DUNKIRK WEEKEND THREAD | ABSOLUTELY NO SPOILERS | Official estimates Dunkirk 50.5M, GT 30.3M, SMH 22M, Apes 20.4M, Val 17M | Wonder Woman is the new summer champ with 389M total | Summer Sale is Live!

[JohnnyGossamer]

2 minutes ago, Maxmoser3 said:

Still a north of $50 million start is great for Dunkirk, and Girls Trip getting closer to $30 million is also very good. Saturday matinees should help out as Dunkirk has adult audiences and Girls Trip has women audiences to bring in some cash.

 

As for Valerian, it was gonna either way. Hopefully STX and Luc Besson/EuropaCorp learn their lesson not to make a $200+ film that tries to something that it's not and putting Cara Delevigne's ugly ass(although her ass is better than her face, no offense) as the lead is poisonous.

That will forever be the mystery here. Even though Fifth Element wasn't a hit, Bruce Willis was a very smart choice as heroic lead. Scarlett Johansson as leading lady in Lucy was an ideal choice as well... The choices here, whether they suited the material in his mind's eye or not, were poor. Maybe because Valerian was made outside of the studio system, he was able to cast exactly who he wanted? Still, very odd... Many, many young, talented actors would've signed up to be a part of such a kaleidoscopic, loony sci-fi fairy tale. Does any know if others were considered for Valerian and Laurelene?

[Hatebox]

Even though apparently they're fine in it, perhaps Delevinge and and Rihanna's casting rang alarm bells for a few people. I know a few years ago Sam Jackson spoke against rappers getting prominent roles just because they were famous for their music.

 

 

Edited July 22, 2017 by Hatebox

[Zakiyyah6]

Why are the women being blamed for the failure? 

[TalismanRing]

7 minutes ago, DeeCee said:

Just remember it was 18 months after Dunkirk before the US decided to show up. Even than it was after a little bit of prompting. 

 

WWI burned everyone out. It was such a horror show and fucking pointless war fought between imperialists that leaders and citizens were loathe to get involved again. 

 

England wasn't exactly quick to enter into war again either as countries were being "annexed" by Hitler in their backyard a year before Poland was invaded.  

 

Meanwhile, Japan started invading Manchuria in 1931. The US, UK & Russia gave minor add to China when Japan attacked. Hundreds of thousands of Chinese were butchered in Nanking in 1937 - two years before Hitler's army set one foot in Poland.

 

[Hatebox]

6 minutes ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

Why are the women being blamed for the failure? 

 

Don't pretend I'm making this a gender thing. We can take it as read DeHaan isn't a draw at all. Just commenting on the impression it gives when you cast superstars not primarily famous for acting.

 

 

Edited July 22, 2017 by Hatebox

[a2k]

7 minutes ago, JohnnyGossamer said:

That will forever be the mystery here. Even though Fifth Element wasn't a hit, Bruce Willis was a very smart choice as heroic lead. Scarlett Johansson as leading lady in Lucy was an ideal choice as well... The choices here, whether they suited the material in his mind's eye or not, were poor. Maybe because Valerian was made outside of the studio system, he was able to cast exactly who he wanted? Still, very odd... Many, many young, talented actors would've signed up to be a part of such a kaleidoscopic, loony sci-fi fairy tale. Does any know if others were considered for Valerian and Laurelene?

 

For all the rebellion, he dropped the ball with conservative casting...Endearing, energetic and charming...these two are not:

 

[nomyth]

2 minutes ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

Why are the women being blamed for the failure? 

Thank you!!! Jeez. Wtf, guys? It's not like anyone ever said King Arthur totally flopped because of Charlie Hunnam's face!

[Michael Seng Wah]

1 minute ago, a2knet said:

 

For all the rebellion, he dropped the ball with conservative casting...Endearing, energetic and charming...these two are not:

 

They need to learn from Tom Hardy, how to act using eyes.

[Hatebox]

2 minutes ago, nomyth said:

Thank you!!! Jeez. Wtf, guys? It's not like anyone ever said King Arthur totally flopped because of Charlie Hunnam's face!

 

Was about to reply 'they pretty much did' until I realized you were joking.

[Zakiyyah6]

Rihanna had a small role, I don't think that anyone thought that she didn't have a small role.

