Jump to content

Ipickthiswhiterose

Free Account+
  • Content Count

    550
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Ipickthiswhiterose

  1. 4 hours ago, ThomasNicole said:

     

     

    Very curious about Japan, Korea and China. In UK should be huge.

     

     

     

    I'm extremely excited about Dune and really hope it does well. But not getting any buzz over here about it, don't know what basis the idea it would be huge here is based on - doesn't come across to me as being aligned to mainstream British audiences. Maybe I'm wrong. The late opening here really, REALLY won't help. Should have got in before Bond, not waited for after. 

  2. 5 hours ago, Eric and the Ten Rings said:

    Eddie Murphy's reign in the 1980s, both in movies and television, was truly something incredible. There's a reason Coming 2 America did so well on Amazon and probably would have done solid business in theaters, despite being garbage.

     

    In terms of tickets sold domestically (67.1 million), it sold more than Dead Man's Chest, Incredibles 2, Finding Nemo, The Lion King and Beauty and the Beast remakes, Rogue One, all the Lord of the Rings movies, etc. Mindboggling to think about really.

     

    Yeah, looking up the numbers for films that just aren't even on the radar today like Golden Child is bonkers.

     

    Although I don't think anything can beat Crocodile Dundee for almost-impossible-to-communicate-to-young-people-how-big-this-film-was ness. 

  3. The trailer for Copshop baffled me. Genuinely baffling as to how this was commissioned. I'm sure for all the world that it might be a perfectly good film with perfectly good performances but nothing about it communicated an even vaguely commercial prospect in the year 2021. Or indeed any year since around 1995. Just came across as a humdrum episode of a TV series with a few extra famous people in. 

     

    Huge congratulations to Candyman since 50m is a pretty great return. I disliked the movie despite great visuals and performances since I found the narrative and treatment of themes to be a shambles, but am glad that it will surely have sent some back to rewatch the masterpiece of the original and that the original's status is being moved up prominence tables in horror history to the elite table where it belongs. It is also a big win for Nia DaCosta who shot the film beautifully and whose feet I don't really lay my blame for the issues I had with it (that would be Peele, since the same issues were present in both his previous).

  4. 19 minutes ago, exomassey said:

    This is hilarious. Simu just can’t do anything right with Weibo lol. A paedo sympathiser? Really?  

     

    I believe now Shang Chi probably won’t get a Chinese release but honestly, the movie never had a chance, there’s new issues everyday lol.
     


     

     

     

    Seems at this point Simu is just getting in some quarters the treatment that Brie Larson got here. Just any chance for a character assassination will be taken no matter how tenuous. Nothing will be good enough, nothing will be acceptable, just an ideologically driven faction.

     

    But at the same time, as with Larson, likely only to be a specialist niche noisy bunch of the Very Online not necessarily attached to the general public. It has become wrapped in an agenda not of its own making and not under its control. At this point it will be little skin off noses. I'm just sad for the Chinese MCU fans who have nothing to do with this who now don't get this, and seemingly other, movies.

     

    I would say that I hope it provides a lesson to those who've been doing/falling for this sort of attack nonsense in the West to see how flagrant and dishonest it looks when another culture/online group is doing it...but I won't get my hopes up.

    • Like 6
  5. It wouldn't surprise me if Feige is already preparing, and indeed possibly has already prepared, for a post-China era in terms of releasing movies.

     

    For all the click baiters have accused Shang-Chi of playing to the Chinese government, as many have pointed out it is abundantly obvious through the casting of Liu and the tone of the film that this was an Asian-American film first and foremost, a general East Asian film second and a 'Chinese film' last. Add to that his steadfastness about Chloe Zhao and with the supernatural/horror/Mephisto-laden aspects of Marvel on the horizon which stand lower chance of Chinese release anyway it seems as though if the chips *have* to fall in one direction, it will be on the direction of simply not making films with a Chinese release in mind - or rather always assuming that the decisions on Chinese releases will be arbitrary and based on momentary contextual politics that are beyond the control of a studio.

