MIB International | June 14 2019 | F Gary Gray directing | Hemsworth, Ferguson, Neeson, Thompson and Thompson

[tawasal]

1 minute ago, Barnack said:

Well yes, no one is arguing he have star power, the conversation was about being toxic or not.

 

The parallel I was making with Reynolds is having a lot of flops, specially when the movie are green lantern/RIPD/Men In black international bad does not indicate much signal about being toxic and that it is easy to mix the correlation of someone being in a lot of flop and them being the cause of it.

 

If you will, to prove is toxicity/poison nature he needed his non MCU failure to be far better than they were.

 

Take Emma Watson commercial track record when leading movie outside the Potter series before Beauty and the Beast (or after Beast), how wrong would it have been to conclude any toxicity and that Disney made a mistake casting Belle ?

 

Like one cannot just look at someone box office full of big numbers and conclude they have to do with star power (specially when the MCU is involved), I think it is a mistake to see a bunch of failure and conclude poison/negative value must be involved.

 

Studios make a lot of exit poll and studies and it is not like in the past when they signed an actor for 12 movies and were obligated to use them even if they were a bad pick.

I don't think Emma Watson was what gave BATB 504m domestic take, more to do with already established fanbase or brand that Disney created around these movie of remakes. 

 

And Hemsworth have had more bad performers as the lead in the box office than MIB:I, such as 12 Strong, In the Heart of the Sea (100m BP), Blackhat (70m PB) & Red Dawn (65m PB) outside of the MCU, he is so far a toxic name. 

[Barnack]

20 minutes ago, tawasal said:

I don't think Emma Watson was what gave BATB 504m domestic take, more to do with already established fanbase or brand that Disney created around these movie of remakes. 

 

Who is saying that we are talking toxic or not (but I think Watson helped, her social media views on this project were off the chart)

 

20 minutes ago, tawasal said:

And Hemsworth have had more bad performers as the lead in the box office than MIB:I, such as 12 Strong, In the Heart of the Sea (100m BP), Blackhat (70m PB) & Red Dawn (65m PB) outside of the MCU, he is so far a toxic name. 

How much more you think those movies would have made with an unknown actor cast has the lead ? (I am not sure 12 Strong was a bad performer, probably did exactly what it was planned to do domestic, like Den of Thieves

[AJG]

1 hour ago, Alli said:

I'm not that upset MIB is flopping (besides RF).   The writer of the first MIB slammed them on twitter.

 

 

 

Marvel sued Sony in 2003 because they were owed money from the first 2 MIB films. They claimed it was "Hollywood accounting".

The fact that 16 years later Sony are still claiming MIB 1 and 2 made no money is incredible.

[Menor the Destroyer]

Edit: Wrong thread

Edited June 14, 2019 by Menor

[Barnack]

46 minutes ago, AJG said:

The fact that 16 years later Sony are still claiming MIB 1 and 2 made no money is incredible.

 

I doubt they claim that, those movies bonus are not calculated on money made but with an agreed formula  that include according to Solomon:

 

Distribution fees, distribution expenses, direct cost, pre-break participations and deferments, supervisory fee, interest, over-budget charges.

 

Studio never told the writer of Forest Gump that the movie didn,t made money, they told him he signed a really bad contract for how it's bonus was calculated.

 

Edited June 14, 2019 by Barnack

[Godzilla]

3 hours ago, AJG said:

 

Marvel sued Sony in 2003 because they were owed money from the first 2 MIB films. They claimed it was "Hollywood accounting".

The fact that 16 years later Sony are still claiming MIB 1 and 2 made no money is incredible.

If $90M movie can’t be profitable with a $590M WW gross then very few movies have ever made money lol. 

Edited June 15, 2019 by Godzilla

[Halba]

i wouldnt blame hemsworth- although a lot of flops he has proven his range in Rush- one of my fav films.

Its just a shitty franchise and a shitty script. runtime only 1h 54 min gives a clue to how much of stinker it is. beware of low runtime movies, they often give a clue to the shitty quality.

[goldenstate5]

114 minutes is short to you?

 

Anyways this sucked. Glad it is bombing.

[reddevil19]

This was quite bad. Not an outright disaster, but it was just sooooooooo boring and felt like it was an hour longer than it actually was. 

I think it's similar in reception to Dark Phoenix last week, but personally I felt that DP had a few scenes that kept my interest and I didn't find it as incompetent as some made it out to be. This on the other hand, didn't gel AT ALL for me. The entire movie felt off, like nothing was coming together.

Weak, predictable, muddled story (the Riza subplot was just so unnecessary)

Comedy that fell flat 99% of the time (only slight chuckles mostly came from a couple of lines delivered by Pawny)

Boring action set pieces

Lack of chemistry - Hemsworth was his usual self as a handsome lug, and it's getting real old, real fast and Thompson felt incredibly off in the movie. Dunno if it was the writing, the direction or what, but she just felt out of place. And whenever they were together, I was hoping for that Ragnarok spark to be there, but it was completely missing for me.

Incredibly weak villains 

 

And I can probably go on and on.

It's not the kind of movie I get angry over, or even a movie I would consider walking out of (like Hellboy earlier this year), but it was instantly forgettable, and it's not even the kind of movie I would put on Netflix, in the background, to fall asleep to. This could have been a great expansion of the lore, but instead it felt like a wasted opportunity. Ah, well... another franchise put to pasture.

[ddddeeee]

MIB3 is a terrific sequel. Much better than it gets credit for.

 

Off to see this in a bit.

