Barnack

GA like Michael Bays movie much more than critics was maybe more the rule happening before Bumblebee and it is the other way around with Travis Knight movies, a critic darling quite appreciated by a certain audience but not has mainstream has what Bay do.

Maybe less with the D+, HD torrent being day and date but usually for wide release affair with a fanbase (if not movie in general) score goes down on IMDB, has the hyped fanbase that see and rate first weekend get averaged down by the regular people seeing it on a flight or back in the day Netflix and so on. Has for what you ask, this tool can help: https://flickmetrix.com/ What movie with a below 7.0 type or below of IMDB score is above 80% on rt ? Is green room more horror than action, Logan Lucky more comedy than action ? That 2 that come in mind, with Melissa McCarthy SPY, imdb can be quite certain type of male heavy, Bumblebee is 90% on RT and 6.7/10 on IMDB for maybe a closer example of a franchise blockbuster action movie. For the subject in general, it is not just studio but a certain produced franchise that can get some benefit of the doubt, that is impossible to prove or disprove in most case, they flight in reviewer on set, give a lot of contain and lot of talent access, the second you do anything else with a movie than reviewing it, you are compromised you just do not know by how much and now a day RT reviewer are in large part content creator of all sort and not just a paid by a big journal movie reviewer that never has to do anything else than that. How much did the Hunger Games giant screening after party and the nice relation talent had with the press did soften the blow on the last 2 entry reception ? Impossible to know. But Marvel started to get good review when it was still being run by Ike that had quite the terrible reputation with the media, including is premiere and Avant-premiere and reception with cost-cutting small Sandwich type of affair, they for sure build some good will from a lot of the press, but expectation and high bar all the same has well, like a Nolan-Tarantino with the press has.

When it is not a deal on profit, There is 2 major type of deal, point or benchmark (sometime a mix with escalation) You get point on the studio revenues (something on a percentage of said revenues, say 20 or 30% of DVD revenues was the norm on gross point). Or you have a $500K bonus if the movie reach each of those benchmark 100m, 120m, 140m, 160m, 180m, 200m domestic or a WW threashold. That was Jennifer Aniston compensation for her cameo on Horrible Bosses 2 for an example. $3.5MM fee (15 days over schedule of PP; includes post days) + Bo bonuses: $500k @ DBO $100MM or WWBO $200MM $500k @ DBO $110MM or WWBO $220MM $500k @ DBO $120MM or WWBO $240MM $500k @ DBO $130MM or WWBO $260MM v. Participation: 5% of SG @ CB 0%. 5% DG @ CB 0% until artist has eraned an amount equal to $2.25MM there from + On screen, single card and in billing block grouped with the “with” credits + Perqs: Didn’t have a perq fund but NLC agreed to engage certain members of her personal crew ( stylist, makeup, wardrobe, costume designer, assistant, and security guard) On we're the millers: $4.5MM fee (schedule of PP) v. bo bonuses: $250k @ DBO $70MM or WWBO $140MM $375k @ DBO $80MM or WWBO $160MM $375k @ DBO $90MM or WWBO $180MM $500k @ DBO $100MM or WWBO $200MM $500k @ DBO $110MM or WWBO $220MM (non applic) $500k @ DBO $100MM or WWBO $200MM $500k @ DBO $110MM or WWBO $220MM $500k @ DBO $120MM or WWBO $240MM $500k @ DBO $130MM or WWBO $260MM + Credit: on screen, main titles in first position; paid ads + Perqs: $500K covered travel, personnel, housing, food, transportation and security When there is a V it is one or the other, you get the biggest of the 2 amount, often calculated in a way that you start to get more once the movie goes into profit territory. Mark Wahlberg on Transformer deal was an escalating, point that growth like tax rate: Wahlberg received $15M for Transformers, but has options in place for 2 sequels, at $19M and $20M respectively. Sounds like maybe this film and the first optional picture were averaged to come up with the $17M. Sounds like there may have been a $1M hold, but the assumption is that it was applicable. Because of all the players (Hasbro, Lorenzo, Bay, Spielberg, etc) and a 25 point first dollar cap, Wahlberg received 4%GP starting at $225M ww AGR, then escalated to 5% @ $425M ww AGR, 6% @ $725M ww AGR, and 7.5% @ $825M ww AGR. So I'm still feeling good about the $12M with 12%GP for purposes of the pool conversion. Wahlberg did have a 30% HV royalty, but we've been running the pool at 35%HV for payout and I don't expect we'll try to roll him back — but just one more favorable thing for him in our proposal, potentially.

