Barnack

Giant budget, giant release, giant director, giant box office.......... That is the typical blockbuster of the 100 last year's of Hollywood on every aspect I would say.

There is a strawmen we should not create and try to take down. Does the media said that movie with women never made money, or that it was a small portion of the large budgeted with an world release getting made until recently ? Small budgets/studio specialty branch for the most part too. But there is a recent shift: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/feb/21/female-protagonists-high-2016-arrival-rogue-one-ghostbusters A reported 37% of films included major female characters, up 3% from 2015 and another all-time high. http://womenintvfilm.sdsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/2016-Its-a-Mans-Celluloid-World-Report.pdf Media are sensationalist, both them and us should probably stay away from using cherry picked example, use 3 year's of released movie (say 1987 to 1990, 95 to 98, etc...) look at the top 300 movies during that time, what was the percentage with a clear female lead vs clear male lead, use those numbers. Exception like James Cameron are not necessarily representative.

I probably do not understand that word usage correctly then.

That would fit what I suspected (after hearing an interview of a stunt men commenting on the subject after the incident), he said that the new wave of incident is probably linked to production having less and less days while still trying to do as much if not more than the previous generation of movies stunt/action wise.

When fear will go down (lower cost or other revenue source boosting margin). Right now, so much is in stake, movie slate are becoming with so many less entry, that they really want to have comparable to point out after the movie fail if it fail to keep their jobs, similar movie at similar date, IP marketing numbers, anything. Opening a good budget movie without being able to compare to an recent equivalent is just too much for most right now. That is a bit of a trivial circular argument, and start with the answer that people do not want to see different type of movie during summer weekdays than christmas season, than fall season, etc... There is so many time people point out a movie didn't open at the right time or too fast, etc... after they fail, there is probably some timing and competition involved. There is better weekend than others imo (Christmas, july summers, award season that studio have a good reason to fight for them and depend on the movie) August do feel like a self-fulfilling prophecy a lot.

He did one: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=barelylethal.htm Jackson do Saban film's , Mac Releasing, direct to video release, the list of people he would not answer the phone from must be quite small.

With the tomato right in the middle of 50% does it mean it state that the movie should have to be around the average wide release opening weekend to respect the law ? In 2016 the average movie with an opening between 2000-3800 theater last year: $16,292,434 2,912 theaters Removing the big franchise/sequel title the average OW was: $12,836,799 2,824 theaters

I am all for adding days of production to movies (specially on a sequel of a 700 million movie, come-on studios....) to make them safer and if they over rushed that one they have a part of responsibility. But I pointed in my example more in particular people dying doing stuff 100% disposable like the dangerous unnecessary 3 am taxi driving after the bars close, lot of completely unnecessary flight, sale worker, etc... Sometime one unnecessary death is more talked just because it has more starpower. It was more, the fact that the movie is an stupid action movie is not much an important part of the equation, all movies are 100% disposable/unessential jobs, the person that die on the set of Scorsese Silence for example, does that make it much better (not talking about unexpected amount of calculated risk here, but the actual movie being made) ?

Sure they could still market an other stunt that went well, but I doubt being injured would help selling that one more than the previous 2 entry.

They did market a hell out of is stunts in their promo of the last 2 MI movie (the tower / airplane stunts were 2 cornerstone of those movie release), the fact that he injured himself doing them this time would maybe make it harder to market them as much in good taste or at least I'm not sure how much more they could use them than previously.

People die driving taxis every week Taxi driver: Fatality rate per 100,000 workers: 19.7 In the US: The 10 Deadliest Jobs: 1. Logging workers 2. Fishers and related fishing workers 3. Aircraft pilot and flight engineers 4. Roofers 5. Structural iron and steel workers 6. Refuse and recyclable material collectors 7. Electrical power-line installers and repairers 8. Drivers/sales workers and truck drivers 9. Farmers, ranchers, and other agricultural managers 10. Construction laborers Around 13/15 people die on the jobs every day in the US: A total of 4,836 fatal work injuries were recorded in the United States in 2015, a slight increase from the 4,821 fatal injuries reported in 2014 When we see something non essential made of wood (say a paper magazine, news papers, fancy chair, etc...), we do not have a wish people would stop dying logging for those. Those movies are probably not just stupid action movies for those risking their life making them.

