George Parr
-
Posts
1,880 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Annual Subscriptions
Media Demo
Posts posted by George Parr
-
-
If I were to think that these clowns didn't make those statements just to rile up people, I'd point them at Raiders of the Lost Ark. In it, Belloq compares himself to Indy, and how the two have both "fallen from the pure faith". But that would require someone like the Critical Drinker actually being in any way an honest person interested in arguing in good faith, which he clearly is not. He is nothing more than a con-artists who enriches himself at the cost of gullible people who want to be lied to. Zero integrity.
Seriously, the whole franchise has been about Indy improving himself, and getting rid of bad character traits. You'd have to be blind to miss Temple of Doom starting with Indy finding and selling items to criminals, only to end up saving children and the Sankara stones because it was the right thing to do.
-
5
-
-
59 minutes ago, Firepower said:
Maybe it'll work somehow, but I just think it's usually in poor taste when you do that in the fifth+ film and know characters very well at this point. For example, in Aliens Ripley having a daughter makes perfect sense because it was just second film and we didn't know much, if anything, about her, so character who works as a "space trucker" and on a long trip away from home very likely has family which is waiting for her on Earth, so it doesn't contradict anything and adds to the character. Here I just think it's too late to introduce new best friends "who were always there, just never shown" and goddaughters who didn't even come to Indy's wedding, but "were always there", I guess...
That's the thing though, we only see Indy for a handful of days with each movie.. Then there is a gap of about 20 years, followed by another gap of 10-15 years. That's plenty yof time to "not see" characters.
Sure, one can point to the wedding. But notice who else wasn't there? Willie, Short Round, Sallah, etc. There can be plenty of reasons why someone wasn't seen there, all you need is a logical sound one and you are golden. In this case, Tobey Jones' character might already have been dead, while Phoebe Waller-Bridge's character might have been too young to travel abroad, busy elsewhere, or simply estranged. She is just a goddaughter after all, that is hardly a particularly close connection. All of that can be explained in the movie. If such an explanation is missing in the movie, then you can wonder whether there is a whole in the story.
I don't find characters not appearing before all that much of an issue. It kind of reminds me of the "we didn't see character X in the original trilogy, therefore he couldnt survive Rogue One" argument in Star Wars. It's a logical fallacy. In a galactic civil war, one person being part of one mission, yet not being seen in another, means nothing at all. A galaxy is a huge place, not constantly running into the same characters is a given. Absence isn't proof that the character doesn't exist (anymore), it is merely proof that the character plays no role in this particular storyline.
While setting something up earlier on is preferable, not doing so works just fine as well, provided you can offer a decent explanation as to why a character wasn't seen before.
-
8 hours ago, Firepower said:
Honestly, before watching the actual film, the only problem I have with it is Tobey Jones' and Phoebe Waller-Bridge's characters. I have nothing against those actors obviously and I think they'll do a good job, but when you create new close friends and relatives, that were never ever shown or mentioned before, in the fifth film, it might be ok for Fast & Furious where it's a meme at this point, but it's not ok when you are doing something that's supposed to be good, it's is one of those popular bad storytelling choices and it's baffling to see filmmaker like Mangold using it (buy hey, even Cameron himself just used it). Mangold could just make Phoebe Brody's daughter as she was rumored initially and it would make sense more or less, and she looks like Brody's daughter, but when you also create a new best friend who "was always there, just never shown or mentioned", it's just utter nonsense.
Don't see much of a problem with it. Sure, in theory you could just namedrop people in movies just for future reference, in case you need someone who sounds familiar once you connect that name to an actual role, but that is more something you can do in tv-shows, not so much in movies.
There are also other factors involved. For one, we don't know yet how long the two know each other. Three out of four Indy movies played prior to WW2. If they got to know each other during the war, then he obviously couldn't appear in those. Then you have to add location. If the character is British, he wouldn't have much of a reason to appear in any of the movies, seeing how Indy never is in Britain or its vicinity in any of them. Short Round is in a movie connected to Asia, Sallah in movies connected to the Middle East / North Africa, neither appears when the movie is happening elsewhere. That is perfectly normal. It would in fact be rather odd if these people always showed up no matter where the action happens.
