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

[CaptainJackSparrow]

Not excited for the next three big Warner Bros films, Tomb Raider, Ready, and Rampage. I’m much more excited for Meg, Mowgli, and Aquaman.

[dudalb]

41 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

I guess Cameron is just a failure then.

Define success.

The whole freaking point I and a few other people are trying to get across is that finiancial success and artistic success are two different things.

I am not denying that Cameron is not a hugely successful director as far as box office goes. As far as being an artistic success. that is a another story.

Why is this so freaking hard for some people to get?

There have been lots of finiancialy successful movies I think were not very good,and lots of very good movies that failed at the box office.

 

[RRA]

1 hour ago, MrGlass2 said:

Like I said someone somewhere not liking one of his movies is a very poor way to measure "subjective success", or it makes those words completely meaningless.

 

Avatar was nominated for 9 Oscars and won 3.

Suicide Squad won an Oscar. WW got no nods. 

 

The Oscars aren't everything. 

[RRA]

14 minutes ago, CaptainJackSparrow said:

Not excited for the next three big Warner Bros films, Tomb Raider, Ready, and Rampage. I’m much more excited for Meg, Mowgli, and Aquaman.

Eh conceptually most if not all of them can be good but the only ones I'm actually interested in are Rampage (Johnson fighting monsters!) and Meg (Jason Statham spin kicking a giant shark!) and Aquaman (because surely they didn't molest James Wan in post on that one.)

 

(If READY wasn't directed by one of my filmmaking heroes, that would have nothing interesting to me.)

[dudalb]

17 minutes ago, Barnack said:

Yes I am encouraged or your not troll intention thanks, you will understand that saying stuff like that:

If people want to discuss weak directors who can't make serious bank like Tarantino, they should be looking to other forums, no? 

 

Sound really trollish (like I said a simple game of naming 10 directors with a better non IP box office track record since the 90s is not easy to do.

 

If you want to start those conversation I strongly encourage you to do so, this message board is an excellent platform.

 

You can do it in the speakeasy section:

 

For example I did that one, talking of trying to be objective as one can about numbers:

 

 

If you want to make a study and start a subject about historical general mood and the type of movie that work at the box office / box office in general you can, there is some theory outthere that when life is rough cinema become more fun in response and vice versa, it is cheap also so link with economics could be seen I imagine, post 2000-2001 economic crisis to 2012 was maybe the most profitable time for Hollywood ever.

 

Same for demographic evolution (that a subject that come from time to time) with the older demographic and the disappearance of the domestic teen audience.

 

But you will see that it will be hard to sustain conversation about those, news and fanboyisme tend to be necessary to have people going, those things are more blog entry.

What makes the guy in question a possible troll was his withering contempt for anybody who wanted to discuss movies in terms other then box office;I resented his snide remarks about "Indie Art Theater Types".

He is just another Cameron fanboy claiming to be an objective analysis of box  office success.

[dudalb]

1 minute ago, RRA said:

Eh conceptually most if not all of them can be good but the only ones I'm actually interested in are Rampage (Johnson fighting monsters!) and Meg (Jason Statham spin kicking a giant shark!) and Aquaman (because surely they didn't molest James Wan in post on that one.)

 

(If READY wasn't directed by one of my filmmaking heroes, that would have nothing interesting to me.)

A good concept guarantes nothing;I wish I had a dime for every good idea I have seen ruined by bad handling.

[dudalb]

1 hour ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

Fixed that for ya.

Both were better then "Avatar".

[Harpospoke]

25 minutes ago, dudalb said:

Define success.

The whole freaking point I and a few other people are trying to get across is that finiancial success and artistic success are two different things.

I am not denying that Cameron is not a hugely successful director as far as box office goes. As far as being an artistic success. that is a another story.

Why is this so freaking hard for some people to get?

There have been lots of finiancialy successful movies I think were not very good,and lots of very good movies that failed at the box office.

 

I think his point was that you can only define one of those things...box office.

 

All the other stuff you mentioned is just opinion.   What is "very good movies"?   What is "not very good"?   What is "artistic success"?

[IronJimbo]

28 minutes ago, Harpospoke said:

I think his point was that you can only define one of those things...box office.

