Jump to content

Eric Atreides

Top 10 Wins and Fails of 2017 (& 5 Disappointments) l LIST COMPLETE l #1 ON P. 7

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, filmlover said:

Priyanka was definitely the only thing about Baywatch that didn't suck so calling her the highlight seems fair.

Maybe she was a highlight to those who think she was cast in the name of diversity or to those who buy into the PR smoke and mirrors Hollywood has created around her. To me, she was bland and overrated. Her only function was to bait for foreign box office, which means her talent to play the part wasn’t the top priority, nor was diversity. You yourself admitted she was miscast yet you feel compelled to put her on the pedestal anyway because apparently we “have” to say good things about her. As far as I’m concerned, the only things that didn’t suck are the things that felt ignored and should have been given more attention.

 

They didn’t really have much sense of priority overall in developing the movie, so it should be no surprise that they pretty much rearranged the movie when they met her to accommodate her starpower, to give her enough to stand out enough and make her marketable enough to bait for foreign box office. Lotta good that did ‘em considering it bombed in the territories she was supposed to be a draw in.

 

I’ve never bothered with Quantico so I never had much of an opinion of her before Baywatch. Now I officially dislike her. Call it an irrational dislike considering it’s more the disposition people have about her I don’t like.

Edited by Jay Beezy
Link to comment
Share on other sites





On 5/1/2018 at 5:12 PM, CoolEric258 said:

FAIL #7

BLADE RUNNER 2049

"Sometimes to love someone, you got to be a stranger."

blade_runner_twenty_forty_nine_ver4_xlg.

 

Release Date: October 6

Director: Denis Villeneuve

Cast: Ryan Gosling, Harrison Ford, Ana de Armas, Sylvia Hoeks, Robin Wright, Mackenzie Davis, Carla Juri, Lennie James, Dave Bautista, Jared Leto

B.O. Gross: $91.7M DOM, $258.7M WW

 

I'm sorry. I had to do it. I didn’t want to do it, really, but I had to. As much as we may all love this movie, it’s still in the end a flop.

 

When the first Blade Runner was released, it was not the critical darling it would later become. It underperformed at the box office and recieved a polarized response from critics and audiences alike. But as time had gone on, the film would garner more appreciation and soon became a cult smash and considered one of the greatest sci-fi films of all time, being an inspiration for dozens of other sci-fi works.

 

35 years later, the film was given a brand new sequel, with a lot of clout behind it. For one, it had Denis Villenueve as director, fresh off of hit films like Sicario and Arrival. It also promised the return of Harrison Ford reprising his previous role as Deckard alongside the hot young rising star Ryan Gosling. It also had a massive marketing campaign behind it, with the first promotional materials arriving in December 2016, as well as three short films that served as prequels to 2049. And with a gargantuan budget ranging from $150 to $185 million, otherworldly visuals, as well as a runtime of 2.5 hours, it was marketed as an epic event that you had to see on the big screen, a tactic WB had already used for Dunkirk to great success. And of course, there was the critical reception, which was unbelievable, as many proclaimed the film was just as good, if not better than its 1982 predecessor. The tracking estimated the film would have a weekend somewhere in the $45 million range, and everything seemed to be going swimmingly and on track. Even if it wouldn’t be a massive success, it would still generate at least Mad Max: Fury Road levels of box office.

 

Well, when the opening day numbers were revealed to only be $12.6 million it was a serious disappointment, and the opening weekend was even worse, as it only earned $32.8 million in its opening weekend. It earned okay enough legs, but its domestic total was only $90 million, with a $258.7 million worldwide total. Experts say that the film was supposed to make more than $400 million to break even, and it’s rumored production studio Alcon will lose $80 million on the project.

 

How did this happen? How did a film that had everything going right turn out so very wrong? While there are a lot of reasons as to why, I think the main issue comes down to that general audiences don’t care about Blade Runner. Like or dislike it, the film is still just a cult classic. Sure, people might know the name of the movie, but how many people actually saw it? How many actually like it? How many actually like it enough they were willing to see the sequel? Simply put, it’s a film that was never that popular, with a sequel that was positioned as a tentpole release. Then you add on a gigantic runtime that limited the amount of shows it could play, as well as a lack of OS appeal, and it simply bombed.

 

But at the end, does it matter if the movie was a hit or not? We still got one of the best movies of the year, we got something that is sure to influence dozens of future filmmakers. And in the end, isn’t having a great movie all that matters?

