Weekend Thread | TAYLOR SWIFT $31M Estimate, KOTFM $23M

[Giorno]

3 minutes ago, MysteryMovieMogul said:

And yet, I can pull tons of quotes from here and the Box Office subreddit claiming that Leo and the other actors from KotFM would have helped that film. So, it can't be both ways. It either helps both or hurts both. To pretend otherwise is just laughable.

 

Scorsese loves to talk about saving Cinema (and it's obvious he means prestige pictures in theaters), but then asks for $200+ million to make a period piece that, even with half its budget, would still only find a niche audience due to the subject matter.

 

Auteurs are still thriving. Avatar 2, Barbie, and Oppenheimer were all from auteurs perfecting their craft. That's what we need more of. Those kind of films will save Cinema. Not 3.5 hour period pieces that people recommend and then say are depressing in the same breath.

Leo is the biggest movie star in the world, him making the rounds does a lot more for this kind of film than a b lister doing the rounds

[MysteryMovieMogul]

Just now, Giorno said:

Leo is the biggest movie star in the world, him making the rounds does a lot more for this kind of film than a b lister doing the rounds

This is maddening. I agree with you. Because I also believe actors not being able to promote Marvel films also hurts those films. But I do not believe that the strikes hurt KotFM and not big budget blockbusters as well.

[titanic2187]

2 minutes ago, ZattMurdock said:

My point was never about the MCU itself, but the need that movie theaters have that films put butts on the seats. Is Five Night At Freddy’s the reason why KotFM is bombing or The Marvels isn’t tracking well at the ticket sales? Who is to blame? Is there blame to be attributed to? If Marvel Studios stopped making their films right now or other franchise became the hot new thing, would they be to blame for cinema’s demise? Because I truly don’t think so.

 

I don’t think shaming MCU fans and treating them like ‘not true cinema’ fans is a good thing for film business. And same goes for each and every popular thing. I just don’t want the movie theater to not go the way of opera and become too prestige. I will always get my Marvel fix, one way or another. But I do think there is something special about the popular moviegoing experience, hence why I am so vocal against film snubs. 

Whatever you are saying is exactly my point. I hate the way MCU made movies and I totally agree with the thought of MCU being theme park. But at the same time I can’t deny the theatrical experience I love need MCU or its kind. It is just reality and the way of life. The thing you dislike won’t go away, or sometime you can’t afford to let them go. 

[Giorno]

4 minutes ago, MysteryMovieMogul said:

This is maddening. I agree with you. Because I also believe actors not being able to promote Marvel films also hurts those films. But I do not believe that the strikes hurt KotFM and not big budget blockbusters as well.

Yeah but I think the impact for a marvel movie is a lot lesser than something like kotfm imp, dicaprio sells tickets whereas most marvel actors are not but yeah not making the rounds does impact both 

[filmlover]

The strikes have hurt the movies over the past few months simply because it doesn't feel like the movies are coming out when the stars can't even acknowledge they exist. Imagine Barbie being released without Robbie turning heads with all those fun outfits. Not a very exciting scenario, huh?

 

Although a resolution isn't far off in all likelihood. AMPTP is probably getting nervous looking at the soft tracking numbers for their holiday movies, and SAG-AFTRA needs some good press after all the negative headlines of infighting and collapse of solidarity this past week.

[MysteryMovieMogul]

3 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

Whatever you are saying is exactly my point. I hate the way MCU made movies and I totally agree with the thought of MCU being theme park. But at the same time I can’t deny the theatrical experience I love need MCU or its kind. It is just reality and the way of life. The thing you dislike won’t go away, or sometime you can’t afford to let them go. 

The thing is, Scorsese is right and wrong about Marvel. He's right in that 2023 Marvel is more about pushing their brand than giving directors and writers a place to create something auteur driven. 

 

But he's wrong that Marvel films are this way as a generalization. Guardians of the Galaxy is a James Gunn franchise through and through. Phase One (which wasn't even a term at the time) of the MCU feels original and distinct.

 

 

[ZattMurdock]

6 minutes ago, MysteryMovieMogul said:

 

 

Scorsese loves to talk about saving Cinema (and it's obvious he means prestige pictures in theaters), but then asks for $200+ million to make a period piece that, even with half its budget, would still only find a niche audience due to the subject matter.