1) We do not know RDH deal (compare the reported deal here of 25M + very little bonus with what seem to transpire, 20M upfront with the vast majority of the expected pay being in bonus structure). 2) Movie compensation deal are usually quite pie like, it is common for half of the profit or so to go on the big name, the more name you have the lesser they get (i.e. Pitt-Dicaprio-Tarantino could have accepted a bit less than when they are just 2 big name involved then when they worked the 3 together, they cannot each get an usual 17M+10% for Pitt and 20M+15 or 20 for the other 2), for a movie like Endgame when you have to share with many people, you would take less than on Iron Man 3 and so on. A clear headliner can make more on a movie than a giant star on an assemble movie with big name producers, writer and director. For a giant franchise movie it could be more in the 25% of the revenues going to the big names than 50%, in that case if Feige-writer/director get 8%, RDJ get 8% that leave just an other 8% for everyone else, Disney has spent around 1375 millions USD of the last 2 avengers movie at least using grossly pound to usd, if both movie budget was kept under 750millions combined, that going over 600m in bonus having been distributed for the 2 movie, if RDJ is getting about third of the bonus he is around $200m. 3) 10% of the gross is not giving her $100m on a $1b film, if the studio movie rental WW average is say 50%, that would have gave her 1,000 * .5 *.1 = $5M, gross point are not gross box office point, but gross from what the studio get, usually a bit less with some form of off the top being removed from it. To give an example of what they mean by gross (Defined gross receipt), a standard on a contract that is point on the profit could look like this: Application of Defined Gross Receipts. Subject to Paragraph 9.2, below and any other rights and remedies of SPWA as set forth in this Agreement, SPWA shall, on an ongoing and continuing basis, deduct the following from Defined Gross Receipts (in order of priority): 9.1.1. Distribution Fee. 9.1.2. Distribution Expenses. 9.1.3. Interest at a rate of Two Percent (2%) over the prime interest rate, as announced from time to time by Bank of America at its home office (“Interest”), on the Minimum Guarantee. 9.1.4. The Minimum Guarantee. 9.1.5. Any amounts remaining shall be allocated 2/3 to Licensor (“Licensor Share”) and 1/3 to SPWA 9.2. SPWA shall have the right to cross-collateralize the Defined Gross Receipts (after SPWA deducts its Distribution Fee) derived from SPWA’s exploitation of the Rights throughout the Territory with respect to the Picture for purposes of collecting Interest, recouping the Distribution Expenses and the Minimum Guarantee, and calculating the Licensor Share. When you have point before reaching profit you can remove the 9.1.2, 9.1.4 but not all of it, it is rarely directly on the rental. That why it is $50M and not more. That $50m is maybe a starting negotiating figure that I would imagine, that is not on the claim, but someone familiar with the contract claimed to the wsj, we do know the structure of the bonus she had (it could have been an escalator that goes up to 15-20% past a point, the highest I ever saw was Will Smith getting about 50% past a certain point on Concussion , but Fate of the furious with Johnson did less than Captain Marvel in theatrical rental, so I could see them try to argue that this should have done better than the latest Fast movie, even if that is pushing it speculation wise. If they settle with that movie would have made $400m more and with the escalator deal structure that would have turned out in 22.5M more with some punitive added in, I would not be surprise, or they will go on with it and win in court that it was some act of God situation mixed with a nice access to the revenues (I could see Disney having opened up the D+ at a near 100% in her pool of revenues in her contract) making it fair and best that was available to the court and win.

