UTJeff

I tremble at what this could lead to.

Split's not good. Sorry mate.

I liked this movie better than Split, which was hot garbage.

What the hell is going on here? People get that Black Adam is the villain right? Why are you making a Black Adam solo movie? If you want The Rock to be in one of these and star in it so bad, just make him Shazam/Captain Marvel. I'm mind-boggled. A Black Adam solo movie? It's Black Adam we are talking about. He's not Deathstroke. He's not even Deadshot. He's Black Adam. I get he's The Rock, but even The Rock has plenty of bombs under his belt as well.

Maybe they don't want to reveal too much? That I don't find necessarily a bad idea.

I wonder why.

After I saw it tonight, I think it will. Otherwise, people are being very disingenuous.

Thanks for the updates on Passengers guys.

Kind of premature going off of a tomato meter with only 22 reviews.

I agree with your Batman prediction.

As a longtime anime fan, I will be seeing this out of curiosity alone. I like large scale sci-fi and cyber-punk, and seeing cyber-punk in live action on this scale is pretty rare. I have my misgivings about the movie; casting included. I'm not certain it will actually work, but I will want to see if it can regardless. Just like with Assassin's Creed.

Well if they want to release it in 2018, they will have to start shooting this year. Will The Rock even have an opening in his schedule this year?

Is this movie ever coming out? I feel like we've been reading about The Rock playing Black Adam for like 10 years.

Not sure if this happens, but I remember in the past reading that some actors negotiating for an off-the-top gross percentage regardless of how much money is made back. Like I think Keanu Reeves was able to negotiate this for The Matrix sequels, but I could be mistaken there so don't take my word for it. But what you said makes sense that they probably only got back end at most and no gross participation.

Krissykins, I think we can have a civilized discussion about this, and I think most of the discussions here are pretty civilized. So with that in mind. Well I've never specifically classified Ghostbusters as a flop. However, Ghostbusters if you look at it's circumstances, the film was built to be a global franchise starter for Sony. Passengers was not. Now for Ghostbusters, The Hollywood Reporter published an article that said the movie is going to lose the studio about $70 million or more. You can see that here. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ghostbusters-box-office-loss-sequel-unlikely-918515 Now one number that we hardly ever seen get thrown around is the P&A/marketing budget. I can't be certain, but one would imagine the P&A budget on Ghostbusters was easily higher than it was for Passengers. With Ghostbusters, you had a big marketing blitz that Passengers just didn't have. So those are other heavy expenses that have to be weighed on whether the film can be considered a financial success or not. That being said, I fully acknowledge I could be wrong about Passengers. For all I know, the film could've lost money when you figure in payouts to Pratt and Lawrence and all the other costs. But I think when you consider how well it's performing overseas, it's having a stronger performance than Ghostbusters overseas. And it's shown remarkable staying power from week to week. Anyway, I get that Ghostbusters can be a touchy issue for some, so I see where you are coming from. I sort of feel similarly about Passengers. I think it got beat up in the press for the wrong reasons.

This isn't a total bomb or failure. I'm sure they were hoping it would've done better with two big name leads. I don't know what kind of split Sony gets for overseas money, but chances are the film will eventually break even with TV rights, home video and all that. Unless Lawrence and Pratt are taking home serious money off the top. The director probably isn't getting paid like them. You got to figure, expectations for this movie weren't that huge especially right before it came out. And then it got terrible reviews. Despite all that, it's still going to finish over $100 million. Keep in mind, this isn't some sort of franchise picture either. Oblivion and Elysium did slightly better with reviews, but still not as bad as Passengers. Passengers I believe was getting misunderstood by a lot of reviewers. Do I think it's a great movie? No. But I think it's a solid, original sci-fi story with two charismatic lead actors.

The movie clearly isn't a complete flop. It's an under-performer for sure, but all things considering, and possibly finishing with at least $100 million domestic, it did OK. I don't think you can call it a flop.

People think it can be a movie because the games have a cinematic style and characters. But what happens when you take out all the gaming and interactive elements. Are people even still going to be interested?

A lot of piracy actually originates from within the industry.

Prince of Persia IMHO wasn't that good, but if you like it more power to you.

Obviously this movie won't be a huge hit, but it's not going to be a major bomb either.

If they lied about that, it's easy for them to lie about player stats and data.

BioWare lied about Mass Effect 3. There's documented evidence of this.

False equivalence.

But how trustworthy is BioWare after Mass Effect 3?