Jump to content

Baerrt

New Member
  • Posts

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Baerrt

  1. 2 hours ago, divinity83 said:

    All things considered, the Mission: Impossible franchise does very well. Understand that he is still extremely controversial and the “couch-jumping” incident is minor league now. There are people who will never pay to see a Cruise-led film because they think paying money for a ticket is the same as donating to an evil cult. I know at least one person who bought a ticket to a different film and snuck into Fallout (Moviepass users likely did that too).

     

    Personally, if I cared about how movie stars spent their money, I would never see a film. After seeing the behind the scenes work of everyone involved, how expensive it must have been, I went to see Fallout on a real IMAX screen at the Smithsonian. It was glorius. I still have real issues with this film, but not with the action.

    The thing with Cruise being a factor is when things such as Going Clear and Leah Remini's tv series, and book, are out there in the culture claiming Scientology to be essentially evil you have a significant amount of the public watching, reading or hearing about these exposes and  it increases the skepticism about Cruise.

  2. The issue with the franchise is that when it began 22 years ago, to the chagrin of fans of the tv show, it's selling point to general movie goers was essentially seeing the world's biggest film star playing his version of James Bond.

     

    The appeal lay in who it's leading man was and not in it's stunts and for much discussed and documented reasons, domestically, it's leading man has been nowhere near universally popular or beloved for the last 12 years at least.

  3. 5 hours ago, redfirebird2008 said:

     

    But they aren't equal. You wouldn't say the average Joe blogger who just started randomly writing reviews this year is the same as Roger Ebert, would you? That said, it's entirely possible for the less experienced and less well known critics to do a better job than the top critics. Batman Begins is a good example. 84% overall but 63% with Top Critics. General audience rating is 94%. 

     

    2001: A Space Odyssey is perhaps the best example of Top Critics blowing it. Variety, New York Times, and others trashed the movie in 1968. Now it's regarded as possibly the best sci-fi movie ever made. 

    The concern it seems is what with reviews now factoring into the success of blockbuster/potential blockbuster movies the negative reviews of Valerian could kill any chances it had at the box office. Also Luc Besson has never really been a critic's favorite (for some he's nothing more than a slightly more talented and idiosyncratic French equivalent of Michael Bay).

     

    Blade Runner might be a better example to use than 2001 as on it's initial release it was the 2nd top grossing film of 1968 (with subsequent releases it's now surpassed that year's top film FUNNY GIRL) and gained Kubrick an Oscar nomination for Best Director so despite critics of the day trashing it for being 'cold' or too 'out there' it's impact was immediately felt.  

    • Like 4
  4. On ‎14‎/‎06‎/‎2017 at 3:14 AM, BOOYAH SUCKAS said:

    Truly a phenomenal run, Sylvester Stallone highest grossing film and his last film to gross over 100m until the expendables. 

    Didnt this film also break the opening weekend record? 

    Does anyone know why Rambo III declined so much from this one? 

    I've read elsewhere that the character was simply no longer popular domestically by the time the third film rolled round. Both Rambo and Rocky sequels in '85 benefited from the spirit of patriotism that was in the air that year and come '88 that was no longer there.

  5. That seems to be the thing with Wright's films or at least the assumption as to why they've never broken out huge in that his protagonists are either not conventionally likeable or in the hiring of Cera and potentially Elgort his choice of leading men aren't convincing or naturally capable enough to headline what are, lower budgets notwithstanding, the kind of summer blockbusters that made stars of the charismatic likes of Tom Cruise and Michael J Fox 30 years ago.

    • Like 2
  6. On 13/05/2016 at 10:16 PM, Dark 33Legend of the Sith said:

    This may seem like a strange topic and I apologize if it has already been discussed before, but I've thought about this a few times the last few years.  I find it kind've amazing and interesting how with all of these powerful mega-franchises out there, it is EXTREMELY difficult for any franchise to be the DOMESTIC box office champion in MULTIPLE years.

