me a lot of confidence that we’ll actually be able to make a cool Fantastic Four movie." LIIIIEEEEEEESSS
On Fantastic Four reshoots: "To confirm - Fantastic Four will be doing 3-4 days of additional photography with director Josh Trank and some key cast members". LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE. Reshoots reportedly lasted at minimum a month, and most of the second half of the film was reshot.
And then when he contradicted himself within months on a possible X-Men/Fantastic Four crossover, going from "No, it is, they live in discrete universes" to "So, hypothetically, the notion of putting them together is really intriguing, and there’s some really fun stuff that the comics have done in the past. So it’s not out of the realm of possibility" almost immediately. Man can't keep his story straight!
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3: TIL that the first weekend in April is a "prime theatrical spot". Also, you seem to be forgetting that the film had three other release dates it never made. Fourth time is the charm? Until the fifth time.... Or the sixth.
4: As of March, New Mutants is officially Horn, Feige, and Iger's project. They own the studio that produced it. They are in charge of the studio distributing it. It's theirs to do with what they want. Any reshoots will be decided by them, not by Kinberg. Unless Kinberg wants to invest his own millions of dollars. Kinberg may have been planing reshoots, but he's not top dog anymore. The studio he reported to is dead and buried. He is no longer the decision-maker.
Long story short, no one has any reason to believe you of all people claiming inside information on a Disney/X-Force/Anya Taylor Joy project.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, TimmyRiggins said:
By someone who has sources, we'll see if it pans out or not. Your tone is so aggressive man.
So I'm to expect that a random BOTer who has made claims such as:
"That Disney is investing money at all in the film for reshoots MEANS something" (despite the fact no one from Disney, not Iger, Feige, or Horn has mentioned anything about reshoots. Just Simon Kinberg)
Or "You're one of those "Kinberg LIES" folks heh?" (implying Simon Kinberg isn't a known liar, which he is and can be proven upon request)
Or "I can see The New Mutants as one film Feige and co will use to introduce the mutants in the MCU" (despite Feige's statements that the X-Men don't fit into the five year plan and won't be seen for a "very long time"? Feige, a control freak (for the better), doesn't have a reason to retrofit someone else's work into his 12-year pet project.
I'm supposed to believe that some rando who has already shown a disconnect with the facts of the situation has a magical source telling him things that no other publication or journalist has suggested?
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, TimmyRiggins said:
If it allows Boone to make the film he wanted and set out to make at first, then that's great. I've been told Disney wants Anya Taylor Joy in X-Force, so if it means that the reshoots allow New Mutants to live on beyond this one film, or if Disney wants to reuse some of the actors in other films, then that's great.
You’ve been told by who? I can not find a single website or article that puts the words “Disney” “X-Forc and “Anya Taylor Joy” in the same sentence.
-
1 hour ago, tonytr87 said:
If you've been following this shit long enough you realize it happens about every other summer. Summer is May through August. Two to three weeks does not a bad summer make. If July stumbles then...yeah, it'll be a bad summer.
I didn't say it's a bad summer alltogether. I said it's been an uncharacteristically lousy June through what will be the first three consecutive weekends. I realize that will change next weekend.
-
56 minutes ago, tonytr87 said:
This summer hasn't been that bad. It's just been a bad couple of weeks. Next weekend and July should make up for it.
When was the last time "major franchise tentpoles" crashed and burned in three consecutive weeks? I know Toy Story 4 is here next week, but we're almost halfway through the most lackluster June in recent memory.
-
25 minutes ago, dudalb said:
For the record, Yates did a workman like job on the Potter movies, his films was not nearly as creative as a couple of the previous directors, Cuaron in particular.
I think it's unfair to compare any director to Alfonso Cuarón
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, dudalb said:
Good films do not sit around on the shelf for two years.
Good films don't need to be 50% reshot.
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, Captain Craig said:
Which means the film was shot closer to 3years ago circa 2016.