Reading the deadline release case, I think that made my impression of the moment when supposed leak of her deal started to be talked about to be right: The source added that Scarlett will also get a revenue bonus if the movie does well at the box office, meaning she could walk away with $31m alleges she's lost more than $50million in earnings as a result of Black Widow being released on Disney+ at the same time as theaters That sound like she had the usual old school 20M+10% "gross" type of deals like the Bullock-Jolie-Denzel-Depp were getting, the idea that a 8 figures headliners would have a bonus structure that cap at 6m.... of them being just 20% of the total compensation would make the concept of bonus completely useless.

To try to show harm and have a case they need for BW to clearly and without reasonable doubt having a lower performance than a traditionally release without D+ would have done in the COVID world I think (which number could be quite low in the current environment), if this was going to go over 700m not sure it happen. It was in the talk since even before COVID, when D+ became a big thing (there is e-mail from 2019 in there) that I would imagine and in the work since the decision was made also, but they need harm, they need a lower than reasonable to expect BO for it to make sense.

I think (at least the big name like people on wonder woman) negotiated and got bought out of their participation bonus by Warner cleanly: including Warner Brothers who, on information and belief, settled with its talent on films such as Wonder Woman after it released those films “day-and-date” to its streaming service HBO Max last year – Disney and Marvel largely ignored Ms. Johansson, essentially forcing her to file this action. The movie did had a theatrical release of more than 1,500 theater has by the contract, the dispute is about the theatrical windows which is not mentionned in it (because in 2017 that was so automatic they did not think of it)

No, contract for such blockbuster would not necessarily do that, because of that time it would have been just impossible to do a non exclusive wide-release, the contract is a copy-paste standard: . Paragraph 2, titled “ENGAGEMENT,” states: Lender shall furnish Producer the services of Artist to perform the role of ‘Black Widow’ / ‘Natasha Romanova’ in the theatrical motion picture currently entitled ‘Black Widow’ (‘Picture’). For the avoidance of doubt, if Producer in its sole discretion determines to release the Picture, then such release shall be a wide theatrical release of the Picture (i.e., no less than 1,500 screens). Johansson case is that at the time the contract was signed, both party fully understood the meaning of a wide release to be an exclusive theatrical release with a window of at least 90 days, something Disney side will not try to argue otherwise. That type of lawsuit is public: https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Complaint_Black-Widow-1-WM.pdf

A bit like the first spider man trilogy of that time, very little (all of Potter 8 movies left Watson of it all) and if Dept is done we could had the Pirates, the 17 Saw movie. They were that first bunch indicating that shift from draw to IPs draw.

That make the scene with her future husband producer when she is very young easier to do I imagine.

I was surprised by how bad it felt in the opening action sequence, with the plane escape. Considering the long release delay, one would thought it would have enough post production time, but maybe COVID complicated things for a very spoiler worry production. Wondered if it was my eyes or the projection or something.

what up with Cruella not dropping while losing a lot of theater ?

I am not sure why you thought the point was about stealing, it was just to show how much it would work with a shared account (that it would even work with a stolen one or a torrent download, because it listen on what play on the tv itself, not how) Apparently unlike sony old technology that was recognizing the sound of the content it use pixel informations to try to find a match with a database of all known medias.

Samba tv listen directly to the smart TV themselve, it could someone that stole someone else account or pirated the movie and would still work I think (probably going with the sound like the playstation did).

When not on film, it tend to be non temporal compression 2K file (100gb to 300gb), something that I think is impossible to get anywhere else too.

