ThiagoMaia

Isn't that similar to Alice Through the looking Glass? The abandonment of 3D and the way worse exchange rates could account for most of that. Also, one has to assume that there is still interest, no movie's gross is subject to the previous, the previous just serves to show how much interest there was for the franchise at the time of it's release. I think that Avatar's run, with all it's 3D, and being 12 years ago, is not that great a picture of how much interest there is. It's not like Star Wars where the popular culture influence is incredible, there are not many people clamoring for the sequel. I wouldn't rule out those incredible drops from the first, all around the world, that you mentioned. I think 1.5 billion is a win for it, and the sequels will only go lower.

Dude, no need to do that. She is just bringing up a possible theory, which no one here really knows if it's true or not. Do you suppose Movie pass has no effect at all? Why do you mind her bringing it up as a possible explanation for some box office data so much? You can just ignore her messages if they bother you so much. Either way, let's just all be nice.

I was very pleasently surprised by season 2. I was not that interested on season one, because I didn't get invested in any of the characters. Now I feel that the characters are more well stabilished, and I got invested into almost all of them. Loved the possessed Will aspect. Also thought that Mad Max and her douche brother were cool additions, so was Bob. I also loved how they got different characters that didn't get to interact much on season 1 to spend time together, like Sheriff and Elle, and Steve and the kids. Episode 7 was really off, mostly because it was rushed, and the characters were unlikable. Thought I'm looking forward to see 8, and other numbers with cool powers in the future. Also I thought the Elle side of the climax was pretty meh, just Eleven pushing her powers to do something that saves the day, same as season 1 iirc. Anyway, great season, increased my interest in the show 200%. Definitely going to watch season 3 sooner after the release.

Interesting. Do you know what is the largest raw drop domestically? Is TLJ taking that too? I could totally see Fallen Kingdom dropping 330+ from JW.

The way Feige is playing (not really saying it is connected, nor that it isn't) makes me feel that they are making it in a way that it is not explicitly connected, and they are just waiting to see if it's going to be well received, and if it is, both critically and commercially, they are going to use Hardy's Venom on the next Spider-Man, or Tom Holland on the next Venom movie. And if it is a turd we can just ignore it, and stop caring about Sony's ideas altogether.

Right? It deserved way more.

I voted for Get Out. Really impressive legs and total considering it's budget and the fact that was sold basically on the quality alone. Is there going to be a surprise flop of the year cathegory too?

Honest question, pardon my ignorance, but are script and screenplay different things?

Ok, sorry, I read them, still didn't get a good understanding of what "subjective" means in the sense you're using it. But if don't want to talk anymore, not going to press you.

Ok let's try this then: can you please elaborate on what you mean by: "it's all subjective" and why you are so sure that it being subjective is objectively true? I'm honestly asking, ok? Like to have well defined terms in discussion.

If it is so subjective why is there so much agreement?

One more thing I'd like to add. It was actually something that a post by @JonathanLBgot me thinking about. He talked a few weeks back, about how the award movies recently have been more disconnected from the GA than they used to be in the past. It got me thinking that one of the reasons for this is that movie making as an art is constantly developing, in the sense that once someone has an idea, other people can copy it. And that's why, for example, even a crappy movie from today is going to have way more elaborate, and most times better, camera work, than a good movie from the 50s. Now, that is obvious, I know, but one thing we should keep in mind, is that the access to knowing what has come before depends on a person's interest on knowing it, and so a critic or a member of the academy, is going to have seem way more movies than a common movie goer, most people don't watch old movies, they usually only watch movies from their lifetime. That leads to the fact that as time goes by, each generation of critics knows more movies than the previous, while the GA knows roughly the same amount. And as a result, GA can be pleased with the same things generation after generation, while movie critics are more inclined to like what is original and fresh. Just my two cents on this matter. Of course this doesn't explain the whole issue, but it might be one of the factors.

Yes, I think in that is why a person can recognize that a movie is good without really liking it. But even here, if we were to share our personal criteria for evaluating a movie we would habe a lot in common. I think that one of the most subjective aspects of a person's enjoyment of a movie is connection to characters.

Why can't there be objective good or bad? I mean, why do critics review movies, and there are awards dedicated to the best movies? Are those people simply voting on their opinion? Why is it that so often people like the same things? I feel like this position that there can't be objectively good or bad in art sort of diminishes the value of studying and knowing things. On the last few years ago have tried to learn more about film, and have been rewarded with the hability to enjoy more films that I normally wouldn't. And I believe that most people on this website also like to study film, and try to watch the movies that are generally considered the best. If everything is just "each person has their own opinion" why bother arguing? I believe discussion about this things help us see new things and enjoy more the good things about this art that we like. I don't think there is any reason to just be dogmatic about there not being absolute good or bad, even because our opinion can change, if the opinions that I had 5 years ago are just as good and valid as they are now, what have I learned? What has changed in my life? I'm not saying that everybody should like the same things but I'm saying that we should make an effort to understand what we are talking about and reward filmmakers who are passionate, creative and well-learnt. Also, I agree with @TwoMisfits that rotten tomatoes needs to do something about this inflation of scores of recent movies. I don't think this says anything about "best ever lists" overall specially because I doubt that any rotten tomatoes critics would put those 12 movies from 2017 on their top 100 of all time, it's just a matter of improving the math behind the ranking.

I think what he is talking about doesn't change even if the movie is good. The fact that it cost a lot, and antecipation levels seem low even in US which is the main market for Star Wars, and the fact that it's coming only 6 months after another Star Wars movie with apparently mixed WOM, make it look like it has big chances of not being profitable.

We're doing one letter acronyms now?

Crazy, right? That 73% is the biggest increase for a movie in 3000+ theaters ever! Also, Jumanji has the 4th.

Should I count myself? I loved it. My friends were: 8 loved or liked it, 2 didn't like it or hated it. 28:7 Still 80%

I was going to make this exact post. Literally I was going to start with "Expectations are everything" Does Jumanji have a chance of passing TLJ dailies tomorrow? Taking 2006 as an example, if TLJ goes like NatM, and Jumanji like most other movies that year, Jumanji will have a bigger Saturday. Thought Jumanji is probably more similar to NatM, right?

Thank you for the tip, gonna check it out. But if it's possible I would like to keep using Imdb because I'm used to it, and already have my lists and ratings there.

Yeah, I know, my point is exactly that there are more factors, it's not as simple as was suggested. Barnack cited other examples that are not as dark or long as BR2049 and still weren't break outs of the size of Jumanji.

Does anyone here use Imdb's list feature to make lists? I use it to keep track of my top 100 movies to for Panda's list (by the way, is that still a thing?), But recently they changed the system, and apparently the only way to change the order of titles is change the number of the titles you want to change the order, witch in a 100 titles list is going to take forever. Does anyone know of another way?

I like you, man. I find you to be probably the most consistently reasonable poster in this forums. Not that there are not other posters who are usually reasonable, but you always come up with great analysis and counter points, taking many variables into account. Keep up the good work.

Didn't work for Blade Runner...

Yeah, I can understand your position, @Valonqar, you have been consistent in your treatment of the movie, for what I have observed, and I respect that, even agree with some of your critiques (is this the right word? Not a native English speaker), even thought I certainly enjoyed the movie more than you, because the highs were really high for me. I just feel that certain people would have said different things about the quality of the movie if the number was 35 instead of 27, even thought that has no bearing on the quality at all.