The concept can feel odd if just dropped into an ongoing timeline. But here we have a large gap between the first three and the fourth movie, we have sonmeone from a place that has yet to be visited in the movies, and we don't even know his exact fate, so he may very well have been dead by the time he could have appeared (say, for Indy's wedding). This gives more than enough time and space to add such a character. Doesn't necessarily mean that it will work, but it could very well fit if done right.
-
1
-
-
No change with the second trend.
I think there is a small typo in the numbers you listed yesterday though. John Wick 4 was at 40k, not 50k.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, ChipDerby said:
I IMAGINE that Gideon will appear in the Ahsoka show, or at some point in S4.
I really hope not, that would be terrible.
He makes a grand entrance in season 1, and fails immediately.
The same thing happens again in season 2, he faily even harder and gets captured.
Then season 3 tops all that by having him
Spoilerbe immediately rescued off-screen, appear late in the season and fail even harder than before, with him actually dying.
You can't have a villain who constantly fails like that. Not only does it lack any sort of tension, because he fails as soon as he meets any of the heroes, but bringing him back from THAT would make Palpatine's return in Episode IX look masterfully executed.
-
Yeah, that was fun. Not great, but fun.
Funnily enough, this is the third time in three seasons I preferred the setup to the finale to the finale itself
Overall the season isn't a match to the first two for me. At its best the episodes were a match for the very good episodes of prior seasons, though not quite on the level of the selective truly great ones. But overall there was too much average stuff to not be a drop in quality.
SpoilerA few things I didn't really like:
The end fight felt way too much like a Marvel / DC movie to me. Masked hero fighting masked villain, both amped up through gadgets / special skills. It wasn't bad to watch, but not something I need to see more of.
The force-shields were reminiscent of Phantom Menace, which is a nice callback, but outside of that the whole thing made little sense. Why where thes guards standing there between the shields? And why were they completely unprepared everytime the shields dropped?
And then there is the opening. The seventh episode made a big deal out of capturing Din Djarin, yet somehow only two people end up dragging him (where exactly?) at the start of this one. Shouldn't he have been the main priority?
And then he escapes, Gideon says he will deal with him, and then he doesn't, instead sitting back in his lair waiting for him to romp through his command center, destroying his clones.
Didn't like getting rid of Gideon this way either. You basically don't have him around for most of the season, re-introduce him at the end, and immediately get rid of him. That's not cutting it. Either spend more time on his arc, or have him escape for use in the next season. Preferably in a way that doesn't make him fail completely either. They just entered the secret Imperial council and the papable power-struggle inside of it, and then they get rid of Gideon, ending the whole thing before it could unfold its potential. That was kind of useless.
Everyone flying around in jetpacks shooting at other people flying around in jetpacks - while being hard to identify - is getting a bit stale as well. It would have been more interesting if that hadn't been the go to move five times already this season.
Outside of that the episode was well shot and with some interesting ideas. It's just that the flaws keep them from being more than that. A bit of a theme for this season...
-
2
-
-
Another really good episode.
Loved the new planet in this one. Vibrant colours, sleek and modern look, finally plenty of people around that made it feel like a proper city. The story worked, there were some unique elements to it. Even a bit of "I, Robot" in there.
SpoilerGrogu seemed kind of superfluous in this episode. Makes you wonder why they had to rush him back so quickly after they made him leave at the end of season 2. The whole season so far could have worked just fine without him. Something that would have made an eventual reunion all the more powerful.
The droids bits were very well done. I liked the droid's interest in "wanting to live", and the investigative parts of the story as a whole. Not to mention the call back to Kuiil. For some reason story-arcs that requite detective work seem to work really well in Star Wars.
With the ending to the last episode, and the involvement of Mandalorians a smercenaries in this one, I guess "someone" is trying to create a conflict between the New Republic and the Mandalorians. Probably the story for the finale. I guess we will see very little of Moff Gideon in this season, possibly using his apperance as the bridge to the next season. In a way that would make the whole season more of a setup than a full story on its own though.
