Ipickthiswhiterose

I will also say this having seen it again, and I hope regardless of what we think of the trailer itself we can agree on this: Iman Vellani twice in this trailer has to play Kamala as being in a seemingly life threatening situation. Once a vocal performance when hurtling through space, and once visibly when seeing the Flerkin for the first time. She plays both of those moments sincerely and gun-barrel straight as being terrified. And that is deeply, deeply refreshing. It shouldn't be, but it is. And puts much bigger names than her to shame. And is why likening this to Thor L&T is IMO incorrect.

Good Lord. Talk about your average day on the internet. Thought it was sound to good. Those who are doing one-to-five word 'looks mid'/'meh' posts are telling on themselves - why bother to post anything if that's your actual opinion rather than a bad faith bit of intenettery? Looks light, which is obviously not the tone one would generally want given the recent criticism of the MCU, but let's not pretend there isn't a difference between the fun nature of this where the humour seems to be coming from situation and characters; rather than the gurning, hipster, above-the-material, fnar-fnar-fnarery of Thor: Love and Thunder. The practical sets though are a massive respite and relief after, well, every Marvel film for the last few years. Think this will read pretty well with the general public. Still to be seen if it manages to garner any star/franchise power though and outweigh the downward trend.

This is, I think, the astonishing thing here. If it's a failure or just disappointment for GOTG3 and the MCU's most surprising humbling yet, even then DC will have still somehow managed find a way by which they've got more egg on their face than Marvel.

GOTG: 773m GOTG2: 864m CM: 1.12bn And bear in mind GOTG2 was released pretty much as heavily in the middle of Marvelmania as CM was. I mean, it would seem pretty self-evident that the par for CM2 would be higher than for GOTG3. As ever, some seem to have just forgotten that James Gunn is not Stephen Spielberg, nor even Christopher Nolan, slapping his name on something has yet to be proved to mean anything - and quite the reverse if you look at Suicide Squad. The initial expectations that the world has been on tenderhooks waiting for GOTG3 was just daft. Creative side they're very good but finanicially...they were popular films in the MCU, nothing more. They weren't BP or Spidey. I always though the idea that GOTG3 had any chance of being a billion dollar movie was insane.

I mean for a start there are all the movies whose studios bailed on them or were sold: Dark Phoenix, Strange World, Every DCEU Release from Shazam onwards outside of Flash, Nutcracker and the Four Realms, Artemis Fowl. Then there are all the prestige releases with inflated budgets: Blade Runner 2049, Amsterdam, Babylon. Then there are all the risk-takes on huge budgets that were objectively unjustified: Mortal Engines, Monster Trucks, Robin Hood, heck arguably even Dungeons and Dragons. It's still a ruddy MCU film and even in the most horrific of all horrific outcomes it does a Grindlewald-esque 400m on a 200m budget which while terrible is still better than many of the above. So the hyperbole is a bit silly. This has some point in it. But the latter half is just unjustified: If obviously has an impact on pop culture because the character was in Endgame and has also been in Shang-Chi since then. And it is, simply, IN the MCU. Except they didn't though. This is just your bad-faith subjective interpretation. You've just had it literally pointed out to you that plenty of people watched it. You just want to keep ignoring that fact. Production troubles I'm not sure about. The current state of the brand is absolutely a fair point, though it's not as bad as some have tried to paint it: BP:WF made par and MOM made above par and those were both last year. Online tantrums was something the first one dealt with, and as much as they do victory laps when films they don't like 'lose' and films they like 'win' there is plenty of evidence now to indicate they have no impact whatsoever on actual bottom lines or behaviour, not least the first Captain Marvel itself. I'm still saying par for this is 750m-850m. The online tantrumeers would still do cartwheels at this and pretend that's a big flop, but given the momentum the first had in its release date that wouldn't be the case. That'd just be a solid number but with the current reduced interest in Asia, especially China, factored in.

Lots of sequels did more than the first film. But not films that took over a cultural zeitgeist. The Hangover was in a cultural environment with Harry Potter, Twilight, Avatar, The Dark Knight and Trandformers. The Dark Knight and perhaps Avatar were Zeitgeist movies. The Hangover was an enormously succesful comedy. Theres a difference.

There's a long and detailed answer to this. And giving it fully would take hours. The shortest I can manage is that there is an overwhelming number of Millenial and (and younger Gen x and maybe older Gen z) men who still cannot unlock the dissonance of their overwhelming cultural victory and dominance for the kind of properties they like, with the fact that during their youth of the 80s and 90s they were made to feel ruthlessly ashamed of those properties by the popular kids. Thus they manage to combine being the cheerleaders for the biggest corporate entertainment juggernauts in the world having almost every whim catered to in terms of the things they like being made into their dream movies, with somehow a simultaneous underdog mentality. It's a weird irreconcilable circle. But also a dangerous one culturally because the last thing that's good for any group is that they simultaneously have loads and loads of power, but also have a massive victim mentality. And Brie Larson reminds them of the popular girl.

