johnboy3434

I don't really see the point in monitoring the RT reviews (of any movie, not just PR) until it reaches the sample size requirements for Certified Fresh: at least 80 reviews, including five or more from Top Critics. That's around the point where the score settles in and doesn't budge.

That's hardly an insult, considering Dunaway's performance was fucking amazing. I get the feeling all you've seen of that movie is the "no wire hangers" clip. It would be rather consistent with your judging Banks' entire performance based on what's in the trailers.

Aren't you a mod? Isn't that worth an infraction or something?

I can certainly understand people not wanting to see this movie and thinking it looks bad, but what justification do some posters here have for actively wanting this movie (or any movie, really) to fail and fail spectacularly? What do you gain from its failure, and how does that outweigh the loss of people who might actually have enjoyed it? It's unnecessarily mean-spirited. Hell, I can even understand if you want something like Hillary's America to fail, because it has a real-world agenda beyond making money (which it thankfully didn't). But fuckin' Power Rangers? How can its existence offend your sensibilities that much?

We're actually all the same person and that's a photograph.

And how exactly is it doing that? Because their suits are armor-like? They did that in the first PR film from the mid-90s. The aesthetics of the Zords don't exactly scream Bayformers either.

I was referring to the past four TF films being so successful (35.8%, 22%, 54.2%, and 33.7% returns on investment, respectively by my calculations) and the current forecast indicating that PR might not make a profit at all.

The Power Rangers can make GRASS EXPLODE.

And that makes me fucking livid. Transformers has no greater merit as a story, as a concept, or even as a source of spectacle than PR does, so why the fuck should it succeed and PR fail?

The Twitter reactions from the press screenings have been positive, but I don't know who the individual people are or how easy it is to impress them. EDIT: If Power Rangers somehow ends up being a smash hit, I could actually see a Beetleborgs film as a possibility. Because unlike Masked Rider, VR Troopers, or Mystic Knights, Beetleborgs was legitimately popular for its short run. If PR is "merely" successful, though, there's not a prayer for any other similar franchise.

Unless, perhaps, $105M is the total budget, with marketing included? What are the odds of that being what Toei meant? If that happens to be the case, I'm pegging "success" at $38.8M OW, $112M DOM, $274M WW, which is more-or-less in line with current projections.

Then we can probably kiss a sequel goodbye. You're probably looking at an overall budget of $158M. If LG keeps a little over half of domestic ticket sales and around a third of the foreign gross (for whatever territories they're distributing in), the bar for success raises pretty quickly. Unless they're counting on it doing gangbuster numbers on Blu-ray.

Using that number, I figure the "success threshold" to be $58.1M OW, $168M DOM, and $410M WW. I'm worried that it's unlikely to reach those numbers.

Oh come now, it should at least be able to outperform the dreck that was the 1995 movie. That one's sitting at 50% right now, although like most films that predate RT it has a low sample size (22 reviews).

To put some perspective on what (might be) expected of this film's performance: According to various rules of thumb, PR needs to make about $51M on its domestic opening weekend in order to be on the road to success. Last year, there were 152 wide release films in the US/Canada market. Those films had a median opening weekend gross of $12.2M. Of those 152, only 15* grossed more than $51M OW. So, this film has to perform in the 90th percentile or better in order to satisfy the execs. *Captain America: Civil War, Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice, Rogue One, Finding Dory, Suicide Squad, Deadpool, Secret Life of Pets, Jungle Book, Doctor Strange, Zootopia, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, X-Men: Apocalypse, Star Trek Beyond, Jason Bourne, and Moana.

Let's not get crazy here. A satisfactory $55M is asking enough.

Because liking something you don't see any merit in is obviously a fault on their part.

OotS was an over 50% loss on investment. PR needs to do substantially better than that.

Personally, I'm putting the "success threshold" for this movie's performance at about $51M OW, $148M DOM, $498M WW. For now, we'll just have to hope that BO.com is lowballing it.

Hey, she literally called herself that with every post she made. If that's not fair game, I don't know what is.

"I'm a whore, but I'm a Puerto Rican whore, goddamnit!"

A version of "reclaiming" a derogatory word, perhaps?

In what universe is Christina Aguilera not good-looking?

Production budget alone was $300M back in 2007, which translates into $347M today. So after marketing and such the total budget was probably in the neighborhood of $520M today.

For whatever it's worth: A user on Rangerboard who also knows someone with an advance screening says they haven't even received their tickets yet, much less seen the film. I don't know if that calls O.92's statements into doubt or not (over how long a period do test screenings usually show?), but his reputation as a bullshitter would merit a grain of salt. Full disclosure: I obviously want to believe that he's lying because I want the movie to be good.