Father’s Day/Juneteenth Weekend Thread | Flash implodes with 55M, Elemental bombs with 29M, holdovers hold atrociously | Theaters are dead, streaming is dead. Everything is dead really.

[dudalb]

It has been a while since we had a weekend like this, where the two biggest studiios in Hollywood both laid a big egg.

[Issac Newton]

GOTG3 SUN up by 25% (From SAT)

[LegionWrex]

Just now, Issac Newton said:

GOTG3 SUN up by 25% (From SAT)

 

GOTG3 supremacy fr

[Issac Newton]

$15.6M Flash SUN

[21C]

4 minutes ago, Issac Newton said:

$15.6M Flash SUN

 

700K UP FROM PROJECTIONS!!!

[WorkingonaName]

Were so back

[Issac Newton]

 

 

[Liiviig 1998]

Terrible CGI and multiverse wasn't explained properly which made parts of the third act wonky, wished we had more a certain character but yeah this was one of DCEU's best movies .

Never dag Ezra Miller as flash but he was great in this film and had a great arc and it was quite emotional.

 

Keaton was awesome too.

 

Other than for a period of around 5 mins in the third act it doesn't indulge heavily in fanservice and it's used efficiently and where it's suppose to. It's a Barry story through and through.

Yeah the third act does get CG heavy but it's not for 'we need giant CGI battle at the end" there is actually purpose to it storywise.

 

This movie was marketed as an NWH type movie and does share elements , they are not exactly going for the same thing esp with the conclusion. It's avoids some of the pitfalls of NWH .

 

Barry arc is on par on with  peters arc.

 

Multiversal side of things though also wonky was better in NWH.

 

Relationship btn the two Barry's is way better than the interaction btn the spiderman in NWH which just felt so gimmicky.

 

Watch this about 12 hours or so go. In Africa my audience ate this up. 

 

Western audience just  didn't connect with this .

 

Movie has some technical and structural issues but Christina Hudson script  and story for this was pretty good just needed a few twiks and this movie could have been way better.

 

8.5/10.  Way better than alot of superhero content we are getting currently.

 

For post covid , my ranking.

 

GOTG 3

ATSV

Batman

The flash

WF

DS2

NWH

Shang chi.

 

 

 

 

Edited June 19, 2023 by Liiviig 1998

[druv10]

29 minutes ago, Issac Newton said:

GOTG3 SUN up by 25% (From SAT)

Fantastic!

 

5.46M(-24.5%) weekend, only movie with a strong hold this week.

[excel1]

2 hours ago, THUNDER BIRD said:

WOM kicking in, an all time great box office run has started, a never seen before.

 

[Sckathian]

31 minutes ago, dudalb said:

It has been a while since we had a weekend like this, where the two biggest studiios in Hollywood both laid a big egg.

I think we have to start accepting this stuff is going to bleed through to future planning and budgets. Thankfully GotG did well signalling audiences still want cinema but it was shakey and really pushed on by brilliant (not good, brilliant) WoM and being a clear direct sequel to films which had built up good will with audiences.

 

WB has already course corrected with DC (which makes how it’s treated the end of the previous era all the more bizarre) but I also think someone just needs to tell Gunn to stay away from Batman considering they have an existing franchise that should be able to attempt to crack a bill with its sequel. These films will need appropriate budgets, they are big risks. Let’s say they do ‘OK’ - they need to be able to make sequels rather than have another damaging relaunch/reset.

 

Pixar needs to outsource or utilise technology (AI) to make their films cheaper. They are simply uncompetitive compared to other studios and that’s not sustainable. They probably should and will just start cranking out sequels,  I  appreciate their original content but they should really only be making those if they think the concept can lead to sequels. 
 

Quite a bit of the industry is already doing this (though Universal still has its insane treatment of F&F) but we’ll likely see more of it, both across big blockbusters but also the lower budget films (Nope should not have got a 70M budget and Beau should not have been A24s highest budget film).

[ThomasNicole]

9 minutes ago, Sckathian said:

I think we have to start accepting this stuff is going to bleed through to future planning and budgets. Thankfully GotG did well signalling audiences still want cinema but it was shakey and really pushed on by brilliant (not good, brilliant) WoM and being a clear direct sequel to films which had built up good will with audiences.

 

WB has already course corrected with DC (which makes how it’s treated the end of the previous era all the more bizarre) but I also think someone just needs to tell Gunn to stay away from Batman considering they have an existing franchise that should be able to attempt to crack a bill with its sequel. These films will need appropriate budgets, they are big risks. Let’s say they do ‘OK’ - they need to be able to make sequels rather than have another damaging relaunch/reset.

 

Pixar needs to outsource or utilise technology (AI) to make their films cheaper. They are simply uncompetitive compared to other studios and that’s not sustainable. They probably should and will just start cranking out sequels,  I  appreciate their original content but they should really only be making those if they think the concept can lead to sequels. 
 

Quite a bit of the industry is already doing this (though Universal still has its insane treatment of F&F) but we’ll likely see more of it, both across big blockbusters but also the lower budget films (Nope should not have got a 70M budget and Beau should not have been A24s highest budget film).

I can’t believe you seriously believe studios should use AI to animate pictures. This is an art form before a product, this is insane. 
 

And you can’t simply reduce movies budgets no matter what. Nope needed to cost 70M, the money is imprinted in every frame of that movie, it’s absurd to think the movie should look worse because it would serve the studio better. 
 

