UTJeff

To be more specific, when I mean anyone, I mean critics who gave the movie a bad review on Rotten Tomatoes. I don't think she's being specifically targeted by critics for speaking up. There might be people in the current showbiz machine who are ticked off about it and don't agree with it though. But more or less higher-ups in the industry. I think it's more of a long-stemming systemic problem of the industry because it's still a largely male dominated industry. I don't think there is anything wrong with shedding light on the problems and discussing them.

I don't think there is a conspiracy. I don't think anyone is targeting Lawrence over her gender pay views. If anything, I would assume most critics would support those views she's spoken about.

People have theorized that Fred Deckard is a Nexus 7. If he's that, maybe that explains his longer lifespan and aging like a human. Or he's actually human. Didn't Ridley Scott always support the idea Deckard is a replicant?

Yeah it's like that stupid theory that Rotten Tomatoes is trying to sabotage Warner Bros.' DCEU movies and promote Marvel. And petitions were started over it. http://www.ew.com/article/2016/08/02/suicide-squad-reviews-rotten-tomatoes-petition

No. The moralizing and moral dilemma are more about how they as Assassins basically have to give up their lives to serve "the light" and the Brotherhood.

Yup. The motion picture soundtrack became a platinum album and was a top 10 seller on the Billboard 200.

Nope the famous theme song actually originated in 1993 as a single. It was released as part of an album in 1994 and then put in the movie in 1995.

You can call him an idiot but Larry Kasanoff delivered a movie that was fairly successful. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/mortal-kombat-movie-oral-history-815287 As for Kingsglaive, I think it's passable as a feature length CG companion piece. I don't even think it's essential if you are playing FF XV. It's OK. Has some nice action scenes and CG visuals. But I don't love any of the characters. Some elements are confusing.

Versus costly endeavors such as Assassins' Creed which probably cost over $200 million and is getting terrible reviews and likely to open with less than $20 million. Meanwhile Advent Children sold over four million copies across DVD and UMD, which is respectable for a home video release of that type. Some people are declaring this sub-genre dead at this point. It's hard to disagree when this year saw both costly failures of Warcraft and soon to be Assassin's Creed.

Exactly you can't. But it's still an industry standard.

Regarding this mythical 2 hour 20 minute cut. All of that originated because of an Empire Cinemas listing. That listing is now 115 minutes. So there's no proof a 2 hour 20 minute cut ever existed. Very likely that time just includes the film, credits and trailers.

The difference is that a critical consensus from Rotten Tomatoes is a simple digestible number. Even though it doesn't tell the whole story and it's just a measurement of critics who liked or disliked a movie, the rating itself is like giving a movie an overall grade. Rather than doing soundbytes of a bunch of reviews, some which are probably made up. We know studios have faked positive critical quotes before or twisted them. So instead of that, it's like, "Oh here's a handy score of the movie and how much critics liked it. It's certified fresh."

For me the first good one was really Mortal Kombat. And let's be fair, some of these films have had varying degrees of success. Besides Mortal Kombat, the Resident Evil movies have all done fairly well. Maybe not great, but they've had several theatrical film releases that did decent business. The first Tomb Raider movie got terrible reviews, but it was a very successful film. I think when people say good they mean a film that's like the Iron Man or Spider-Man of video game movies. However, I still don't think it will happen. I think the best thing you can do is just make companion type pieces such as Advent Children or Kingsglaive. Focus directly on home video and VOD market. Rather than $200 million theatrical features.

I understand it to some degree. I'm a gamer and comic fan. When I was a kid I used to dream about these characters getting movies. There's an eerie dreamlike prestige to getting a big movie. Game series and brands have really hardcore fans. Some don't want to see their material sullied. Others want to hope their movies can be right up there with what's happening with Marvel right now. Some have argued that game movies are in a similar place to comic book movies before films like X-Men and Spider-Man. I personally disagree. I just think there's something about games that makes them basically unfilmable. You can't really translate a game into a great movie.

Rotten Tomatoes is an industry standard and a heavy marketing tool now. It's not just in TV spots, but also on DVD covers now. PR people stick the RT numbers in press releases now too. They matter.

I have a specific theory about video game movies and why they don't work. Video games like Assassin's Creed are about empowering the player. Uncharted is about empowering the player. Yes they are cinematic and they have intricate stories, but in Assassin's Creed it's like you are getting to live through your ancestors genetic memories, and you get to live through these famous historical periods. You get to be a part of history and interact with amazing historical figures. The Legend of Zelda? Link is nothing more than a proxy for the player. That's why a lot of games have lead characters who are still silent or blank ciphers. They are a way to empower gamers to insert their own personality into these characters. Other times, games are really just patchwork stories to enable you to play. Or the plot's threadbare. Zombies are attacking. Here you go. Get going. Start blasting zombies and monsters. It's a step beyond movies. Movies can't capture that immersion. They can't capture that interactivity. And they can't boil down those longer storylines into just two hour plots.

It was never that high for this film. Hence the tracking was only at around $20 million.

I think the movie is flawed, but I did enjoy it, and I enjoyed Pratt and Lawrence in it as well. I would recommend giving it a look at least once via a Redbox rental or Netflix viewing. I thought Morten Tyldum's direction was generally good as well.

None of the trailers were getting much buzz or excitement at all.

That seems awfully generous considering tracking isn't always accurate. Second of all, the film is getting awful reviews.

People are free to judge for themselves. For some people, what this movie offers might be well and good enough for them. All the power to them. But is this movie going to land with audiences? Will it be a hit? Will it get a sequel? I'm predicting no on all fronts. In terms of box office discussion, I'm thinking bomb here. I think it probably makes even less than Warcraft domestically. Warcraft did end up making $386 million overseas. So overseas box office might help the film a little bit. We shall see.

You seem to have some stake in the film judging by your posts.

What happens in the movie aren't big secrets or plot twists. The movie is upfront about everything that takes place.

Literally none of those things about the movie were good.

Directed by David O. Russell and starred Jennifer Lawrence, Bradley Cooper and Robert DeNiro.