Valonqar
-
Posts
21,556 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Annual Subscriptions
Media Demo
Posts posted by Valonqar
-
-
7 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:
You know the word of mouth isn't the only factor that worked in the market right?
Marketing have a great role, even greater than the film's quality itself......That being said, first man sucked......
Marketing is crucial for OW but WOM takes over after. Movies that caught on had both, movies that didn't, lacked one or both. First Man and Widows had deceiving marketing that made Moon landing/heist more central to either slow meandering movie with unlikable characters than it was, so WOM was not good. Fool me once. Also, Gosling and Davis are no stars so OW was shit too.
But speaking of the topic, Spiderverse should do well with audience cause of appealing marketing and characters. There's no deception and Spiderman is a legit draw.
-
51 minutes ago, Deep Wang said:
ME - 4k
SV - 99k
MPR - 194k
AM - 310k
BB - 35k
Very good for SV and insane for MPR and AM.
-
3 minutes ago, Premium George said:
Duh. Box office and rt score are not in some equation. Doesn't make one side wrong or right, if they are different.
exactly. Critics hated Venom and were meh on BR but audience went nuts for them. critics tried to make First Man, Widows and Green Book happen but audience rejected them. Neither side is wrong or right, just different.
-
6 minutes ago, Premium George said:
Currently you are doing it.
Maybe you are right. Maybe they just didn't like IW as much as I did but the world liked it more than movies they liked more so it made 2B. And that's all that matters.
-
2 minutes ago, CoolEric258 said:
In your subjective opinion.
Thanks for the reminder that I should have put IMO. Fixed.
-
Just now, Premium George said:
Holy fuck, conspiracy. 300 critics are part of some underground cult that decides which movie gets good rating.
it isn't conspiracy and it isn't a cult. everyone can go all the way with overpraise if something checks their boxes or reign themselves in if it challenges the favorite. Happens all the time with awards hopefuls.
-
17 hours ago, sfran43 said:
Dec 21 is packed. they should have expanded more this and next week.
-
3 hours ago, MCKillswitch123 said:
84% is too low for IW since it was the best MCU movie of 2018, IMO. Russos directed the shit out of it, juggled gazillion characters without anyone feeling 100% not needed and useless (I'm looking at you Martin Freeman), they kept everyone's character distinctive (the quippy ones quipped in their own way retaining their own voice) and they created an amazing actual character out of a CGI (Thanos). Also, when certain trio shows up to save the day is the most cheer-worthy scene of the year this side of Queen's Live Aid. I honestly think critics held back so that it didn't challenge/jeopardize BP rating.
-
I'm thrilled that they sent screeners.
-
-
8 minutes ago, Napoleon said:
Mortal Engines - $25
ME Under RH
-
I had to stoop as low as to check out his site for NYCC update cause other sites were slow.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Nova said:
Ehh I think any other year I would agree but I feel like supporting actress is pretty deep this year that I could see her not getting a nom. Especially since she got snubbed in Arrival and that movie got several noms. Again that’s IF this movie isn’t well received. If it is then there’s nothing to see here and she’ll most likely get nominated.
Arrival was a bit different as she didn't compete for a win. here, she's competing for a win. But granted, if the movie is awful and competition cutthroat, she might miss out. Though Arrival snub is her narrative to get in this time no matter what.
-
16 minutes ago, CoolEric258 said:
Ummm....what critics? No seriously, what critics are saying this? I checked every review from the Top Critics section of RT, and not one of them talks about Grant's character being a "cat killer". The actual cat is typically only mentioned once, typically with the statement "Melissa McCarthy has a sick cat who is the only character McCatrhy seems to care about." Granted these are only Top Critics, so it's a small sample size, but I ain't gonna look at every single review, and I'm pretty sure, since they are major and important, that they would be more likely to have "cat killer" or whatever in their review.
So where's your proof? Where are these critics who keep calling Grant's character a "cat killer". Where are these critics falsely claiming Grant's character kills cats? I need reciepts.
Jeffrey Wells:
http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2018/11/monitoring-nyfcc-voting/
HE response: All hail the glorious cat killer!that's a receipt!
-
this well play well across the demos.
-
3 minutes ago, CoolEric258 said:
He is not constantly referred to as a cat killer. The scene is essentially McCarthy running away for a while, Grant housesitting, and the cat dying from natural causes that is brought up in the very beginning in the movie. Grant is only referred to as a cat killer because McCarthy is hysterical over her pet and her only other friend and companion dying. That's it. Only one scene. Grant didn't kill it. The cat died on its own.
Next time, when you want to complain about something in a movie, how about you actually watch the movie first, then complain about it?
How about critics stop calling his character that stupid nick name and deceiving the public about the movie content?
So that's the forgiveness from the title?
-
47 minutes ago, DAJK said:
SpiderVerse - $205
Mortal Engines - $50
Elessar on suicide watch.
-
3 minutes ago, Nova said:
I’m beginning to wonder if Amy Adams even gets nominated. Supporting actress is very deep this year and it’s possible she gets replaced by someone in a film that’s actually well received. Although who knows about this movie anyways.
We shall see.
She's a big name and playing a baity character. she should be fine for a nom but win may elude her. still, nothing is over til televised awards start dropping. critics are not the voters.
-
GoT is a fantasy and horse decapitations are not central to the plot, certainly not to the point of calling a character Horse Decapitator. so what's Grant character's excuse for the awful reference? Either way, word must have spread and boxoffice is low.
-
-
25 minutes ago, sfran43 said:
so something gets released in the dead week w/o new releases after all.
-
4 minutes ago, WittyUsername said:
Sony definitely doesn’t have the rights to that character. Then again, if they’re allowed to use Kingpin, I suppose Marvel might be willing to lend Ms. Marvel to them, but from what I understand, they’re planning on including her in the MCU at some point.
I see. Thanks! It's all about who holds rights to what.
-
Now that I know there's animal cruelty in the movie, I'm happy it isn't doing well at the boxoffice. I will never see it.
-
Do you think they'll put Kamala Khan in the sequel? Since they are a couple in CB no?
Thursday Numbers
in Numbers and Data
Posted
it expanded in 90 more theaters. I guess the studio is using the slow season to make as much money as it can.