King Arthur: Legend of the Sword | Guy Ritchie | May 12, 2017 | Charlie Hunnam

[BeastByTheBay]

3 minutes ago, Blaze Heatnix said:

One of the rotten reviews said they're planning 6 movies...

 

Is that for real? lol

 

Saban or Lionsgate said the same about Power Rangers and Sony about their upcoming Robin Hood universe lol

 

It's like a curse, as soon as you announce it, your movie is doomed

[The Futurist]

Warner makes the best blockbusters right now.

 

 

[filmlover]

Just now, BeastByTheBay said:

 

Saban or Lionsgate said the same about Power Rangers and Sony about their upcoming Robin Hood universe lol

 

It's like a curse, as soon as you announce it, your movie is doomed

The moral of this story is: put all of your effort into making a good movie first and save your franchise dreams for if you get it right.

[Jay Beezy]

6 minutes ago, BeastByTheBay said:

 

Saban or Lionsgate said the same about Power Rangers and Sony about their upcoming Robin Hood universe lol

 

It's like a curse, as soon as you announce it, your movie is doomed

 

Terminator Genishyts also. They had set a date for the sequel. They then replaced it with Baywatch after it underwhelmed.

Edited May 9, 2017 by Jay Beezy

[filmlover]

Didn't Fox also set a release date for a sequel to Fantastic Four '15 before removing it after the first film was savaged and flopped? lol.

[Jake Gittes]

1 minute ago, filmlover said:

Didn't Fox also set a release date for a sequel to Fantastic Four '15 before removing it after the first film was savaged and flopped? lol.

 

Yup the one that Apes is currently on.

[Kvikk Lunsj]

Can a mod create a thread in the review that movie. I would like to be able to talk about the movie

[UNDERDOG]

Also, didn't that one company order a sequel for a specific film until that specific film bombed and they scrapped those plans?

Whoa crazy shit.

[filmlover]

2 minutes ago, UNDERDOG said:

Also, didn't that one company order a sequel for a specific film until that specific film bombed and they scrapped those plans?

Whoa crazy shit.

I believe you're talking about 2013's The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones. They had already casted some key roles and were ready to start shooting a few weeks after the first was set to open, and after the first movie flopped production was put on hold and never resumed. Funny stuff.

[Chewy]

1 hour ago, Blaze Heatnix said:

One of the rotten reviews said they're planning 6 movies...

 

Is that for real? lol

 

Yea check it out, first post in the thread

 

On 1/27/2014 at 6:08 PM, Tele Came Back said:

http://www.slashfilm.com/guy-ritchie-circling-six-film-king-arthur-franchise-for-warner-bros/

 

Six film King Arthur series? YES PLEASE.

 

Guy Ritchie? AW YEA.

 

This is gonna be rad. Hope they make him a street urchin

 

[MrPink]

7 minutes ago, Chewy said:

 

Yea check it out, first post in the thread

 

 

 

[UNDERDOG]

41 minutes ago, filmlover said:

I believe you're talking about 2013's The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones. They had already casted some key roles and were ready to start shooting a few weeks after the first was set to open, and after the first movie flopped production was put on hold and never resumed. Funny stuff.

 

Oh yeah, and it turned into a TV show.

[Plain Old Tele]

53 minutes ago, Dexter of Suburbia said:

Can a mod create a thread in the review that movie. I would like to be able to talk about the movie

 

http://forums.boxofficetheory.com/topic/23973-king-arthur-legend-of-the-sword-2017/

[Mikasa Ackerman]

2 hours ago, filmlover said:

The moral of this story is: put all of your effort into making a good movie first and save your franchise dreams for if you get it right.

 

Nah, the moral of the story is not to announce it. Every studio has long term future plans from the outset these days, but it always hinges on success of the first one.

[Arlborn]

TOMATOMETER

19%

Average Rating: 4.7/10

Reviews Counted: 32

Fresh: 6

Rotten: 26

 

Critics Consensus: King Arthur: Legend of the Sword piles mounds of modern action flash on an age-old tale -- and wipes out much of what made it a classic story in the first place.

 

 

I'm pretty sure that's the kind of movie that I have loads of fun watching and I wonder what that says about me. Don't answer that though.

[TalismanRing]

2 minutes ago, Arlborn said:

TOMATOMETER

19%

Average Rating: 4.7/10

Reviews Counted: 32

Fresh: 6

Rotten: 26

 

Critics Consensus: King Arthur: Legend of the Sword piles mounds of modern action flash on an age-old tale -- and wipes out much of what made it a classic story in the first place.

 

 

I'm pretty sure that's the kind of movie that I have loads of fun watching and I wonder what that says about me. Don't answer that though.

 

That's a rather benign consensus for the kind of reviews it's getting.

 

[filmlover]

What are the chances this does sub-$100M worldwide? I don't think anyone's coming to its rescue.

[Jonwo]

I suspect WB knew it was a flop, it got pushed back from its original date three times. At $102m, it's not too expensive but I suspect they won't give Ritchie another big budget film for a while.

[Barnack]

12 minutes ago, Mikasa Ackerman said:

 

Nah, the moral of the story is not to announce it. 

 

What for ? Only to protect the ego ?

 

I imagine it could be hard to do in some case, if you sign a lot of people (and proposed role to a lot of people including that they would have to accept to be in sequels) with options on future movie to keep it a secret and talked about it to your financier presentation, offering them option that they would have priority to invest on sequels if they want, it can become a lot of people external to the studio with little control that know about it.

 

It does work a lot of the time they announce them (Marvel, Star Wars, Jurassic World and so on), almost everyone assume that their is sequel plans for movies like that like you said, so if no sequel happen people will know your planned one was cancelled anyway.

 

Or do you think that it is because it would be bad marketing, audience knowing the movie will be again an open ended affair and a big committeemen to get on, 6 movie, for something that would probably not be worth it ?

 

But I agree with you that the effort on the first one narrative seem weak, I doubt they would have put a different amount of effort on that first one, I don't think it was the people currently doing the first one developing to the other one at the same time (probably little work was made on those).

 

That comment would make more sense for the next Avatar 2-3 or the Peter Jackson Lords of the rings trilogy , or any other project were 2 or more movie was shot at the same time and not the full focus was put on the production of the first movie.

 

[Barnack]

3 minutes ago, Jonwo said:

I suspect WB knew it was a flop, it got pushed back from its original date three times. At $102m, it's not too expensive but I suspect they won't give Ritchie another big budget film for a while.

 

$102m would be really great for a movie like that (that had a very long pre-production hell).

 

That article is talking about something closer to what Tarzan rumored cost was:

http://www.latimes.com/business/hollywood/la-fi-ct-movie-projector-king-arthur-20170508-htmlstory.html

 

$175m