-
3
-
-
I agree, it was the best one yet.
There was a bunch of minor stuff that seemed a bit off, but in itself the episode was really good, and the ending was very intriguing. Not among the really great episodes yet, but probably comparable to episodes 3 and 4 of season 2.
SpoilerI really liked the feel of the ending, we could use more of that.
Some of the character-driven moments worked really well, and we got a bit more about where the story is actually heading, something that was a bit lacking over the past few episodes.
The villains were plain as usual, and not a real threat, also as usual. But they were fine as means to advance the plot. I just wish they would take a page out of the old movies or even Andor and not make henchman devoid of anything remotely threatening. It just makes firefights and dogfights rather lame if you know the villains are just there as filler and or target practise who get blown away without much of a sweat.
Some of the minor stuff I meant:
- why do X-Wing pilots constantly run around in their combat-gear? That doesn't make any sense at all. It happened in the past as well. The only reason I can think of is "look, orange suits! you recognize these guys as rebel pilots, yes?", and that is a very weak reason
- space travel seemingly being done in an instant yet again. Way to make the galaxy look small. The pilot travelled from his base to Coruscant, had a short meeting there, then went off to find the Mandalorians, all in what seemed like an hour and half. This has been a weakness since 2015. They REALLY need to learn to create a vague sense of passing time, so it doesn't look like you can reach every place in 5 minutes. The OT and PT never had that issue, because they moved fluently between the different plotlines, hiding the exact time that had passed.
- Nevarro is apparently populated by 50 people. They really need to find a way to scale things right. In Boba Fett they made a Tatooine town look like a sprawling metropolis, and here a decently sized settlement has barely any people in it. Neither really fit. Yes, there is a limit to how many extras you will use on a tv-show, but there are ways to make the number look bigger. Like, don't have them walk slowly to a meeting point and have a shot where you can see all of the tiny bunch, but already have them there, preferably with some caves to hide in. Have just a bunch of people in front, but add some in the background digitally if necessary, or at least imply there is a larger group than that.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Kalo said:
There is one thing it doesn't do very well. in TFA the Resistance wins. they destroy starkiller base. and in TLJ. it shows the resistance being on the brink of extinction. which would be ok. expect we know TLJ takes place directly after TFA because Rey is still meeting Luke. granted I guess we can believe the resistance forces we're really dwindled down already. but then we kind of get into a FA problem, don't get me wrong I enjoy TFA and TLJ. but I feel like it was kind of redundant to make the good guys the rebels again basically. and JJ Abrams just was too lazy to want to write the politics of the New Republic. and his obvious hatred for the prequels shows, by trying to avoid anything they could be seen as similar or political. but really it's just poor world building imo.
That whole thing was a given. It was part one of a trilogy, the bad guys were always going to come back and look more powerful than the heroes, that's what part 2 is for. Just look at the original trilogy. The Death Star gets destroyed. How does the next movie start? With the Empire hunting down the Rebels who are hiding in the middle of nowhere.
TFA wa a bit sloppy in regard to just how capable each side was. It should made it clearer how powerful the First Order was. It mostly hinted that the Resistance was rather weak, but due to nothing about the official stance of the New Republic being mentioned, it remained a bit too vague. The resistance was meant as a group that was kind of shunned by the Republic due to being too "radical". The whole storyline mirrored the period from WW1 up to WW2. The general financial situation requiring a massive reduction in military capablities, as no one could afford the massive wartime armies anymore. A fallen Empire, rising from the ashes in an even more fanatical way, rearming in secret. Appeasement. Democracy undermined by elements who pretend they are democratic, or who use the means of democracy to undermine it. Attempts to whitewash those who were responsible for the past, attempts to make fanatical groups seem benign, while portraying those who warn about the threat as scare-mongers lusting for war. The elements are all there. And in itself it is a great basis for a story. Sadly, only a bare minimum of the circumstances got mentioned directly. JJ Abrams went more with the adventure and general feeling, not so much with an in-depth story behind the whole thing.