     

    I suspect there's no chance of Simu being recast, or even of current plans changing in any way. Although it's certainly possible a mainland Chinese actor takes on a major protagonist role very soon. But it's hard to tell anything from the Hollywood articles and writers that are so lacking in self-awareness of the bubbles they reside in that they were genuinely surprised and confused when Crazy Rich Asians wasn't successful in Asia.

    • Like 7
  6. 1 hour ago, imbruglia said:

    ‘Shang-Chi’ doesn’t resist racist tropes. It just repackages them.

    If Shang-Chi” breaks any ground, though, it won’t be for the quality and nuance of how it represents Asians or Asian Americans, but for the simple fact of that representation. The movie is an Orientalist fantasia that presents the same old tropes in slightly updated, somewhat self-aware, very expensive packaging.

     

    ....

     

     

    Our inclusion in this comic book saga, banking hundreds of millions with each installment is, for many, enough. It’s not enough for me. I’m sorry. I’m not grateful for Shang Chi, because I’m not grateful for scraps from the table anymore.

     

    I want a seat at the table.

     

    I want the table.

     

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/09/15/shang-chi-orientalist-fantasy/

     

    great read.

     

     

    Conclusion-led hogwash that mostly is just a barrage of fallacy by omission:

     

    - Complains about not representing contemporary Asia, ignoring the whole sequence in Macau. Complains about Asia being represented as static, despite the timbre of the end credits sequence specifically manifesting change.

    - Pretends that it is in some way unique that the Asian character's father is mythical in nature (y'know, like half the other superheroes) or there is an implied family secret (y'know, like 90% of the other superheroes)

    - Literally pulls out a fully strawmanned quote ("who are you *really*") in order to stretch to a point.

    - Complains tenuously about 'exotic cliches' when the material is clearly drawn and inspired by Chinese history - just in a non-literal manner suitable for a contemporary audience - which presumably is what Walter wants because otherwise it sure would be hypocritical to complain elsewhere about Asia being represented as static and unchanging.

    - I mean let's be clear about this: one paragraph Walter is complaining about this piece supposedly misrepresenting Asia as static and unchanging, and then spends a paragraph moaning about how they've changed the mythic creatures from their fourth century origins.

    - "When you're a White superhero in the MCU, you get to have an origin story that doesn't involve ancient Chinese secrets". No, it involves ancient Scandinavian secrets instead.

    - Establishing Katy is an underachiever isn't character progression apparently, it's an Asian stereotype.

    - A character from an immigrant background speaking multiple languages isn't a signifier of intelligence, just of a mixed background. Literally any polyglot or person from a mixed background knows this and it's disingenuous to pretend otherwise. 

     

    - And finally, as already stated by the poster above the film could not more specifically establish that the character is "at the table". 

     

    There's good criticism to be had of representing cultures in film, including this one. There's certainly good criticism to be discussed of the impossibility of representing Asian-ness in general and the very concept being somewhat deluded. There's plenty good criticism to be had in discussing how international film will always struggle with the fundamental differentiation of "Asian-American" from "Asian".

     

    But this isn't any of those things. It's bad, conclusion-led journalism mostly made up of a Gish gallop.

    • Like 8
  7. 21 minutes ago, Spidey Freak said:

     

    How are Captain Marvel and FFH mid-tier box office though? 

     

    To be fair, Captain Marvel had possibly the most optimum positioning for box office of any film in history. I like the film far more than most (my 5th ranked MCU) but it's BO performance was undeniably situational.

     

    I think Homecoming would have been a better example of a smaller scale story but as ever with categorising systems, they don't *totally* work to encompass everything....but they're useful to have to help discuss and conceive of films and I think the categories being proposed avove are useful enough to help discussion of future box office.

