Jump to content

GirafficPark

Free Account+
  • Posts

    804
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GirafficPark

  1. I actually dont care, SW isnt really that big a deal for me. Im simply interested in the numbers. The justifications im seeing here are very weak thats all. The notion that TLJ is responsible for the 'death' of SW is laughable. My opinions are based on historical data, most others seem to be based on personal opinions.
  2. The n8umbers say the opposite of what you think because you arent looking at the right ones. Solos numbers are irrelevant to the episodes. I guess TFA should have failed because Clone Wars took so little? People seem to forget about Clone Wars (waits for the excuses).
  3. +20-25% is likely. Nearer 20% I suspect. It will increase because its the last in the trilogy and (for some reason) people will trust Abrams.
  4. How did he? They were pretty much in line with expectations for me. The only one not so obvious was Poe, but only because in TFA he wasnt even 2D, so anything was possible.
  5. You didnt rebutt it, you made a claim, I rejected it. A rebuttal implies you had authority of accuracy, which you don't have, you only have an opinion.
  6. TTT is irrelvant. For a start FOTR was awesome as was TTT, that helps big time, they also had huge international appeal that SW doesnt have.
  7. AOTC had worse but ROTS went up. Empire had great reception, but Jedi went up. Quality means nothing in the SW universe. Solo has not dropped so bad because of quality, its dropped because its pointless and internationally because its pointless and no one cares about Han Solo.
  8. So youre ignoring the other 2 SW trilogies.. AGAIN. Keep it up, there is another 18 months to go until you are proven wrong.
  9. Its not relevant in any way whatsoever what TA4 makes compared to TA3. Couldnt be less relevant to SW if you tried.
  10. I have seen people say it. For a Movie as marginal as this looks like it will be the after theatre revenue is very important indeed. It wouldnt save a monster like John Carter thats true. The streaming market is very new though so right now we dont know how it will play out, but as an example look at 'Bright' or Altered carbon as a TV show. Neither are going to be directly 'profitable in the sense that they bring in $100M of new subs each, but they are considered successful because they are getting sequels.
  11. Half the stuff they post is garbage, and thats being generous. At this point all they are doing to trying to generate interest in a marketing strategy thats dying more by the day.
  12. Thats exactly what it is though. Movies are being made now that never get to the theatres at all, by the likes of Netflix and Amazon, their value comes from their existence as part of a library. With Disney also going the streaming service route the long term value in Solo is as part of a library. The same is happening with TV. Ratings are becoming ever more meaningless, which is why amazon picked up 'The Expanse'.
  13. This place might not, but the studios consider ALL revenue sources, not just the BO. The days of the BO being it all are long gone, the subject of losing money at the box office is now an irrelevant subject. Move with the times man.
  14. STILL ignoring that its completely normal for SW to do that I see. SW is a hype driven franchise, not a quality driven one.
  15. Not comparable since SW has only one thread, the MCU has both the ongoing larger story and the individual stories.
  16. This is agree with, but Solo isnt part of this because its stand alone and in no way part of the ongoing story. The biggest problem for SW was that TFA was a terrible base to build on. All the DCEU movies over preformed their quality, imagine what they could have done if they were good?
  17. Solo is a failure, because it cost too much. Disney got over confident I guess. I dont think its a failure of a movie though.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.