STRANGE MAGIC | 01.23.15 | Disney | final domestic gross: $12,429,583

[23IsEverywhere]

This isn't Disney it's touchstone

Edited January 12, 2015 by 23IsEverywhere

[Alpha]

This isn't Disney it's touchstone

[Rorschach]

This isn't Disney it's touchstone

Still Disney

[Ezen Baklattan]

Disney distributes anything too mature/serious for kids (like The Wind Rises) or stuff they wouldn't touch with a 100 foot pole through Touchstone. This likely falls in the latter. Then again, so did Gnomeo and Juliet, which turned out to be a pretty nice hit.

[Sir Tiki]

George Lucas Explains Why He Stopped Making 'Star Wars' Movies To Make An Animated One Instead

 

Well, originally I had two daughters, and eventually, another daughter. ‘Star Wars’ was for 12-year-old boys. I figured I’d make one for 12-year-old girls. You know, the 12-year-old boy one worked for everybody from eight months to 88 and boys, girls, dogs, whatever. It really worked. So, I said, well, maybe I can do one like this, but it’s slightly more female-centric. [in ‘Strange Magic,’] we still have sword fighting, we still have things, but truly a story that hopefully will work for everybody. But, what’s really something, I said, well, maybe I’ll do this.

 

And, I just wanted to have fun. I was directing 'Star Wars' while I was doing these. I’d go out and shoot and this movie we’d put it on the shelf for awhile, and the guys would kind of work. I had a little group of guys and girls that were working on this thing. 

 

It’s a project that I’ve been doing for a long time, and then, when it came to sell the company I realized that it wasn’t completely finished, but I said, well, I still want to retire. I’m not going to wait this out. I want to retire now. Time is more important to me than money. And, so, I just did it and hoped that Kathy [Kennedy] and everybody who has been working on the film and everything would follow through and Disney would put up the money to finish it. I mean, it was mostly done, so it wasn’t like they had to put up a whole bunch of money to finish it. It turned out extremely well. It’s what I envisioned, but, I know it’s been … maybe two years since I sold the company, but time moves very slow in animation.

 

Entire article here:

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-george-lucas-isnt-making-more-star-wars-movies-2015-1

[filmlover]

This is going to straight up bomb Hoodwinked 2-style. Next weekend looks like the worst weekend for new movies in forever.

[forg]

There's decent marketing push on  ABC (especially the Wednesday comedy block)

[Yandereprime101189]

I will say, that the clips they've released on the internet outside of the trailers or TV spots make this look vaguely passable at best.

 

But man, that trailer was awful.

[Alpha]

This looks so stupid.

 

Like, I don't even know what this movie is about by the advertising I've seen.

[Mojoguy]

Disney should have just released this movie direct to video! Would have saved them some marketing money!

[Icicle]

‘Star Wars’ was for 12-year-old boys. I figured I’d make one for 12-year-old girls.

 

And yet, there's a 100% chance more girls and women will go see Star Wars at the end of this year than will go to see Strange Magic.

[AniNate]

Reviews are out

 

http://variety.com/2015/film/reviews/film-review-strange-magic-1201410499/

http://www.thewrap.com/strange-magic-review-george-lucas-alan-cumming-evan-rachel-wood/

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movie/strange-magic/review/765394

 

Remember, folks, from the former director of Newt

[Heat Vision]

Looks shit.

[grim22]

Reviews are out

 

http://variety.com/2015/film/reviews/film-review-strange-magic-1201410499/

http://www.thewrap.com/strange-magic-review-george-lucas-alan-cumming-evan-rachel-wood/

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movie/strange-magic/review/765394

 

Remember, folks, from the former director of Newt

 

This is a sick burn

 

George Lucas’ Off-Key Kiddie Dud Will Make You Miss Jar Jar Binks

Edited January 21, 2015 by grim22

[The Futurist]

And Lucas was bashing the oscars for not nominating Selma because for him the OScars are more about politics than quality.

