Barnack

Hum that sound like people that like FK need to never watch it again. Having a good read about a movie (whatever that would mean) < enjoyment.

I think we are miscommunicating (I am probably unclear) when I said in my message: well establish commercial genre/proven high concept It did include horror (mostly horror even), it will include nice IP also. The Witch was a 4m movie bought after the fact after it played well at Sundance no ? Is distribution was not financed before it proved itself to be a great movie if I remember correctly. Moonlight was a 1.5-4m movie and yes had A24 on board before the movie was shoot after Brad Pitt company got involved. At those price, we will find many, I have not read this script so I do not know what it look like in term of budget, but a period mobster movie we are use to a certain level of production design. Even on the smaller scale a movie like Legend was 20-25m net. That the kind of movie I am talking about 1) Not a proven commercial genre/high concept 2) Not a big name director (Besson being that and obviously Nolan/Cameron not needing a cast to get greenlight) 3) A not obvious zone budget wise, 25-60m type, that you cannot just easily bury it/direct tor video it, if it does not work small horror movie style and not big enough to sell it on it's spectacle/trailer either. Of all the people vocally complaining about the situation (some in the industry) why do you think they themselves didn't picked up the spec script and didn't not got it made with a trans actor ? That is such an iconic female world sex-symbol (voice and body), hard to see how they would pull it off artistically (even without any controversial issue. it does seem odd on it's face). But then many thought the same of Robbie, a classic 10/10 beauty playing someone that had her life defined by not matching her world beauty and class criterion and they ended up making it work.

De Niro has a 2W 1L fighting career I think (and he worked a while has a night shift cab driver in NY), he was quite the Daniel Day Lewis of is time. It is quite easier to get an close too experience to a profession (well boxing is a bit of a near life long commitment to have your body working really efficiently like those champion)

Not an MPAA studio, and by a studio run by the movie director and giant budget SCI-FI with an IP adaptation, that is a totally different beast, he did sold almost all of it before doing it (and that the part people take about, he would have not done it if is intl/local market pre-sales didn't got that big). No one is saying it is about people not wanting to see a movie without an A-list actor (at least certainly not me), it is about the difficulty to pre-sales/co-finance a smaller movie that is not in a well establish commercial genre/proven high concept without one. And I am not saying it is logical for them (intl buyer, investor), but it is far to be a rational business in general and even less at that level.

Yes a point, there is no doubt there is a point to be made, it is about trying to make the good one, the good read on the situation.

Sports traditions started way before athlete were paid and obviously people do not think, do you think people that care about the next Marvel movie box office think Disney millionaire and Feige are their tribe ? The tribe is more the fanbase, the athlete are the elite (like the best hunter were). Do you really think people think ? Do you think people that love Apple or Android or their country is because they think ? But I kid you not, you can hear fan say we won after a sport event (And even more out of this world strange, I read it on this message board marvel fan "we" dominate or something of the sort, I actually saw we use when talked about movies or the word ours) it is that strong and obviously completely irrational, it is company using old biological mechanism that still express themselves.

If it is ever made, really wonder how they would pull it off (the iconic Johansson voice also)

Over 100m for an AntMan movie, this is just getting nuts now.

By creating material I am talking into turning a spec script into an actual movie (and not being cast by a studio), it is probably the good wording. It is not but it is in the subject, one can frame the situation as she should have cast a trans actor. But in the reality (outside of risking her own money) maybe the realistic option presented is more between not making the movie at all because no one pick up at a price high enough to make a period movie justice or to do it with a name role in the lead big enough to pre-sales intl markets (with I think no trans actor fitting that bill for the moment). Movie does not need to make future movie to be made, they never know for movie like that if it will or not, but it often need to pre-sales / gather larger group of investor to be made and without a name actor the hypothetical read on the reality is that does not happen. But rarely started in a certain type of movies lead role.