 

Auteurs are still thriving. Avatar 2, Barbie, and Oppenheimer were all from auteurs perfecting their craft. That's what we need more of. Those kind of films will save Cinema. Not 3.5 hour period pieces that people recommend and then say are depressing in the same breath.

I mean no ill to Scorsese and he has earned the right to say whatever he wants about film and the film industry. But at some point we need to just disregard some of his stuff he says just like he and his peers needed to disregard what the old crew would say about Scorsese’s own take on cinema. It’s with all the love and respect in the world for his lifelong contributions to cinema, old man barking at clouds shit.
 

At some point we need to understand that for movie theaters to thrive, either Star Wars or Marvel Studios or what have you actually need to exist. For auteur filmmaking to keep thriving and finding bigger audiences, the film moviegoing experience needs to be popular. If we keep trashing what is popular, they won’t watch the next Scorsese film, the general moviegoer will just find another thing to latch on to, either via streaming or another franchise, either Super Mario, Five Night at Freddy’s or whatever. Absolutely no studio or no one is to blame if a ‘prestige’ film isn’t popular. And I’m 100% that just like Scorsese feels jaded about current cinema landscape, when he came around back in the 70s a lot of his older peers felt that way too.

[titanic2187]

14 hours ago, lab276 said:

Soon!!!! Just 15m to go!

 

I believe 2023 is already beat 2022. BOM isn’t very good in tracking foreign film. Many Indian especially if their distributor aren’t Yash raj are left out. Likewise for Chinese film, seem like of Well Go USA distributor is properly reporting their BO. 

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

Just got out of Killers of the Flower Moon and like I posted yesterday about the 4-hour cut of Napoleon, a very long movie is a generally a script issue. To make KotFM dramatically shorter (120-130 minutes vs 206), you'd have to change how the story is approached. But a 2 hour version probably has a lower budget and slightly better financial prospects.

 

It's not discussed enough how the length of a movie can add to its cost: a longer movie often takes more time to film and that's an entire crew who needs to be paid for all that time.

[titanic2187]

9 minutes ago, MysteryMovieMogul said:

The thing is, Scorsese is right and wrong about Marvel. He's right in that 2023 Marvel is more about pushing their brand than giving directors and writers a place to create something auteur driven. 

 

But he's wrong that Marvel films are this way as a generalization. Guardians of the Galaxy is a James Gunn franchise through and through. Phase One (which wasn't even a term at the time) of the MCU feels original and distinct.

 

 

Nah , GOTG is James Gunn baby you are right, but that is the case simply because whatever Gunn is doing with GOTG is aligning with MCU as a masterplan. Not because MCU embracing auteur in a meaningful away. Like wise for waititi, MCU only embrace the auteur filmmaking when the director share their vision with MCU. Nothing wrong with that for crafting interconnected universe but far from embracing auteur, more like they got a right worker to build their kitchen. 

[M37]

56 minutes ago, John Marston said:

 

Nobody decides to watch the latest Marvel movie because some actor appeared on some crappy comedian’s show. Iman Vellani was everywhere promoting Ms Marvel yet it tanked in viewership 

It’s not just about people deciding to watch, but casting a wider net of who is even aware a movie (or any content) is coming out. With demise of cable and rise of streaming and social media, it’s more difficult to reach a large audience with paid media (traditional advertising)
 

Even better if a clip goes viral - even for something not necessarily directly related to the movie - and becomes free media. And sometimes, with Barbenheimer or GentleMinions as prime examples, the spread of awareness takes a life of its own, without any direct promotional work 

 

That’s what’s missing by the SAG strike, having to rely on paid media with decreasing ROI, or hoping for some organic viral trend 

[ZattMurdock]

15 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

Nah , GOTG is James Gunn baby you are right, but that is the case simply because whatever Gunn is doing with GOTG is aligning with MCU as a masterplan. Not because MCU embracing auteur in a meaningful away. Like wise for waititi, MCU only embrace the auteur filmmaking when the director share their vision with MCU. Nothing wrong with that for crafting interconnected universe but far from embracing auteur, more like they got a right worker to build their kitchen. 

I love James Gunn but Nicole Perlman might have one thing or two to say about that. Filmmaking is a collective endeavor. The MCU has produced some of the best films of its genre, and people working on those films poured their hearts and souls into them. There is absolutely nothing wrong loving the MCU or any popular film out there. The more shit we say about popular shit when there is nothing inherently wrong with them, the more we scare away audiences.
 

