The Warner Bros. Thread | Will NOT merge with Paramount...capitalism is still terrible

[dudalb]

8 hours ago, clockwork said:

Whoa alright lets tone it down a bit there. Putting people on a high pedestal that you don't personally know is risky business no matter how much you like their work.

 The mediocrity of the FB films has taken the shine off her for me.

And, yeah, blind worship of anybody or anything is bad news.

[BruiseCruise]

9 hours ago, El Gato said:

The Harry Potter fandom is much larger than Twitter/Reddit… guarantee 99.9% of fans don’t care about that “controversy” 

 

Basically this,online controversies don't really matter to GAs, Ant-Man 3, black Panther 2 and Aquaman also will feel no impact from their lead actress problems 

[WittyUsername]

At the risk of being blunt and cynical, I think people overestimate how much the general public truly cares about what Rowling thinks of transgender people. Unfortunately, the trans community is still very much seen as an easy target that many famous individuals will openly ridicule without any significant consequences. We aren’t yet at the point where society at large is truly accepting of trans people. 

[Porthos]

3 hours ago, WittyUsername said:

At the risk of being blunt and cynical, I think people overestimate how much the general public truly cares about what Rowling thinks of transgender people. Unfortunately, the trans community is still very much seen as an easy target that many famous individuals will openly ridicule without any significant consequences. We aren’t yet at the point where society at large is truly accepting of trans people. 

 

Here's the thing.  It is 100% true that "Twitter isn't real life".  But I think people really oversell the idea when they say it has no effect.

 

Like, let's just talk about mood of a fanbase.  I've slowly come around to the idea that even if the GA doesn't know exactly what fans are honked off about, the very fact that at least part of the fanbase is irked does filter down to the GA.  Dismiss vibes and feels all one wants, but the more I watch social media and GA reception, the more I do think it filters down on some level.

 

At the very least a happy, excited fan base can be an engine which powers hype and buzz which the GA in turn picks up on, and if that hype and buzz is absent, then there's less of a buzz for the GA to pick up and in turn care about a project.

 

And if we want to discount that, then aren't we really discounting the idea of hype and buzz in the first place?

 

To put it another way, Twitter buzz, even negative buzz, is still buzz.  The danger is thinking it is the end all and be all, coz ldo, it isn't.  And it also ldo can be overcome and get a well received movie.  But is it a factor?  Got to say, I think it's whistling past the graveyard to think it isn't A factor.

 

tl;dr: The GA may not be aware of exactly what some folks are upset about when it comes to J.K. Rowling or even care when they do find out. But I do tend to think enough of the GA is aware that folks are upset with her and at the very least might pick up on that folks aren't falling all over themselves to go crazy over her latest flicks.

 

Add in their own disappointment with FB2 and... Well, not a great combo, IMO.

Edited March 9, 2022 by Porthos

[BruiseCruise]

13 minutes ago, Porthos said:

 

Here's the thing.  It is 100% true that "Twitter isn't real life".  But I think people really oversell the idea when they say it has no effect.

 

Like, let's just talk about mood of a fanbase.  I've slowly come around to the idea that even if the GA doesn't know exactly what fans are honked off about, the very fact that at least part of the fanbase is irked does filter down to the GA.  Dismiss vibes and feels all one wants, but the more I watch social media and GA reception, the more I do think it filters down on some level.

 

At the very least a happy, excited fan base can be an engine which powers hype and buzz which the GA in turn picks up on, and if that hype and buzz is absent, then there's less of a buzz for the GA to pick up and in turn care about a project.

 

And if we want to discount that, then aren't we really discounting the idea of hype and buzz in the first place?

 

To put it another way, Twitter buzz, even negative buzz, is still buzz.  The danger is thinking it is the end all and be all, coz ldo, it isn't.  And it also ldo can be overcome and get a well received movie.  But is it a factor?  Got to say, I think it's whistling past the graveyard to think it isn't A factor.

 

tl;dr: The GA may not be aware of exactly what some folks are upset about when it comes to J.K. Rowling or even care when they do find out. But I do tend to think enough of the GA is aware that folks are upset with her and at the very least might pick up on that folks aren't falling all over themselves to go crazy over her latest flicks.

 

Add in their own disappointment with FB2 and... Well, not a great combo, IMO.

Counterpoint: Tom cruise mission impossible has only been making more and more money each installment despite Internet communities hating him 

[Porthos]

23 minutes ago, BruiseCruise said:

Counterpoint: Tom cruise mission impossible has only been making more and more money each installment despite Internet communities hating him 

 

Counterpoint to the counterpoint:

37 minutes ago, Porthos said:

And it also ldo can be overcome and get a well received movie. 

