Jump to content

BXT

Free Account
  • Posts

    94
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by BXT

  1. 21 minutes ago, Jeriosnal said:

    That's the problem though, she hasn't really.  O. Russell is easily the greatest director she's worked with and, lo and behold, he's the one most responsible for her career success.  Aronofsky has always been erratic and was coming off of the lousy Noah.  Ross and F. Lawrence are just journeymen capable of nothing great.  Tyldum is a hack, despite IG getting Oscar noms.  etc.  If J-Law actually got the Spielberg movie happening and a QT film, her career would look very different right now to the average person despite her very limited talent.  

    How many good directors have Meryl Streep, Angelina Jolie, Julia Roberts or any other A-list actresses have worked with ? We keep having this discussion every few months but the fact is that good directors make movies with mostly male lead actors. Why should JLaw go for supporting roles just so she can work with them ?

  2. 56 minutes ago, TombRaider said:

    I guess. But in general females wont be a draw unless old school rom-coms make a comeback and I doubt that'll happen. Bad news for the kate hudsons, meg ryans and katherine heigls of the world

    This is a ridiculous post. Angelina Jolie was one of the biggest draws until she stopped acting in movies even though she never did any romcoms. Melissa McCarthy never did any romcoms and is a bigger draw domestically than pretty much any male actor other than maybe The Rock.

  3. 5 minutes ago, Barnack said:

    I have a bit of an hard time following people in this thread if they are talking about dbo or OW ?

     

    Biggest opening for non-sequel live action without a really strong IP:

     

    American Sniper: 89m (still an american hero and helped by the limited release build up)

    Passion of Christ: 83m (not sure how to rank Jesus in term of IP, I guess a bad example)

    I am Legend: 77m (not that know of a book ?, really popular genre and peak Smith)

    Avatar: 77m

     

    That is pretty much all the live action movie that achieved 75m without being a giant franchise entry/sequel/book adaptation.

     

    I suspect a giant opening over Ted/Martian/Gravity/San Andreas 55m could happen, but obviously it could do under 75m that would be an exceptional number.

     

     

     

     That $75 million number was for DOM total. A $30-35 million opening with a stacked May lineup may easily result in under $75 million if this is a bad movie.

  4. 31 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

    She will kill her career if she really goes on hiatus following mother and this. Maybe she’ll make some kind of comeback in her late 30s or something with an acclaimed award type of role, but it will be an uphill battle for her to get those kind of roles and she’ll likely never be a box office draw again. I highly advise against the hiatus before trying to get another mainstream hit or two.

    Most lead actors/actresses take a year or two off every now and then and it has no impact on their careers.

    • Like 1
  5. 5 hours ago, marveldcfox said:

    Man....if I reveal anything, it will go into spoiler territory. The whole plot and things certain characters do...will piss off hardcore Predator fans and even casuals might roll their eyes. 

     

    Oh and I think one of the human lead characters will be completely deleted from the movie OR replaced by someone else in the reshoots...not 100% sure whether it's this project or a different fox project...depends on how much cash fox wants to waste. 

     

    Woah. Who could the actor be and why ?

  6. 19 hours ago, TwoMisfits said:

    https://www.wired.com/story/moviepass-second-act/

     

    Lots of actual info from the company itself...some of the more interesting pieces for box office...

    1. They expect subscribers to TRIPLE by the end of this summer - so 1.5M to 4.5M (if you use the Jan 9 numbers - could be more if there were using numbers as of today) - not sure if they are planning another "push", but that would be sure to bump the BO of movies in that term...

    2. They expect to more limit theaters and/or showtimes and/or actual movies at the "non-cooperative" chains if you read between the lines...AMC was mentioned (and Regal was also, for not commenting)...interestingly, Cinemark was not until the end...not big enough to matter as much as the other 2?  Or not as against the company?  And if a movie got excluded from the pass, that's gonna really hurt the bottom line for that movie as time goes on...maybe not the big, big movies, but the next tier down could get killed...

    3. As of now, they estimate they have at least SEVEN months of cash flow, to cover super user use...they really are gonna play the "get on board" or "mutually assured destruction" game, b/c a full year of "cheap" movies will be an enormously tough habit to break...and since they will probably represent 15-20% of frequent movie goers by the end of summer (when in theory the money could run out)...the industry itself would probably crack if Moviepass ends without an immediate and equivalent replacement...

     

    Gonna be crazy times for the next 7 months, whether you love or hate Moviepass...it literally will have the ability to have a bigger and bigger effect (both positively and negatively) on movie box office, individual and chain theater profitability, etc...

     

    PS - I ignored some of their "throw it at the wall and see what sticks" ideas, but if you want more of all the different plans - read the article:)...

     

    PPS - This felt like a "throw down" article...and if I'm AMC, I'd be speeding up my own subscription service asap, b/c it sounds like the 10 theaters dropped were only the opening gambit in hardball from Moviepass...and at AMC, you may not be able to weather a serious hit any better than Moviepass can, b/c you don't have speculative investors pouring money into you at will...

    There is no "Mutually Assured Destruction". Moviepass with 5 million subscribers and no cash is not a threat to studios/exhibitors. People are not going to change their movie watching habits just because they have used moviepass for a few months. I was actually rooting for MP but it is becoming more and more obvious everyday that they don't have a sound business plan. For example, they want a share of the exhibition pie but they are not bringing anything (capital, investment) to the table. They are also growing too fast for their own good. Unless they can demonstrate that a few months of free movies has changed their customers' movie watching habits, why would you negotiate with them if you are an exhibitor ?

    • Like 1
  7. I don't think Moviepass has the leverage that the company thinks it does. They have less than 2 million subscribers and they want a cut from AMC. That's not gonna happen unless you have a lot more subscribers. I wonder why they couldn't wait another couple of years to make this move. Could they be running out of cash ? If AMC stops honoring MoviePass they are fucked as there are plenty of small towns in North America that don't have any other theater chains. It will also weaken their hand against AMC's rivals. Why should Regal pay them anything if AMC isn't ?

  8. 1 hour ago, iceni said:

     

    You talking about this?  http://digitalcinema.bydeluxe.com  (iirc, they used to list trailers attached to movies under a pdf called "TrailMix")

     

    1 hour ago, WrathOfHan said:

    This and https://cinema.dcinema.com/default.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2f are the two sites; they typically upload at the same time. The TrailerMixes stopped back in November after how popular they became to the general public; maybe we were a critical reason why :jeb!: 

     

    Thanks. This is exactly what I was looking for.

×
×
  • 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.