I have a new pet theory about the rise of streaming that I came up and it’s about how little scrutiny most of these silly Netflix shows become popular with no pushback whatsoever. Fandoms want to like the cool shiny new thing, and don’t want the hassle of fighting online constantly and they are 100% right on that, it’s not worth it. At some point, slowly, the moviegoing experience will sadly become more and more a prestige experience. It’s our job as moviegoers to praise the good shit, either from auteurs or the latest blockbuster film that it’s good at what it does. We are here having to the death arguments meanwhile fandoms for Elite are going nuts with their new season or the resurgence of Suits is happening thanks to social media and the Royal family or something.

 

Basically, what I’m saying is that film twitter or online film discourse in general has become insufferable. We are the uncool gang, and it doesn’t matter if we are talking about Scorsese, Marvel, DC or what have you. With so much vitriol always going on, who can blame those not wanting any part on that?

Edited October 21, 2023 by ZattMurdock

[MysteryMovieMogul]

7 minutes ago, ZattMurdock said:

Basically, what I’m saying is that film twitter or online film discourse in general has become insufferable

It's exhausting, and honestly, with the SAG strike going on, the online discourse is taking over, and it's too much.

Edited October 21, 2023 by MysteryMovieMogul

[ZattMurdock]

28 minutes ago, MysteryMovieMogul said:

It's exhausting, and honestly, with the SAG strike going on, the online discourse is taking over, and it's too much.

I mean, who wants to be part of this shithole? The level of discourse is fandom wars all the time, between everything. We live in an extremely polarized world. Who can blame anyone preferring to chill at home and watch whatever Netflix is featuring that barely anyone knows about? Scorsese - and films snubs in general - lack the finesse of Nolan, for example. Here is a dude that just made a $900m black and white biopic praising Taylor Swift’s movie theater going endeavor and saying it’s the future of cinema. And you know what? He is 100% right. We are the ones killing cinema, not Marvel Studios. If there is someone that film snubs and Scorsese should be trashing and shaming is the fact that Suits is what, one year in a roll the most watched shit on streaming and no one has a single good reason on why. We should be protecting cinema. We should be celebrating Endgame, No Way Home, Maverick, Avatar 2, Super Mario Bros, Barbie and Oppenheimer. Instead, we are in the ‘superhero fatigue’ discussions day in and day out, discussion about "true cinema" day in and day out. Who has the time for this shit?

 

 

1 hour ago, titanic2187 said:

Whatever you are saying is exactly my point. I hate the way MCU made movies and I totally agree with the thought of MCU being theme park. But at the same time I can’t deny the theatrical experience I love need MCU or its kind. It is just reality and the way of life. The thing you dislike won’t go away, or sometime you can’t afford to let them go. 

 Apologies, just saw your post. I mean, it might not always be the MCU. But there is no guarantee what takes over you will enjoy it either or even be part of the moviegoing experience whatsoever. What happens in an world that like Scorsese says, ‘cinema is saved’ from the MCU and their ‘theme park’ formula?
 

The answer might be it’s already slowly happening, but not in the way we are generally perceiving these days. Marvel Studios true enemy is the same enemy that any film movie theater experience has: streaming. Carefully curated by A.I. and having directives like "second screen", namely, it’s just there to pass time. We keep putting films against each other on our message boards coliseum while more and more people are just content to stay at home and avoid the hassle of going to a movie theater.

 

We need a healthy MCU just like we need a healthy Star Wars franchise or a thriving DC Films studio or Fast and Furious familia. Or how we need Scorsese, Nolan and Cameron films. We need to take more time celebrating when audiences want to show up for a film, regardless which film - unless it’s a pyramid scheme and you all know what I meant - or what franchise it belongs to. You can dislike and trash anything you want. But remember to celebrate more what you like than trashing what you don’t. That’s all I’m saying. 

Edited October 21, 2023 by ZattMurdock

[JustLurking]

Ngl, if this is where he's at already the marvels' opening thread is going to be very funny.

[ZattMurdock]

Just now, JustLurking said:

Ngl, if this is where he's at already the marvels' opening thread is going to be very funny.