     

    As for Eternals, I - without trying to grief it - do think it stands the biggest chance of misfire unless it *really* picks up some of the non-standard audience such as higher proportions of women and fandom communities. I think it's the film most effected by the changes in schedule. If I remember correctly, it was originally positioned as the second film of Phase 4, with only 2 films to be released that year (2020). That would have made it both the emotional launch of Phase 4 (given the perception of Black Widow as a bridge/coda) and therefore positionable as "This is the vision for Marvel going forward" while taking advantage of a Marvel-barren period post Endgame where the Disney+ series had barely launched (if at all). Changed to a release within the ultra-crowded 2021 schedule for MCU, following Shang-Chi and 4 D+ series where the Phase 4 is very established already, and only shortly before a massive (and very Marvel-normative) Spider-Man movie the rationale for its release seems to have been shrunk significantly and the movie's placement will come across - possibly - as more of an anomaly. And general audiences - and to a lesser extent critics - are unpredictable, trending negative, when it comes to anomalies from what they see as standard templates no matter how good the movie actually is (see cinema scores for A24s horror masterpieces like The VVitch, Hereditary and Midsommar).

    • Like 1
  8. 3 minutes ago, grey ghost said:

    Venom may not be a traditional horror film but it definitely has Halloween vibes like Beetlejuice and Corpse Bride.

     

    I think it definitely gets a Halloween boost.

     

    Meanwhile I totally agree with this.

     

    Venom isn't a horror film but if done well it does have what I would very academically term a warm spooky spook factor. A warm cosy hygge bit of atmosphere.

     

    ....And I actually think Halloween is better for spooky spook factor than it is for balls to the wall horror. Certainly I'd pick watching Hocus Pocus and Monster House on Halloween over a Saw marathon any year. And I suspect the box office will reflect that general sentiment in favour of Venom.

    • Like 1
  9. 6 minutes ago, Krissykins said:

     


    100% agree. The body horror is played for laughs and used for fighting, not to scare or gross out/gore.

     

    Interesting side note is that the Jurassic Park films actually follow the slasher movie formula. 

     

    Yeah, Crichton wasn't far off a horror writer, really. 13th Warrior and Congo also follow slasher structures to a hefty degree, and Disclosure isn't too far away from a domestic socio-political horror. JP1 and 3 are close to Horror films, and a couple of the kills in the newer ones are directed with slasher sensibilities, but all contain too many other beats to really fit into the horror category IMO, and the films are constructed around the overall narrative (in the case of the first) and all-purpose action (in the case of the others) more prominently than the composition/timing of the death scenes.

  10. Having written academically about horror a lot I have found engaging in epistolary discussion about what is and isn't horror to be a deeply futile task.

     

    But for what it's worth I wouldn't come close to defining Venom as horror. It *could be done* as horror. But it wasn't in either of Venom's first two major movie appearances, or any screen interaction I've seen.

     

    The inherent "Body horror" in Venom is no different from Fantastic 4, Hulk or Spider-Man. 

     

    If you go with just "He eats them and is a monster" elements, that would mean, say Yoshi makes Super Mario horror. 

     

    None of the real affective triggers: disgust, fear, shock etc are triggered consistently as a part of the rationale of the film. The Jurassic films or Kong: Skull Island are closer to Horror films than Venom by pretty much all measurable and you'd still largely be pressed to call them horror.

     

    On the other hand Halloween is certainly a Horror. For some reason I think this will underperform a little. I think the first return was a bit more of a novelty than folks think but I'm very willing to be wrong.

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
  11. I think Venom will do great. As has been mentioned above, it's in the same ballpark as Jurassic World whereby even if the general consensus in *online film conversation* is that it is terrible and most objective measures used to evaluate media say that it's terrible, it was still raucously popular and audiences liked it and will be there for a sequel. It will probably eventually run out of coolness points with its main target demographic but that won't be yet.

     

    That differs significantly from, say, Suicide Squad and BVS where there was a clear chorus from Joe Public that the film was as poor as the *online film conversation* types said.

  12. 2 minutes ago, YourMother the Edgelord said:

    Question: did Shang-Chi go over Ant Man and the Wasp OW?

     

    AM&W was $75.8m. Will be close but the revised estimate places it still very slightly below.

     

    (Edit: Apologies, had already been answered)

  13. I'd put:

     

    Master and Commander

    Dead Poet's Society

    Fearless

    The Truman Show

    Picnic at Hanging Rock

    The Last Wave

    Gallipoli

    The Year of Living Dangerously

    The Mosquito Coast

    Witness

     

    Against any Top 10 from any other living director's filmography. 