Too beautiful for this world. We didn't deserve it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FAIL #6

ALIEN: COVENANT

"Serve in heaven or reign in hell?"

AlienCovenant.jpg

 

Release Date: May 19

Director: Ridley Scott

Cast: Michael Fassbender, Katherine Waterston, Billy Crudup, Danny McBride, Demian Bichir

B.O. Gross: $74.3M DOM, $240.7M WW

 

In 2012, Fox released Prometheus, a spin-off/prequel/something to the Alien franchise. The film received positive reviews from critics, most notably for its production design and the performance of Michael Fassbender, but polarized audiences, mainly for its writing and plot. Regardless, strong marketing and curiosity propelled the movie to become a decent hit at the box office, and Fox greenlit a sequel. Due to the controversial response towards Prometheus, the film promised to repent the film’s mistakes. The xenomorphs would have a far bigger role. There would be more action and suspense. It would have a stronger connection to the previous Alien films. By all accounts, this should have made just as much as Prometheus.

 

But in the end, it didn’t. The film had weaker reviews than Prometheus and was just as polarizing to audiences, which didn’t help matters in the slightest. While the film’s opening to $36.2M, below tracking, was a bad omen the film didn’t click with audiences, it got even worse once the next weekend rolled around. Even with the holiday weekend, the film managed to drop over 70% in weekend 2, one of the biggest of the year. Then add on a third weekend drop of 61%, and the film completely flopped with a $74.3 million domestic total, which is lower than the first Alien movie back in 1979. The worldwide total wasn’t much better. While the film likely broke even, as the film was smartly budgeted at around $97 million, it still dropped to $240.7 million, losing nearly 40% of Prometheus’ total ($403.3 million).

 

The reasons for it are plentiful. For one, Prometheus still left a sour taste in many people's mouths, and seeing as how the two previous Alien movies weren't much better, there wasn't much goodwill towards the property. Then you add in competition with Guardians of the Galaxy 2, less superstars than before, being based on a niche, ultraviolent property that didn't attract many mainstream moviegoers, and even having its fanbase completely split on their opinions, and it seems somewhat clear why the film was such a massive disappointment.

 

While it’s rumored a sequel to Covenant is in the works, with the polarizing reception of the last two films, the massive dropoff from both features, and the Disney-Fox deal, it’s unlikely the film will come into fruition. Maybe someday soon Alien can become a respectable box office performer once again, but for now, it’s in a rough place with fanboys and newcomers alike.

  • Like 4
  • Sad 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites



WIN #6

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST

"How would you feel about growing a beard?"

beauty-poster-final.jpg&h=600&q=100

 

Release Date: March 17

Director: Bill Condon

Cast: Emma Watson, Dan Stevens, Luke Evans, Kevin Kline, Josh Gad, Ewan McGregor, Stanley Tucci, Audra McDonald, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Ian McKellen, Emma Thompson

B.O. Gross: $504M DOM, $1.263B WW

 

Beauty and the Beast: Ever since the release of 2010’s Alice in Wonderland, Disney has managed to successfully reimagine several of their classic animated features, including Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, and The Jungle Book. In 2017, the biggest moneymaker out of this series/trend/whatever was with Beauty and the Beast. The 1991 classic is considered one of Disney’s greatest films ever made, so much so that it became the first animated film to be nominated for Best Picture. Naturally, with a film so beloved and iconic, it was only natural Disney would at some point give the feature a live-action spin. What was unexpected to just about everyone, at least until the homestretch, was how much of a bea--I mean monster the film truly was.

 

To put the film’s $174.8 million opening in perspective, the film delivered the seventh-highest opening of all time, beating out all of the films from franchises like Harry Potter, Hunger Games, Batman and Spider-Man. It’s an incredible number that really accentuates how much interest and excitement the remake truly had among audiences. Legs were also okay, if a touch frontloaded, as the film went on to gross over $504 million domestic and crossed $1.26 billion worldwide, making it the highest-grossing film of 2017 (well, until The Last Jedi beats it in a few weeks).