Going with Empire vs. Rebels again was rather cookie-cutter. But in a way it offered the easiest way to please everyone. You could get the heros back, you could use the designs everyone knew and loved, and in a way it offered the biggest stakes as well. It appealed to the broadest possible audience, with no real risk involved. And seeing how the movie was received, it excelled at that. At the cost of not being the most creative, as well as being too vague about the whole scenario its story was based on.
-
2
-
-
This show just lacks the *oomph* for me this season so far. It's always kind of good, but there hasn't been a single episode that I felt was great. With just four episodes left, I don't think this season can match up with the last two. It would need an almost perfect streak the rest of the way for that.
The dialogue has some issues that weren't quite that noticeable in the past, and it hasn't really had any magical moments like the last two seasons had. The fight-scenes have been good at times, but they haven't really offered anything unique either, so they can't really make up for other issues.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Daxtreme said:
Years ago I would have agreed with you. But having seen hundreds if not thousands of movies since then, I no longer agree. Not because what you say is false, but because...
No amount of logic or reasoning or explanation will make someone change how they feel about a movie (generally).
That is how baumer feels. That's how the movie made him feel.
You can explain all you want that the movie was exactly how it was marketed to be, or that the TFA+TLJ story progression makes perfect sense, but the truth is that some people felt that it didn't. That it went against everything TFA set up. That they felt betrayed by the story and its handling of the characters. And that is all there is to it.
I'm mostly ambivalent on this (I used to hate TLJ but after a rewatch I gave it around a 7/10) but I can see where baumer is coming from.
Sometimes, emotions trump everything else.
Sorry for continuing the dreaded TLJ discussion but I feel like people are being unfairly mean to his opinion here...
edit: For the record I've always enjoyed your contributions around these forums George, they're always insightful, keep doing what you're doing. I just had to throw my 2 cents here
Well, yes, sometimes emotions trump everything else, that is very much true. And I don't see anything wrong in someone disliking a movie or even hating it if the person feels he needs to go there.
That being said, one should not accept people throwing reality out of the window. Otherwise you end up with certain people and their alternative facts. People can feel whatever they want, but they do not have the right to lie about stuff or pretend that their feelings matter more than facts. At that point you simply have to draw the line. You shouldn't try to force your opinion onto them, but correcting incorrect statements is a given, even if you generally like the person (or maybe, especially then?).
Someone's dislike for a movie is not wrong, there is no argument to be made against someone feeling he didn't like a movie. A person cannot be wrong about his own opinion. He can however make up faux reasons for it that go against what is actually happening in the movie, and that is not an opinion anymore. There is something you can have an opinion about (e.g. was a movie good or not), there are things that are open to interpretation, but there are also things that either happened or didn't happen. What one feels should have happened has no bearing whatsoever on whether the person behind a sequel followed up on what the first movie set up.
Logic and reason may not convince someone who hates something that he is wrong, but that doesn't mean you should stop saying facts under such circumstances. If you let incorrect things stand, other people may confuse it for being true. Bad things happened way too often when people didn't speak up. Now, that is rather meaningless on such a largely irrelevant topic as a movie, but the principle remains the same. Not to mention that there are actual people behind these movies, whose lives are very much impacted if people lie about them or drag their name threw the mud out of petty personal feelings. Just look at Ahmed Best and Jake Lloyd. Someone who cares so much about his own feelings should maybe try and not trample over the feelings of everyone else, or it just comes off as entitlement.
I have no issue with Baumer hating The Last Jedi, unless you consider feeling it would have been nicer if he had enjoyed it to be having an issue with it
I very much remember him being very positive about Attack of the Clones back on the old BOM-forum, at a time when quite a few members were throwing mud at it. It would very much be preferable if people didn't need to hate something, but that's just not feasible. There are way too many people for there not to be a group to hate something. No matter what you do, someone will always dislike it. But disliking it does not give someone the right to make false claims.