     

    Certainly not as high profile as a Spielberg and others but the variety in that list is staggering: to the extent that I think the only reason that Weir is not placed perennially alongside the all timers is that he is selfless enough to not impose a personal stamp on his projects. Admittedly fewer films, but a much better hitrate also than the likes of Scorsese, Nolan, Coppola with arguably not a single poor film to his name. And he directed Jeff Bridges, Harrison Ford, Jim Carrey, Russell Crowe, Paul Bettany, Mel Gibson and Sigourney Weaver all to career best performances.

  14. On 8/16/2021 at 5:42 AM, CoolK said:

    Is there any super hero movie which was well received & bombed as badly as TSS?

     

    The closest isn't quite a Superhero movie, just a comic book movie, but I think is quite illuminating.....It's Scott Pilgrim V The World. 

     

    For all Brie Larson got so much flack for pointing this out, there is once in a while a movie that narrows the parameters of who its aimed at massively without online culture particularly noticing. Scott Pilgrim did that, and I think TSS does it as well: "The angels are splooging on us", "Beach full of penises" and a talking shark saying "hand" in a childlike goofy voice are all in the trailer and I just don't think they play to a general audience the way they play to online culture. They don't even read as 'edgy' in a Deadpool or Venom way, they just read - without context - as an easily dismissible "dumb" or "childish".

     

    But more than anything else I just think that like The Wolfman, Solo, Mortal Engines, Dredd, Birds of Prey, John Carter the ultimate reason for the debacle is just a fundamental failure to judge the actual appeal of the premise of the film.

     

    The Suicide Squad has, it seems, absolutely no inherent pull as a property. The first film was tethered to the Joker, one of the biggest box office juggernauts in film history. Plus Will Smith.

     

    Even though it has been mentioned multiple times in tandem with other reasons, I think the Joker factor has still been hugely underestimated in what's happened here.

     

  15. 10 minutes ago, grey ghost said:

    I think The Suicide Squad flopping spooked Sony.

     

    Venom probably would've opened to 85+m with plenty of breathing room.

     

    Scared money don't make money! :Venom:

     

     

    The Irony is that the completely wrong lesson that was learned from The Suicide Squad.

     

    The Joker dynamic was utterly, utterly underestimated. Doesn't matter that Leto was unpopular. Doesn't matter how little the Joker was in Suicide Squad. The Joker was in the first and not the second, and the Joker is a generationally proven box office goldmine. This was the single biggest, by a mile, non-COVID factor in Suicide Squad v The Suicide Squad AFAIC.

     

    If anything the lesson should have been "Jesus, THAT'S how much the difference there is between having one of the two ultra famous fashionable antihero type figures with a cool design in your movie and not having one???? I realised those were popular but not THAT popular.....best rush out our sequel of the only comparable ultra famous antihero with a cool design and get those fashionable antihero $s".

    • Like 1
  16. Loved the movie. No problem with the CGI-a-thon - Clear and coherent storytelling was still going on throughout, which is where this stuff often loses me. As long as the emotional beats are clear and the narrative is clear, I'm good.

     

    Real crowdpleaser in my theatre, best reactions in a theatre since Endgame. (North-west UK)

     

    Spoiler

     

    There's a part of me that thinks it would have been even greater to have a gritty lower budget Shang-Chi 1 filled with hand to hand combat and revealing Wenwu at the end followed by a fantastical big budget Shang-Chi 2 with CGI and Wuxia. On the other that's probably overambitious for a new character for where the MCU is now, they'd have to have come out close together and that wasn't realistic. 

     

    Wenwu is easily top tier Marvel villain, nay comic book movie villain. The casting and use of characters in general, but especially of Leung, is triumphant. But everyone works: Katy, Xialing, Trevor, even Razor Fist surprisingly survives the movie and will be a useful minion type going forward. Excited to see what's next for Boss Bitch Sister, half thought we'd get another Val cameo at the end, but it seems there are even bigger plans.

