Jake Gittes
-
Posts
13,694 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
14
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Annual Subscriptions
Media Demo
Posts posted by Jake Gittes
-
-
-
As long as it's not like Alps or The Killing of a Sacred Deer (a movie I admittedly should give another chance) I'm good.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, DInky said:
I feel like if Zack Snyder, for example, made the same exact movie then it'd have 0% on RT.
Zack Snyder couldn't make the same exact movie because he is Zack Snyder and not Francis Ford Coppola.
This line of argument is trotted out a lot but it's built on a false premise. No piece of work exists in a vacuum, and if it's made by someone who's been creating for a long time, no shit it's gonna gain a part of its meaning through the context of their life and work. You can't just decide to forget who made the movie.
-
7
-
-
1 hour ago, MysteryMovieMogul said:
I have a feeling IF is going to be a film critics don't like because of a weird dislike of Ryan Reynolds but audiences enjoy because they don't actually dislike Ryan Reynolds.
Or you could read some actual reviews and see the actual reasons critics didn't like it instead of making shit up.
-
6
-
-
32 minutes ago, AJG said:
critics trying to hitch their wagon on the back of potential Oscar-bait movies
They only do that in your bizarre paranoid fantasies. What's happening is different individuals are responding to what they saw.
-
1
-
-
Stephanie Zacharek is the one critic so far whose mixed/negative take I do pay attention to. Heartening reception overall, though.
-
3
-
-
Ferrari, The Last Duel, Annette (Carax isn't that old but it was another movie Driver helped get made) all good. And fingers crossed for Heat 2. If I were him I'd jump at the chance to hang around the old-timers while I still could, too.
-
7
-
-
11 minutes ago, kayumanggi said:
Non-existent Saturday bumps and now the same drop from Sunday to Monday that it had from Saturday to Sunday. Never seen a movie (at least a major wide release) hold quite like this.
-
8
-
-
To me a closer comparison than The Tree of Life, which was basically autobiography in the familiar-but-pushed-to-the-extreme Malick style, seems to be Cloud Atlas (ambitious, philosophically blunt science fiction passion project with a nine-figure budget that had to be raised outside of Hollywood). Hopefully this can find a bigger audience.
-
5
-
-
He still sucks for that though. Shoulda gotten bitched out
-
52 minutes ago, TMP said:
Honestly just hoping I Saw the TV Glow doesn’t get lost in the shuffle once it starts expanding next week; that’s a movie that’s going to mean a lot to a lot of different people, and even beyond that it’s just such an incredibly original & well-made movie. Can’t stop thinking about it
I'm very much looking forward to it but if it's anything like World's Fair I think a 5m total would be a huge win.
-
R-rated genre films like Civil War tend to hold better on weekdays, then have lower Friday and Saturday increases.
Looking at recent PG-13 movies that opened in this range outside of summer/holidays, The Fall Guy had the same Monday drop as M3GAN and The Woman King (they dropped 40% and 42% in their second weekend respectively, the former with the MLK weekend to soften it), and a slightly worse one than The Lost City (dropped 52% against Morbius' 39m, probably the closest comp to Apes) and Dungeons & Dragons (bulldozed by Mario).
-
It's a fine hold for a PG-13 action movie. Exact same as that of Guardians 3 last year. Which, yes, was not facing a big opener in its second weekend, but still.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Jake Gittes said:
a 9-years-later prequel with no main returning actors
Realized right after hitting post that this almost exactly describes The Hobbit, which came in juuuuuust below Fellowship unadjusted and 20% under Return of the King. And 120-150 could be the range for this unless it just really doesn't hook people.
-
If this doesn't outperform Fury Road, it's because a 9-years-later prequel with no main returning actors is an uphill battle for any franchise. Still, hopefully the reviews out of Cannes are similarly enthusiastic and kick the awareness/hype up a notch.
-
8
-
-
That's only nine minutes shorter than the original cut of Apocalypse Now.
