Jump to content

Issac Newton

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

Recommended Posts

  • Founder / Operator

I've said it before and I'll say it again: It doesn't matter how long a movie is; it matters how long a movie feels.

 

And quite honestly, if it weren't Scorsese, KOTFM would be split into a 3- or 4-episode streaming miniseries in a heartbeat. 

 

(Said with all due respect for the craft and passion that went into that film.)

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites



5 hours ago, Valencia said:

Saw is the 10th entry in a 20 year old franchise, where the record opening weekend for the series is $33M. 
 

What kind of comparison is that?

I was simply putting things into perspective. A $20 million+ OW for a movie like KotFM doesn’t seem all that bad when you think about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



17 minutes ago, Shawn said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again: It doesn't matter how long a movie is; it matters how long a movie feels.

 

And quite honestly, if it weren't Scorsese, KOTFM would be split into a 3- or 4-episode streaming miniseries in a heartbeat. 

 

(Said with all due respect for the craft and passion that went into that film.)

I can’t say anything about KotFM, but both Oppenheimer and Avengers: Endgame fly by as far as I’m concerned. Then there are films that drags. Peter Jackson’s King Kong as one of them, and I’d kinda argue Dune too.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



2 hours ago, Jonwo said:

It's mad that The Wolf of Wall Street got a C Cinemascore but yet is one of the highest grossing Marty movie.

 

Honestly Killers getting $20m+ is okay considering both the runtime and the subject matter. I do think that directors like Marty and Ari Aster get overindulged and there are times where studios should intervene such as the James L Brooks film How Do You Know which bombed for Sony and cost $120m. 

 

 


The longer projects drag out, the more expensive they are in the end. Took them 6-7 years to make the movie, including a couple of years with COVID issues. The budget bloat adds up in these situations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John Marston said:

Funny how film Twitter can’t handle long running times but general audiences can 

About that “unless you are James Cameron”, KoTFM is a far better movie than Avatar 2 but I do agree when it come to handle 3 hours+ run time, Cameron is still a master. I saw avatar five time in theatre and each time runtime still fly pass pretty quick.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



1 hour ago, robertman2 said:

I want to see KotF so much, but trying to fit a 200 minute movie into your schedule while working 3 jobs is kinda hard!

This sentiment is likely a popular one tbh.

 

I'm going to see KOTFM in theaters (no time this weekend), but a length of nearly 3.5 hours (and that's before including 15-20 minutes of trailers + however long it takes to travel to and from the theater) is a mighty big commitment that takes out a good chunk of the day. But I think that's also going to help it in the long run, especially when it won't be exiting the top 5 until the weekend of November 17 at the earliest looking at the schedule these next few weeks (the 11/3 frame is made up of movies that are either dumps or too niche).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jonwo said:

It's mad that The Wolf of Wall Street got a C Cinemascore but yet is one of the highest grossing Marty movie.

 

Honestly Killers getting $20m+ is okay considering both the runtime and the subject matter. I do think that directors like Marty and Ari Aster get overindulged and there are times where studios should intervene such as the James L Brooks film How Do You Know which bombed for Sony and cost $120m. 

 

 

Wolf of Wall Street is a banger, no wonder it made so much money

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



4 hours ago, lorddemaxus said:

KotFM could've easily opened to below $10 mil. More like Silence numbers could've happened if they got Andrew Garfield to play the lead or something. I think it doing over $20 mil is pretty decent.

 

With basically any other under 50 actor is not Di Caprio not more than 15M 😅

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes KOTFM feels long but that´s kinda the point ... it´s revolting to see violence happening and just going on and on and on. You end the movie drained, sad, exhausted, reflective, and to me that´s exactly what a movie about genocide should do. Yes it could be shorter, it would probably not achieve the strong and necessary bleak effect it have tho. 

 

And after seeing the movie i´m even more sure that Apple never really expected this to be a huge movie commercially. Unlike Oppenheimer that have many moments of grandeur, this does everything to move away from any sense of spectacle. It doesn´t really inspire excitement or even tension, you know from the very first minute you´re watching awful people and you keep with them for 200 minutes, almost like a partner in crime that makes you feel guilty since it´s their POV.