     

    Honestly, Slattery thinking he was mad and Morris was in his head (and that he'd completely accepted as such) was a beautiful piece of bittersweet comedy. That he was funny isn't surprising, but that he was funny in such a deadpan, sincere way was. I was expecting Goldblum in Ragnarok, but got actual Falstaff instead (up to and including playing dead, what a reference!).

     

     

  17. 46 minutes ago, tonytr87 said:

     

    Transparent how much the film is emulating Black Panther. Awkwafina is Shuri. Rhinos vs Dragons. Family squabbles. I'm not familiar with the comic at all so perhaps that's just what it is, but...it's hard to ignore. 

    Spoiler

     

    This is a gigantic stretch. Black Panther starts with all the characters from the distant world being dragged into the normal world. Shang-Chi starts with the protagonists in the normal world and takes them into increasingly fantastical environments. 

     

    "Awkwafina is Shuri": Not even vaguely the same actorial function, nor the same character type. Shuri is immersed in the 'far away' world, Katy is the one embedded in the 'normal' world. Shuri is a genius, Katy is the audience proxy. Even if you were hypothetically playing the "which Black Panther character is this" game for some inexplicable reason Katy would be Everett Ross, not Shuri.

     

    "Rhinos v Dragons": In Shang-Chi the Dragons are a fundamental, core component of the plot and resolution of the film. In Black Panther.....there are some Rhinos. 

     

    Family Squabbles: Half of the films in existence can be reduced to "Family Squabbles". Heck, Black Panther isn't even that heavy with the family squabbles. The characters in Shang-Chi are a nuclear family. Black Panther just uses a trope of the distant lost cousin.  

     

    "Hard to ignore" my foot. Just bad faith shoehorning. Seriously, I haven't even posted on this forum in two years and yet this was just too silly for me not to respond to.

     

     

    Codswallop.

     

    Shang-Chi seems to be doing well over here in the UK within reason. Good word of mouth so far on social media, and cinema was pretty close to full all day. Only anecdotal but promising.

    • Like 1
  18. 1 minute ago, RealLyre said:

    tenor.gif?itemid=14961976

     

     

     

     

     

    I don't know if this is trying to be a serious answer but he was in a move that was virtually the exact same as the Joker the year before and it made no money whatsoever. 

     

    None of his movies before Joker had made money for years and years. And if Joker was exactly the same but called 'Arthur' it would have had the same fate.  

     

    Also, are people ignoring the fact that Ford V Ferrari wasn't actually a hit?

     

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  19. I just think taking a fantasy concept but then plonking a seemingly mundane family-drama road-trip element on it just is a weird thing to sell. Very oxymoronic. 

     

    If I remember correctly Brave kept the extent of its mother-daugher family plot very quiet and mostly sold it on badass Merida doing cool stuff in a pseudo-medieval environment. Maybe this should have done something similar and emphasised a more generic fantasy quest scenario in the marketing.

     

    I think this was well on its way to being a huge misfire well before Corona came along. It's made it worse but the rest of the BO and some of the better holdovers seem to indicate that there was more money to be made here with a more appealing movie.

  20. 18 hours ago, Krissykins said:

    Just looked at Armond White’s RT page (noticed he hated Parasite).

     

    He usually hates films that critics and audiences love. Yikes at the level of sheer bad taste. Surprised he’s employed as a critic, if he is. 

    He isn't.

     

    Hes an extreme right wing fundamentalist polemicist who writes a series of extreme right wing fundamentalist polemics that are kind of vaguely tangentially related to movies that comes out. 

     

    There's no taste involved, just a rigid political pseudo-intellectualism that only really exists in a certain corner of American society. All right leaning films get praise, regardless of quality,  anything else (and I dont mean left leaning films, just pretty much anything) is painted as Marxist, various shades of immoral, "woke" (without any sense in the qualification) or eeeeeeevil.

     

    Read his Little Women "review" if you want to set a personal reading record for non-sequiteurs, race-baiting (he literally uses the heading to accuse it of racism, but doesn't say why or how anywhere in the review) and utter strawman WTFery. Guy's basically a lunatic youtuber who learned to write essays. 

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
×
×
  • 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.