C'mon now. Black Panther was a completely unique zeitgeist movie. There was no way, Boseman or no Boseman of coming close to replicating its success. It made 700 freaking million dollars domestic. The 850m haul was the bottom end of a 850-950 par. It wasn't a disappointment, not even vaguely. Neither was MoM. TL&T was and AMQ was a big ol disaster. Expecting BP2 to do anything like BP is like expecting Joker 2 to do Joker numbers or Jaws 2 to do Jaws numbers. They can be way down and still be a big success. I mean Jeez Godfather 2 made half of what the Godfather did 2 years after Godfather was a zeitgeist juggernaut. Did that mean Godfather 2 was a bust?

It would be absolutely astonishing if Joker 2 makes anything like the first one regardless of its quality. It would be absolutely astonishing if CM2/TM makes anything like the first one regardless of its quality. Joker relied less on China for its first success, which is in its favour. But it was even more of a specific zeitgeist moment than the MCU was.

The World Cup boss. The World Cup is why Ant-Man and the Wasp had some issues cashing in. Release dates were all over the place because Disney were (reasonably) terrified of releasing a movie in Europe and South America in the middle of football mania but wanted to keep their North American date intact. I think Captain Marvel is a hugely underrated movie, it is a Top Tier MCU for me and i think it's a much better watch for non-regular fans than the hardcore crowd want to give it credit for. At the same time I think it benefitted from possibly the most convenient release timing any movie has gotten, just about. Ant Man and Far From Home came in come-down periods following massive films, but CM came out in the perfect ramping-up sweet spot, plus big marketing, plus IWD. It wasn't the logo, it was the general MCU mania, the moment of cultural zeitgeist. It's fine to acknowledge that and still think it had an amazing run, just as it's fine to think Avatar 2 is an incredible all-time BO accomplishent that still had a minor assist from other studios being terrified of it and/or having a lacklustre season. I am in the 800 if it's good, 620 if its weaker camp. And that would be something I'd consider a decent success in the current climate.

My final say on this is that I can't help but wonder if those currently engaged on social media and the Youtubes in discussions of "It's been made for fans of the property and those who aren't fans of the property should just butt out and don't have a valid say" .....extended the same attitude towards the Twilight and Fifty Shades of Grey franchises, and will extend the same attitude towards the Little Mermaid. I mean, if they aren't big fans of the property, I'm sure they've never commented on them, felt they had nothing valuable to say about them, and certainly wouldn't even dream of allocating a status of good/bad to them.

As for point one I'm inclined to say "hogwash" but it has a caveat to it. Star Wars has near total cultural coverage in the areas where it has it. Mario has nowhere near that coverage in those areas but the overall span is worldwide including huge swathes of Asia making it internationally a bigger property. That's not the same thing. As for the "they didnt' make this for you"....no, and that's fine. But the point is don't moan and whine when people who don't care about the property point out that it has nothing to offer them, and that that makes it a somewhat limited film in terms of grading it....which *doesn't have anything to do with whether you like or or not or are allowed to like it because yes you're allowed to like it anyway even if it doesn't stand up*. And the final result is a pile of braying about "victory over critics" regardless of the fact this movie was going to make a ton of money anyway. Because you're (conceptual you, not literally you) not allowed to just like something, you have to DEMAND that the critics VALIDATE your liking it with the stamp of declaring it to be good. It has to be turned into a conflict, into a cultural fight.

This is perfect. If the movie is only enjoyed by those who are already big fans of the characters and games and who went in desperate to be fed some memberberries and it has nothing to offer anyone who isn't.....then by any objective standard it's pretty definitively a bad movie that nevertheless will garner success based on the huge pre-existing consumer base. We're going to get two weeks of "Critics don't understand audiences, WAAAAAAH!" from the same people who two weeks later are going to whinge that the general audiences are a bunch of mindless sheep. And in three years time everyone will just accept this was a mundane crappy movie just as is now starting to happen with the meh Sonic movie everyone spent boundless energy claiming was astonishingly good.

Transformers would be the obvious, go-to reference here. It isn't aimed at 5-year old girls. Barbie THE TOY has been aimed at 5 year old girls SINCE 1959. Barbie the movie is therefore aimed at anyone who has been a 5 year old girl, raised a 5 year old girl, or been the sibling of a 5 year old girl, since 1959. I would be more embarrassed going to a Transformers movie as an adult than I would be going to a Barbie movie. And I'm a man.

This money is going to make so much money while being overtly socio-political I can ALREADY feel the heat from the furious youtube videos. It's going to be like the week of tantrums that came after the Captain Marvel opening weekend but threefold.

Really like the look of everything to do with this.... ....except it seems we've only seen a tiny %, which is a mostly good thing.... ...but the 'real world' indication worries me that actually this is just going to be a remake of Pleasantville (well, a kind of inverted remake of Pleasantville).

