Weekend Thread: Top 5 Actuals- The Lion King $76.62M | OUATIH $41.08M | SM: FFH $12.45M | TS3 $10.45M | CRAWL $4.06M

[Taruseth]

6 minutes ago, fabiopazzo2 said:

DD say 95M for TLK, amazing 2nd weekend if it happen

They say a lot.

 

95m would be a big surprise and its basically impossible.

Would need like:

26m (+73.3% in summer this won't happen, not even close)

39 (+50% not happening)

30 (-23% the only realistic drop)

 

Average summer increase would give like: 

22m

29m

22m

 

73m

[TalismanRing]

3 minutes ago, Jake Gittes said:

19m friday would make a 50 weekend feasible. (19/17/14) But off these previews any number will be a relief given that I was sorta expecting a BR2049 situation right up until the end. 

23% Saturday bump would be far higher than  Gatsby's  9% over True Friday (in mid May)  or any of  Tarantino's wide releases (non X-Mas)

[NCsoft]

5 minutes ago, xiazhi said:

There hasn't been one weekly #1 original movie this year so far. GA just don't want it.

US? 

 

[cannastop]

29 minutes ago, Porthos said:

No Pulse???

Wait Pulse is gone? Why?

[cdsacken]

2 minutes ago, That One Guy said:

 

Yes, this is why you bring up that I think Hellboy is slightly less awful than The Lion King at every opportunity, because it doesn't concern you whatsoever

Because you act likes it a fact. All you do is complain about Disney all the time and have negative clubs everywhere. It's not the opinion I dislike. Have a good one let's not ruin this thread anymore.

[That One Girl]

.

Edited February 28, 2022 by That One Guy

[titanic2187]

6 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

"Original" is an overrated term for movies. Movies have scarcely been "original" in the true sense of the word since day 1 of the industry. Now franchises and sequels are a different story. 

Original movies doesn't mean an original idea or concept. Most importantly they are either standalone or have no association with any previous material  

[cdsacken]

1 minute ago, That One Guy said:

 

I don't act like it's a fact though.  Subjectivity should be implied.  I don't have to say "imo" after every single post that I make, imo

Fair enough I will assume all of them are opinions and ignore. Have a nice day

[MOVIEGUY]

bUt tHeReS nO HoOk leO taRaNtInO bRAd pItT sO wHaT/ 

[Porthos]

5 minutes ago, cannastop said:

Wait Pulse is gone? Why?

No idea.  Pulse was removed from the Fandango mobile app (which is what it actually is, desktop links not withstanding) in an update late June with no explanation or comment.

Edited July 26, 2019 by Porthos

[cdsacken]

10 minutes ago, cannastop said:

So you're a snob about your lowbrow taste?

How am I snob? I don't disparage content I dislike other than universally acclaimed horrific stuff I will call out films I wanted to be good (Dumbo and frankly TLK was very disappointing too). Regardless just because a movie I liked doesn't do well I don't pretend the cinema is dying. 

 

 

I can also admit when I'm wrong. I thought TLK would be awesome it was not and you were right to have your reservations.

Edited July 26, 2019 by cdsacken

[YM!]

11 minutes ago, cdsacken said:

If you said Cinema is dead because they don't make more Suicide Squads I would say the same. Difference being I don't give a crap about Studios nor do I let my bias blind me. Suicide Squad is a mess but you know what? It's fun as hell. The more I watch it, the more I like it. I don't care about the problems with and I'm not surprised so many went to see it. I thought Venom wasn't good on the first watch, I liked it more on the 2nd and 3rd viewing.

 

Elitist attitude is what annoys me. I don't care what someone likes as long as they don't pretend their opinion is better than anyone else. 

 

Also I never root for films to fail, another thing I don't like personally.

