A Very Queer Thanksgiving Weekend Thread | We Here. We Queer. Move On. | 3-Day/5-Day: Black Panther 45.9/64, Strange World 11.9/18.6, Glass Onion 9.2/13.3, Devotion 6/9, The Menu 5.2/7.3 | Daddy Cameron, please save us!

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

1 hour ago, TwoMisfits said:

 

It's more "why watch almost the exact same movie again 3 months later?"  Especially with the price of tickets and inflation overall. 

 

Kids don't mind repeats, but adults like fresh material.  With Top Gun 2 being seen by almost everyone, this movie offered nothing fresh for anyone.  It would have been better to delay its release 12-18 months to make people pine for a Top Gun 2 type experience again, not wonder when they'd get to see Top Gun 2 on digital (which is Paramount Plus's announced Xmas movie)...

This ad for Devotion makes it look like a historical version of Top Gun:

 

 

Also, not sure about Devotion as a title. It's the shortened version of a book title (Devotion: An Epic Story of Heroism, Friendship, and Sacrifice) but if I heard "Devotion" alone, I would think the movie was a romance, maybe? Or a family story, before a fighter pilot drama. We're not in a climate where non-franchise movies can coast on enigmatic titles. Every trick in the book is needed to lure in viewers and that includes what the movie is called.

 

*

 

Not surprised by The Fabelmans. Have any of these "thinly disguised autobiopics of a director's youth" movies been box office hits? Belfast did well in the UK, at least, but that had The Troubles to make it relatable there.

[reddevil19]

Devotion is a bad title, yes. I'm thinking, based on title and poster... A fighter pilot relies on his deep faith to overcome racism in the Air Force's early history. No? 

[CaptNathanBrittles]

Indeed. The audience for this movie is men and no man is going to see a movie called Devotion. I bet the producers were women.

[CaptNathanBrittles]

Reading the book premise a better title would have been RESERVOIR DOGFIGHTS.

[Eric Prime]

7 minutes ago, CaptNathanBrittles said:

Indeed. The audience for this movie is men and no man is going to see a movie called Devotion. I bet the producers were women.

...what?

[Torontofan]

2 minutes ago, Eric Clade said:

...what?

 

based on the title i assume its a romantic film

[Ozymandias]

14 minutes ago, CaptNathanBrittles said:

Indeed. The audience for this movie is men and no man is going to see a movie called Devotion. I bet the producers were women.

 

this post is bad and you should feel bad

[Ledmonkey96]

12 minutes ago, Torontofan said:

 

based on the title i assume its a romantic film

A quick check tells me that it had the same group of producers that did Sicario and La la land, it's possible that the estate of the book wanted the name Devotion.

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

31 minutes ago, Torontofan said:

 

based on the title i assume its a romantic film

"Devotion: torn between religion and a forbidden love!" It would be different if the book was huge like Unbroken (but that one was also just a better title for a war survival story). But if Devotion had had this massive following as a book, then sticking with the title would make sense.

 

42 minutes ago, CaptNathanBrittles said:

Indeed. The audience for this movie is men and no man is going to see a movie called Devotion. I bet the producers were women.

Two women, two men. The production company Black Label Media produces a lot of different things:

 

• Begin Again (2013)
• The Good Lie (2014)
• '71 (2014)
• Demolition (2015)
• Sicario (2015)
• Breaking a Monster (2015)
• La La Land (2016)
• Rebel in the Rye (2017)
• Only the Brave (2017)
• 12 Strong (2018)
• Sicario: Day of the Soldado (2018)
• Sierra Burgess Is a Loser (2018)
• Broken Diamonds (2021)
• Reptile (2022)
• Devotion (2022)

 

 

Edited November 24, 2022 by BoxOfficeFangrl

[Flopped]

Well there's not much to say about these numbers so I'll post this instead 

 

 

[FilmFincher]

I loved Bones and All, it's exactly what you want from a Luca Guadagnino road trip movie that happens to feature cannibals. A very tender (pun intended) film about living in a lonely world. 

Great score as well. 

 

Even though they don't quite fit in the box, Bones and All and The Menu cap off a banner year for horror cinema. Truly one of the best. 

 

 

Edited November 24, 2022 by FilmFincher

[Krissykins]

4 minutes ago, Flopped said:

Well there's not much to say about these numbers so I'll post this instead 

 

 

Appropriate, because Wednesday is probably going to have the biggest audience this week anyway. 

[Verrows]

18 minutes ago, FilmFincher said:

I loved Bones and All, it's exactly what you want from a Luca Guadagnino road trip movie that happens to feature cannibals. A very tender (pun intended) film about living in a lonely world. 

Great score as well. 

 

Even though they don't quite fit in the box, Bones and All and The Menu cap off a banner year for horror cinema. Truly one of the best. 

 

 

Too much body horror. Not enough variety. Just my two cents.