Filming started July '17 and I believe finished that September.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, Litio said:
You suggested that Disney needed to spend "big" money to release NM. I have shown you that it is not like that.
Look, I and others have explained the finances, production troubles, reshoot logistics and surrounding circumstances to you ad nauseam at this point, you clearly have already decided that New Mutants would be a financial success in theatrical release. Even though most movies never recoup their budgets. Even though we're about to have our third consecutive blockbuster flop in as many weeks.
In your mind, it seems Disney has no reason to consider alternative distribution platforms. That it's theatrical or bust.
I'm not going to argue with a psychic.
-
1 minute ago, Litio said:
I said release costs, not budget. Distributor keeps spending money to keep the movie in theaters.
.... I'm not sure how this argument (which applies to any and every movie ever released) is supposed to help New Mutants.
Never mind the fact that the distribution rollout is decided and paid for before any film is released. A distributor is going to pay the same distribution fees regardless of if their film is a breakout hit or dumpster fire in the opening weeks. Generally the first two weeks are locked. For example, "Godzilla 2" didn't lose a single theater in it's second weekend, despite crashing in it's opening weekend.
So those distribution costs are pre-determined and largely insignificant compared to the production and marketing costs.
-
9 minutes ago, Litio said:
Disney spent $0 to produce NM and as I had said before, these expenses increase after the film is released according to reception / success. Films don't significantly increase initial release costs if it doesn't do as expected at BO. These movies you cited were big hits.
1: Disney having not (personally) funded the production budget gives them more leeway to distribute it however they want, not more incentive to release it in theaters.
2: Are you actually claiming that a film's production and/or marketing budget increases AFTER release, based on the box office run? Aside from the distribution of back end revenue points (%) that top line creative talent might receive, this is a hilariously baseless claim.
Tell me, after a film has been produced, marketed, and released, what more is there for the studio to invest in based on the film's box office?
Films DO NOT "significantly increase initial release costs" AFTER being released, based on critical/commercial reception. That's factually impossible. Name me one film that saw it's budget increase after it was released.
-
10 minutes ago, Litio said:
Makes sense, but they didn't take so long to make some changes in Fox calendar.
So why did Disney bother to find a new date for NM in theaters if the movie is unsaveable and it is going to D+?
Paramount scheduled a new release date for Cloverfield Paradox I think a month before it dropped on Netflix.
Having a placeholder release date puts a better face on the project than leaving it undated altogether.
Its also plausible that Disney was considering the theatrical release based on how Dark Phoenix did, and secured the release date if they wanted to go that route.
At the end of the day, it’s just a save-the-date that’s been moved around 3 times and an end easily move some more. Disney is as commited to releasing it in April 2020 as Fox was commited to any of their release dates for NM.
-
1 hour ago, Litio said:
People told me that Dark Phoenix would have the same FF 2015 quality level and it didn't. Seriously, if New Mutants is so garbage, horrible, unsaveable, why didn't Disney simply put it on Hulu? If the film is unsaveable, why are they still wondering what to do with it? If Disney is forced to release this "unsaveable piece of crap" in theaters, why haven't they released it on a limited theatrical run with little or no marketing?
Disney+ isn’t out for at least another 5 months.
Its also wise to give this breathing space from Dark Phoenix.
I love how your options are either release it in theaters in April or dump it on the internet immediately, as if there are no other options.
-
28 minutes ago, Litio said:
Maybe Disney would reshoot New Mutants to prevent it from becoming a bomb like DP?
Like I said before, New Mutants is not a kind of expensive movie. It's not fair to compare it to a movie like Solo.Wasn't I clear when I said: "I'm not saying it will be bigger because of... trailer views, but I mean there's a lot of curiosity about this movie"? I mean there's big potential for NM.... just like there was bigger potential for Red Sparrow.