People are saying Cinema is dead not just because of TLK but a lot of other factors, comedy, drama and mid budget films are dying, the only thing surviving are Disney’s films and most of them are their IPs, and the only times they try original films are through animation. Admittedly there’s a lot of frustration of not just one studio that seems to take the least amount of risks is dominating the game but the only things doing big business are superheroes and animated remakes. Animation is much stronger than ever which make me happy but it’s sad that only that industry is succeeding with original films and even then due to real stigma that animation has as purely children’s entertainment, it’s really hard to find an all ages affair.

 

No one is saying your opinion or anyone else’s is wrong for liking Disney. Apart from their remakes, Disney is the best at the blockbuster game creating grade A product most of the time and all of them are inoffensive. And yes, without Disney, theaters would struggle, though it’s plausible something could take its place but nowhere as strong. But do you see a film like E.T. or Titanic being as big in this era or even happening.

[ACSlater]

19 minutes ago, infamous5445 said:

The day Leo joins a superhero movie is the day the world ends.

Make this happen preferably as one of the best villains as ever:

 

 

[LawrenceBrolivier]

Considering how mainstream almost everybody's tastes here are, including mine... just look at our constant best-of-lists for all the proof you need we're as down-the-middle pop fans as there could be... all the handwringing about "cinema" just comes off like a front anyway... There's no need to be so dismissive about the "state of cinema," especially on a forum built specifically to discuss box-office, which is more than anything else just a reflection of popularity and marketing... 

"cinema" is lots of things. It's Dredd, it's Spider-Verse, it's Persepolis... yes I just named three comic book movies in a row because I just voted in the comic book movies poll LOL... but its also a good example of how limiting we're constantly making the conversation by pretending "cinema" is a knee-jerk high-falutin' idea of serious "eat your vegetables" movie-making, when "cinema" can be ANYTHING that looks amazing, that speaks to you in a way that excites more than just one of your senses at a time... that realizes the promise of film as art in ways that mean something to you personally...

Roma is cinema, even though it's a Netflix movie. Logan Lucky is cinema, even though it's also "Oceans 7-11"... Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is cinema... but Avengers: Endgame is just as much cinema, and could only work the way it does AS cinema... Citizen Kane gets used as an example of "cinema" in its purest form but it was also a weirdly cut together muckraking soap opera when it first came out... 

 

"Cinema" will be just fine whether Tarantino's latest kills at the box office or not... Theatrical exhibition is a different story... but "cinema" is very healthy right now. It doesn't need a "savior" and I don't know if ex-video store clerk and too-frequent advocate of rightly forgotten trash Quentin Tarantino needs to be framed as such, either... I love his movies but there's no reason to put that much weight on either this film or the man himself...

Edited July 26, 2019 by LawrenceBrolivier

[cdsacken]

11 minutes ago, YourMother the Edgelord said:

People are saying Cinema is dead not just because of TLK but a lot of other factors, comedy, drama and mid budget films are dying, the only thing surviving are Disney’s films and most of them are their IPs, and the only times they try original films are through animation. Admittedly there’s a lot of frustration of not just one studio that seems to take the least amount of risks is dominating the game but the only things doing big business are superheroes and animated remakes. Animation is much stronger than ever which make me happy but it’s sad that only that industry is succeeding with original films and even then due to real stigma that animation has as purely children’s entertainment, it’s really hard to find an all ages affair.

 

No one is saying your opinion or anyone else’s is wrong for liking Disney. Apart from their remakes, Disney is the best at the blockbuster game creating grade A product most of the time and all of them are inoffensive. And yes, without Disney, theaters would struggle, though it’s plausible something could take its place but nowhere as strong. But do you see a film like E.T. or Titanic being as big in this era or even happening.

Without Disney they wouldn't struggle, they would barely be open.

Some originals are doing well and yes occasionally midbudget films get screwed. Often they lose out because they suck.

2020 should be a nice stretch for non Disney films to shine and I hope all of them do well especially WW1984. Regardless more movies are out and cinema is not dying. 

 

No one ever saw Avatar happening either.

Edited July 26, 2019 by cdsacken

[TMP]

28 minutes ago, infamous5445 said:

The day Leo joins a superhero movie is the day the world ends.

