THE STAR WARS THE RISE OF SKYWALKER WEEKEND THREAD | Abandon all hope, ye who enter here | 177.38 DOM, 197 OS, 373.5 WW | SALE NOW LIVE

[JohnnyGossamer]

Any more recent updates for Friday? Still 90? Or, higher?

[Brainbug]

What Disney can take away from this is that Star Wars as a brand will always have the potential (alteast in the US/Canada) to open massive. That the Skywalker storyline ends with this one can be a very good thing for the future if they realize that the franchise needs another long break now (5 years minimum id say) and then they can start a new storyline with entirely new characters, new worlds and still make it feel like Star Wars.

 

I realize that is daydreaming though and Disney will probably not go down that road.

[Nova]

I was scrolling through Twitter and searched for CATs just to see reactions from people. My favorite one: 

“I bought a ticket for CATs to support Taylor but that doesn’t mean I have to go watch it.” 
 

 

[Zakiyyah6]

I haven't seen the film yet so I can't give an opinion but judging by the reception I honestly do not understand how Disney could have screwed up the sequel trilogy so much. It's like the put no thought into having a broad outline of what was going to happen.

 

I think the lesson that modern blockbuster series can learn from Star Wars and the early DCU is have a real freaking plan and if people didn't like a film, don't go into panic mode while trying to fix the series.

[MrFanaticGuy34]

1 hour ago, Valonqar said:

Yes, this. people were really excited that Emma played Belle. So while she isn't a draw herself, that was a combo of role and actress that excited people. I don't know why some are still trying to deny it. 

 

Cinderella is much better movie than BatB and Jolie is much bigger star than Emma. Yet those movies did much less than BatB even though Jolie as Maleficent excited people, another character/actress match up and Mal likely wouldn't have done those numbers without her. 

 

 

It’s kinda odd that Kenneth Branagh’s Cinderella only did $543M WW (still a big profitable hit) which is still good for a Disney live action remake of an animated Disney film outside the Renaissance...but nowhere near Alice in Wonderland’s $1.025B WW. What things did Cinderella not have that Alice did have (aside from Johnny Depp in Alice’s case, being one of the stars in that film)?

 

85% on RT and it couldn’t go higher than what it ended with. Did something go wrong with poor Ella’s box office run? 🙍🏻‍♀️

[redfirebird2008]

2 minutes ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

I haven't seen the film yet so I can't give an opinion but judging by the reception I honestly do not understand how Disney could have screwed up the sequel trilogy so much. It's like the put no thought into having a broad outline of what was going to happen.

 

I think the lesson that modern blockbuster series can learn from Star Wars and the early DCU is have a real freaking plan and if people didn't like a film, don't go into panic mode while trying to fix the series.

 

Lucas gave them an outline for 7-9 and they threw it in the trash. 

[darthdevidem01]

4 minutes ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

I haven't seen the film yet so I can't give an opinion but judging by the reception I honestly do not understand how Disney could have screwed up the sequel trilogy so much. It's like the put no thought into having a broad outline of what was going to happen.

 

I think the lesson that modern blockbuster series can learn from Star Wars and the early DCU is have a real freaking plan and if people didn't like a film, don't go into panic mode while trying to fix the series.

Strong vision + creativity + plan + respect/love for the series

4 things you need not just a little of...but oodles of. Feige and the team at Marvel nail this. 

TFA had the respect/love
TLJ had the creativity aspect
TROS...well felt like a puppy & his 6 year old owner wrote the film because they love star wars so much. So guess it has love for the series

But as you can see there is zero cohesion. 

Edited December 21, 2019 by darthdevidem01

[a2k]

40m previews, ~90m full day is on the expected-to-positive side of expectations if you look at the Tracking Thread updates from a month before social media reaction and reviews.

 

With such a massive fan-base where in so many are ready to see the movie at least 1, it will take more than a weekend for GA reception (good or bad) to show up in boxoffice.

 

As to critics reviews they mattered zilch for Aladdin, TLJ, TLK, Venom, blah blah and they will matter zilch for the finale of a 40 year franchise TROS. Even for movies like Cats, TGS, Bombshells they may affect the opening but not the long-term boxoffice cause GA reception/wom is king.

Edited December 21, 2019 by a2k

[darthdevidem01]

1 minute ago, MrFanaticGuy34 said:

It’s kinda odd that Kenneth Branagh’s Cinderella only did $543M WW (still a big profitable hit) which is still good for a Disney live action remake of an animated Disney film outside the Renaissance...but nowhere near Alice in Wonderland’s $1.025B WW. What things did Cinderella not have that Alice did have (aside from Johnny Depp in Alice’s case, being one of the stars in that film)?