 

It´s just not really commercial and for once i´m really thankful that an streaming service let this happen. It´s an astonishing movie and i´m grateful that is exists, i don´t care if Apple spend a fortune on it, it´s not my money and if Scorsese didn´t spend it, someone else would in likely a way worse project like that Russo Brothers TV Show that costs 300M and not only it´s awful, but nobody saw it.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites



6 hours ago, Jonwo said:

It's mad that The Wolf of Wall Street got a C Cinemascore but yet is one of the highest grossing Marty movie.

 

Honestly Killers getting $20m+ is okay considering both the runtime and the subject matter. I do think that directors like Marty and Ari Aster get overindulged and there are times where studios should intervene such as the James L Brooks film How Do You Know which bombed for Sony and cost $120m. 

 

 

 

It had Leo at his peak and people really used to go watch movies..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ThomasNicole said:

Yes KOTFM feels long but that´s kinda the point ... it´s revolting to see violence happening and just going on and on and on. You end the movie drained, sad, exhausted, reflective, and to me that´s exactly what a movie about genocide should do. Yes it could be shorter, it would probably not achieve the strong and necessary bleak effect it have tho. 

 

And after seeing the movie i´m even more sure that Apple never really expected this to be a huge movie commercially. Unlike Oppenheimer that have many moments of grandeur, this does everything to move away from any sense of spectacle. It doesn´t really inspire excitement or even tension, you know from the very first minute you´re watching awful people and you keep with them for 200 minutes, almost like a partner in crime that makes you feel guilty since it´s their POV.

 

It´s just not really commercial and for once i´m really thankful that an streaming service let this happen. It´s an astonishing movie and i´m grateful that is exists, i don´t care if Apple spend a fortune on it, it´s not my money and if Scorsese didn´t spend it, someone else would in likely a way worse project like that Russo Brothers TV Show that costs 300M and not only it´s awful, but nobody saw it.

The real aspect to be grateful about, to me, is that this is getting a global and wide theatrical release. As someone living in a not-so-premium area, we barely get any serious prestige movies here, so a big Scorsese picture actually playing here is a big deal to me. As shady as Apple is, I'll have to thank them for this one. Hopefully Napoleon follows suit.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites









3 hours ago, ThomasNicole said:

Yes KOTFM feels long but that´s kinda the point ... it´s revolting to see violence happening and just going on and on and on. You end the movie drained, sad, exhausted, reflective, and to me that´s exactly what a movie about genocide should do. Yes it could be shorter, it would probably not achieve the strong and necessary bleak effect it have tho. 

 

 

But that even more emphasises that the movie should have been an ensemble film and that the two star leads have unjustifiably dominated the film.

 

I don't know if it was a production demand, actor demand, or genuinely Marty's vision. But the choice to make the 2 star leads so dominant in the movie strongly undermines the rationale of the rest of the film. Wolf of Wall Street completely justifies being a one man tour de force led by one guy. This is fundamentally undermined by it. It's not about the DeNiro or DiCaprio performances themselves, they are both very good, it's about this story and this production seemingly being suited to a wide scale ensemble movie, and instead being shoehorned into a star vehicle regardless of the impact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





9 hours ago, Shawn said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again: It doesn't matter how long a movie is; it matters how long a movie feels.

 

And quite honestly, if it weren't Scorsese, KOTFM would be split into a 3- or 4-episode streaming miniseries in a heartbeat. 

 

(Said with all due respect for the craft and passion that went into that film.)

3-4 episode streaming series with at least twice lower budget and without DiCaprio ans De Niro. Cool.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



I’m at the theatre now for KOTFM. It’s got an interval too, so curious if there’s a natural pause as an act ends or it feels like it’s just been stopped. 
 

Had one a few times before. Notably for Dances with Wolves in 1990, Wyatt Earp in 94 and Hateful Eight. It worked great in the latter as Tarantino designed it for one. 
 

anyways, here we go. Very hyped. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.