"Potential" is a dime a dozen. Every movie has potential. Most movies fail to reach their potential. At this point, it's all about cost-benefit. Disney needs cold, hard numbers that show the extra investment, both in production, marketing, and distribution, is worth the chance the film reaches it's "potential". Dark Phoenix's numbers were a stab in the opposite direction. "Potential" doesn't change that. Again I'm not saying Disney will bury this underground. It has a lot of "potential" as a streaming film on D+. Consider it New Mutants getting a head start on the inevitable death of the cinema experience.
-
7 minutes ago, Litio said:
1. Movie looks very cheap. There's only 1 location, no big stars and cheap visual effects from what I've seen from trailer. Disney could reshoot the same movie 3x and prob budget would keep under $100m.
2. 39m of views in this one
2: Well that is interesting. For my metrics I stuck to the official Fox YT channel, as that’s the only outlet for objectively comparable numbers. If you’re really interested I can add up the 10 most watched trailer videos for each of DP and NM but I think that’s excessive.
I’ll add this, that’s the most popular video on that channel with 39m hits. Second most popular vid was trailer to Red Sparrow with 37m hits. Red Sparrow earned just 46m domestic and 151m global. Let’s say the extra 2 million trailer views brings the global tally up to 160m. Is that worth Disney’s time and efforts?
The math behind this is very flawed, the point is YouTube hits doesn’t mean success. Detective Pilachu’s trailer numbers led many to think it was going be a break out hit. Nope.
-
I would never surprised if this ended with positive reviews. This doesn’t look awful, but it doesn’t feel like MiB. The marketing lacks any sense of quirkiness. It lacks the Barry Sonenfeld charm.
The last film from the writing team behind this was Transformers 5. Before that, Punisher 2 and Iron Man, which was famously being rewritten on set by Downy and Favreau.
-
8 minutes ago, Litio said:
Dark Phoenix is going to do about $300m WW with weak reception from audience. A well received New Mutants movie could to do that or even more. In youtube, New Mutants has more trailer views than Dark Phoenix. I'm not saying it will be bigger because of... trailer views, but I mean there's a lot of curiosity about this movie. Horror movies has a audience and superheroes movies too. A well received NM movie can bring enough people to do $300m+ WW.
1: “A well received New Mutants movie”. If FOX thinks half the film needs to be reshot, why do you think it’s assured to be well received? What was the last film delayed for two years so half could be reshot, that was well received? This logic is more wishful thinking than anything concrete. And wishful thinking isn’t enough to invest in reshooting half a film.
2: “New Mutants has more trailer views than Dark Phoenix”. NM has tallied 10.5m views in the 20 months since it came out. The DP trailer from 3 months ago has 11m views and the trailer from a month and a half ago has 9.3m views. So no, New Mutants does NOT have more viewership on YouTube. By the metrics I just listed, interest in NM is lower than DP.
-
11 minutes ago, Litio said:
You said that Dark Phoenix bombed because the movie was not good. Disney is thinking about the possibility of doing reshoots to improve NM and you're suggesting they shouldn't do it? WTF. Isn't better to release a better movie? There's an audience for it.
There's little point to reshoots if it's going to get Cloverfield Paradoxed onto D+. What leads you to think a larger audience awaits New Mutants in theaters than Dark Phoenix drew in? And again, it bears repeating, no one from Disney has mentioned anything about reshoots. Not Feige. Not Iger. Not Horn. Only person talking reshoots is Kinberg, who has been talking about the reshoots since last spring.
At this point it's about cutting your losses. It's easier when those losses are from a now-defunct studio you just absorbed.
-
2
-
-
I spy another delay incoming. This is going to be such a disaster on-screen...
Toy Story 4 Weekend Thread | Estimates: Small Soldiers 118, Puppet Master 14.1, Prince of Persia 12.2 (-30%), Blues Brothers 2000 10.8 (-64%), Beverly Hills Chihuahua: The Squeakquel 10.3 (-58%)
in Numbers and Data
Posted
A victim of unreasonably high (opening weekend) expectations