Blipsy

Is anyone actually nostalgic for the first movie? It was 7 years ago, which makes it extremely delayed for a regular sequel, but too soon for a nostalgic connection. I doubt the 14-year-olds who saw the first one when they were 7 have much interest in this. Especially since I doubt most people even remember the first movie, so this isn't a case like the Pixar sequels. And the movie was first announced a year after the first one. So yeah, this was just supposed to be a "regular sequel" that kept getting delayed, because I guess they realized nobody was that interested.

Looking over Anderson's filmography, you may have a point. I had forgotten how well The Grand Budapest Hotel did. Still, it seems like kind of a longshot to me. Isle Of Dogs looks like it will be way too weird for family audiences, a lot more than Fantastic Mr. Fox. And I think general audiences who liked some of his movies but aren't huge fans of him will also find it too weird, probably not even sure if it's a family movie or not. So, it seems like the movie will really only appeal to big Wes Anderson fans, and people who like more "arthouse" movies. Personally, I see Isle Of Dogs doing around $25-30M, and Sherlock doing $35-40. Though Isle Of Dogs looks a million times better, so I'd love to be proven wrong.

I just realized something: Sherlock Gnomes is practically guaranteed to be the highest-grossing fully-animated movie of the year until The Incredibles 2 comes out. Heck, it could make as little as $20M DOM and still have a chance at that considering its competition (Early Man, Isle Of Dogs, Duck Duck Goose, Sgt. Stubby). I think this will also be the first year since 2007 where no animated movie makes over $100M in the first four months of the year. And the first year since 2004 where one didn't even come close to $100M. I know that doesn't mean much, but I thought it was kind of interesting (and may end up helping The Incredibles 2 even more when it's released).

Well, it's pretty much what I expected. Some decent meta-humor mixed in with really obvious kiddie humor. And the only thing that seems to have improved about the animation in the backgrounds. At least it's a new 2D animated movie getting a wide release...

I'm gonna go ahead and predict this makes $35-45M DOM. Movies based off cartoons only tend to really break out if the original show is a real pop culture phenomenon, which is how I would describe shows like Spongebob and Rugrats. TTG may be the most popular show on CN right now, but I still see its popularity being closer to shows like The Wild Thornberrys or Hey Arnold. And I really don't see this breaking out of its existing fanbase. If anything, I expect there to be dozens of articles and Youtube videos comparing it to The Emoji Movie (and yes, I think the performance of The Emoji Movie played a big part in WB choosing this release date). But it will probably still be a win for Warner Bros. I can't imagine it having that high a budget, considering how cheap the show looks. In fact, I think that's what I'm most interested in about the movie at this point: How much of a jump the animation quality takes compared to the show.

The human faces looks a little "off" and plastic-y, but the rest of it looks amazing. I could easily see this being SPA's best movie of all time.

I know what I'll be hearing my mom talk about for the next year... At least it will be fun to see how much lower it will go after the second movie's huge drop.

The first trailer that premiered in the spring made it look it look like a rather charming movie. The second trailer that premiered in the summer made it look a lot more average and silly, but still not too bad. Just kind of a generic animated movie. The third trailer that premiered in the fall made it look like garbage. I'm really holding out hope that it's just the studio making it look dumber than it is to appeal to kids, and that the first (or at least the second, which is probably more realistic) trailer is a more accurate representation of the overall film.

According to BBFC, the movie's runtime is 106 minutes. Kind of surprising it's that long, as it'll be Blue Sky's longest film, and fairly long for an animated movie in general. I hope this means the studio has confidence in it and it will be one of Blue Sky's better movies.

That's the same teaser that came out months ago, just with the Weinstein logo switched out for the Warner logo. And it's a cute enough teaser, but I don't know if it's enough to really get the average movie-goer excited when it shows so little, and the release date is so close.

So, I'm guessing we won't see a full U.S. trailer until Ferdinand, which gives them basically a month to advertise this movie. I adored the first movie, and am highly anticipating this one. But WB needs to really up their game if they want this to do well domestically.

Glad to see WB got the rights, but I still think they're facing an uphill battle. Has ANY live-action family sequel grossed more than its predecessor? Add in the fact that they have only 2 months to advertise it (would it even be possible for them to get a trailer out in time for Coco?), and I just keep getting "Babe 2" vibes. Meaning the movie will be great, but I don't know how well it will do financially.