I would imagine that Kaamelott could be extremely fan driven too,

Many will be not fully what you have in mind, like Kill bill 1-2, was a single movie latter on cut in 2 I think after the final cut was getting over 4 hours. Here a list from the superman blockbuster era: Superman (1978) and Superman II (1980) (see also Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut, released 2006) Trail of the Pink Panther (1982) and Curse of the Pink Panther (1983), parts of the Pink Panther series The Outsiders (1983) and Rumble Fish (1983), both films directed by Francis Ford Coppola that were based on novels by S.E. Hinton. Missing in Action (1984) and Missing in Action 2: The Beginning (1985), the second film was filmed first, but released later as a prequel King Solomon's Mines (1985) and Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold (1986) Jean de Florette and Manon des Sources (both 1986) Sleepaway Camp II: Unhappy Campers (1988) and III: Teenage Wasteland (1989), sequels to the 1983 film Sleepaway Camp[2] The Toxic Avenger Part II and The Toxic Avenger Part III: The Last Temptation of Toxie (both 1989) were filmed as one movie but was later re-edited into two La Révolution française (1989) Back to the Future Part II (1989) and Part III (1990), of the Back to the Future film series[3][4] Critters 3 and 4 (both 1991), two films of the Critters series The Lost World and Return to the Lost World (both 1992) Smoking/No Smoking (1993) The Three Colours trilogy: Blue (1993), White (1994) and Red (1994) Joan the Maiden (1994) Blue in the Face (1995) was conceived and filmed completely ad libbed immediately following production of Smoke (1995) Bullet to Beijing (1995) and Midnight in Saint Petersburg (1996) Wishmaster 3: Beyond the Gates of Hell (2001) and Wishmaster: The Prophecy Fulfilled (2002) The Lord of the Rings trilogy: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001), The Two Towers (2002) and The Return of the King (2003)[5] The Matrix Reloaded and The Matrix Revolutions (both 2003), parts of the Matrix series[5] The Best of Youth (2003) Kill Bill: Volume 1 (2003) and Volume 2 (2004), which were originally shot as one film and later edited into two Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy and Wake Up, Ron Burgundy: The Lost Movie (2004), the second being a direct-to-video effort assembled from deleted scenes and outtakes of the first Ginger Snaps 2: Unleashed and Ginger Snaps Back: The Beginning (both 2004) Hellraiser: Deader and Hellraiser: Hellworld (both 2005) Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis and Rave to the Grave (both 2005), the fourth and fifth films in the Return of the Living Dead series Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (2006) and At World's End (2007), the second and third films in the Pirates of the Caribbean series[5] Flags of Our Fathers and Letters From Iwo Jima (both 2006) Arn – The Knight Templar (2007) and Arn – The Kingdom at Road's End (2008) Che Part 1: The Argentine and Che Part 2: Guerilla (both 2008) Anaconda 3: Offspring (2008) and Anacondas: Trail of Blood (2009)[6] Pulse 2: Afterlife and Pulse 3 (both 2008) Feast II: Sloppy Seconds (2008) and Feast III: The Happy Finish (2009) Mesrine (2008) Shred (2008) and Revenge of the Boarding School Dropouts (2009) The Girl Who Played with Fire and The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest (both 2009) Arthur and the Revenge of Maltazard (2009) and Arthur 3: The War of the Two Worlds (2010); the films were edited into Arthur and the Great Adventure (2010) for release in the United Kingdom Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1 (2010) and Part 2 (2011) The 10 "chapters" of the Adams Apples film series (2011–2012) The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 1 (2011) and Part 2 (2012) Gangs of Wasseypur - Part 1 and Part 2 were originally shot as a single film measuring a total of 319 minutes, but because of its over-five-hour length, it was divided into two parts (160 mins and 159 mins, respectively) for the Indian market. Nymphomaniac (2013) was originally supposed to be only one complete entry; but, because of its over-five-hour length, Lars von Trier had to split the project into two separate films. The Hobbit trilogy: An Unexpected Journey (2012), The Desolation of Smaug (2013) and The Battle of the Five Armies (2014) The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 1 (2014) and Part 2 (2015) Fifty Shades Darker (2017) and Fifty Shades Freed (2018) Avengers: Infinity War (2018) and Avengers: Endgame (2019) as part of the conclusion of the Infinity Saga (the first 11 years) of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. K.G.F: Chapter 1 (2018) and K.G.F: Chapter 2 (2020). To All the Boys: P.S. I Still Love You (2020) and To All the Boys: Always and Forever (2021) The Kissing Booth 2 (2020) and The Kissing Booth 3 (2021) Avatar 2 (2022) and Avatar 3 (2024)[5] Avatar 4 (2026) and Avatar 5 (2028)[5]

Pirates was not fully from nothing, it was based on the Disney attraction (the last one Walt Disney personally worked on). Avatar sequel will tell us if it happened.

