Weekend Estimates (Page 50): The Conjuring 40.3M | Warcraft 24M | NYSM 23M| TMNT 14.8M | X-Men 10M | Me Before You 9.2M

[CJohn]

4 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

Personally, I'd like to see a more balanced approach, and I think the studios are basically eating themselves without an eye on the future -- when you're continually rebooting and sequelizing everything, at some point the well's gonna run dry. And if you haven't invested in generating and creating some new IP, there's gonna be some dark days. 

It is already crashing and burning. 2016 always looked stupidly full of tentpole releases and sequels. The amount of big budget catastrophes and sequels bombing/underperforming we have had this year is insane. The entire industry is collapsing. 

[Rman823]

Still haven't decided whether to see The Conjuring 2 or NYSM 2 first. Both of the originals were in my top movies of Sumner 2013. It seems like this whole month has and will have 2 movies coning out the same week that I want to see.

[Impact]

A status on Facebook I saw earlier "Can't wait till Warcraft 2!" I was thinking "I could tell him that its unlikely due to that its not doing great, but probably shouldn't tell him that".

[RobinHood26]

I think Boyega actually helps. PR2 is a toss up. Depends on quality of course. I could see it doing less or even more than the first. 

[grim22]

10 minutes ago, CJohn said:

MY GOD STOP WITH THE HYPE!!!!!

 

Seriously, when the reveal comes you will be "Ok, that seems cool" and then rapidly go to "But if he... then that entire heist... and the pointless second act... and the entire freaking first movie!!!" and then just give up and say "Yeah, this makes literally no sense"

 

The reveal speech which 

Spoiler

retcons the entire first movie

 

is one of the most hilariously stupid justifications ever.

[Dementeleus]

1 minute ago, CJohn said:

The entire industry is collapsing. 

 

Stahp.  

[CJohn]

Just now, grim22 said:

 

Seriously, when the reveal comes you will be "Ok, that seems cool" and then rapidly go to "But if he... then that entire heist... and the pointless second act... and the entire freaking first movie!!!" and then just give up and say "Yeah, this makes literally no sense"

 

The reveal speech which 

  Reveal hidden contents

retcons the entire first movie

 

is one of the most hilariously stupid justifications ever.

STOP TEASING ME WITH THE GREATNESS!!!! I can only see it on Thursday at the earliest  

[Porthos]

1 minute ago, grim22 said:

 

Seriously, when the reveal comes you will be "Ok, that seems cool" and then rapidly go to "But if he... then that entire heist... and the pointless second act... and the entire freaking first movie!!!" and then just give up and say "Yeah, this makes literally no sense"

 

The reveal speech which 

  Hide contents

retcons the entire first movie

 

is one of the most hilariously stupid justifications ever.

 

Classic case of the perils of Twist Addiction?

[Rman823]

1 minute ago, grim22 said:

 

Seriously, when the reveal comes you will be "Ok, that seems cool" and then rapidly go to "But if he... then that entire heist... and the pointless second act... and the entire freaking first movie!!!" and then just give up and say "Yeah, this makes literally no sense"

 

The reveal speech which 

  Reveal hidden contents

retcons the entire first movie

 

is one of the most hilariously stupid justifications ever.

Really trying to resist the urge to click on the spoiler.

[grim22]

Just now, Porthos said:

 

Classic case of the perils of Twist Addiction?

 

For sure.

 

But the packaging around the twist here has more gloss and looks good. Jon M. Chu can put together a good looking movie if nothing else. I also liked that they tease a lot of stereotypical female characters and then subvert expectations throughout the movie in the very next scene after they tease it. Liked that part of it.

[grim22]

4 minutes ago, CJohn said:

STOP TEASING ME WITH THE GREATNESS!!!! I can only see it on Thursday at the earliest  

 

Will see if I can type out a spoiler review in RTM later today.

[filmlover]

4 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

Stahp.  

They call him CFlop for a reason.

[CJohn]

Just now, grim22 said:

 

Will see if I can type out a spoiler review in RTM later today.

I won't read it. 

[CJohn]

Just now, filmlover said:

They call him CFlop for a reason.

 

[WrathOfHan]

1 minute ago, filmlover said:

They call him CFlop for a reason.

And his name................... IS @JohnC-Nah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

[johnboy3434]

1 minute ago, CJohn said:

 

 

Apocalypse and Ben Affleck are the reasons they call you CFlop? I don't follow.

[cannastop]

10 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

Sure, although that's a slightly different diacussion (studios going essentially all in on expensive pre-established franchise tentpoles over modestly budgeted dramas and comedies). The thing about comedies is that they're cheap, so it's hard to lose a ton of money, and when they hit big, they're really profitable, and they tend to have a long life on video and TV. 

 

Personally, I'd like to see a more balanced approach, and I think the studios are basically eating themselves without an eye on the future -- when you're continually rebooting and sequelizing everything, at some point the well's gonna run dry. And if you haven't invested in generating and creating some new IP, there's gonna be some dark days. 

Do you suggest trying to make a new Star Wars or something?

 

As for me, I'm happy that animated features are basically the only kind of movies that can be new IP and be blockbusters.

[superweirdo87]

32 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

Domestic numbers are certainly important for the co-producer and distributor, especially when they're also covering P&A. They get the best percentage of revenue gross by far. 

 

But what we all miss (myself included), is that once all expenses are covered, a movie is basically an endless profit stream (no matter how slight). That's why studios are so invested in making all these tentpoles. 

 

It is also worth noting that domestic is one of the best, if not the best, market for ancillary revenues.

[Jonwo]

18 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

Sure, although that's a slightly different diacussion (studios going essentially all in on expensive pre-established franchise tentpoles over modestly budgeted dramas and comedies). The thing about comedies is that they're cheap, so it's hard to lose a ton of money, and when they hit big, they're really profitable, and they tend to have a long life on video and TV. 

 

Personally, I'd like to see a more balanced approach, and I think the studios are basically eating themselves without an eye on the future -- when you're continually rebooting and sequelizing everything, at some point the well's gonna run dry. And if you haven't invested in generating and creating some new IP, there's gonna be some dark days. 

 

I don't think studios will ever give up on adaptations, reboots and remakes but I do agree there should be a balance. I don't blame studios for exploiting their IP and backcatalogue as Disney have proved it can be a goldmine with the live action fairytale films

Edited June 11, 2016 by Jonwo

[filmlover]

3 minutes ago, johnboy3434 said:

 

Apocalypse and Ben Affleck are the reasons they call you CFlop? I don't follow.

Every movie he stans for misses expectations. It's his curse.