-
1
-
-
Sub-60% hold from Sunday.
-
3
-
3
-
-
8 minutes ago, AJG said:
See - these are the numbers I expected OW for both films.You mean for these intellectual, avant garde films?
-
29 minutes ago, AJG said:
They’re both movies for adults the same way Frasier was a sitcom for “smart” people.
I’m saying they should be sold like something that actually looks appealing rather than Letterboxd approved critic bait.If your personal notions of "appealing" and "letterboxd approved critic bait" have no overlap, it doesn't mean it's the same for everyone, or that it's the marketing's problem. As far as I'm concerned treating people as if they were grown-ups is better than treating them as if they were babies.
-
6
-
-
53 minutes ago, AJG said:
A thing I’ve seen with films like Challengers and Civil War are that they’re advertised like they’re these Oscar-bait, intellectual, avant-garde cinematic experiences. I feel like I have to put in effort just to sit through them, and I think people might find it off-putting or exhausting.
I think you're just trying to say that they're films for adults.
-
2
-
-
Pitt was a draw during the period Moneyball was made (mid-00s to mid-10s). He'd aged into a respected actor and was coming off a bunch of critical and commercial successes, and his presence obviously helped a movie with pretty dry subject matter.
-
4
-
-
46 minutes ago, AJG said:
Every movie produced by these corporations are mainstream movies. The subject matter doesn’t matter.Bones and All wasn't produced by these corporations, only acquired by them for distribution. Which doesn't magically make it mainstream. The subject matter and style are exactly what makes a movie more or less accessible, not the logo in front of it.
-
4
-
2
-
-
Somehow I feel like I never see this concern over the budgets when some useless franchise movie fails to turn a profit. A quality movie should cost what it needs to cost, and I think Amazon can just about survive spending 55m on this.
-
6
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Cmasterclay said:
I could be wrong about those movies making that money in 2015. My thing is more - if it's the product, then we can look at the product from 2015 and see if films of that quality (marketing and star power) are really missing from the schedule, or are they doing less? 2015 actually a shitty example because wow a pretty bad year for midsized movies, but over 70 million you had Spy, Trainwreck, Get Hard, Goosebumps, Pixels, The Intern, The Imitation Game, The Intern all over 70 million. So instead of asking what Challengers or Civil War would have done then, the more fair question is to ask what those films would have done NOW. Because I don't think I see 50m domestic for any of them. So I'm not convinced it's a product issue - that list ain't exactly hot product, and they all made near or over 100m.
It's a competition-for-attention issue. 2015 was the year of the first Netflix Original film (Beasts of No Nation) which was followed by Adam Sandler, the star of one of the movies you brought up, going to work with them exclusively. That got the streaming ball rolling. Before that point movies that weren't big-screen spectacles didn't have to do as much to prove they were worth a trip to the theater, so of course they made more money. To answer your question, I'd say Trainwreck, Get Hard, The Intern and The Imitation Game (that's a 2014 movie, but whatever) make significantly less or are streaming exclusives today; Spy, with its combo of ensemble, reviews and action element, probably makes close to as much (it actually didn't make as much as it could/should have in 2015, relative to McCarthy's earlier much less well-reviewed star vehicles); Goosebumps, an IP thing starring Jack Black, surely does fine as well; Pixels is either a Netflix movie with Sandler or it obviously stars Ryan Reynolds and is bigger if anything.
But also, like @AniNate said, what's the point? We are in both a post-streaming and post-COVID world, not in 2015, and it may be more relevant to note that both Civil War and Challengers are surely making more than they would have in 2021-22. Some ground's been gained back. The issue is not the product, it's making it look worth the effort of going to the theater with all the other options around - and worth the money, too, since there is also apparently the unresolved issue of the high ticket prices.
-
6
-
Weekend Thread (5/17-19/2024) | WEEKEND ESTIMATES: $35M for IF, $12M for Strangers, $2.85M for Back to Black, $26M for Apes
in Numbers and Data
Posted