One time he said that he was getting much more shooting days in Hong Kong than Hollywood. And was he doing the Hollywood movie he starred in, or just acting / stunt coordinated them, that would be a huge difference also.

This, the "if you come at me" is an important part of the rules here, the other category is probably an by experience those from that profile never lead to an interesting conversation that made him grow or have fun.

Did I read somewhere that they will limit it to 100k new members (or maybe that it was there hopes/expectation) ? If so, that would be a limited impact, if 100% of the users go to a movie and none them would have gone otherwise, it will be less than a million dollar difference on the complete movie runs.

In term of the amount of interaction it had with the others MCU characters (close to nothing) and total box office (263m), Norton Hulk was quite small yes.

The Revenant ?

There was no crossover or any link of any sort between Garfield spiderman and any MCU entry too. It would be a bit different to have a different Batman interacting with the same Gadot Wonder Woman, Iron Alfred, Cavill Superman, etc.... specially in a DCEU movie marathon. Those really establish for a long time character like batman/superman/spiderman/Bond are easy to recast for sure, but in a constant movie universe it would not be just like previous example, there is a little bit more resistance than usual, it would call more attention to itself.

I know about the jokes and he still make Golden Globes party, but studio's caught up to him and it has been a while they have been struggling at winning awards over them.

He did lie in interviews about developing that project since the mid 90's and the technology used for the battle, he had a 5% participation on the first 3 and the first Hobbit ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings_(film_series) The Weinstein name appear 5 times on that page. http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-weinsteins-sue-warner-bros-over-hobbit-profits-2013dec11-story.html Weinsteins sue Warner Bros. over 'Hobbit' profits The "Lord of the Rings" films grossed nearly $3 billion worldwide. Along with "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey," the movies have each netted the Weinsteins more than $100 million. Although the Weinsteins have since sold Miramax to Disney, they retained a share in "The Hobbit" profits. That was all made up by them and the media, what is your source ? The trials actually happen about the hobbit sequels points.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings_(film_series) He probably still has a big personal fortune from Lords of the rings + first Hobbit, but it has been a while is company has not been that relevant, what was the last globe he won ? Even Carol didn't won any.

2017 not a bad summer (at least in term of top 7/8) for the collider compatible style of movies imo.

That is a bit funny text: I can confirm that everything Mr. Morton said is spot-on. The Cyborg character was altered quite a bit during the reshoots. Also, as I’ve been saying since June 2nd of this year, the JL reshoots and the resulting changes being made to the film are significant. These reshoots – which are still taking place – are not standard pick-ups/additional photography. Why? Apparently, an early cut of the film was deemed “unwatchable.” Thus, substantial changes to the film were ordered. Circular use of himself as a source (of him saying) followed by apparently.

Not something audience knew going on the first weekend (I imagine in both case, didn't saw the other movie or followed is promotion), I'm purely talking opening here not legs.

Might yes, but you comparing him with one of the most loved actor out there (domestic) with one of the most fidel fanbase in Denze, he is arguably the biggest domestic draw of the 2000's. Reynolds starpower raised post Deadpool and will be better used in a comedy but: 3/24/17 Life (2017) Sony $30,234,022 3,146 $12,501,936 3,146 16 4/15/16 Criminal (2016) LG/S $14,708,696 2,683 $5,767,278 2,683 21 That is not Denzel I opened 16 or my 17 wide released moveis of the 2000's above 20m incredible run (something even Dicaprio didn't come close to do) Between 17.5m to 19.5m is much more likely than a 26/28 like a 2 Guns scenario.

There is some reasons to think it will not be that close. 1) Denzel Washington is arguably the biggest domestic draw actor wise for a movie like that and is co-star scored well among Denzel weakest quadrant (white young girls) like studio often do choose for is co-stars (Pratt, chloe moretz, etc...). 2) Big studio (Universal) release vs Liongates (mini-major), only one non-IP movie ever opened like 2 Guns in all Liongates studio history with Now you see me At least theaters count will be the same and reviews for the genre are probably not that factor (for that level of difference), but I could easily see HB doing less than 24m, even less than 19.5