 

Why exactly did the film gross so much, leaving all of the other Disney live-action remake things in the dust? The best way to explain it comes down to the strong nostalgia factor of the 1991 classicl. While the original animated Alice, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, and Jungle Book were and still are beloved, the one thing Beauty and the Beast has as an advantage over those films is its age. The film came out in 1991, while the others released in the 50s and 60s. This was an advantage, as the film came out at a time when young adults and thirtysomethings were still kids. Considering the ‘91 film was so acclaimed and beloved, to the point where it became the first animated film to be nominated for Best Picture, and launched an ultra-successful Broadway adaptation, it was something that stuck in the minds of adults who now have kids of their own, or are trying to relive the days gone by. It got so many people excited to see something that they don’t just love, but absolutely adored and was an important part of their childhoods. And being acclaimed and loved by all other generations helped a lot too.

 

Then you add on the inspired casting of Emma Watson as Belle, and it’s no wonder the film garnered record-breaking teaser and trailer views. And thanks to the ever ominpresent Disney marketing machine, they let audiences of all ages and backgrounds aware that this was an event, and everyone had to go see it. And with decent reviews, the film’s marketing paid off handsomely, as the film played a major part in Disney’s domination when it came to 2017 market share.

 

Disney is already fast-tracking other live-action remakes, with films like Dumbo and Mulan in the works, but more interestingly, Aladdin, and The Lion King, both slated for summer 2019. As those two films were essential features within the Disney Renaissance, much like Beauty and the Beast, and are just as, if not more recognizable and beloved than that film, it will be interesting to see how those two films will match up to Beauty’s new records.

 

It will also be interesting to see how this film’s success will help the musical genre. With this, La La Land, and The Greatest Showman, 2017 was a pretty great year for musicals when it came to the box office, and it will be interesting to see if the momentum continues in the coming years (I’m feeling more and more confident in a Mamma Mia 2 breakout every day, and of course films like Aladdin, Lion King, and Wicked will be monsters when they come out in 2019)

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
  • ...wtf 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/6/2018 at 6:58 AM, baumer said:

Love your write-ups but why is LLL on this list?  It's a 2016 film.

I think he’s doing calendar year, which is why Hidden Figures is on here.  Makes sense for the box office since LLL made a lot of its gross in 2017

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Again, with the bottom 5 out of the way, I'm going to have a little break by talking about the "Disappointments". Originally it was going to be 6, but I thought more and more about it, and realized I didn't have much to argue about when it comes to Fifty Shades Darker being a "disappointment." If anything, I'd argue it somewhat overperformed to expectations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





2 hours ago, CoolEric258 said:

WIN #6

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST

"How would you feel about growing a beard?"

beauty-poster-final.jpg&h=600&q=100

 

Release Date: March 17

Director: Bill Condon

Cast: Emma Watson, Dan Stevens, Luke Evans, Kevin Kline, Josh Gad, Ewan McGregor, Stanley Tucci, Audra McDonald, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Ian McKellen, Emma Thompson

B.O. Gross: $504M DOM, $1.263B WW

 

Beauty and the Beast: Ever since the release of 2010’s Alice in Wonderland, Disney has managed to successfully reimagine several of their classic animated features, including Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, and The Jungle Book. In 2017, the biggest moneymaker out of this series/trend/whatever was with Beauty and the Beast. The 1991 classic is considered one of Disney’s greatest films ever made, so much so that it became the first animated film to be nominated for Best Picture. Naturally, with a film so beloved and iconic, it was only natural Disney would at some point give the feature a live-action spin. What was unexpected to just about everyone, at least until the homestretch, was how much of a bea--I mean monster the film truly was.

 

To put the film’s $174.8 million opening in perspective, the film delivered the seventh-highest opening of all time, beating out all of the films from franchises like Harry Potter, Hunger Games, Batman and Spider-Man. It’s an incredible number that really accentuates how much interest and excitement the remake truly had among audiences. Legs were also okay, if a touch frontloaded, as the film went on to gross over $504 million domestic and crossed $1.26 billion worldwide, making it the highest-grossing film of 2017 (well, until The Last Jedi beats it in a few weeks).

 

Why exactly did the film gross so much, leaving all of the other Disney live-action remake things in the dust? The best way to explain it comes down to the strong nostalgia factor of the 1991 classicl. While the original animated Alice, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, and Jungle Book were and still are beloved, the one thing Beauty and the Beast has as an advantage over those films is its age. The film came out in 1991, while the others released in the 50s and 60s. This was an advantage, as the film came out at a time when young adults and thirtysomethings were still kids. Considering the ‘91 film was so acclaimed and beloved, to the point where it became the first animated film to be nominated for Best Picture, and launched an ultra-successful Broadway adaptation, it was something that stuck in the minds of adults who now have kids of their own, or are trying to relive the days gone by. It got so many people excited to see something that they don’t just love, but absolutely adored and was an important part of their childhoods. And being acclaimed and loved by all other generations helped a lot too.