[Webslinger]

I caught Strange World this afternoon with family. Cute movie (character development was a little weak, but the visuals were impressive and it's fairly enjoyable) and the relatively small audience seemed into it.

 

If I had to wager anything about its reception, it seems like a case where the majority of audiences who see it are liking it just fine, but the loudest, most toxic voices are driving the narrative and sinking the various audience reception metrics. Unfortunately, much like the case with Lightyear, it will result in a perception that the film is a huge bomb because "everyone" hates it, which in turn will keep potential viewers in the coming weeks away.

[GOGODanca]

Disney spent 135-180 mil producing strange world and $180 marketing it, good thing chapek is gone cause otherwise disney would have just become marvel and nothing else

[CJohn]

5 hours ago, AJG said:

The repercussions could be devastating.

 

Large LGBT Groups and Organisations have placed heavy emphasis on representation and a lack of representation as a primary issue facing LGBT people. Forget the MonkeyPox scandal, the recent attacks on Marriage rights by big name political figures, Florida, and the trans debate. These orgs address LGBT issues in a way that’s palatable to the mostly straight “allies” that help bankroll and platform them. The LGBT population is low, the best way for these organisations to display “progress” for  supportive people that don’t know (or don’t know they know) any LGBT people is through increased representation in media, backed up with incredibly flawed and questionable “studies” that conclude “more gay = more money” (which these orgs pay for, of course).

 

We are now seeing the manifestation of GLAADs whitewashing of homophobia and anti-LGBT prejudice. They banned teachers from speaking about homosexuality in schools and established large LGBT charities skipped over the hundreds of teachers organising, legal experts on the ground and outraged families, to scream out “Where’s Disney?” It was insanity. Not only did it greatly distract from the issue, not only did it beg for private companies to influence policy that doesn’t affect them, it highlighted that there are now repercussions and that the struggle for LGBT rights is not a parade in a park, it is a fight. No other movie studio said, did, or lost anything over the Florida issue apart from Disney. That law went through and prominent LGBT news sites and organisations damn near buried the story because it demonstrated that there could now be a financial blowback for entertainment industry partners they still want to be aligned with.

 

When it comes to the Lightyear and Strange World (and Bros to a lesser extent), I am not saying that these films have no right to exist, but right now studios will use these films to claim that they were right all along. That having obviously LGBT characters in films aimed at children is a financial burden. I’d be shocked if there’s still overtly LGBT characters in Disney cartoons next year, let alone anything from Illumination or Dreamworks. Homophobia is REAL, it’s everywhere, and it constant. My sister cannot show Strange World to her class because of potential complaints. My daughters old after-school group won’t take the kids on their bi-monthly trip to the cinema to see this film. People I spoke with today from work, people I call good, honest, and tolerant individuals OPENLY, without consideration, without fear of repercussion, in front of lesbian and gay colleagues, stated that they would not take their kids to see any movie with LGBT characters and themes, not as some frivolous F.U to a corporation, but due to a belief that that’s “too adult” or “too personal” or “too much of an overstep”. This is just how casual these stigmas are and how normalised this thinking is.

 

If there’s any good that comes from this is that “supportive” straight people might finally start to understand that the accepting and pro-LGBT world presented on TV is fiction designed to play to their sensibilities, and start to realise the scale of anti-LGBT prejudice in western society. A DeSantis 2024 run will be hell on earth and begging Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny for attention won’t help. I have people I’m frightened for and get the sense that no one is listening because they they think we’re living in the oh-so tolerant world of a Netflix teen drama.

(I’m really sorry this is long but the behaviour and sugarcoating of LGBT issues by some of the major players within the community has bugged me for years and this whole Strange World business has really irked me. I forgot there was a gay character in the film until earlier today.)

 

 

 

 

 

Amazing post

[snarkmachine]

Bones and All opening to $2.4m 3-day is just dreadful.

 

X opened to $4.2m and Pearl opened to $3.1m with zero stars and far less hype than Bones.

 

The Chalamet is a movie star discourse can probably pipe down a notch now.

Edited November 24, 2022 by snarkmachine

[GOGODanca]

there are no true movie stars under the age of 48 , just franchises and directors

[Felipe]

16 minutes ago, GOGODanca said:

there are no true movie stars under the age of 48 , just franchises and directors

Well, there's Lady Gaga.

[cedec0]

4 hours ago, ThomasNicole said:

It's certainly not. 

 

At this point is clear to me that movies with strong representation needs to be always great, undeniable so, in order to have a chance of succeed. 

 

Homophobics always find a way to be shitty, but it's way easier to bury a movie when it's bland or uneventhful.

 

The whole idea behind representation is that people like seeing themselves in movies.

 

It isn't Homophobics for straight people to have a preference for seeing straight romance.  If you remove something that resonates with +95% of people, you've gotta make up for it elsewhere.  Bland or uneventhful isn't gonna cut it.