Jump to content

SnokesLegs

Free Account
  • Content count

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

29 Likes

About SnokesLegs

  • Rank
    Straight-to-DVD

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Rated 15 today by the BBFC. So we’re basically getting a watered down version of Deadpool 2 for seemingly no reason in the UK. I hope they at least have some fun with the censorship and get meta with it.
  2. It’s undersrandable really, by making it a one night only event it’ll probably sell out, but spreading it out over 12 days will lead to a lot of empty theatres after the initial curiosity fades. I wouldn’t be surprised if it still got a 15 rating over here too based on that MPAA description. Plus, with Aquaman releasing on the 14th, there won’t be much room for a needlessly toned down version of Deadpool 2 that you can watch uncut at home.
  3. Saw this last night, I love the original but this one just left me completely cold. I didn’t hate it, but it’s a film that tries to do the polar opposite of what the original does (colour scheme, character motivations, length, etc...) while still trying to stick to the same framework, which I sort of respect considering they tried to do something different with it, but that doesn’t mean it’s a “good” different. Its unnecessarily long and by the half way point you begin to feel every turgid minute of it, it really slows down to a crawl in the middle. There’s standout sequences and the performances are good (particularly Mia Goth), but it’s weighed down by uninteresting additions that either don’t add anything to the plot or just take far to long to make a point. They turned a trashy 70’s classic into an art film with delusions of grandeur. If they try to take this wide, it’ll definitely get an F CinemaScore, I can’t see mainstream audiences taking to this at all.
  4. Enjoy! Watching the original in a cinema with an audience is one of my favourite cinema experiences. I saw a 35mm print of the film when I was at uni in the packed out university cinema with a sizeable portion of the audience having never seen the film before. People were involuntarily screaming whenever Michael would appear out of nowhere, the atmosphere was incredible, I’ve never seen anything like it, it was fantastic! if you’ve only ever seen the film at home, you’re in for a treat.
  5. I don’t think it’ll hurt it too much really, 18 rated films like The Wolf of Wall Street, Gone Girl and (unfortunately) the Fifty Shades films prove that 18’s can still be sizeable hits. I feel like this is a film that will mainly appeal to the 18+ crowd anyway.
  6. Rated 18 in the UK for “strong bloody violence and gore”. I’m pleasantly surprised (and relieved, as it’ll keep the younger chavs away), it’s quite unusual these days for a mainstream horror film to get an 18 rating, the original Halloween has recently been downgraded to a 15 too. There must be some pretty grisly stuff in this one!
  7. It would have made more as a 12A. A comic book film being a 15 doesn’t stop it being a hit (Deadpool 1&2, and as you say, Suicide Squad, are examples of that), but cutting off a sizeable portion of your audience undeniably means that it’ll make less than it could have had it been open to families. Particularly in the case of Venom where Sony are hoping to catch the MCU audience. I’m surprised they didn’t cut it to be honest.
  8. Venom is also rated 15, cutting out family attendance, so that will limit the audience and likely give Johnny English the upper hand. I also imagine the reviews for Venom will be quite damaging.
  9. Awful title change. Honestly makes you wonder what kind of idiots are being hired to come up with something like this. “A New Dragon Tattoo Story”....Jesus, how about trusting your audience to recognise when it’s part of a franchise. Not that there is an audience for this... Still, we can confirm that Avengers 4 will probably be called “Avengers 4: A New Avengers Story”...
  10. We’re not seriously going to have that “Hamill hates it/loves it” debate again are we, guys? Let it go...🙄
  11. I’ve seen many films in the format, and none of them should be anyone’s initial viewing of a film. It’s a distraction, nothing more. As Crainy correctly stated, if the director didn’t plan on it being part of their film, then it is just a pointless gimmick, and none of the films presented in 4DX have been made with moving chairs and other effects in mind. The 4DX company make up the motion/effects files after the film has been completed, and often it doesn’t even correspond properly with what’s happening. Case in point, Independence Day Resurgence (awful film anyway) has moments in space where the chairs lazily listed from side to side, presumably to simulate zero G, it was awful and didn’t correspond with the on screen movements. The fans that simulate the wind effects are also loud enough to be heard over the film, the strobe lights just take your eyes away from the screen, and the 3D is just regular old Real D 3D, complete with all the ghosting that you tend to find with that form of 3D, only it’s made worse because you’re actually moving. People should temper their expectations a bit, it’s absolutely not the future of cinema, and neither is that terrible Screen X that Cineworld are currently pushing. By all means, people should try it, but don’t expect anything groundbreaking.
  12. Don’t believe the hype, 4DX is a gimmick of the worst kind. It’s cinema for people with no attention span. I’ve seen a fair few films in 4DX when I used to work in a cinema that had one and we had to test the 4DX motion files, and while it’s fun for half an hour or so (the rides at Universal and Disney are perfect for it), it quickly becomes tiresome. Jurassic World was headache inducing when I saw it in the format. The smells are also very limited, so don’t be expecting to smell Pandora when Avatar 2 comes out, unless the whole place smells of burning rubber/sea breeze/roses. Getting sprayed in the face with water also quickly loses its charm. In case you can’t tell, I’m really not a fan! IMAX is infinitely more immersive.
  13. Not a chance that this makes more than either of The Conjuring films on OW. I think people are going a bit OTT with the predictions for this, The Nun will likely perform more like Annabelle Creation. It blowing up last year doesn’t mean that a spin off from The Conjuring will suddenly explode on the same weekend, particularly when this looks like “Jump Scares: The Movie” based on the trailers. The hype for this is nowhere near comparable to It (I know nobody is saying that, but It’s performance last year is clearly clouding people’s expectations here). $35-40 million is my bet, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see it fall under that.
  14. I honestly think Disney messed up by not releasing Ant Man & The Wasp at the same time as the US. Not everyone in the country is glued to the World Cup and it’d have likely opened higher than it has ($6.5 million) if it didn’t have a month of “it’s fine” WOM spreading from the rest of the world, it took away the must see nature of it. Coming off of Infinity War, AM&TW should have opened bigger.
  15. Exactly. At this point, even if it’s Disney releasing them, they don’t really stand to lose much on either of them, they’re basically inheriting two almost complete films that they could theoretically market as “the end” of that particular cinematic universe. This isn’t even remotely the same situation that God Particle or Mowgli were/are in, both Dark Phoenix and New Mutants are part of a fairly lucrative franchise. They will be released in theatres, and they’ll make a decent amount of money, X Men films always do, even the crap ones (not saying either of these are going to be crap, but you know what I mean).
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.