Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Not often am I completely baffled by a film's financial failure, but such is the case with this movie. It may not have had the most interesting concept but it still looked reasonably entertaining and reviews had indicated that its promised technical achievements lived up to their billing. Yet it's going to be Zemeckis' lowest grossing film in a long time, if not all time. So why is it being so ruthlessly ignored by the general populace?

Edited by tribefan695




Posted

The trailer gave everything away.

He arrives, explains why he's doing it, assembles a squad, we see them make their plan, we see them implement the plan, we see what goes wrong (stepping on the nail), and we then see him on the wire.

This movie had 15 minutes worth seeing, and that was spoiled by the fact it's based on a true story.

  • Like 1


Posted

Not a compelling story. I personally have no interest in daredevil stories. I was not compelled to watch the guy walk across Niagara Falls nor was I compelled to see this movie. And that is very odd for me. I see pretty much anything and everything that I can and this is one movie that I will be avoiding completely.

  • Like 3
Posted (edited)

They should've just made this a Documentary type of movie for the Discovery Channel instead of a 2 hour movie for the Silver Screen....

It already exists:

 

man%20on%20wire%202.jpg

Edited by WrathOfHan
  • Like 6


Posted

Lots of competition... The.pg didn't really help it because it just doesn't appeal to kids...

I don't think these fully explain it but I'm just trying into throw some things out there

  • Like 2




Posted

People just didn't have interest in the story

This, pretty much. I don't see why everyone is blaming Sony when they did the best they could to make it into a must see experience; people just didn't care to see the story of a French guy with an awful taste in haircuts that walked on a tightrope in the 70s between two buildings that are no longer around (and in fact still serve as a painful reminder for a number of people of that day even if it's been almost a decade and a half since). Also, JGL isn't a draw at all.

 

I don't think the reviews, while overall very positive, stating that you have to wait 90 minutes to get to where the real fun begins helped either, nor did reports that the film was making people nauseous (this, especially). The rest of the movie before the actual walk has a sort of whimsical and madcap quality to it but they probably rightly figured that wasn't going to sell tickets.



Posted
All due respect, guys, we shouldn't do a WWW thread for a movie that cost only $30m. It's small-fry.
No, this should've been a lot bigger in theory. It may not even make that modest budget back


Posted

The theater drop in week 3 is going to be HUGE for this movie.

The Walk did manage to accomplish one important thing, by taken ALL IMAX screens it prevented The Martian from beating Gravity's October OW record. So yay? :wacko:



Posted (edited)

I thought the movie was excellent, but I don't think it is the kind of story that would make people want to put the effort into seeing it on the big screen (despite that probably being the only way to fully appreciate it). Unless your a big fan of Zemeckis's and/or heavily interrested in the evolution of IMAX 3D (which most people are not), a story about a man traveling between the two towers of the World Trade Center is just not mainstream enough to sell the amount tickets required to justify its budget. I thought the movie was great and that Zemeckis did a masterful job, but this is just not the kind of fare that will pack IMAX theaters let alone any normal theaters. I think there were maybe 3 or 4 people at the IMAX showing I attended which just doesn't happen even outside peak showings.

Edited by Clavius




Posted

One point someone brought up in the weekend thread was how the only thing they could think about when looking at the final scene in the movie is that this was the view many people saw as they plummeted to their death on 9/11. I think a lot of people may have had such associations with the movie as well. The WTC and 9/11 are understandably emotional issues for plenty of people.



Posted

Not often am I completely baffled by a film's financial failure, but such is the case with this movie. It may not have had the most interesting concept but it still looked reasonably entertaining and reviews had indicated that its promised technical achievements lived up to their billing. Yet it's going to be Zemeckis' lowest grossing film in a long time, if not all time. So why is it being so ruthlessly ignored by the general populace?

 

I saw it on Friday night opening day and I WAS ALONE IN THE WHOLE THEATRE.

 

THAT's how bad it's doing.

 

And why? People are just afraid of heights, lol.

 

PS: And yes, this is the Shay back here from a two weeks sightseeing in the very Southern Italy, Hi Guys,hope I didn't miss much. :)

  • Like 1


Posted

I saw it on Friday night opening day and I WAS ALONE IN THE WHOLE THEATRE.

 

THAT's how bad it's doing.

 

And why? People are just afraid of heights, lol.

 

PS: And yes, this is the Shay back here from a two weeks sightseeing in the very Southern Italy, Hi Guys,hope I didn't miss much. :)

Shay! How did you like the movie?

  • Like 1


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.