Am I the only one who thinks the way this dude for over one year talks about me kinda creepy? It happens when I’m around or not, it’s always the same shit, rinse and repeat. It creeps me the fuck out and I’d be very happy if he never even mentioned ever again. I’m just saying out there so maybe he gets ashamed and just stop. I’ll do my part and never address him again. If he keeps doing it, you all know that he will be talking to himself, or talking about me to you, which is even weirder. It wasn’t funny one year ago, it’s creeping the fuck out of me out now. I’m not your buddy and I’d be incredibly pleased if you just didn’t talk to me or about me ever again.

[AMC Theaters Enjoyer]

I go away for a few hours to do some work and then see KOTFM and I come back to chaos.

 

 

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

 

1 hour ago, M37 said:

It’s not just about people deciding to watch, but casting a wider net of who is even aware a movie (or any content) is coming out. With demise of cable and rise of streaming and social media, it’s more difficult to reach a large audience with paid media (traditional advertising)
 

Even better if a clip goes viral - even for something not necessarily directly related to the movie - and becomes free media. And sometimes, with Barbenheimer or GentleMinions as prime examples, the spread of awareness takes a life of its own, without any direct promotional work 

 

That’s what’s missing by the SAG strike, having to rely on paid media with decreasing ROI, or hoping for some organic viral trend 

I think people who regularly follow movie news via social media/forums don't understand how much of the audience just has no idea if/when something non-franchise is coming out, if it's in theaters or a streaming release, if it's even a movie or limited series.

 

These are all the people who 15-30 years ago would have eventually come across enough TV/movie/radio/newspaper ads or talk show appearances/making-of specials to  know which movies were coming out and when. You also used to have more people who would go to movie theaters as an activity and were willing to see whatever was playing.

 

The box office legs of yesteryear meant that prestige movies in particular could stay in 1000+ theaters for months and still be around when the stragglers finally showed up to theaters. Now, these are the casuals who will say  "I didn’t see any ads! Why have I never heard of this movie before?" when an acclaimed flop finally hits streaming. Studios have to do a lot to reach people when many go out of their way to block out advertising.

 

Edited October 21, 2023 by BoxOfficeFangrl

[ZattMurdock]

23 minutes ago, BoxOfficeFangrl said:

 

I think people who regularly follow movie news via social media/forums don't understand how much of the audience just has no idea if/when something non-franchise is coming out, if it's in theaters or a streaming release, if it's even a movie or limited series.

 

These are all the people who 15-30 years ago would have eventually come across enough TV/movie/radio/newspaper ads or talk show appearances/making-of specials to  know which movies were coming out and when. You also used to have more people who would go to movie theaters as an activity and were willing to see whatever was playing.

 

The box office legs of yesteryear meant that prestige movies in particular could stay in 1000+ theaters for months and still be around when the stragglers finally showed up to theaters. Now, these are the casuals who will say  "I didn’t see any ads! Why have I never heard of this movie before?" when an acclaimed flop finally hits streaming. Studios have to do a lot to reach people when many go out of their way to block out advertising.

 

That and not to mention that yeah, streaming is more prevalent than ever. My close group of friends have a sort of competition going on about which obscure film or series they are watching on Netflix or something. The moviegoing experience never faced so much competition like it does today. For people to go out of their way to watch something in the big screen if you aren’t a die hard moviegoer it takes one hell lot. If it’s readily available at a streaming service, why even bother? We trash and make fun of films way too much and ignore whatever the shit it gets incredibly popular at streaming way too little. 
 

I think it’s crazy how incredibly harsh we are with films in general and how incredibly lenient we are with streaming content in general. There is a whole culture with gaming that it’s very metacritic based that I find incredibly toxic, but my understanding is that most the streaming stuff always get a pass. We aren’t on forums pitting I don’t know, Stranger Things against Chernobyl, we don’t have old farts critically acclaimed showrunners trashing on Suits.

 

What I’m saying is: why film twitter is so keyboard warriory lol? When online film discourse has become a joke?

[WittyUsername]

KotFM is looking to have a bigger OW than the latest Saw movie. Regardless of cost, that seems pretty solid for a three and a half hour Martin Scorsese movie with this kind of subject matter. Martin Scorsese has never been a box office darling anyway, and I’m certain that Apple wasn’t expecting the movie to recoup its massive $200 million budget in theaters.