     

    Since 1970, only 4 franchises have won the domestic crown more than once:

     

    Star Wars: 6 times- 1977, 1980, 1983, 1999, 2005, 2015

    (3rd in 02)

     

    Batman: 2 times- 1989, 2008

    (3rd in 92, 2nd in 95, 12th in 97, 8th in 05, 2nd in 12)

     

    Toy Story: 2 times- 1995, 2010

    (3rd in 99)

     

    Harry Potter: 2 times- 2001, 2011

    (4th in 02, 6th in 04, 3rd in 05, 5th in 07, 3rd in 09, 5th in 10)

     

    Spider-Man: 2002, 2007

    (2nd in 04, 7th in 12, 12th in 14)

     

    Look at all the behemoth franchises that have won only 1 year:

    The Godfather: 1st in 1972 (Well short in 74 and 90)

    The Exorcist: 1st in 1973 (23rd in 77, 48th in 90, 72nd in 04)

    Jaws: 1st in 1975  (3rd in 78, 15th in 83, 54th in 87))

    Rocky: 1st in 1976 (4th in 82, 3rd in 85, well back in other years)

    Indiana Jones: 1st in 1981 (3rd in 84, 2nd in 89, 3rd in 08)

    Back to the Future: 1st in 1985 (6th in 89, 11th in 90)

    Home Alone: 1st in 1990 (2nd in 1992)

    Terminator: 1st in 1992 (21st in 84, 8th in 03, 23rd in 09, 32nd in 84)

    Jurassic Park: 1st in 1993 (3rd in 97, 9th in 01, 2nd in 15 if you count JW)

    The Lord of the Rings: 1st in 2003 (2nd in 01, 2nd in 02, 5th in 12,  8th in 13, 6th in 14)

    Shrek: Won in 2004 (3rd in 01, 2nd in 07, 8th in 10)

    Pirates of the Caribbean: Won in 2006 (3rd in 03, 4th in 07, 5th in 11)

    Marvel Phase 2:  Won in 2012 (2nd in 08, 3rd in 10, 2nd in 13, 3rd and 4th in 14, 3rd in 15)

    The Hunger Games: Won in 2013 (3rd in 12, 2nd in 14, 7th in 15)

     

    These franchises has never won a domestic crown:

    Transformers (3rd in 07, 2nd in 09, 2nd in 11, 7th in 14)

    Twilight (7th in 08, 4th in 09, 4th in 10, 3rd in 11, 6th in 12)

    Superman (2nd in 78, 3rd in 81, 12th in 83, 69th in 87, 6th in 06, 5th in 13, ?? in 16)

    Beverly Hills Cop (2nd in 84, 3rd in 87)

    Lethan Weapon (9th in 87, 3rd in 89, 4th in 92, 11th in 98)

    Mission Impossible (3rd in 96, 3rd in 00, 14th in 06, 7th in 11, 11th in 15)

    X-Men (8th in 00, 6th in 03, 4th in 06, 13th in 09, 9th in 14)

    The Matrix (5th in 99, 4th and 9th in 03)

    Star Trek (4th in 79, 6th in 82, 9th in 84, 5th in 86, 15th in 91, 7th in 09, 11th in 13, ? in 16)

    Despicable Me (7th in 10, 4th in 13, 6th in 15)

    Fast and Furious (14th in 01, 15th in 03, 46th in 06, 17th in 09, 6th in 11, 9th in 13, 5th in 15)

     

    I understand some of you may find this useless info, but I find it interesting.  You would think there would be more multiple winners. It just shows how tough it is to maintain elite level success.  It also show how surprises can thwart some pretty big franchises (American Sniper and Avatar come to mind).

     

    It will be interesting to see what franchises can join what has become an elite and rare box office club. Have any you followed this type of thing?

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Beverly Hills Cop was number 1 in '84 not Ghostbusters.

    • Like 4
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.