 

All the other stuff you mentioned is just opinion.   What is "very good movies"?   What is "not very good"?   What is "artistic success"?

@dudalb seems to be interpreting "the only objective measure is box office"  to mean " the only way to judge the total worth of a film is box office".

 

 

Edited February 13, 2018 by IronJimbo

[dudalb]

And, in other news, the mods put the Justice League thread out of it's misery.

[dudalb]

19 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

@dudalb seems to be interpreting "the only objective measure is box office"  to mean " the only way to judge the total worth of a film is box office".

 

 

Well ,given how some people ,when discussing the virtues and flaws of Avatar as a movie,always fall back on how much money it made....

[That One Girl]

Smart of the mods to archive the JL thread because this article came out today lmao

 

https://www.polygon.com/2018/2/13/17007872/zack-snyder-justice-league-fired

 

Quote

Report: Zack Snyder was fired from Justice League (update)

 

[IronJimbo]

26 minutes ago, dudalb said:

Well ,given how some people ,when discussing the virtues and flaws of Avatar as a movie,always fall back on how much money it made....

Despite Avatar being the highest grossing film of all time you're still misinterpreting what I said about objective measures.

[CaptainJackSparrow]

With The Nun out of July now, the only movie I am looking forward to see that month will be Purge. (Similar to how last July I saw only one movie, Valerian)

[a2k]

7 hours ago, CaptainJackSparrow said:

Not excited for the next three big Warner Bros films, Tomb Raider, Ready, and Rampage. I’m much more excited for Meg, Mowgli, and Aquaman.

In between there's O8 which can be considered a big film. It should outgross TR, Meg and Mowgli at least. Curious to see how it fares against Rampage, AQM and RPO.

 

edit: FB2 could be WB's highest dom grosser this year and possibly the only one to cross 200.

Edited February 14, 2018 by a2knet

[Jonwo]

10 minutes ago, a2knet said:

In between there's O8 which can be considered a big film. It should outgross TR, Meg and Mowgli at least. Curious to see how it fares against Rampage, AQM and RPO.

 

edit: FB2 could be WB's highest dom grosser this year and possibly the only one to cross 200.

I think Aquaman could do over $200m, I have a feeling it's going to surprise. Rampage is a wildcard but I think WB would be happy with San Andreas numbers and Ready Player One, it's difficult to predict but I think it's going to do well, I think BO Pro's predictions is in the right ball park, plum slot and not much competition.

[RRA]

47 minutes ago, Jonwo said:

I think Aquaman could do over $200m, I have a feeling it's going to surprise. Rampage is a wildcard but I think WB would be happy with San Andreas numbers and Ready Player One, it's difficult to predict but I think it's going to do well, I think BO Pro's predictions is in the right ball park, plum slot and not much competition.

Any thoughts on the Alita move to that same release dare as Aquaman and Bumblebee? (I think though Paramount will move Bumblebee.)

[Jonwo]

1 minute ago, RRA said:

Any thoughts on the Alita move to that same release dare as Aquaman and Bumblebee? (I think though Paramount will move Bumblebee.)

Bumblebee will likely move, I think Aquaman will just move up two days to the 19th December. Holmes and Watson I can also see moving to either 2019 or early December.

[TomCruiseTop]

10 hours ago, dudalb said:

Me. Avatar, take away the visuals, is not a very good film.

"Infinite Jest, take away the text, and it really just wasn't a great book." 

 

That's the argument you just made. Take a moment to reflect on that. 

[TomCruiseTop]

8 hours ago, dudalb said:

What makes the guy in question a possible troll was his withering contempt for anybody who wanted to discuss movies in terms other then box office;I resented his snide remarks about "Indie Art Theater Types".

He is just another Cameron fanboy claiming to be an objective analysis of box  office success.

At no point have i made any such claims as you have just made. In fact, I'd go as far to say this approaches libel. 

 

I make these points because, as stated many times  now we are on a box office theory website. I in fact co-own with a long term friend of mine a small independent cinema here in London. We mostly play what we like personally as neither I nor my business partner have much financial need for its success. We played Stalker for its anniversary extensively and even take audience requests where possible.

 

Your entire characterization of me seems to come from some deeply deluded view, far from reality.