Like the first it used 35mm a lot. (with the very latest update on what film (https://www.kodak.com/en/motion/product/camera-films/500t-5219-7219)-lense can do in the dark): https://ymcinema.com/2020/06/01/a-quiet-place-part-ii-was-shot-on-panavisions-panaflex-millennium-xl2-and-t-glass/ Shooting dark scenes with film The film contains a vast amount of dark scenes, which are the Achilles Heel of film and the main advantages of the digitals. However, according to DP Polly Morgan BSC ASC, this was a no brainer. The fact is that the film’s “extensive dark situations” (night scenes and stage work that comprised 75% of screen time) were shot with Kodak Vision3 500T 5219 film stock for the dark scenes, while Vision3 250D 5207 was used mainly for day exteriors. Furthermore, Morgan filmed with Panavision Panaflex Millennium XL2 cameras (were chosen after “extensive testing”) and T-Series anamorphic lenses, which had been adjusted to match the C-Series lenses Christensen used on the first film, and to optimize their close-focus abilities and performance in low light. With wrote about those lenses in the articles: Panavision T-Series Anamorphic: The Lenses Behind Line of Duty, and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood Proves That Film is (Still) The King. Feel free to catch a glimpse at those.

I think Villeneuve was at some point the highest ranked director (current in the sense, next movie not career I think): Add the franchise and it was certain to be quite anticipated on that type of platform, Reddit r-movies could be nicher than twitter movies.

Bit surprised that the price point for their deal did not include some form of windows exclusivity of tv-movies content or maybe it did, anime project can take a long time to make.

I cannot really even start to look at and thing in the current market place, but a fully wide release at 43.44m at the end of the second weekend outside the holiday season reaching 100m ? Men in black international was at 52.6 millions after it's second sunday and ended around 80, Kingsman 2 crawled to 100m and was at 66.6, Christopher Robin was a super leggy movie that went an above 4.0x multiplier and it was a 50.6m at that point, which show that yes it look possible when looking at that one. Would that mean that A quiet place is headed toward 165m-200m ? Or the legs show that different of a trajectory ? That would be incredible good legs I think, adding almost 8 times your second weekend to a 4 days holiday weekend start for a movie on PPV.

For a movie that has a giant and obvious tension (it does not want Cruella to actually be Cruella it seem, but try to have is Cake and eat it too by having her being it with people thinking it is part of a bit and they dance an impossible line on it), maybe should have been more surrealist and have her actually be Cruella (but animated is much better for that) or not at all (what would be the point), so I think they understood all that and did the best they could with that strange task of a strange movie. That said it works because of the Emma's, the big budget a bit of an over-reliance on music and so on. It felt a lot American Hustle-y to me and then it felt a bit strange that they went so much for a non film look for a movie set in those eras-astheatic, that could have possibly gained to have a 35mm looking filter apply

I was quite impressed by either how tactile it was or just how good computer SFX are today, really interesting use of sound has well, solid craft, pretty much has good has you can go for a sequel plot wise, maybe my standard got lower for going to the cinema for the first time in like 15 months, but it was all round really really good. Good exposition.

WW: https://www.the-numbers.com/box-office-records/worldwide/all-movies/cumulative/released-in-2008 Dom: https://www.the-numbers.com/box-office-records/domestic/all-movies/cumulative/released-in-2008 If those do not work: https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/ https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/world/2018/ Try pausing your VPN, he seem to block people connecting via those sometime.