Barnack

The score on 10 make spotting trolls more obvious to them I imagine and make it more possible to weight people rating according to the chance they are not serious (people that vote movie only 10/10 or only 1/10 are more easily remove).

Yeah looking at my theater time, it started at 19:00 here (not sure why I had 6PM in mind probably read it in the deadline text like stated above). Everything Thursday were some big fan events not so long ago, they are really stretching it.

http://www.boxofficereport.com/previewgrosses.html With a 7pm start instead of 6pm for CM BP did 25.2M for a $202.005M OW, Civil War did $25M (also 7PM) for a 179M start. A $24M would be giant, because it could easily be less frontloaded than Civil War.

Hard to qualify such things sometime, but wonder if it impacted the rapid raise in archery : https://geekdad.com/2013/09/archery-americas-fastest-growing-sport/ https://business.realtree.com/business-blog/archery-equipment-market-upward-trend-2016 And Hunger Games is still an somewhat day to day expression.. Well not unsustainable 2013/14 peak, but there is still no bigger actress:

American are giant monster at exporting their culture.

The fact 51% of the population and 51% of the movie going audience is female make it sound like a everyone is our audience type of statement. Or their internal numbers do not match what we can get at all: https://www.statista.com/statistics/807365/marvel-movie-viewership-gender/

If a movie with those trailer/reception/budget/almost unknown hero open at freaking $150M+, that would show how strong the brand currently is. This is getting crazy.

Rotten tomatoes critic without being false, is a bit pushing it: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/critic/dany-roth/tv He reviewed on RT only one thing, Supergirl season 2 and 0 movie. When he is talking about not saying he hated a movie it is on twitter on personal blog or something, not on a RT accepted platform review. Everyone "knew" a lot of those people at that level were doing that. And they make that distinction at 59:00, 2 of the podcaster explicitly say we all played ball with a corporation, but in 20 year's I never heard/saw someone softball an actual review with the other saying no that is true that do not happen. Acting like you liked the person movie you are currently interviewing on the junket to make the interview flow smoothly is quite quite different than writing an actual published review of the movie. Close to fake news territory.

You are mistaken what the push can be, does not need to be pushing for equality of outcome, but equality of opportunity, making an industry less toxic for example, see the shift in the programming field that came with the personal computer marketing strategy versus before when computer were giant tool in universities. There is some forces that can unbalance outcome that can be changed, without forcing the outcome. Coal is the energy source that boomed the most in the last 15 year's, is it really a dying field ? Miners/plumber are probably some that will survive the most automation versus law clerk, Oncology, etc..., AI will destroy repetitive intellectual task more than manual one.

Push for equality is when there a perceived possible impact on the product-society, for examples there is push for more male teacher at a young age but not for male hairdresser, more female miners and you have at the end of it the same mined product pretty much. More female politicians, ceo, filmmaker is perceived as something that could change the products and it is usually made in some realism of a big gender difference in interest explaining most of those difference, but not all of them. Editing in the movie industry was almost all made by female in the silent era for example, in some aspect of the industry the gap is bigger than the interest level (who see a decrease from film school to festival to low budget to big budget)

Critics I would imagine very much so, junket-access type (he said people in the access game) well obviously they trade stuff for access (that why real media will tend to make a rule for their critics to not accept anything from studio).

Warner Brother have been streaming at a very high level for decades.

It is a strange movie, because it is a big animated big budget sequel from a liked first entry that has one of the best second half I have ever seen (but a very middle of the road first). Must be little different needed for this to be more successful, maybe the total lack of link story wise between the first and 2 ?

You would call that a conspiracy ? Say if Disney as a big ads buyer of RT would have asked them to take measure to help sales their movie better without touching at all on their integrity and mission of aggregating critic movie reviews ? Could just be them not liking to see the press around the situation fearing it could hurt they ability to sales ads to studio in generals and not one in particular also.

You do not predict this to be more domestic heavy (and more OW heavy) ?

It had a high multiplier for the genre, I think 85-90m was in play after that preview numbers. It was at 11m lower than the first Guardian of the Galaxy 11.2 or ant-man and the wasp 11.5: http://www.boxofficereport.com/previewgrosses.html

Wonder Woman/Aquaman were far from low tier superhero, they were mid-tier and up. Cap America, Thor, 65m OW are better example, but those were 200m and more budget movies with the trailers and promotion that come with that also but in the other sense SH popularity changed since.

Bit hard to find info, when Avatar get into a copyright sued the defendant than to be 3 people, Fox, Lightstorm and Cameron himself. The deal for Disney attraction park was between Fox and Lightstorm (Cameron company), sometime they add Dune ent, Ingenious film partner has well..

That sound way too intense for some movie.

155m was gross I think, net was closer to 125m after a $32M in tax credit: https://fastlane.louisianaeconomicdevelopment.com/Film/FilmSearchDetails.aspx?ProjNum=7BYt%2fON1B3jjnaofKKjHKg%3d%3d

Well yes that what I meant by HBO just did Leaving Neverland, good luck for an estate to try to block an biopic that is not using the music or outside very well establish public knowledge facts.

Well HBO just did Leaving Neverland, maybe you need something that powerful, but I am not sure, depending of the storyline how legal it is, is quite well establish.

It flirt with being great by a lot of moments imo.

Will be quite impossible to block a biopic like they could not bloc this documentary to play, but yes one that use it's music and make money would be under complete control.

My thought has well, concentrate over a big moment/performance with just a little bit of the rest.