My Little Pony: The Movie October 17, 1:50 PM Trailers: Daddy's Home 2 (no interest) The Star (this just looks so bizarre, I have to see it sometime) The Man Who Invented Christmas (might be slightly interested, but not enough to see it in theaters) Ferdinand (the latest trailer, with clips of John Cena narrating. REALLY hoping this is better than this trailer makes it look) Coco (looks alright, but still just seems like a more mainstream version of The Book Of Life) Paddington 2 (I loved the first one, so hopefully this one doesn't disappoint) It was just me and a mom with her daughter. She seemed to like it, and I admit that I absolutely adored this movie. Easily my favorite animated movie of the year so far. And I've only seen a single episode of the show!

They apparently made the first movie from scratch in about 2 years, I imagine that if a sequel gets made, we could see it in 2019 or 2020.

The movie was supposed to come out tomorrow, but I guess they changed it at the last minute. No matter when they release it, this movie will be a huge bomb. And the title is absolutely awful, even by bad movie standards. "Gnomeo and Juliet" and "Sherlock Gnomes" may be bad movies, but at least they give you an idea of what to expect. The title makes it seem like it's about garden gnomes protecting a house from robbers.

I agree that people are underestimating Ferdinand. I could see it doing even better than that, maybe 120-140M. No, it won't do Illumination numbers, but the only Blue Sky movie to do under 100m is Ice Age 5. If Chipmunks 4 could make 85M under similar circumstances, I think a decent-looking original animated movie can do significantly better.

Disney released both "Planes" movies in between Cars 2 and Cars 3. I don't think Cars 3 would have done that much better if those spin-offs (or just the second one) hadn't been released, but they certainly couldn't have helped. Anyway, I do think Lego Ninjago will have decent legs. If Lego Ninjago is too "boy-centric", My Little Pony will be far too "girl-centric" to do much damage to it. So, I think it will make about as much money as Storks. I wouldn't be surprised if "Billion Brick Race" gets cancelled at this point, or redone into a direct-to-video movie.

I think I mentioned this in the Lego Batman thread, but I'm really starting to wonder now how these spin-offs will affect the reception of the actual Lego Movie Sequel. No matter how good that movie turns out to be, I think both audiences and critics will be underwhelmed because of WB's decision to release TWO spin-off movies in between them, and so close together. If they had just done the Lego Batman Movie, things probably wouldn't turn out too badly. But after this, I think they're really going to see it backfire. Now the Lego Movie Sequel won't be seen as "the sequel to a movie loved by a audiences and critics alike", but "just another in a long line of Lego movies".

Didn't they distribute Princess Mononoke? But excluding that (and possibly 2007 Ninja Turtles, which was partially distributed by WB), I would probably agree with you on that.

I'm probably looking forward to it more than most people, but that's not saying much. I think it honestly looks like it could be a nice alternative to the more frantic, hyperactive animated movies that are so popular, but who knows, especially after the additional changes made? I'm hoping this movie will either be decent enough, or at the very least, have enough absolutely insane stuff in it to make it somewhat entertaining (like "The Wild Life" from last year).

The fact that this is even playing in over 4,000 theaters is (pardon the pun) just nuts. I don't think this movie will have a Hoodwinked 2 or Happy Feet 2-sized drop, but I can't see this doing any more than MAYBE $35M. I know playing on over 4,0000 screens isn't as big of a deal as it was even a few years ago, but still, that's way too many for a movie like this.

The only question I have is: How are this movie end credit's going to top the animals dancing along with a CGI Psy to "Gangnam Style"?

Nut Job 2 may be actually worse, but it won't be remembered that way. This will be almost entirely forgotten 2 weeks after it's released, and then fall into obscurity. The Emoji Movie will be the butt of "bad Hollywood ideas" jokes for years to come.

As somebody who's never seen a full episode of the show, but still likes a lot of similar cartoons, I think it looks pretty enjoyable. Not crazy about all the off-looking CGI, but I'm just glad to see SOME hand-drawn movie get a wide release. It will be interesting to see how it does, though. No matter how much Lionsgate hypes up the celebrity voices, I think the stigma of being "My Little Pony" will keep it from breaking out. It reminds me of how The Powerpuff Girls Movie flopped in 2002. But one thing this movie has in its favor was that PPG opened at the height of the summer blockbuster season, while I think MLP will only really have to worry about Lego Ninjago.

No, the studio just figured that most people wouldn't recognize the regular voice actors, so they only gave billing to the celebrities voicing new characters. Which is kind of annoying, but not really a new thing for movies like this. I remember the 2007 Ninja Turtles had Kevin Smith billed above the actors who played the actual turtles, while Smith only had maybe 5 lines of dialogue.