Just because we like to discuss numbers doesn’t mean we need to treat art completely as products that need to bow to profit. 

Edited June 19, 2023 by ThomasNicole

[Sckathian]

4 minutes ago, ThomasNicole said:

I can’t believe you seriously believe studios should use AI to animate pictures. This is an art form before a product, this is insane. 
 

And you can’t simply reduce movies budgets no matter what. Nope needed to cost 70M, the money is imprinted in every frame of that movie, it’s absurd to think the movie should look worse because it would serve the studio better. 
 

Just because we like to discuss numbers doesn’t mean we need to treat art completely as products that need to bow to profit. 

So I don’t believe they should use AI, my point is they either need to outsource or find a way of using technology to greatly improve their productivity. They should outsource, and AI/computer techniques are already used in the industry. I mean you know what CGI stands for right? 
 

If you want this art then it needs significant investment. An interesting innovation I would argue right now is the animated Spider-Man films - still a big upside but importantly the budget means the risk is greatly reduced. With CBMs turning into CGI messes why not embrace animation?

 

There’s more ‘art’ in every frame of those films compared to Quantamania or Flash and yet they are working on lower budgets.

 

The film industry has always existed with limitations on budget. That’s actually where a lot of creativity and innovation comes from. Just saying that whatever the product is, it should get the money it wants is not based in any reality. 

[Grebacio]

3 hours ago, across the Jat verse said:

First blockbuster thread in terms of pages since 2019

Avatar weekend had 177 pages 6 months ago

 

[Flopped]

1 hour ago, Issac Newton said:

 

 

 

Every still and every trailer I've seen from this movie looks garish and horrifically bad. What am I missing? 

[ThomasNicole]

1 minute ago, Sckathian said:

So I don’t believe they should use AI, my point is they either need to outsource or find a way of using technology to greatly improve their productivity. They should outsource, and AI/computer techniques are already used in the industry. I mean you know what CGI stands for right? 
 

If you want this art then it needs significant investment. An interesting innovation I would argue right now is the animated Spider-Man films - still a big upside but importantly the budget means the risk is greatly reduced. With CBMs turning into CGI messes why not embrace animation?

 

There’s more ‘art’ in every frame of those films compared to Quantamania or Flash and yet they are working on lower budgets.

 

The film industry has always existed with limitations on budget. That’s actually where a lot of creativity and innovation comes from. Just saying that whatever the product is, it should get the money it wants is not based in any reality. 

Is not the money it wants, sometimes is the money it needs. 
 

Of course Fast X doesn’t need 340M, it doesn’t even looks like such an expensive movie and we all know these blockbusters are so expensive because they use awfully planned CGI even for the most mundane things so is just lazy production that can afford the highly costs of being lazy. But you mentioned 2 movies that have very reasonable budgets.
 

Nope costs 65M, this is fair and it looks more expensive than it actually is, this is a creative use of money and the movie as it is simply couldn’t be made for such lower price. For every example of movie that turn lack of budget into creativity, there’s twenty examples of movies that could’ve been amazing and they aren’t because they couldn’t get the money needed to create greatness. 
 

Even Beau, that movie looks way more expensive than 35M. They did exceptional use of the money, to think it should be way cheaper is to think the movie as it is shouldn’t exist. 
 

And of course movies has always been made with budget limitations, i’m pretty sure both Nope and Beau already worked with limitations, but they actually put effort and creativity in how to spent that money to create something with quality. 
 

It’s a completely different type of production and execution compared to the inflated blockbusters, is not really fair of a comparisson.
 

 

[Ledmonkey96]

Just now, Flopped said:

 

Every still and every trailer I've seen from this movie looks garish and horrifically bad. What am I missing? 

no see it's SUPPOSED to look horrible, it's ironic or something

[AniNate]

Disney/Pixar have always had higher quality standards w audiences than other western animation studios. The aggressive slapstick hijinks that has built Illumination's cache just isn't in their DNA. 

 

I still think original films can draw audiences provided they have the critical enthusiasm to make them think it's worthwhile, but they just don't show up for Pixar anymore if they're just putting out breezy trifles.

Edited June 19, 2023 by AniNate

[ThomasNicole]

1 minute ago, Ledmonkey96 said:

no see it's SUPPOSED to look horrible, it's ironic or something

It is indeed. If it’ll work as a whole movie is yet to be seen, but the fact that is looks fake is by design and thematically coherent with the whole concept of what Barbie means.
 

I would go further and say is nice that we’re getting some movies shifting away from stupid realism that is the norm even for stories that aren’t supposed to be presented realistically. 
 

With that said is a tricky type of style to work with so i get that it can generate some bad feeling (and it can be bad indeed if not well executed).

[Flopped]

8 minutes ago, ThomasNicole said:

It is indeed. If it’ll work as a whole movie is yet to be seen, but the fact that is looks fake is by design and thematically coherent with the whole concept of what Barbie means.
 

I would go further and say is nice that we’re getting some movies shifting away from stupid realism that is the norm even for stories that aren’t supposed to be presented realistically. 
 

With that said is a tricky type of style to work with so i get that it can generate some bad feeling (and it can be bad indeed if not well executed).

 

It just looks lazy and cheap and it feels to me like they're hiding behind "kitsch" to get away with it.