Jump to content

Water Bottle

HAN SOLO MEMORIAL (day weekend) THREAD | Solo Flops Domestically with 83M/101M weekend. Spectacularly Bombs Overseas with 65M weekend.

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Jandrew said:

Can someone without hyperbole, a stupid head emoji, or sarcasm tell me WHY this numbers are being seen as so bad? It's a Han Solo spinoff six months away from another Star Wars movie. I'm getting the feeling that yall act like Star Wars is entitled. SW is the Lebron James of cinema. If this makes mid $200m or so, why is that seen as so bad?

It’s a record low for SW and may not make theatrical profit.  That’s not good.

 

I don’t think it’s doomed the brand or means there can never another SW movie again (just like I don’t think DC has no hope to make a profitable movie again).  But I do think it means Disney may need to rethink this whole annual release and spin-off solo movie stuff.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



3 minutes ago, Jandrew said:

Can someone without hyperbole, a stupid head emoji, or sarcasm tell me WHY this numbers are being seen as so bad? It's a Han Solo spinoff six months away from another Star Wars movie. I'm getting the feeling that yall act like Star Wars is entitled. SW is the Lebron James of cinema. If this makes mid $200m or so, why is that seen as so bad?

Well SW was the Lebron James of cinema in the domestic market.

 

Every Star Wars movies except one were the biggest movie of the year, including 2015, 2016, 2017....

 

The worst happened with the prequel number 2 when it finished #3 of the year.

 

This one could possibly miss the top 10, something that was unfathomable to almost everyone in early 2016. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it possible Chris Pratt as Peter Quill somewhat diluted the appeal of Solo, at least for millennials and Gen Z kids?

 

Pratt's portrayal is obviously based on Han Solo, but he does it so well and the Guardians films have been really popular that maybe audiences weren't interested in another character like that, especially when it's obviously a cash grab by recasting Ford with a younger actor. We also just saw the actual Han in Force Awakens less than 3 years ago.

 

Also, Alden Eihneneichwhatever is nowhere near as good looking or charismatic as young Harrison Ford or present day Chris Pratt.

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





Just now, Pandamia! said:

It’s a record low for SW and may not make theatrical profit.  That’s not good.

 

I don’t think it’s doomed the brand or means there can never another SW movie again (just like I don’t think DC has no hope to make a profitable movie again).  But I do think it means Disney may need to rethink this whole annual release and spin-off solo movie stuff.

Disney isn't going to cancel any Star Wars films in development, I imagine they'll see it as a blip and concentrate on IX. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



1 minute ago, Brainbug said:

LMAO at that true Friday. Like wtf. It could actually be under The Last Jedis 3rd Friday lolololol.

 

 

That true Friday could go under Deadpool 2's Thursday preview number :ph34r:

  • Astonished 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



11 minutes ago, Jandrew said:

Can someone without hyperbole, a stupid head emoji, or sarcasm tell me WHY this numbers are being seen as so bad? It's a Han Solo spinoff six months away from another Star Wars movie. I'm getting the feeling that yall act like Star Wars is entitled. SW is the Lebron James of cinema. If this makes mid $200m or so, why is that seen as so bad?

The last Star Wars spin-off did a billion dollars. This may do less than half of that. In fact it might do well less than half.

Edited by Ithil
Link to comment
Share on other sites





Just now, Jonwo said:

Disney isn't going to cancel any Star Wars films in development, I imagine they'll see it as a blip and concentrate on IX. 

I don't think they'll cancel anything...yet...but there's no way they see this is a blip.

 

With a $250m+ budget and $180m (rumoured) marketing budget and a total WW gross that may not reach $500m, this has potential to lose LOTS of money. That's not a blip.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites





11 minutes ago, Hunch said:

Imagine thinking Shuri and whatever her name was are anywhere near Kirsten Dunst's iconic, generation-defining turn as Mary Jane Watson :hahaha:

I would agree with that but unfortunately it would have been so much better if Raimi had waited until the end of the movie for the big reveal that

Spoiler

she was called MJ.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



1 minute ago, Jonwo said:

Disney isn't going to cancel any Star Wars films in development, I imagine they'll see it as a blip and concentrate on IX. 

If it’s already in production, nah they won’t.

 

But will they actually go forward with a Jabba the Hutt or Boba Fett movie in reality?  Not positive about that unless they adjust their budgets accordingly

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Okay okay, I get. I haven't been keeping track of box office or tracking, didn't know the budget was that high. I just know the forum likes to turn discussions into "lol haha lol venom head emoji haha JJ head emoji lol", so I was curious on why exactly it was seen as so bad. I see now, though I still don't see why it really matters in the grand scheme.

 

Not like this is some original movie that we were hoping could bud into a new franchise, it's still yet another Star Wars. I'm not hurting for Disney and they're still gonna pump out a billion SW movies. If anything it's fresh air. SW and Marvel dominance is diluting the fun of the chart.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites









  • 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.