 

More to the point, I'd say when it comes right down to it, even on Twitter it's divided on Tom Cruise. From what I can tell, most of it even on Twitter is that Tom Cruise is seen as a goofball/kinda eccentric guy and not an eeeeeeevil Scientologist or someone who was a bad father/husband.  Being a goofball/kinda eccentric guy is hardly a death sentence to a career.

 

Also, Tom Cruise has been around a hell of a lot longer than even J.K. Rowling and a MUCH deeper body of work.  Add in some other sociological factors that are mostly irrelevant to this side-discussion and I just don't think it is that apt of a comparison.

 

But let me bring up a couple of more concrete and recent examples: West Side Story and Death on the Nile.

 

I've heard more times than I can count that controversies around Ansel Elgort and Armie Hammer didn't hurt either of the movies, and I just... find it strange to think that.  Yes, it is 100% true that most adult-skewing flicks have suffered, so we're already talking about a huge uphill battle.  I just tend to think that not having a major star of a flick involved in promotion, and the stars that are out there having to tip-toe around things creates a pall around a movie that the GA does pick up on, even if they don't know the specifics.  

 

This is why I mentioned the hype/buzz machine. If actors are holding back on various press tours, if some of the stars aren't involved at all, and if social media reaction is muted because either the stars themselves can't go all out or because their fans can't really stan as hard as they'd like, or simply because folks are just plain exhausted by it all, it stands to reason that would deflate the hype of a project. 

 

I just think both of those films didn't reach the hype/buzz level they could have thanks to the controversies surrounding of their respective actors.  And maybe WSS and DotN wouldn't have made that much more if the hype machine for both films could have been fully activated on Twitter and the greater internet.  I just think that the hype and buzz was muted and that has to have some effect.

 

Still, is it an absolute?  No.  That's why I went out of my way to call it "A" factor. Sometimes, the sheer wattage of a star or a project can overcome it. But, like, Tom Cruise isn't exactly common place here.

Edited March 9, 2022 by Porthos

[BruiseCruise]

Aquaman 2 would have been interesting to see if theres an impact but as of now competing with avatar 2 muddies that up, if it moves then we will be able to tell. Atleast since the criticism of amber heard seems more prevalent than say Letitia wright 

[BestPicturePlutoNash]

Meh. Amber Heard is not remotely comparable to JK (or Cruise). Heard is not the face of Aquaman, WB can easily not include her in marketing. Her presence will not impact the film in any way.. JK Rowling is the literal creator of Fantastic Beasts.

[Menor the Destroyer]

I am with @Porthos here, part of the way fanbase driven films become big hits is that the invested fans are talking about them a lot and really hyped, spreading interest among GA members that they know. When a fanbase is muted on a film it is quite possible that this can significantly hurt the revenue even if the general audience doesn't care much about the reason that the fanbase is muted. I think Solo was a good example of this, obviously this isn't provable but I think it would have done much better if TLJ had TFA reception among the fanbase.

[clockwork]

The fact of the matter is the Fantastic Beasts films don't have a lot of good press right now and every time Rowling goes on her soapbox about trans people it just adds a little more insult to injury. If this were a marvel series and Kevin Feige starting saying some controversial things then I'm willing to bet a lot of marvel fans would still go see the next MCU movie regardless and be like "Well Idc about what Fiege says just give me more cape shit". People let a lot slide when they already like something vs when they don't. A lot of audience members have a "what have you done for me lately? mentality and we can see the detriments and benefits that can bring to a franchise.

 

But part of me does think that overseas audiences aren't as invested in the typical internet controversies as us Americans over here tend to be. Regardless, all studios want good press for all their content no matter what. And if they can guarantee that good press the best they can do is minimize the role or press of whoever causes said controversies and hope people mostly forget about them.

Edited March 9, 2022 by clockwork

[filmlover]

1 hour ago, Porthos said:

 

Counterpoint to the counterpoint:

 

More to the point, I'd say when it comes right down to it, even on Twitter it's divided on Tom Cruise. From what I can tell, most of it even on Twitter is that Tom Cruise is seen as a goofball/kinda eccentric guy and not an eeeeeeevil Scientologist or someone who was a bad father/husband.  Being a goofball/kinda eccentric guy is hardly a death sentence to a career.

 

Also, Tom Cruise has been around a hell of a lot longer than even J.K. Rowling and a MUCH deeper body of work.  Add in some other sociological factors that are mostly irrelevant to this side-discussion and I just don't think it is that apt of a comparison.

 

But let me bring up a couple of more concrete and recent examples: West Side Story and Death on the Nile.

 

I've heard more times than I can count that controversies around Ansel Elgort and Armie Hammer didn't hurt either of the movies, and I just... find it strange to think that.  Yes, it is 100% true that most adult-skewing flicks have suffered, so we're already talking about a huge uphill battle.  I just tend to think that not having a major star of a flick involved in promotion, and the stars that are out there having to tip-toe around things creates a pall around a movie that the GA does pick up on, even if they don't know the specifics.  