-
1
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, baumer said:
TLJ it's just pure trash. There's nothing redeeming about that film. Everything that was set up in the force awakens was shit on flushed down the toilet and forgotten about by Rian johnson. I've never disliked anything about Star wars before the last jedi. The last Jedi changed all of that. It's the only Star wars production I truly despise.
Funny, I can't think of a single thing that was set up in TFA that was somehow "forgotten about" in TLJ, much less "shit on". The movie did in fact adhere strictly to everything TFA said. It was TFA that split up the heroes prior to the second part. It was TFA that claimed that Luke blamed himself for what happened and left everything behind, it was TFA that showed us that Finn cared mostly about Rey and saving his own skin and not about being a hero of the resistance. That the list goes on and on.
I think some people just confuse what they read into the story - or wanted to happen - with what TFA actually said.
-
7
-
1
-
-
Some interesting stuff in there. The flow once again could have been better, but the content itself had some very cool elements to give a better picture of the New Republic, and tie everything more together.
SpoilerLoved to see TIE-Interceptors again. They have put way too much focus on regular TIEs (and X-Wings for that matter) while ignoring the other ship-types over the recent past, so it's good to see a bit more variety, like the TIE-Bomber in Andor or the Interceptors here. Though I felt the CGI was rather awkward. They had much better looking ships than that in the past.
The storyline of the doctor was pretty interesting, though I think the episode suffered a bit from the completely seperate bits. First you get a bunch of stuff with Din and Bo-Katan, then an abrupt cut to Doctor Pershing, on which they spend a ton of time, before it suddenly went back to Din and the other Mandalorians again. I think that could have been intervowen a bit better, something they didn't quite manage in the episodes before either.
Coruscant looked cool, the opening shot amazing even, though later on there were a few rather shoddy bits as well. Still nice to get a feel of the whole place, as well as a bit of story about incorporating old Imperials into the New Republic.
That being said, what on earth was that sheer level of incompetence by the New Republic doctors, or whatever they were? Lets start a procedure and then have everyone leave, while leaving a "guest" behind. What could possibly go wrong?
How do you have five people around doing basically nothing before the whole thing starts, only for everyone to leave while it is actually going on?
Also not quite sure what Kane's plan was. The lab is entirely irrelevant to her, she needs the doctor to put it to any use, so why risk damage to him by frying his brain?
Unless the idea is to wipe him clean and hope to wash away his guilt about working for the Empire, so you can manipulate him to work for the remnant. I guess we will see about that.
-
I would agree with that. Definately a step up from the first one, but not really a match for the best the show has shown in the past.
There is some cool stuff in there, but the flow isn't there yet. Dare I say it, it is almost a bit JJ Abrams'esque in the way it rushed through stuff so far and even dropped earlier storypoints quickly.
SpoilerI'm not sure why they spend quite a bit of time on the rebuilding of IG-11, only to drop it right away in the next episode. He "needed" IG-11, because it was the only droid he trusts. Yet he stopped rather quickly looking for parts, took another droid instead, and the whole thing wasn't all that important when he was on Mandalore anyway. Why all that focus on IG-11 then?
Feels like a waste of time to spend all that screentime building up the necessity for this particular droid, only to not do anything with it in the next one.
Come to think of it, if that was were the story was heading, it may have been a better fit to have him go to Tatooine at the end of the first episode. Have him settle on R5 instead, and THEN go and visit Bo-Katan. Going Nevarro->Tatooine->Mandalore system, stopping by at Bo-Katan's place, makes more sense then him suddenly visiting Bo-Katan - which didn't fit to his need to find parts for IG-11 - then heading for Tatooine, and then going back to the Mandalore system.
-
15 hours ago, Impact said:
Finally I can reply, I kept on trying but my phone kept on wanting to quote posts instead! Anyway, how the heck is the Last Jedi not mentioned yet? I thought that was pretty much hated.
It never was, nor were any of the other movies really. It's just another case of a group of people shouting the loudest, and many people confusing that with them being a majority. That's barely ever actually the case though.