He was the first choice for Joker (2019). Would be funny to see him and Joaquin both nominated this year; like when Bale & DiCaprio were nominated the same time as Fassbender was for Steve Jobs; a role both of them were attached to at one point.

[cdsacken]

1 minute ago, LawrenceBrolivier said:

Considering how mainstream almost everybody's tastes here are, including mine... just look at our constant best-of-lists for all the proof you need we're as down-the-middle pop fans as there could be... all the handwringing about "cinema" just comes off like a front anyway... There's no need to be so dismissive about the "state of cinema," especially on a forum built specifically to discuss box-office, which is more than anything else just a reflection of popularity and marketing... 

"cinema" is lots of things. It's Dredd, it's Spider-Verse, it's Persepolis... yes I just named three comic book movies in a row because I just voted in the comic book movies poll LOL... but its also a good example of how limiting we're constantly making the conversation by pretending "cinema" is a knee-jerk high-falutin' idea of serious "eat your vegetables" movie-making, when "cinema" can be ANYTHING that looks amazing, that speaks to you in a way that excites more than just one of your senses at a time... that realizes the promise of film as art in ways that touch your personally...

Roma is cinema, even though it's a Netflix movie. Logan Lucky is cinema, even though it's also "Oceans 7-11"... Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is cinema... but Avengers: Endgame is just as much cinema, and could only work the way it does AS cinema... Citizen Kane gets used as an example of "cinema" in its purest form but it was also a weirdly cut together muckraking soap opera when it first came out... 

 

"Cinema" will be just fine whether Tarantino's latest kills at the box office or not... Theatrical exhibition is a different story... but "cinema" is very healthy right now. It doesn't need a "savior" and I don't know if ex-video store clerk and too-frequent advocate of rightly forgotten trash Quentin Tarantino needs to be framed as such, either... I love his movies but there's no reason to put that much weight on either this film or the man himself...

Exactly. Thank you!

[cdsacken]

2 minutes ago, TMP said:

He was the first choice for Joker (2019). Would be funny to see him and Joaquin both nominated this year; like when Bale & DiCaprio were nominated the same time as Fassbender was for Steve Jobs; a role both of them were attached to at one point.

I'd love to see him in a Batman film. Something dark and very serious.

[TMP]

1 minute ago, cdsacken said:

I'd love to see him in a Batman film. Something dark and very serious.

Him and Gosling are two actors I can't ever see signing onto one of these films. Maybe when he's old he can do a Brando-in-Superman and play Uncle Ben in the next reboot or something

[NCsoft]

18 minutes ago, YourMother the Edgelord said:

 People are saying Cinema is dead not just because of TLK but a lot of other factors, comedy, drama and mid budget films are dying, the only thing surviving are Disney’s films and most of them are their IPs, and the only times they try original films are through animation.

My point has always been that in our current film landscape, there's no popular films/franchises that is created in this generation, this is a new situation unique pretty much only to the 2010s. Current slate of films are living vicariously through the film glories of the past (Star Wars, Alien, Terminator, Mad Max, Blade Runner, Ghostbusters, Jurassic Park , The Lion King, Aladdin, BATB and Toy Story), or source material of the past (MCU, DCEU), which also happens to be dominating the screens ever since the early 2000s (Sam Raimi's Spiderman, X-Men, Dark Knight).

Partly as a result of superhero domination from source materials tracing back to the 1930s, we're no longer seeing much, if any, War epics, historic epics, hard Sci-Fi, Fantasy, disaster films, and Romantic Epics  in the realm of big blockbusters, or sometimes not at all.

 

I wouldn't even have as much of a problem with Disney dominating, if Disney is actually interested in creating new IPs, and testing new ideas, and diversify their slate including blockbusters that is not either something rebooted from the 70s, or live-action remake from their previous animated films. Pixar's upcoming originals are promising, but in order to make the 2020s better, that's not enough and all studios need to do more.

Edited July 26, 2019 by NCsoft