Fanboy Wars Thread: Personal Attacks not allowed | With Digital Fur Technology

[Deja23]

42 minutes ago, YourMother said:

It’s not about X-Men or the rating. Disney hasn’t made anything outside of blockbusters for the past 8 years. Or anything that doesn’t appeal to the adult crowd since Touchstone which was used for Dreamworks deal was forgotten in favor of IPs.

They haven’t? Queen of Katwe is a blockbuster? The BFG? The Finest Hours, Into the Woods, Saving Mr. Banks? I get that these are a small amount compared to their other movies and may not have appealed to you, but it’s incorrect to state that they haven’t made anything but blockbusters recently. 

[Rebeccas]

1 minute ago, Deja23 said:

They haven’t? Queen of Katwe is a blockbuster? The BFG? The Finest Hours, Into the Woods, Saving Mr. Banks? I get that these are a small amount compared to their other movies and may not have appealed to you, but it’s incorrect to state that they haven’t made anything but blockbusters recently. 

But you can definitely see that slate dwindling year to year (mainly cause they tend to flop). Granted, most prestige fare flops unless it can get significant Oscar buzz.

Edited December 5, 2017 by Rebeccas

[Jordanstine]

1 minute ago, filmlover said:

People were mostly delighted for the most part. Then again, Disney wasn't yet the completely dominant force trying to buy the whole galaxy that they are now.

Breaking News: Disney to open Disney Galaxy theme park in Mars by 2065.

 

 

Darn, I'll be in my 70's 

[dudalb]

1 minute ago, Deja23 said:

They haven’t? Queen of Katwe is a blockbuster? The BFG? The Finest Hours, Into the Woods, Saving Mr. Banks? I get that these are a small amount compared to their other movies and may not have appealed to you, but it’s incorrect to state that they haven’t made anything but blockbusters recently. 

But Disney does pretty much play it safe;all of those were potential hits. it has not made a geinunily risky film in a long time. Fox..the Searchlight  division in particular...has.

[Rebeccas]

ETA; wrong thread

Edited December 5, 2017 by Rebeccas

[TalismanRing]

1 hour ago, YourMother said:

It’s not about X-Men or the rating. Disney hasn’t made anything outside of blockbusters for the past 8 years. Or anything that doesn’t appeal to the adult crowd since Touchstone which was used for Dreamworks deal was forgotten in favor of IPs.

Disney did have that Speilberg/Dreamworks deal with films from War Horse  to Bridge of Spies.  Yes, they entered a phase with Pixar, Marvel and Lucas Films where they had the studios under full control and financing which left Dreamworks the odd man out.    Fox has a complete acquisition would be treated differently than Dreamworks.

 

And as @Deja23 pointed out there have been other non blockbuster releases previous to this later year.  It's that there schedule is so jam packed with the big ones they often go unnoticed.  They've also had mid budget live action films like Pete's Dragon. 

 

Disney also produces foreign films for mainly foreign markets - like the recent Dangal .  Though they're shuttering their UTV Motion Pictures in India even after it's huge success. 

 

Edited December 5, 2017 by TalismanRing

[langer]

4 minutes ago, dudalb said:

But Disney does pretty much play it safe;all of those were potential hits. it has not made a geinunily risky film in a long time. Fox..the Searchlight  division in particular...has.

Any big budget movie that was released by Fox Searchlight recently?

[TalismanRing]

4 minutes ago, Rebeccas said:

Franco creepo rumors are swirling. A24 better get this in wide release ASAP before this rumored article drops.

That text mess with the 17 yr old a couple of years ago was a red flag.

 

[filmlover]

1 minute ago, langer said:

Any big budget movie that was released by Fox Searchlight recently?

I think the last movie that cost more than $20M released by them was The Grand Budapest Hotel.

[Deja23]

13 minutes ago, Rebeccas said:

But you can definitely see that slate dwindling year to year (mainly cause they tend to flop). Granted, most prestige fare flops unless it can get significant Oscar buzz.

 

10 minutes ago, dudalb said:

But Disney does pretty much play it safe;all of those were potential hits. it has not made a geinunily risky film in a long time. Fox..the Searchlight  division in particular...has.

Of course. I get that their output isn’t ideal in terms of variety for audiences or ‘riskiness’, but going into hyperbole about their content isn’t the way to present the argument against them. I’m not really for or against the deal. While I like most of the MCU movies and Deadpool, I’d rather they not get mixed up in the same universe. I don’t care enough about what happens X-men and F4 to be supportive of the deal either. 