 

I'll agree that DeHaan and Cara just didn't move the needle. There is no buzz on either of them. Cara had buzz last year for Suicide Squad but after that film her buzz died.

[TalismanRing]

5 minutes ago, a2knet said:

 

For all the rebellion, he dropped the ball with conservative casting...Endearing, energetic and charming...these two are not:

 

 

Just the energetic, charming, sexy, magnetic duo I want leading me through a fun candy coated space romp.

 

[a2k]

1 minute ago, TalismanRing said:

 

Just the energetic, charming, sexy, magnetic duo I want leading me through a fun candy coated space romp.

 

Then pick the guy behind DeHaan

Edited July 22, 2017 by a2knet

[TalismanRing]

Just now, a2knet said:

 

 

Poor guy always looks like he's in the 53rd day of a Sleep Deprivation trial.

[cookie]

5 minutes ago, nomyth said:

Thank you!!! Jeez. Wtf, guys? It's not like anyone ever said King Arthur totally flopped because of Charlie Hunnam's face!

I called Hunnam a charisma vacuum and said it was going to be one of the reasons KA flops before any of y'all ever did.

[Zakiyyah6]

I don't get why so many filmmakers don't know how to cast their space epics. Jupiter Ascending's casting was horrible as well. 

[TalismanRing]

Just now, Zakiyyah6 said:

I don't get why so many filmmakers don't know how to cast their space epics. Jupiter Ascending's casting was horrible as well. 

 

They might get better casts if their scripts were better.  

[a2k]

2 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

 

Poor guy always looks like he's in the 53rd day of a Sleep Deprivation trial.

[Hatebox]

Anywaaay. 60m always sound too good to be true for Dunkirk. 50m following onto a 150m total would do very nicely.

 

[MCKillswitch123]

While my worries of frontloadedness are still very much there, 20M+ OD for Dunkirk is a damn good achievement. 50M OW, over Interstellar which sounded absurd a while ago for me, is at reach, which would be insane for a WW2 movie opening in July 2017 (proving, without a shadow of a doubt, that Nolan is one of Hollywood's top draws today). Still, beware of Saturday's hold. The Nolan fanbase is incomparable to that of any other director besides Cameron (who only shows up every 12 fucking years), and dare I say maybe any Hollywood star out there outside of Leo DiCaprio, and noticeable rush is a risk factor at play.

 

Girls Trip doing 13M OD is nuts. It's looking at mid to high 20's OW, which would be refreshing considering the amount of flopped comedies we've seen all year long. Would be hilarious if it did more in 3 days than the likes of Baywatch in 4 or 5.

 

Valerian... yeah, that ship never sailed. O/U Jupiter Ascending?

 

Apes, unfortunately but expectedly, looking at a nasty drop. At the end of the day, the Popcorn Law speaks louder than any law, and the GA probably wasn't turned on by a super heavy and dreary drama in the middle of the Summer (not to mention, the apparently - have not seen the movie yet - misleading marketing that made it look like a massive action movie, when it's anything but). Mismarketing has been a noticeable problem throughout this entire Summer. Hopefully Hollywood learns a thing or two.

 

Spidey looking at anything in the 51-49% threshold, which is okay enough if it lands on the latter... not so okay if it lands on the former (50%+ drop two weeks in a row is bad, sorry to tell ya but it IS). Still, it's headed towards 300M and that's alright. I'm taking a wild guess/hot take and say that Homecoming 2 will probably have better legs (this definitely had the problem of being the 3rd reboot in 10 years of Spider-Man, + The Amazing Spider-Man films that drained almost all the energy from the GA to support another Spidey this soon... but I doubt the wom itself was all that positive anyway, and I'm starting to see more and more people coming to social media calling out Marvel on their "safeness", so maybe that didn't help either).

Edited July 22, 2017 by MCKillswitch123

[Cochofles]

52 minutes ago, Maxmoser3 said:

As for Valerian, it was gonna either way. Hopefully STX and Luc Besson/EuropaCorp learn their lesson not to make a $200+ film that tries to something that it's not and putting Cara Delevigne's ugly ass(although her ass is better than her face, no offense) as the lead is poisonous.

Dan Deham (or whatever his name is) has an ugly face AND an ugly ass, and he is equally to blame for the two leads lacking chemistry, screen charisma, and energy. Let's not act as if she is the sole reason for this...