Yes George, quality is important no doubt.

[AniNate]

It's a lot easier to judge quality than to make it

[Walt Disney]

It's a lot easier to judge quality than to make it

 

I used to think so, but now I disagree. Maybe I am just a creative person or there is some other reason, but I think it's very easy to make quality films. It's hard to make blockbuster films, but not quality films.

[dashrendar44]

It's "easier" to make a blockbuster because there's a recipe to make blockbusters from script to finish, people figured it out back in the seventies derived from dramaturgy rules and Campbell's Hero Myth writings. 3 acts, A hero/anti-hero aka protagonist clashes with the antagonist (threat), exposition painting the basics of the characters, macguffin that sets the plot in motion, a story arc being resolved at the end, love interest, at least 3 big set pieces filled with action and VFX money shots per acts and the biggest one is always in the climax, possible sequel bait and so on. (And if you can't even figure it out despite all those outlines, there's a shitload of sycophants and assistants hired around you that will take care of it whether you're capable or not to handle it)

 

You apply those basics religiously you got 99% of chance of making a conventional and satisfying blockbuster by the current standards.

 

There's no actual recipe to make quality movies because it depends on a lot of factors that you can't absolutely control. If there was an actual effective recipe to make quality movies an easy task and 100% surefire bet, there would be no bad movies. That's why a director whose body of work contains masterpieces can also have bad misfires even though he's the same person making those movies.

 

You can only try your best at fulfilling your definition of quality in your head but it's something you got to figure out by yourself for each case along the way (especially if you're not directing a blockbuster which are 99,9% paste and copy filmmaking standard techniques and want to give your own voice to the material, your choices will matter exponentially, good or bad) because what works great in one movie sometimes doesn't in one another. You got to climb a new mountain each time, faster or slower than your previous accomplishment depending on the gained experience but you still got to climb to deliver quality.

Edited January 21, 2015 by dashrendar44

[Ezen Baklattan]

It's "easier" to make a blockbuster because there's a recipe to make blockbusters from script to finish, peopled figure it out back in the seventies derived from dramaturgy rules and Campbell's Hero Myth writings. 3 acts, A hero/anti-hero aka protagonist clashes with the antagonist (threat), exposition painting the basics of the characters, macguffin that sets the plot in motion, a story arc being resolved at the end, love interest, at least 3 big set pieces filled with action and VFX money shots per acts and the biggest one is always in the climax, eventual sequel bait and so on. (And if you can't even figure it out despite all those outlines, there's a shitload of sycophants and assistants hired around you that will take care of it whether you're capable or not to handle it)

You apply those basics religiously you got 99% of chance of making a conventional and satisfying blockbuster by the current standards.

There's no actual recipe to make quality movies because it depends on a lot of factors that you can't absolutely control. If there was an actual effective recipe to make quality movies an easy task and 100% surefire bet, there would be no bad movies. That's why a director whose body of work contains masterpieces can also have bad misfires even though he's the same person making those movies.

You can only try your best at fulfilling your definition of quality in your head but it's something you got to figure out by yourself for each case along the way (especially if you're not directing a blockbuster which are 99,9% paste and copy filmmaking standard techniques and want to give your own voice to the material, your choices will matter exponentially, good or bad) because what works great in one movie sometimes doesn't in one another. You got to climb a new mountain each time, faster or slower than your previous accomplishment depending on the gained experience but you still got to climb to deliver quality.

It really makes you appreciate the more unpredictable and unique directors today, like PTA, Wes Anderson, David Fincher, Jonathan Glazer, etc.

I feel like we're also getting to a point where all of these hero's journey type films actually need to put effort in creating a unique character for itself in order to succeed with geneural audiences, not just critics. There are only so many times people can see the same film over and over again.

Basically, studios can follow the so called recipe for a blockbuster, but they need to add their own touches and chanhe up some ingredients if they really want to succeed

[Blankments]

I think Chewy mentioned this earlier but somebody here has to do a triple header this weekend of the wide openers