[MovieGuyKyle17]

Box Offfice Mojo reporting this made 10.4 million on Friday.



 

[Valonqar]

IMO, there's a difference between actors who don't put butts in seats unless in the right project (Reynolds outside of Deadpool) and actors who are boxoffice poison meaning people actively run away from movies starring such an actor (Fassbender since a survey proved that interest in MacBeth and Steve Jobs collapsed when polled people were told he was in those movies). The first group cannot save a turd or uninteresting concept but can add value to something already appealing (Watson as Belle). The second group is a bust. 

[The Futurist]

Adjusted for Ticket Price Inflation

Rank	Title (click to view)	Studio	Adjusted Gross	Unadjusted Gross	Release
1	Avengers: Endgame	BV	$827,811,400	$827,811,359	4/26/19
2	Marvel's The Avengers	BV	$692,699,700	$623,357,910	5/4/12
3	Avengers: Infinity War	BV	$652,501,800	$678,815,482	4/27/18
4	Avengers: Age of Ultron	BV	$482,277,500	$459,005,868	5/1/15
-	Star Trek	Par.	$311,277,600	$257,730,019	5/8/09
5	Thor: Ragnarok	BV	$309,233,900	$315,058,289	11/3/17
6	Thor: The Dark World	BV	$222,915,200	$206,362,140	11/8/13
7	Thor	Par.	$202,427,300	$181,030,624	5/6/11
8	Snow White and the Huntsman	Uni.	$173,043,700	$155,332,381	6/1/12
9	Ghostbusters (2016)	Sony	$135,862,500	$128,350,574	7/15/16
10	Vacation	WB (NL)	$64,275,700	$58,884,188	7/29/15
11	Red Dawn (2012)	FD	$50,178,200	$44,806,783	11/21/12
12	The Huntsman: Winter's War	Uni.	$49,947,500	$48,390,190	4/22/16
13	The Cabin in the Woods	LGF	$46,694,800	$42,073,277	4/13/12
14	12 Strong	WB	$45,069,400	$45,819,713	1/19/18
15	Rush (2013)	Uni.	$29,095,900	$26,947,624	9/20/13
16	In the Heart of the Sea	WB	$25,940,600	$25,020,758	12/11/15
17	A Perfect Getaway	Uni.	$18,739,200	$15,515,460	8/7/09
18	Bad Times At The El Royale	Fox	$17,799,600	$17,839,115	10/12/18
19	Men in Black International	Sony	$10,400,000	$10,400,000	6/14/19
20	Blackhat	Uni.	$8,883,500	$8,005,980	1/16/15
21	Ca$h	RAtt.	$52,700	$46,488	3/26/10

[ddddeeee]

This was...fine.

 

Not sure anyone has ever phoned in a performance as much as Neeson did here.

 

 

[Zakiyyah6]

2 hours ago, Valonqar said:

IMO, there's a difference between actors who don't put butts in seats unless in the right project (Reynolds outside of Deadpool) and actors who are boxoffice poison meaning people actively run away from movies starring such an actor (Fassbender since a survey proved that interest in MacBeth and Steve Jobs collapsed when polled people were told he was in those movies). The first group cannot save a turd or uninteresting concept but can add value to something already appealing (Watson as Belle). The second group is a bust. 

I like your assessment. Fassbender is a great actor imo but he will never be the star fanboys want him to be. People just don't find him compelling enough. 

[TMP]

10 minutes ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

I like your assessment. Fassbender is a great actor imo but he will never be the star fanboys want him to be. People just don't find him compelling enough. 

Yeah, his blockbuster stuff's always been lackluster, I don't know why he doesn't go back to indie movies. He's so good in Shame & Steve Jobs, but he keeps doing stuff like Assassins Creed and Dark Phoenix.

[Zakiyyah6]

5 minutes ago, TMP said:

Yeah, his blockbuster stuff's always been lackluster, I don't know why he doesn't go back to indie movies. He's so good in Shame & Steve Jobs, but he keeps doing stuff like Assassins Creed and Dark Phoenix.

Steve Jobs was supposed to be a hit and it flopped big time, it was not an indie project. I do agree that he should continue to do smaller fair and give up the blockbuster dreams.

[AndyK]

3 hours ago, Valonqar said:

IMO, there's a difference between actors who don't put butts in seats unless in the right project (Reynolds outside of Deadpool) and actors who are boxoffice poison meaning people actively run away from movies starring such an actor (Fassbender since a survey proved that interest in MacBeth and Steve Jobs collapsed when polled people were told he was in those movies). The first group cannot save a turd or uninteresting concept but can add value to something already appealing (Watson as Belle). The second group is a bust. 

Reynolds was good in Hitman's Bodyguard and it did well enough to get sequel.

[LaughingEvans]

On 6/14/2019 at 10:11 PM, AJG said:

 

Marvel sued Sony in 2003 because they were owed money from the first 2 MIB films. They claimed it was "Hollywood accounting".

The fact that 16 years later Sony are still claiming MIB 1 and 2 made no money is incredible.

 

Didn't they do exactly the same with Spiderman and Stan Lee?

 

 

 

[Blaze Heatnix]

5 hours ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

I like your assessment. Fassbender is a great actor imo but he will never be the star fanboys want him to be. People just don't find him compelling enough. 

 

Just hire Fassbender as Dr Doom in the MCU and keep his face hidden. Fortunately Dr Doom has a mask. It'll help a lot the box office.

Edited June 16, 2019 by Blaze Heatnix