I am not sure if you are being serious, but if you are 1) sports is quite similar to group hunting 2) Watching them is like watching your tribe doing the hunt and rooting for it's success (sports is almost watched and mostly enjoyed when rooting for a side for a reason and with members of the own tribes the fan base) Not sure how much it would sustain scrutinize, but it seem to trigger very similar to tribalism type of emotion, enjoyment frustration and so on and on world stage type of competition like world cup you had the nationalism over it (often city-ism for city level competition like old time Greek Olympics). Like mentioned why it is popular and why people care (or the better question how) should be easier to grasp than why people care about the next Marvel movie box office at such level (specially once it is big enough that it is certain they will make a next one and any rational reason to care fully disappear after that level, but it is the same ancestral mechanism hijacked for 100% useless stuff in modern time)

Could be that Mamma Mia is quite high.

I imagine they tried all their life and never got financed. But they can do like many do, and lie about loving being trap in genre convention for commercial reason.

Obviously higher the better for a ultra wide release, but 3,800 is still quite the footprint, that Kong Skull Island type of release, a bit over Jumanji.

Actor creating material to not play themselve or letting it go in the proces is a rather rare thing, but Whiterspoon did it with Gone Girl/Damon with Manchester by the sea, etc... so it obviously possible. But do you think if she and Ruppert hired an virtually unknown for that lead that they would have find a somewhat major buyer like they did ? Or that they would have needed to go the I Tonya road, make the movie and then take their chance it will find someone once buyer see the movie ? For a one would imagine, rather expensive mafia 70s period movie ? Would you have bought a period Rupert Sanders movie without a lead to be able to sales some international market in advance ?

Yeah I really doubt they are doing this to distribute and help low days theater business, it is clearly a move to try to bleed so much money for when they big movies come out.

It start on a shocking scene that I imagine would not have been made by a studio, It was a 100% independent financed production with 0 control from studios (nor Liongates) from what I understand.

That not more complex (specially than they still introduce a bad guy in there anyway) or much plot who you are stealing from being someone root against. Complaining that someone with large debt that was in direct contact with the jewelry, insisted for the jewel to be used, that seem to clean her debt and start a new business right after the coup being a bit of a stretch is nitpicking, not having the assemble together in interesting enough blocking is a bit less nitpick, what the motivation for the characters are, for what audience root or does not root for, is far from nitpick imo, feel like in the very core of a movie.

Oh yes, the high prediction come from Jurassic World/Beauty and the Beast/It/Jumanji/long list type of performance. Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull for all the negativity surrounding it in some part of the Internet, did over 400m adjusted and 786m worlwide in 2008 (918m today).

18 year's after the first one/14 after Shrek 2 monster performance too, people that enjoyed the first one now have kids to see it with, a dangerous box office dynamic.

It is a lot (if it work) a gut level sequence of set piece. Not sure the character are not the same and just basic tropes really (even if they are the same actor), lot of the setup for a sequel was just cancelled, maybe it is better to not have seen Jurassic World, there is many winks to it, but you will get some because they were Internet meme.

They tend to be a bit more than that. http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/07/17/critic-faces-death-threats-over-bad-dark-knight-rises-review/ http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/18/nation/la-na-nn-rotten-tomatoes-shuts-down-batman-comments-after-death-threats-20120718 http://screencrush.com/dc-fans-petition-rotten-tomatoes/

A bit the same for Baywatch (with smaller stars, bigger IP but no high concept). The general point is that Skyscraper has much more going for it than it's cast.

That put Jurassic World 286.17m, 28m above the 405m movie Hunger Games after 12 days( that was at 258.33m) With summer days kicking in, could it finish around 435m ?

I am not sure I understand it too. Did anyone ever heard before of a percentage bonus on a movie box office gross (and not studio take/rental of said box office) before ? Also: They are only basing their math on the sequels having 50% each of the growth of the original. Not sure I understand, but if he mean basing the guaranteed compensation at 0.5 Avatar is 1.4 billion or (150+0.2*400) = 230, that is quite far from 335m. If the movie make 1 billion in China, studio make around 220-230m and give 200m to Cameron, that would be quite the nice deal. I would imagine that it would a bonus on box office only (not touching video and other merchandise type revenues) ? Usually gross point is on: All money actually Received by the studio (but just 20% of the home video revenues received by the studio). Net point is on: All the money actually received by the studio - expense. It is common to have fix box office bonus (1m if you reach 500m + 500k for each of the following landmark), but point % on box office ?

I did not knew about that motion capture disqualify you but that make sense, not having to animate the character is a huge difference.