What TLJ has, is a sizeable part of the fandom who cannot stand the movie at all. But they aren't remotely close to being the majority of the fandom, and they are even further away from being a majority among the general audience.
In general terms, you tend to have the general public, which quickly moves on to the next thing, and who tends to be the a majority of the audience. Their reception can differ, but they aren't really getting involved in any debates about the movie. They were looking for some enjoyment, they either got it or they didn't, but it's not a big deal either way.
Then you have the hyped fanboys, who tend to tell everyone how awesome the movie was in the early going after the release, before eventually quieting down. They might still talk about the movie in a smaller circle, but they don't feel the need to convince everyone how much they should love the movie once the initial rush is over. And then you have the detractors, who tend to be incapable of moving on. They try to make every debate about how much the movie sucks, and will continue to harp on about it for months or years. The latter are the worst, not because they dislike the movie, but because they cannot live without trying to make others feel bad about about the movie (or themselves for daring to like it).
-
1
-
1
-
-
16 hours ago, Hatebox said:
I think people's silence on this says more than words ever could. Thanks for the tacit answer everyone 😔
Uh, no, it doesn't. Sometimes people aren't around, or just don't bother answering a question they might not care about.
First off, I don't see where "low stakes" comes from in the first place. Sure, it didn't have the fate of the galaxy at stake, but that was about to be expected, considering who the character is and that it is just a tv-show.
As a whole, the quest of the week format mostly stayed around, though there was a bit more of an overarching storyline. It was quite a bit different than the first one, though if you didn't love the first one I doubt that would change for the second one.
-
3
-
-
It was fine, I guess, but a season opener should have a bit more oomph than that.
My feeling after the end was more of a Book of Boba Fett like "okay, lets see what they will do next week", and not a "gimme that next episode right now!" the way much of the last two seasons and Andor had done.
-
On 2/21/2023 at 8:27 PM, CaptNathanBrittles said:
It would be pretty embarrassing for the American film industry if they awarded Best Picture to an inferior German remake of an American classic that won in 1930.
It's not a remake of an American classic, it is an adaption of a German book. Both movies being an adaption of said book doesn't make the newer movie a remake of the older one. Or would you consider Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings movies to be a remake of the 1978 animated movie?
Not that there would be anything embarrassing about it regardless of the circumstances. Every year is different. Even if the new All Quiet on the Western Front were no match for the old one - which is up to debate and not a fact - it winning Best Picture would say nothing about the state of the American film industry. All it would really say, is that the majority of voters thought the output of the American film industry over the last year was not as good as this particular movie. It doesn't even give you a clue what they would say about the movie when compared to the movies of 2021 or 2023.
-
On 2/9/2023 at 8:09 PM, CaptNathanBrittles said:
I can't blame Abrams, he had a ridiculously short amount of time to complete a film of that size. Blame Disney and their release dates.
At least ROS didn't have a malicious soul like TLJ, it was just incredibly dumb.
There is nothing malicious whatsoever in TLJ, such a claim is just nonsense.
-
4
-
1
-
-
Don't see it. First of, the death of Carrie Fisher kind of prevented them from doing anything else with her character. Secondly, the old heroes were not the main protagonist of the ST, they were mentors who passed on the torch. You know what happened to those kind of characters in the OT and PT? They died!
Obi-Wan and Yoda died in the OT, and you can kind of add Anakin to that as well. Yet, ROTJ was most definately a happy ending.
It's not like their deaths were somehow surprising. People were surprised that Harrison Ford returned at all, and then assumed that it would just a one off to get his character killed. The death of his character was essential to the story and character development of the antagonist. Luke was supposed to die in Episode VIII even in the story Lucas had written, which was also what happened to all Jedi masters we had seen before. Luke basically went out in the biggest blaze of glory of any character in the saga, sacrificing himself to save others, the epitome of what it means to be a Jedi. Maybe some people thought along the lines of "I love my old heroes, I don't want them to die", and that is fine, I didn't "need" to see them die either. But it certainly would be a sorry excuse of writing if they survived just because of that.
IX had many issues, the fate of the big three was not one of them.