 

85% on RT and it couldn’t go higher than what it ended with. Did something go wrong with poor Ella’s box office run? 🙍🏻‍♀️

Cinderella has always been an overrated snooze fest of a story. As is Snow White tbh

The gross is what the story deserved (never saw the film but there is only so much you can do with that source material). 

Alice as a story is wayyyyy more interesting & it had that 3D gimmick too. 

[Zakiyyah6]

Cinderella is seen as the least exciting princess story. That adaption was never going to do any better than it did. It did well. And Cinderella is still miles better than Beauty and the Beast and Alice. I'll take a good movie over short term box office goals.

Edited December 21, 2019 by Zakiyyah6

[a2k]

1 minute ago, darthdevidem01 said:

Cinderella has always been an overrated snooze fest of a story. As is Snow White tbh

The gross is what the story deserved (never saw the film but there is only so much you can do with that source material). 

Alice as a story is wayyyyy more interesting & it had that 3D gimmick too. 

Alice and HTTYD1, while Avatar was still in theaters (towards the fag end for HTTYD1), were the biggest beneficiaries of 3D.

[Nova]

I finally got Disney + cause I’m done with classes forever and the first movie I watched was Mulan. Then I found out there was a Mulan II and talk about destroying any good will from the original film. Sheesh 

[a2k]

3 minutes ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

Cinderella is seen as the least exciting princess story. That adaption was never going to do any better than it did. It did well.

Also it didn't have dat Emma Watson effect

[Blaze Heatnix]

A B+ CinemaScore is bad for a movie that's being sold as the finale for a 40 years old saga.

 

People pooled during its opening day were fans / fanboys who rushed to see it. If fanboys gave it a B+, that's disappointing no matter what. 

 

This is not just another Star Wars movie. This is meant to be the freaking finale, lol. That's why the B+ is concerning.

[George Parr]

2 minutes ago, Nova said:

I finally got Disney + cause I’m done with classes forever and the first movie I watched was Mulan. Then I found out there was a Mulan II and talk about destroying any good will from the original film. Sheesh 

They really loved making direct-to-video sequels of their big successes back then. I really have no idea why.

 

Aladdin had two sequels like that, as did Beauty and the Beast and Lion King. Little Mermaid, The Hunchback of Notre Dame and 101 Dalmatians got another movie as well.

[MrFanaticGuy34]

1 minute ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

Cinderella is seen as the least exciting princess story. That adaption was never going to do any better than it did. It did well.

That seems fairly true. Deserved to make more, though.

 

I was basing it’s box office potential more to the impact & legacy of the 1950-animated film left for new generations to come. Since that was the film at the time, which saved Walt Disney and his company from bankruptcy. Hence it became one of Disney’s highest achievements in the 50’s.

[redfirebird2008]

1 minute ago, Blaze Heatnix said:

A B+ CinemaScore is bad for a movie that's being sold as the finale for a 40 years old saga.

 

People pooled during its opening day were fans / fanboys who rushed to see it. If fanboys gave it a B+, that's disappointing no matter what. 

 

This is not just another Star Wars movie. This is meant to be the freaking finale, lol. That's why the B+ is concerning.

 

And yet I won’t be surprised if this one has better legs than the supposed “A” Last Jedi. Somehow they found a pocket of people that all loved TLJ with no dissent. Hard to believe when you look at the rubbish Christmas legs. 

[baumer]

1 hour ago, Movie nerd said:

What kind of nonsense excuse is that, maybe they should make a better movie so they would get better reviews then. 

Am I missing something here? Granted I haven't been online since yesterday afternoon but I'm pretty sure the fan reviews for this are way better than what the critics reviews are. Pretty sure it has a good score for most people who have seen it. Last time I read it was in the high 80s from regular People. Regular people do make more of a difference than critics do.

[Zakiyyah6]

7 minutes ago, a2k said:

Also it didn't have dat Emma Watson effect

Yeah it actually had a good actress in the lead role. 

[Nova]

1 minute ago, George Parr said:

They really loved making direct-to-video sequels of their big successes back then. I really have no idea why.

 

Aladdin had two sequels like that, as did Beauty and the Beast and Lion King. Little Mermaid, The Hunchback of Notre Dame and 101 Dalmatians got another movie as well.

I knew about Aladdin and Lion King. Didn’t know about any of the others. And thank god I didn’t. Mulan II was trash. I imagine the other direct to video sequels are as well.