Edited December 5, 2017 by Deja23

[TalismanRing]

1 minute ago, langer said:

Any big budget movie that was released by Fox Searchlight recently?

Fox Searchlight really doesn't do big budget.   Battle of The Sexes at $25m was on the high end.  Shape of Water's budget is only $19.5m.  Three Billboards - $12m. Gifted - $7m.  They way over paid for Patti Cakes at Sundance for I think $10m

[Barnack]

21 minutes ago, langer said:

Any big budget movie that was released by Fox Searchlight recently?

I do not think they ever released a big budget title in their history, it is a low budget movie division, when Joy become a big budget David O Russell movie it stopped to be a Fox Searchlight project to become a direct under the studio one for a recent example.

 

Grand Budapest hotel, Tree of Life type (30-35m) are their biggest release I think.

 

If it work like Sony Classic at Sony, they have a different deal with theater chain and get a smaller percentage of the tickets sales for them to accept to play their slates because they spent significantly less in the marketing budget than the studio branch. Would make little sense to use FS for a movie that would have a huge marketing budget instead of Fox and not just for that reason.

Edited December 5, 2017 by Barnack

[dudalb]

The concept of a film company that is not interested in block busters and exists to fund small films that are not genre films is really difficult to people who seem only to be able to think in terms of huge budget blockbusters or small budget genre films.

[Harpospoke]

31 minutes ago, Deja23 said:

They haven’t? Queen of Katwe is a blockbuster? The BFG? The Finest Hours, Into the Woods, Saving Mr. Banks? I get that these are a small amount compared to their other movies and may not have appealed to you, but it’s incorrect to state that they haven’t made anything but blockbusters recently. 

Speaking of Saving Mr Banks.   Just watched that one last week and it's amazing.   Really emotional stuff at the end.   Tears.

26 minutes ago, dudalb said:

But Disney does pretty much play it safe;all of those were potential hits. it has not made a geinunily risky film in a long time. Fox..the Searchlight  division in particular...has.

There is no such thing as "risky".

 

Unless you mean all movies are a risk...which is true.

 

When you lower the budget you mitigate the risk.   That's WHY they lower the budgets.   "Risky" would be Fox making a 200m Deadpool movie...which of course they didn't do.   They made a 60m Deadpool movie instead.

[Barnack]

Just now, Harpospoke said:

There is no such thing as "risky".

 

Unless you mean all movies are a risk...which is true.

 

When you lower the budget you mitigate the risk.   That's WHY they lower the budgets.   "Risky" would be Fox making a 200m Deadpool movie...which of course they didn't do.   They made a 60m Deadpool movie instead.

Lower budget less risk is a misconception I think, the safest movie of 2018 (if you define it as the minimum ROI it is certain to do) is probably the Last Jedi and it is one of the most expensive, the top 10 safest movie of 2018 would probably mostly fill of giant budget one.

 

There is a risk of opportunity with SW8 and it is still challenging to maximize is potential, same with Guardian of the Galaxy 2, but the risk of not reaching a 8% ROI on those 2 was almost nill, let alone the risk of loosing money on those.

 

King Arthur was in comparison much riskier so was Downsizing or Suburbicon, Risky tend to mean in people mouth:

 

The smaller the landing script for that movie commercial success, The Last Jedi will be a success in pre-sales even before anyone saw the movie.

 

[That One Girl]

Disney buying fox is legit garbage

[Daxtreme]

‘Iron Fist’ Season 2 Adds ‘Star Trek’ Alum Alice Eve (EXCLUSIVE)

 

@Chewy

 

[dudalb]

16 minutes ago, That One Guy said:

Disney buying fox is legit garbage

Please explain what you mean. Do you mean  you think the deal would be bad for the industry?

Or do you mean the possibility of this happening. If this is garbage, it is sure fooling a lot of outlets whixh cover business for a living. It might well still fall through, but to dismiss it as garbage is wrong.....

[AJG]

18 minutes ago, That One Guy said:

Disney buying fox is legit garbage

 

How do you feel about replacing Mickey Mouse with Ralph Wiggum?

 

[dudalb]

Point is Disney has been out of the small budget edgy indie movie market for around a decade. Fox Searchlite specializes in that type of film.  See why some of us are concerned? The kind of film that  Searchlite does is not part of the Mouse's strategy.