-
Are you sure that's admissions and not money?
Insidekino has him a lot lower than that for the whole weekend, much less opening day.
Anyway, here is the first trend ( http://www.insidekino.com/News.html )
#1 Avatar 2: 360k (-29%)
#2 Die drei ???: 250-350k
#3 Puss in Boots 2: 140k (-3%)
Pathaan: 30k in limited viewings
-
5
-
2
-
-
First trend is up: http://www.insidekino.com/News.htm
#1 Avatar 2 675k (-40%)
#2 M3gan 170k
#3 Puss in Boots 2 150k (-41%)
#4 Operation Fortune 85k (-33%)
#5 The Banshees of Inisherin 60k (-1%)
-
5
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Brainbug said:
Thats one point i have been arguing for for a long time as well. One part (of many) reasons why the german box office numbers decreased in the 2010s i believe is that the Superhero genre never really took off here. Sure, it has a fanbase in Germany and some Superhero movies like Endgame grossed a lot, but compared to markets like the US, South Korea or Latin American markets, the genre is just not that popular here.
It certainly hasn't helped that the movies Hollywood produces don't really line up with German tastes anymore. Germany was really into comedies, especially romantic ones. They are all but gone now. Fantasy movies? Pretty rare these days, and for the most part either sequels or to material that isn't that well known here. Animated tentpoles? All but gone, all that is left are the 5th sequel to a once well-received franchise, or a multitude of rather generic animations.
Marvel has certainly grown a lot over the last few years, but that's still just going from "nobody cares" to decent, and with the the biggest one like Endgame to "preyy big hit". A far cry from what you can see elsewhere. And if that's supposed to be the biggest movies around, you are kind of screwed.
And as has been mentioned on insidekino again and again, and I think Mark G. also told it countless times in speeches in front of studio-managers: the schedules are simply horrendous.
With worldwide releases being common these days, the whole thing runs counter to the way German cinema works. Here winter is the best time to release movies, it's the time where audiences are prepared to spend indoors as the weather just doesn't cut it. Sadly it is also the time Hollywood has little to offer outside of the recent trend to big christmas releases. To make matters worse, the studios also don't drop big German releases either, so they largely waste the best time of the year.
And to top things off, they also couldn't be bothered to use common sense and avpoid competition. You will see two decently sized animated movies aimed at kids come out one week apart, only for none of this type to arrive over the next few months. People will go out and see a movie if you have something interesting to offer, but many weeks are wasted because there's just nothing with decent hype coming out as all studios try to cram their best movies into a few condensed months.
-
2
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, CoolioD1 said:
i thought johnson would be bold enough to try something different but this is just a more annoying version of the first one. i just don't think he's very good at writing murder mysteries i guess. it's gonna age like milk.
Huh?
Glass Onion has little resemblance to Knives Out. It is a rather clear departure from what he did with the first one.
And if he wasn't good at writing murder mysteries, then Knives Out wouldn't have had a great reception either (not to mention that this one has a rock solid one as well).
Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny | June 30 2023 | Very mixed reviews out of Cannes
in Box Office Discussion
Posted
No, it wasn't.
Reviews were good but not great, starting at Cannes and continuing from there. The same can be said for audience reactions, which for the most part was in the mold of "pretty solid entertainment, not on the level of the first three". The over the top criticism came from the usual loudmouths, who represent a vocal minority, not the general audience. The latter pretty much never really cares about some over the top stuff or things that impact the lore, only fans really do (outside of loons who love to hate stuff for the sake of hating on it, but those tend to be very few). Just like with the Star Wars sequels, it's fans who freak out if something isn't according to their liking, not a casual viewer. The casual viewer doesn't go to length telling others how good or bad something is, he simply doesn't care enough to do that. Only people with a fixation on the movie do.
Sadly, those who shout the loudest often get remembered, even if they don't represent the actual audience as a whole. That's how a movie with a reaction that was just fine (and not more than that) somehow got slandered as bad, horrid or whatever else you can think of, which isn't in any way representative of the audience reaction at that time.