 

Then you add on the inspired casting of Emma Watson as Belle, and it’s no wonder the film garnered record-breaking teaser and trailer views. And thanks to the ever ominpresent Disney marketing machine, they let audiences of all ages and backgrounds aware that this was an event, and everyone had to go see it. And with decent reviews, the film’s marketing paid off handsomely, as the film played a major part in Disney’s domination when it came to 2017 market share.

 

Disney is already fast-tracking other live-action remakes, with films like Dumbo and Mulan in the works, but more interestingly, Aladdin, and The Lion King, both slated for summer 2019. As those two films were essential features within the Disney Renaissance, much like Beauty and the Beast, and are just as, if not more recognizable and beloved than that film, it will be interesting to see how those two films will match up to Beauty’s new records.

 

It will also be interesting to see how this film’s success will help the musical genre. With this, La La Land, and The Greatest Showman, 2017 was a pretty great year for musicals when it came to the box office, and it will be interesting to see if the momentum continues in the coming years (I’m feeling more and more confident in a Mamma Mia 2 breakout every day, and of course films like Aladdin, Lion King, and Wicked will be monsters when they come out in 2019)

 

Really great to see Beauty and the Beast on the ”Wins”-list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



To remind people, the films in the "disappointment" category by all technicalities didn’t do horrible. In some cases, you can argue they were still financial successes. They broke even, made a lot of money, and still offered their studios a lot of profit. However, there’s still the argument that they underperformed to what was expected, whether it be with critics or at the box office. Essentially, the problem isn’t that they didn’t make money. They did. But they not only could have made more money, they should have made more money. Also, these will go by release date.

 

DISAPPOINTMENT #1

PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: DEAD MEN TELL NO TALES

"You'd have seen a lot more if you kept your cakehole shut."

MV5BMTYyMTcxNzc5M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwOTg2

 

Release Date: May 26

Director: Joachim Ronning, Espen Sandberg

Cast: Johnny Depp, Javier Bardem, Brenton Thwaites, Kaya Scodelario, Kevin McNally, Geoffrey Rush

B.O. Gross: $172.6M DOM, $794.8M

 

When the first Pirates film, a feature that was expected to be one of Disney’s biggest bombs in history, became one of Disney’s biggest movies ever, with a boffo opening and stellar legs to boot, Michael Eisner saw dollar signs, and immediately demanded Gore Verbinski to produce two sequels at the exact same time. Dead Man’s Chest would of course become an even bigger phenomenon, and At World’s End didn’t do so shabby either. Naturally, Disney would greenlight a fourth film, On Stranger Tides. And while it was a massive success, grossing over $1 billion worldwide, there was a sense that the property was becoming a touch passe. Although OST grossed $1 billion, a good chunk of that came to the incredible exchange rates and overseas boost, going from around $600M from the last two films to nearly $800M to the 2011 flick. And in the case of domestic, it suffered a pretty substantial drop, with around $240 million, making it the lowest-grossing of the series in that region at the time, far from the $305 million Curse of the Black Pearl got nearly 8 years ago. But seeing as how the property was still very, very popular, Disney still thought they could squeeze one more film out of the waning property.

 

And you can’t say Disney didn’t pull out all the stops, with a massive marketing campaign featuring several strong and appealing trailers, as well as a Super Bowl spot that garnered a lot of head turns from viewers.

 

When the film first hit tracking, it was expected to gross over $115 million on its 4-day Memorial Day weekend. But when the days had gone by, those projections got lower and lower, going from $90-100 million, all the way to $80-85 million. And when the film finally did open, it couldn’t even make that threshold, as the 4-day weekend was only $78.5 million. It definitely did better than Disney’s other Memorial Day stinkers, like Alice Through the Looking Glass and Tomorrowland, but it was still a disappointment in that it couldn’t even reach the low-end of tracking. And following a disastrous second-weekend hold of more than 65%, the film essentially petered out, grossing only $172.6 million domestically, making it the lowest-grossing entry in the series in that region. Worldwide was a little bit rosier, because around $795 million isn’t anything to sneeze at, but it still became the second-lowest grossing film in the franchise, only behind the 2003 original.

