THE JUSTICE LEAGUE (and The Star and Wonder) WEEKEND THREAD | PREMIUM ACCOUNT SALE NOW LIVE | Weekend Actuals ~ JL 93.84M, W 27.54M, T:R 21.66M, DH2 14.43M, MOTOE 13.80M, TS 9.81M

[RandomCat]

3 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

You should not assume it's a bunch of Marvel fanboys piling on. We piled on Iron Man 2 back in the old days of the Mojo forums. We also piled on Age of Ultron recently here at the BOT forum. Personally I just enjoy the chaos of watching these types of situations play out, regardless of which company is involved.

We all kind of live for the day now of a Star Wars bomb.

[That One Girl]

Just now, Dexter of Suburbia said:

They should make Bad Grandmas instead

 

That...actually exists  

[grey ghost]

24 minutes ago, Barnack said:

Original is not necessarily about the story, it is much more about how it is told, Avatar visuals were originals.

 

Cloud Atlas was not original in the sense that it was a book adaptation, it is still in many aspect one of the most "original" giant budget movie of the 2000's.

Same for MadMax Fury Road shooting/editing technics, cinema is not much about narrative.

Okay so they should replace the term "original" with non-franchise/non-adaptation or innovative fiction.

[AniNate]

People don't really want "originality", they want "ambition". That can manifest as either a sequel (Blade Runner 2049) or an adaptation (Annihilation)

[Lordmandeep]

7 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

You should not assume it's a bunch of Marvel fanboys piling on. We piled on Iron Man 2 back in the old days of the Mojo forums. We also piled on Age of Ultron recently here at the BOT forum. Personally I just enjoy the chaos of watching these types of situations play out, regardless of which company is involved.

 

 

Yeah we did not diminish Wonder Women for beating Civil War either... it was a praiseworthy box office run for a comic book film of recent times 

[Barnack]

1 minute ago, grey ghost said:

Okay so they should replace the term "original" with non-franchise/non-adaptation or innovative fiction.

Adaptation can be really original and franchise also (Fury Road has an example, There Will be blood/Cloud Atlas for other example of adaptation one could call "original" in the sense we are using it)

 

Innovative vs recycled is often what people mean yes, not original vs adaptation.

[The Futurist]

1 minute ago, tribefan695 said:

People don't really want "originality", they want "ambition". That can manifest as either a sequel (Blade Runner 2049) or an adaptation (Annihilation)

Yeah, Blade Runner 2049 was a crowdpleaser, hail ambitious ambitions !

[Amadeus]

10 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

You should not assume it's a bunch of Marvel fanboys piling on. We piled on Iron Man 2 back in the old days of the Mojo forums. We also piled on Age of Ultron recently here at the BOT forum. Personally I just enjoy the chaos of watching these types of situations play out, regardless of which company is involved.

 

I think that If TLJ opens on par with RO there will not be many happy faces even if it would be fun chaos to revisit in 2018.

[Barnack]

1 minute ago, The Futurist said:

Yeah, Blade Runner 2049 was a crowdpleaser, hail ambitious ambitions !

Not peoples at large, he is talking about the small group of people that say they want original, those people do not mean a movie not being an adaptation/inspired by something.

 

Obviously world audience is clearly showing, at least in theater, they want known narrative/presentation they know from the past they will like and do not want ambitious/original in that sense (or will take a chance only if everyone else ostensibly do before them).

[ZattMurdock]

11 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

You should not assume it's a bunch of Marvel fanboys piling on. We piled on Iron Man 2 back in the old days of the Mojo forums. We also piled on Age of Ultron recently here at the BOT forum. Personally I just enjoy the chaos of watching these types of situations play out, regardless of which company is involved.

I don't like the chaos, it's unfortunate as fuck for the superhero genre as a whole. That said, seeing hardcores gloating or blaming Whedon is mind numbing to me. Would the hardcores rather watch the superhero genre implode before admitting they are wrong? It seems to me they would.

[Lordmandeep]

Original to some people here is making a boring Terrance Malick flick that goes over our heads

[Blaze Heatnix]

So, any news from Warner's headquarters?

 

Any comments on the terrible opening? Any comments on changes, movies?  I'm curious.

[grey ghost]

30 minutes ago, That One Guy said:

 

No, because it sets bad precedent for up and coming executives and film studios that the only way to get big is by finding their own cash cow and milking it for all its worth.  STX fell into this trap when they tried to make the Bad Moms Cinematic Universe happen.

Don't put that on superhero movies, Rick Bobby!

 

Unnecessary sequels have been a thing since Jaws 3D.

[tonytr87]

2 minutes ago, Lordmandeep said:

Original to some people here is making a boring Terrance Malick flick that goes over our heads

 

Not what I'm referring to. Also, your cinephile stereotype is out of date. Malick hasn't made a good film since Tree of Life and everybody knows it. 

[Thrylos 7]

15 minutes ago, RandomJC said:

We all kind of live for the day now of a Star Wars bomb.

Anyone who was a member in the bo mojo forums knows what happened when spider man beat attack of the clones.

[Amadeus]

4 minutes ago, ZattMurdock said:

I don't like the chaos, it's unfortunate as fuck for the superhero genre as a whole. That said, seeing hardcores gloating or blaming Whedon is mind numbing to me. Would the hardcores rather watch the superhero genre implode before admitting they are wrong? It seems to me they would.

Its time for the superheroes to die. 

 

That would have been an awesome Line in the deadpool 2 trailer.

[Barnack]

5 minutes ago, Lordmandeep said:

Original to some people here is making a boring Terrance Malick flick that goes over our heads

 

They are certainly original (at least until he started to repeat is film making a bit too much), now what does boring/not boring has to do with original or not ? And who here are you talking about ?

Edited November 20, 2017 by Barnack

[RandomCat]

Just now, Thrylos 7 said:

Anyone who was a member in the bo mojo forums knows what happened when spider man beat attack of the clones.

Must have been some sight.

[LaughingEvans]

What's Digital Cinema By Deluxe?

 

And is there a family member that these family comedies have not done?

[tonytr87]

29 minutes ago, grey ghost said:

Lend someone 200 million dollar and tell them to take more risks for art's sake.

 

I dare you.

 

 

I'm not sure how you can look at the state of Hollywood right now and say there aren't too many franchise films. I'm not advocating for a big change here. I'm not talking about art or anything high falutin' but you keep assuming that for some reason. 

 

I'm talking about creating more Matrixs and Pirates of the Caribbeans (based on a theme park ride, yes, but a theme park ride has no story or characters to rip off), not Malick films or even Blade Runners. 

 

The early 2000s were a good balance between original blockbusters and franchises. Today there's a huge imbalance and it's hurting their business.