 

This is why I mentioned the hype/buzz machine. If actors are holding back on various press tours, if some of the stars aren't involved at all, and if social media reaction is muted because either the stars themselves can't go all out or because their fans can't really stan as hard as they'd like, or simply because folks are just plain exhausted by it all, it stands to reason that would deflate the hype of a project. 

 

I just think both of those films didn't reach the hype/buzz level they could have thanks to the controversies surrounding of their respective actors.  And maybe WSS and DotN wouldn't have made that much more if the hype machine for both films could have been fully activated on Twitter and the greater internet.  I just think that the hype and buzz was muted and that has to have some effect.

 

Still, is it an absolute?  No.  That's why I went out of my way to call it "A" factor. Sometimes, the sheer wattage of a star or a project can overcome it. But, like, Tom Cruise isn't exactly common place here.

Ansel did plenty of promo for West Side Story leading up to its release (his online controversies not going further than the Twitter echo chamber made it easy to dance around). Disney pretty much hid Armie, whose controversies did reach mainstream news, as much as they could in the marketing (as someone who saw the movie, can confirm they did nothing to downsize his role since he's in the majority of it) but no one from the movie did any promo for it at all (in part because he was hardly the only person from it to find themselves in hot water) so the fact it made as much as it did seems more impressive.

Edited March 9, 2022 by filmlover

[Noctis]

I think my issue is that some people are just so relentlessly negative about the FB series and literally just want to shit on it and make it worse for others. You may not like Rowling or Crimes, but if you keep hammering home that this will be a failure and shit is just so pathetic.

 

 

[lorddemaxus]

4 hours ago, BestPicturePlutoNash said:

Meh. Amber Heard is not remotely comparable to JK (or Cruise). Heard is not the face of Aquaman, WB can easily not include her in marketing. Her presence will not impact the film in any way.. JK Rowling is the literal creator of Fantastic Beasts.

She seems to have a pretty limited role in it anyways. Orm seems to be replacing her role as Aquaman's companion.

[lorddemaxus]

12 minutes ago, Noctis said:

EDIT: She's still the main female, which means she will have a major role. I thought Orm was a female lol

Yeah, she's a woman, but that doesn't mean she has a main role in it. Movies can work with two guys being the main leads instead of a man and a woman.

[Noctis]

6 minutes ago, lorddemaxus said:

Yeah, she's a woman, but that doesn't mean she has a main role in it. Movies can work with two guys being the main leads instead of a man and a woman.

 

Boring for AQ2.

 

As much as I don't like what Heard has done, she was a great presence in the first film.

Edited March 9, 2022 by Noctis

[jking123]

man mera is a great character. very fun. hope Warner dont cut her out. Should have recast her instead.

 

I think Harry Potter is still obviously a property with great potential. ideally for wb they would buy the complete rights...never gonna happen id assume..(they are getting outspent by apple, amazon often or so it seems). but the game has potential. A revival of the original series/sequel could be be very big done well.

[Spidey Freak]

On 3/8/2022 at 3:42 AM, El Gato said:

The Harry Potter fandom is much larger than Twitter/Reddit… guarantee 99.9% of fans don’t care about that “controversy” 

 

On 3/8/2022 at 3:43 AM, Noctis said:

Internet minority. 

 

On 3/8/2022 at 3:51 AM, Heretic said:

The vast majority of Potter fans outside of ‘Twitterverse’ don’t even know about her views. It will have a very IMMATERIAL impact  on any future box office revenue. 

 

Let's talk once Fantastic Bugaloo 3 DOM numbers come in.

[BruiseCruise]

10 minutes ago, Spidey Freak said:

 

 

 

Let's talk once Fantastic Bugaloo 3 DOM numbers come in.

Those numbers wont be so good cause there isnt that much interest in the film anyways not cause of some "internet boycott" 

[Heretic]

24 minutes ago, Spidey Freak said:

 

 

 

Let's talk once Fantastic Bugaloo 3 DOM numbers come in.

No one is even expecting amazing numbers for FB3, so whatever the case, it is very unlikely to be attributable directly to Rowling. Domestically, expectations are between the $100-150m mark, so your argument seems pretty void. 

Edited March 9, 2022 by Heretic

[Noctis]

25 minutes ago, Spidey Freak said:

 

 

 

Let's talk once Fantastic Bugaloo 3 DOM numbers come in.

 

Why only DOM? 

 

No one is expecting ludicrous numbers for this film....the expectation for me is $100m-$120m. 

 

Let them announce an OG Potter and mark my words it will be a juggernaut of epic proportions.