Weekend Numbers [05.24 - 05.27, 2024] | 4-day actuals | 32.3M FURIOSA: A MAD MAX SAGA | 31.3M THE GARFIELD MOVIE | 22.3M IF | 17.6M KINGDOM OF THE PLANET OF THE APES

[filmlover]

Love Charlize, but not bringing her back for a prequel that would've asked her to spend the entire movie trying to pass as a 20-something was the right choice (especially when you have the perfect substitute for her with Anya). Not only would that be Ben Platt in the Dear Evan Hansen movie levels of unbelievable, the technology required for such an extensive de-aging job would've brought the budget up even higher too.

[AniNate]

3 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Love Charlize, but not bringing her back for a prequel that would've asked her to spend the entire movie trying to pass as a 20-something was the right choice (especially when you have the perfect substitute for her with Anya). Not only would that be Ben Platt in the Dear Evan Hansen movie levels of unbelievable, the technology required for such an extensive de-aging job would've brought the budget up even higher too.

 

That and possibly put the movie in the crosshairs of the anti-AI discourse

[Jake Gittes]

edit: see filmlover's post above

Edited May 24 by Jake Gittes

[Firepower]

5 minutes ago, Maggie said:

but Gladiator 1 was extremely popular, i think it can overcome Rusell's abscence

I don't know, Russell IS Gladiator, Fury Road barely overcame Gibson's absence and only phenomenal reception and awards helped it break even in the end, I don't see it happening here.

[ZeroHour]

Furiosa seems like it's getting hit by some of the same issues as the last Mission Impossible. A well-reviewed sequel/prequel that doesn't match the glowing reviews of the previous film and a marketing campaign that just looks like more of the same compared to that previous film. But at least Mission Impossible still has Tom Cruise and not Tom Holland playing a younger Ethan Hunt.

[PlatnumRoyce]

19 minutes ago, Spidey Freak said:

Ya'll will make all kinds of excuses except point out the obvious elephant in the room that many ppl brought up as soon as Furiosa was announced. It was a losing battle as soon as it wasn't Charlize. No offense to Anya Taylor-Joy, but honestly fuck ageism and sexism. This is basically the Solo spin-off without Harrison Ford that no one wanted.

The not insignificant difference is that WB had a 70 year old named "George" returning to helm "his franchise." I think WB underestimated the importance of having actors front and center.

[Speedorito]

18 minutes ago, Maggie said:

You say that because Russell Crowe is not returning? I agree, reviews will probably be worse, but Gladiator 1 was extremely popular, i think it can overcome Rusell's abscence

I was partially joking, it could either way. But it has a lot of similarities:

-Sequel/prequel to critically acclaimed film

-Casts a young rising star rather than bringing back the popular lead who made the film (ATJ and Charlize Theron vs Paul Mescal and Russell Crowe)

-Comes years later

-Casts a older popular actor or two in a supporting role to compensate (Chris Hemsworth vs Denzel Washington and Pedro Pascal)

 

Only difference is that Gladiator was more popular than Fury Road like you said. But George Miller is consistently good while Ridley Scott is…something else.

Edited May 24 by Speedorito

[AniNate]

I don't disagree that a franchise prequel is a lot more audience limiting than a sequel. But main thing I care about is that it was something Miller wanted to make, got full creative control over and based on the reviews it'll be a movie that probably has a lot more cultural relevance years from now than this budget/actor discourse will 

 

 

Edited May 24 by AniNate

[titanic2187]

Furiosa is a reminder why we should really be careful when come to online buzz vs real world buzz. Furiosa definitely has more online talk and that early stage of presale suggest passionate love is indeed present. On the other hand, nobody seem to care another Apes reboot and that movie overperform.

 

With that, I am quite confident with IO2 because there are real talk about that movie in my social circle. This is what i call the organic buzz. 

[THUNDER BIRD]

How come Hollywood has no deaging tech.

[eddyxx]

1 hour ago, AniNate said:

 

If it's a good movie it can cost $1 billion for all I or anyone not directly invested in it should care

 

 

[PrinceRico]

Furiosa does seem to have good WOM however if you not a fan of this franchise I don't think great WOM will matter. With this being the 5th entry in the franchise if you're not on board at this point then you probably are just not interested in this kind of film no matter how great it is.

[AniNate]

Fury Road did have pretty decent legs, and while there might be some audience overlap with Bad Boys 4 I think the future schedule is barren enough of competition to work in Furiosa's favor.

[PlatnumRoyce]

Deadline only giving "4.5 stars for kids/3.5 stars for parents" as a posttrak garfield anecdote suggests the film is not performing particularly well among children.  

[cookie]

36 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Love Charlize, but not bringing her back for a prequel that would've asked her to spend the entire movie trying to pass as a 20-something was the right choice (especially when you have the perfect substitute for her with Anya). Not only would that be Ben Platt in the Dear Evan Hansen movie levels of unbelievable, the technology required for such an extensive de-aging job would've brought the budget up even higher too.

Not gonna go into spoilers, but having seen the movie, I don’t think this argument holds up all that well. I think they could’ve made Theron work if they wanted to.

Edited May 24 by cookie

[ringedmortality]

1 minute ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

Deadline only giving "4.5 stars for kids/3.5 stars for parents" as a posttrak garfield anecdote suggests the film is not performing particularly well among children.  

 

Children have a case of the mondays womp womp

[discussingnotfilms]

33 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Love Charlize, but not bringing her back for a prequel that would've asked her to spend the entire movie trying to pass as a 20-something was the right choice (especially when you have the perfect substitute for her with Anya). Not only would that be Ben Platt in the Dear Evan Hansen movie levels of unbelievable, the technology required for such an extensive de-aging job would've brought the budget up even higher too.

i would agree with this but they spent money on replacing the young furiosa with anya's face so i don't think de -ging would've been that different in terms of costs, as far as i know they didn't go that route because miller wasn't convinced with the result. As much as i loved furiosa, i didn't really buy that i was watching a younger version of theron's furiosa

[ringedmortality]

1 minute ago, discussingnotfilms said:

would agree with this but they spent money on replacing the young furiosa with anya's face

Speaking of which, where's all the hoopla about the use of A.I for that? People freaked out when Late Night with the Devil used A.I but not a peep for A.I use in this.

[AJG]

22 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

Furiosa is a reminder why we should really be careful when come to online buzz vs real world buzz. Furiosa definitely has more online talk and that early stage of presale suggest passionate love is indeed present.

 

Who remembers Monkey Man?

 

Anybody???

[AMC Theaters Enjoyer]

Interesting that Garfield is getting such a shrug domestically after its pretty good OS performance.