 

There were a lot of people wondering why something that should have been a slam dunk did below-average results, and while many pointed to the low Rotten Tomatoes rating, I think the main issue is that both Pirates and Johnny Depp are kinda yesterday’s news. It had been nearly six years since the last film, and by that point there were so many other new franchises Pirates had to deal with, and this one didn’t have nearly as strong of a hook as the previous films, nor as other flicks like Guardians 2 or Wonder Woman. And since Depp’s eccentric acting style was gaining more and more groans from audiences in between Stranger Tides and Dead Men Tell No Tales, why would they come back for something they’ve grown tired of? His recent domestic abuse allegations likely didn’t help either.

 

As of now, a sixth film is in the works, as Dead Men ended on a post-credits cliffhanger, but with the diminishing returns and Disney having so many other, more bigger properties and franchises at the moment, I doubt it will come into fruition any time soon. And so, Pirates has ended with somewhat of a whimper that might have still made Disney oodles of money, but definitely nothing like what Dead Man’s Chest gave them nearly 12 years ago. (Man, it’s really been that long?)

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



DISAPPOINTMENT #2

CARS 3

"I decide when I'm done."

cars_three_ver3_xlg.jpg

 

Release Date: June 16

Director: Brian Fee

Cast: Owen Wilson, Cristela Alonzo, Chris Cooper, Armie Hammer, Larry the Cable Guy, Bonnie Hunt, Nathan Fillion, Lea DeLaria, Kerry Washington

B.O. Gross: $152.9M DOM, $383.7M WW

 

I honestly feel bad for Cars 1 and 2. While most of the other Pixar films are celebrated, adored, and appreciated for their technical wizardry and beautiful storytelling, these films are often considered the black sheeps of the Pixar family. Cars had solid reception, but it wasn’t as acclaimed or as celebrated as films like Finding Nemo or The Incredibles, although it was still a solid hit. Cars 2 on the other hand became Pixar’s first film to garner negative reviews, and is still considered Pixar’s worst movie. The film also wasn’t that big of a hit at the box office, becoming the first Pixar film since A Bug’s Life to gross less than $200 million domestically.

 

Once Cars 3 was announced, the Internet collectively groaned. Why is Pixar wasting their time on this movie? Who asked for another film in this series?

 

While people more or less ignored its existence after its announcement, when the first official teaser came out, it was somewhat unique. It was darker, portrayed a serious crash towards Lightning McQueen, and seemed to take itself far more serious than the other two movies had. And with the film going back to its roots and focusing on Route 66 instead of the globe-trotting escapades of Cars 2, as well as a surprise lack of Mater and friends, maybe this can course correct and at least improve on Cars 2’s performance.

 

In the end, that didn’t happen. Reception was right in between both movies, and was considered an improvement to Cars 2, but it opened to only $53.7 million, the lowest of the franchise, and one of the lowest in Pixar history. Word of mouth also wasn’t so hot, as the film dropped considerably with 55% and 60% in the following weekends, leading to a mediocre $152.9 million gross, making it the lowest-grossing Pixar film since The Good Dinosaur. OS was never really fond of the property to begin with, meaning the film only grossed around $383.8 million, the lowest-grossing of the Cars franchise.

 

Similar to Pirates, Cars was a franchise that people just weren’t interested in anymore. In 2011, people couldn’t stand Cars 2, and it wasn’t like the first Cars was that beloved to begin with. And considering the film’s premise of an aging racer dealing with technology and the youth, there really wasn’t anything appealing towards kids, the demographic that made Cars popular in the first place. This resulted in a medicore gross for a mediocre movie.

 

A Cars 4 is unlikely to come anytime soon, and following Incredibles 2 and Toy Story 4, Pixar is expected to scale back on their sequel craze with original pieces, so the chances for another outing with Lightning McQueen is looking dimmer and dimmer. So as the unofficial end, Cars 3 ended with a dud at the box office, but it was still better than Cars 2, so...I guess that’s something?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites





16 minutes ago, FantasticBeasts said:

I think that The Last Jedi deserves to be in the disapointment list but that would require some balls. They will kill you If you do it.

 

He has said already that he wont mention TLJ because of the heated debates around here. For example: I strongly disagree that its a disappointment on any level and what would that lead into? More heated debates :lol:. So better leave it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



2 minutes ago, Brainbug said:

 

He has said already that he wont mention TLJ because of the heated debates around here. For example: I strongly disagree that its a disappointment on any level and what would that lead into? More heated debates :lol:. So better leave it out.

OK then.

I missed this so take it as just an opinion.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites







Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.