Jump to content

Barnack

Free Account+
  • Content Count

    12,583
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Barnack last won the day on September 3 2018

Barnack had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

10,165 Likes

3 Followers

About Barnack

  • Rank
    Global Phenomenon

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Canada

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Those are a lot of hindsight (that I imagine the post was talking about), Universal would have never greenlighted that movie with that trailer.
  2. Depending of when those prediction were made, you had the trailers, ultra late review embargo, etc.... How many predicted under $30M 4 days holiday weekend when it was announced ?
  3. I would not assume that mean they put money in it because they got a producing credit and profit participation too. I could check but it is really common for big names to have their production company credited.
  4. Is it really that clean and low amount of player's ? Last Pacific Rim: Production Companies Legendary Entertainment (present) (as Legendary Pictures) Universal Pictures (present) Legendary Entertainment (A Legendary Pictures/DDY Production) Double Dare You (DDY) (A Legendary Pictures/DDY Production) Khorgos Shanwei Film (in association with) (as Khorgos Shanwei Film Co., Ltd.) Dentsu (presented in association with) Fuji Television Network (presented in association with) UpperRoom Productions Pikachu: Production Companies Warner Bros. (presents) (as Warner Bros. Pictures) Legendary Entertainment (presents) (as Legendary Pictures) The Pokemon Company Toho Company (in association with) (as Toho Co., Ltd) Province of British Columbia Production Services Tax Credit Nintendo (additional copyright holder) Creatures (additional copyright holder) GAME FREAK (additional copyright holder) And I imagine that many private fund /venture capital not dedicated to movie are not listed in those. Maybe they will take a swing on something like Dune too, apparently Universal went all-in on the $175-$200M Dolittle, from time to time I imagine the big player's do take huge risk on some franchise starter.
  5. For people old enough (if there is on this message board?), how does it compare versus the conscription time of the Vietnam war ? I imagine that recent and current common enemy of WW2 and the cold war created some form of unity
  6. In a way too, Star Wars do not seem particularly popular in many of the main OS new markets, making it not too surprising if it follow inflation more than market growth. But to put it in a way Global box office Global Market grow: 2005: 23.1 billion 2019: 42.5 billion +84% Vs US dollar estimated inflation 2005: 23.1 billion 2019: 30.24 billion +30.9%
  7. I feel that the casting as well, production can do signaling to audience with it, and having Bautista/Momoa/Zendaya/Brolin can send a message do not worry this is not an art film, it is a legitimate blockbuster affair to segment of the population (while having Bardem/Chamalet/Rampling type and Villeneuve directing has an other population have no worry has well), the AI working for distributor seem to be working well.
  8. True, Tree of Life and Malick/Paul Thomas Anderson work in general look amazing, it seem it help a lot (Gravity/Revenant/Dunkirk) but you need something to go with it. It is saying a bit of the same (and going into you need more than looking great), but it would not surprise me if the appeal of the visuals was quite mainstream, it is the 8.188x OW/thursday preview multiplier from what I imagine terrible WOM among a good part of the audience once they saw it that really what hurted it. It had a better start than the best comparable that I can think of: Fury Road after all.
  9. The first trailer made it look almost the opposite of Bond in the spy genre too, low budget vs 300M gross budget type of production, prestigious Austin Martin on the fanciest world location vs grim and didn't not seem to hint that it is set in the same world, in that sense I do not know how much from the producer of Bond production/EON help here, but yes that a case for which there was probably a bidding of interested distributor and just didn't find is hard to define working tone (if it failed, who know if it would not surprise)
  10. Not sure I agree with this, a specific family is presented has easy to manipulate, the character do point out many time that they are specially so. Same goes for the have-nots (some live a miserable life in a secret basement) and in like most Hoo movies, all characters are filled with flaws.
  11. Good trailers can probably survive bad reviews quite well (the Transformer had them for example) That quite the strange take even for him: "RDJ" is clearly no stronger now than it was prior to becoming Tony Stark. Does the Sherlock Holmes both make half a billion and Due Date over $200M with 2005 RDJ ? Dolittle make more than 2x Star Wars on OW with 2005 RDJ ? Maybe, who knows, but that is quite far from being clear. Is looking at the 2008 Tropic Thunder result with today glass is also quite misleading, I am pretty sure that movie made a huge bank. He contradict itself right away saying : Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes movies, which amounted to a strong “star+character” There’s a lot that went wrong with Dolittle, but chief among them was spending MCU money (and giving Downey Jr. an MCU paycheck) for playing anyone other than Iron Man. I would say that it was not even in the movie problem, how different would have been the story if RDJ would have got a Walberg not in Transformer type of money on this (say around $12-14M, there would be virtually nothing different if it would have been 184M instead of 190M budget with a on a more budget up front salary)..... Universal will survive the “disaster in relation to cost” miss that is Dolittle, thanks to both 1917 Also by being part of an over 30B media conglomerate, I doubt any movie even doing $0 can kill a major-studio with how big they become (and how big the TV business tend to be relative to the movie side of them)
  12. Removing the But the shipping of white relationships over interracial relationships as part of a broad pattern among multiple fandoms is evidence of racism, is quite the editorial choice. It is really normal to be racist, it is probably the human norm (over almost all history and all place). that a strange opposition that normal mean it is not racist. Higher level of empathy not just attraction to people that look like what you saw around you growing up is indeed quite normal, it does not mean that it is not part of the source of a lot of problems. One big potential problem with that article (and that hole field philosophie) is the amount of importance giving by who said what and about none about what is said, the article often criticize the research for not saying the skin color of the person writing on twitter, Internet could have been a way to get out of sexism/racism in discourse quite a lot if not completely, but we made sure to put it there quite fast.
×
×
  • 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.