Okay, so look I'd love to do a top 100 after a lot of thought and rewatching/watching a lot of options and that's my intention. But I know myself and so I've instinctively sketched down a Top 25 (EDIT: Finished) placeholder both just in case I completely forget or disappear from the forum as I'm very likely to do. And also because, heck, it's a carte blanche barren wasteland currently and might as well throw an opener out there to get discussion/controversy/complaints going..... Casablanca The Adventures of Robin Hood Barry Lyndon The Devils The Mission Full Metal Jacket The Exorcist My Fair Lady McCabe & Mrs Miller Strangers on a Train The Mosquito Coast After Hours Badlands Treasure of the Sierra Madre Zodiac The Public Enemy The Wicker Man (original, obviously) The Wild Bunch The Shining Blade Runner Captain Blood Clockwork Orange Paddington 2 Unforgiven Calamity Jane Pan’s Labyrinth Life of Brian Deliverance Black Christmas Performance Superman: The Motion Picture Dirty Harry Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf!? The Skin I Live In Insomnia The NeverEnding Story Demolition Man Batman Returns Last of the Mohicans What Ever Happened to Baby Jane Goodfellas Little Shop of Horrors Before Sunset LA Confidential Dial M for Murder Cool Hand Luke Heat Giant The Outlaw Josey Wales Dog Day Afternoon The Towering Inferno The Iron Giant Kiss Kiss Bang Bang Maverick The Music Man Rebel Without a Cause The Pajama Game The Last Samurai Contact Empire of the Sun The Fountain The Lost Boys The Left Handed Gun The Maltese Falcon The Prestige House of Flying Daggers Michael Collins Blazing Saddles The Bad Seed The Departed Her The Dish Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves JFK Beetlejuice Twister Just Mercy Damn Yankees Klute Purple Rain Falling Down A Streetcar Named Desire The Pledge Mad Max: Fury Road Miss Congeniality Matchstick Men Prisoners Chariots of Fire A Midsummer Night’s Sex Comedy The Conjuring Ladyhawke Trick R Treat The Nice Guys Gremlins Doctor Sleep Bonfire of the Vanities The Killing Fields The Matrix Batman Begins Eyes Wide Shut

I mean D&D is niche, but Magic is considerably more niche. D&D has had three booms, Magic just one. And the lore in D&D is a fundamental part of the property - you can't engage in D&D without engaging with the lore, while the lore of Magic exists almost tangential to the gameplay and many players (in my experience) don't really engage with it.

The last time I remember seeing you pronounce a BOMB like this after 3 days was Puss. How did that work out?

Ah yes, I see it has an ambiguous official/festival release one year, general release the next situation.

I think in 10-20 years time we might see Crimes of the Future as an obvious Top 5 film of the year in the way that Under the Skin wasn't on the 2013 list when it was first made as it was received with muted curiosity but is now widely considered - at least in critic circles - to be a clear film of the year. I'd still pick Aftersun and Banshees over it. But I don't see any film being more important and more earnest in its attempt to explore the world. Sometimes it feels like true sci-fi is a deeply dwindling art.

This right here is so much of it. Nothing to grieve...it just straight-up blew through a lot of its audience in the first weekend. Didn't help that it is a spoiler affected film. A huge element behind Top Gun Maverick, Puss and Avatar being legs juggernauts are that they're all completely spoiler proof. Wick plotted itself out of being spoiler proof and made itself very spoiler dependent.

Because Ghostbusters: Afterlife was as much if not much more of, a sequel to the cultural elements that rose following the Ghostbusters film (cartoon, toys, magazines) that were US-specific than it was a sequel to the movie itself. - The Ghostbusters of Ghostbusters are a schlubby bunch of chancing opportunists and hack scientists who are pretty terrible human beings who happen to fall backwards into saving the world. - The Ghostbusters of the cartoons, toys, magazines and Saturday morning kid culture were a bunch of adventurous heroes who fought ghosts while quipping happily and having a lovely time. The latter only ever existed in the US and, to a lesser degree, in the areas that got some splash from US culture back in the 80s (ie UK, Australia, Canada). The former is what everyone else always saw and Ghostbusters: Afterlife is a completely atonal sequel to that. (Added to which that like all comedies, the overall cultural imprint of Ghostbusters is not quite as international in the first place as action films and blockbusters since comedy is inherently more culturally specific.) I think D&D WILL struggle internationally. But not because of those factors, but just because it straight-up doesn't have the cultural imprint outside of North America; and because Asian markets that would otherwise be the most open to American fantasy are for various reasons all currently looking inwards.

Would have been nice in what might have been one of the few possible years where there was a chance of getting one or two more legitimate non-blockbusters in the Top 5, and I say that as someone who liked The Batman and Top Gun and is okay with Avatar 2. Nevertheless not bad at all, really. Blockbusters dominating the top of the list is to be expected and at least this year they were largely good ones and certainly all better than the ludicrously overpraised No Way Home was last year. I could moan that the likes of Decision to Leave, Northman and Aftersun should all have been much higher but really that they made a list like this at all is very impressive.

Think D&D has a big span of possibility in the UK depending on if word of mouth spills into the family market. If it does then this has the potential to be a WOM tank. If it doesn't then it may just fall on its face here. Mario and it's (to me) inexplicable inherent appeal and even more inexplicably (to me) positively-received trailers scares me.