RED SPARROW | 03.02.18 | Fox | Jennifer Lawrence

[straggler]

Hopefully this lands in the 70s on RTs. In the age of instant analysis and aggregate scores it is very tough to do edgier material. Someone is always offended. There is always some sort of censorial reaction nowadays. This sounds like it is right up my alley. I like Jlaw's choices. Doing Mother! then Red Sparrow. Living dangerously. 

Edited February 17, 2018 by straggler

[KeepItU25071906]

10 hours ago, 75Live said:

59% with 22 reviews and an average of 5.7/10

[StevenG]

Jennifer needs to do a non-divisive, non-"edgy" crowd pleaser ASAP.

Actresses' shelf-life in the Hollywood system is even shorter than actors, and she really needs a big box office hit that is all about her likeability, charm, and screen presence.

Maybe she can be the one who brings back the classic romcom...

[The Futurist]

She s taking 2 years off, resuming maybe in 2020.

[StevenG]

19 hours ago, Hades said:

Already a better Black Widow movie.........

Have you been paying attention to the MCU's critical history? A Black Widow film would probably get close to twice the critical score that this movie is gonna end up with (I predict Red Sparrow will end up at 45 % rotten)...

Edited February 17, 2018 by StevenG

[TombRaider]

she had X-Men: A and passengers in 2016, people act like she's been doing risky roles for 5 years, lol. And actually, RS is meant to be a box office hit not some indie edgy film. So Mother! is like the only risky choice in her career

 

I think the problem with her is that she was too big, too soon. The stars aligned for her, THG movies were HUGE and she also won an oscar at the same time. It was going to be impossible to keep that level of fame. That, and her constant 'i'm so relatable' persona backfired and she became annoying for many, she was also rude to fans and press in some interviews. Hanging out with the kardashians doesnt help her movie star credibility either.

 

Edited February 17, 2018 by TombRaider

[XO21]

We have the new Cocholofe. 

[a2k]

JLaw needs to delay her hiatus and salvage her career with a couple of new generic easy on the brain humdrum movies, The NRA Diaries: Why They Suck Balls followed by Go Green: The End of Blue and Red Politics.

[filmlover]

lol some of the Trying It in this thread.

[Valonqar]

28 minutes ago, TombRaider said:

she had X-Men: A and passengers in 2016, people act like she's been doing risky roles for 5 years, lol. And actually, RS is meant to be a box office hit not some indie edgy film. So Mother! is like the only risky choice in her career

 

I think the problem with her is that she was too big, too soon. The stars aligned for her, THG movies were HUGE and she also won an oscar at the same time. It was going to be impossible to keep that level of fame. That, and her constant 'i'm so relatable' persona backfired and she became annoying for many, she was also rude to fans and press in some interviews. Hanging out with the kardashians doesnt help her movie star credibility either.

 

Don't recall that being married to a Kardashian hurt Kanye's music star credibility. So lets not be selective.

 

It's what always is - the choice of roles and movie is not going to be a home run every time. And indies are not risky to big stars from star image POV cause GA doesn't see them and therefore cannot be put off by the star unlike starring in a profane big Xmas release such as Wolf of Wall Street. So saying that RS is a safe choice for her, though she's doing a lot of R rated naked sex and torture in a wide release, doesn't stand. It's safer to do Under the Skin, cause mommies, daddies and kiddies who adore Black Widow will never hear of its existence, than RS or WOWS. Not that Under the Skin isn't risky but it's risky in artistic terms not in artistic AND star image ones. Anne Hathaway faced public backlash when she went from Princess Diaries to Brokeback Mountain (sex, nudity). So there are risks and risks but, IMO, Jlaw is in the long run game. She won't be 20something forever and she's making a transition to movies that are not aimed at teenagers. What Leo did after Titanic. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 17, 2018 by Valonqar

[TombRaider]

You guys need to seriously stop comparing men and women in hollywood. women have much less chances of having box office success

[straggler]

3 hours ago, StevenG said:

Jennifer needs to do a non-divisive, non-"edgy" crowd pleaser ASAP.

Actresses' shelf-life in the Hollywood system is even shorter than actors, and she really needs a big box office hit that is all about her likeability, charm, and screen presence.

Maybe she can be the one who brings back the classic romcom...

I think an actresses' shelf life in Hollywood is based on their being taken seriously as actors. The dilemma that Jlaw ran into is that as she got to be a bigger and bigger star critics (at least a vocal minority) like clockwork tried to box her in as an actress and dismiss her. They forgot why she became a star in the first place. She started out doing very tough material and enjoys the challenge. I think her goal is not to be a rom-com actress and not even a box office darling. It is short term vs. long term thinking. A film like Mother! pays tremendous dividends down the road. As to RS, still way too early. It will have 300 reviews in the end, and so far all we know is that it is divisive. 

[filmlover]

 

[TombRaider]

I just saw Mother! and she was quite good in it, and i dont understand all the hate the film got. was it because the trailers were misleading? i didnt like the movie but its not bad

[TheDarkKnightOfSteel]

This reviews actually make me really excited.

 

[straggler]

7 minutes ago, TombRaider said:

I just saw Mother! and she was quite good in it, and i dont understand all the hate the film got. was it because the trailers were misleading? i didnt like the movie but its not bad

The film got some very nice reviews and has a solid metacritic score. Some critics (Rex Reed) hated it, but others loved it. But it was not a film that should ever have been given a conventiional wide release. It is a crazy Aronofsky film like The Fountain and but was marketed as a conventional home invasion movie and then sprung on unsuspecting audiences at the multiplex expecting a standard thriller. And it is meant to be disturbing and uncomfortable. I thought the movie was brilliant although not for everyone, but it helps to know what type of film to expect going in. And the real issue today is that we have so much instant analysis. Martin Scorsese wrote an article about it. Paramount imo made a big mistake with the wide release because that exposed the film to cinemascore and box office expectations and that set up how the film was perceived as a failure. Statistically valid or not, that F became the headline, which immediately caused a negative pilling on by critics. The pendulum seems to have swung back,  but the film should have never been subjected to that. That is what limited and platformed releases are for.   

[WrathOfHan]

8 minutes ago, straggler said:

Paramount imo made a big mistake with the wide release because that exposed the film to cinemascore and box office expectations and that set up how the film was perceived as a failure.

No they didn't. If it went limited, it would have never gone wide, and Paramount would have lost even more money.

[filmlover]

Paramount tried the best they could to sell a hard-to-sell movie to the public with mother! and make as much money off of it as they possibly could. Audiences just violently rejected it. End of.

[Kvikk Lunsj]

6 hours ago, StevenG said:

Have you been paying attention to the MCU's critical history? A Black Widow film would probably get close to twice the critical score that this movie is gonna end up with (I predict Red Sparrow will end up at 45 % rotten)...

But it would still be boring and lackluster. 

[straggler]

7 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

No they didn't. If it went limited, it would have never gone wide, and Paramount would have lost even more money.

In the short term that film was never going to make money. It made $17 million US and $44 million WW as it is. I cannot imagine a platformed release doing any harm, and it would have avoided all the negativity that eliminated any awards consideration. This is the RS thread so I'll leave it here, but some films are just not box office films, and any slim chance that Mother! had to break through evaporated OW when the narrative was set. That is the whole idea of limiting a release. 

Edited February 17, 2018 by straggler