|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Oct 15, 2017 2:08:59 GMT
Fair opinion, but doesn't speak for everyone else who saw it I saw it and I have to agree with Dennis Reynolds on this one. GotG was extremely over-rated. Well you're a ***** and ********, so I'm not surprised. But again, two lousy opinions don't equal everyone else's.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2017 2:24:39 GMT
It shouldn't affect it much at all. Wonder Woman had great buzz and that was enormously successful but it didn't stop Spider-man Homecoming from doing well. That said Spider-man did get very good reviews which Justice League likely won't get. It also didn't stop Homecoming from kicking Wonder Woman's ass.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Oct 15, 2017 2:47:12 GMT
Guardians did, and it became one of the most successful films ever. And one of the most overrated. A dance off is likely to be the way that the MCU ends the DCEU permanently. Hee hee hee... Beware! SaveSave
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Oct 15, 2017 3:51:15 GMT
So Disney/Marvel is lifting the review embargo only 5 days before the premiere? That doesn't sound very confident at all. Uh oh, sounds like you're jealous of the early buzz and that Thor will be another hit for the MCU
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Oct 15, 2017 3:55:09 GMT
A quick stop in, as I'm still not reading any updates to the board until after Ragnarok, but it'll be interesting to read these comments later.
Now that Thor is getting overwhelmingly great reviews, what does that mean for Justice League?
- I feel like Thor being released 2 weeks ahead of time with such positive buzz will significantly diminish JL's ability to generate as much of it's own buzz right during the time it needs to. And what I mean is a film need those 2 or 3 weeks just before it releases to be the leading conversation, but the conversation for most of that time is going to be about Thor. That has to have an impact. - Can JL come anywhere near the levels of positive comments for Thor and if it can't, doesn't that make it's appeal even more underwhelming by comparison? - Surely Ragnarok's buzz will have a positive benefit to Thor's box office, but will it affect JL's? Where do you think the two films end box office wise now, and if JL was the presumed overall winner, how small does that win have to be before it feels like a loss? If Thor comes within 50 mil, that's a win for Thor right? How about 100? 150, etc?
I'll be curious to see what everybody thinks when I get back. If the tracking is correct and Ragnarok opens to around $100 million then it will be lucky to make much more than $800 million. Justice League is tracking around the $150 million mark for it's opening weekend so even if it is as bad as it looks it's unlikely to gross less than $900 million (which would still be pretty embarrassing BTW ). Why are you replying to your own sock?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2017 3:59:24 GMT
And one of the most overrated. A dance off is likely to be the way that the MCU ends the DCEU permanently. Hee hee hee... Beware! SaveSaveHonestly, the "dance off" is a perfect analogy of the MCU and DCEU's respective attitudes. One is Peter Quill: laid back and willing to have fun, and very popular as the result. The other is Ronan: always mega serious and absolutely perplexed by the behavior of its foe. It thinks little of all the insane stunts the MCU pulls, resting assured in its position of dominance right up until the moment its enemy's combined forces are able to wield the Infinity Stone and vaporize it.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Oct 15, 2017 5:26:17 GMT
A dance off is likely to be the way that the MCU ends the DCEU permanently. Hee hee hee... Beware! SaveSaveHonestly, the "dance off" is a perfect analogy of the MCU and DCEU's respective attitudes. One is Peter Quill: laid back and willing to have fun, and very popular as the result. The other is Ronan: always mega serious and absolutely perplexed by the behavior of its foe. It thinks little of all the insane stunts the MCU pulls, resting assured in its position of dominance right up until the moment its enemy's combined forces are able to wield the Infinity Stone and vaporize it. Say what you will about the MCU - it's kiddy, safe, formulaic, etc.; what it has going for it is a sweeping sense of adventure like the swashbuckling serials of old. I really think that's the key to it all for them. There are so many places to go; the Nine Realms, the Microverse, a floating (or flying) fortresses, a seedy, crime-ridden metropolis, etc. The MCU isn't designed around a series of money shots set against post-apocalyptic landscapes and rain-soaked streets. The DCEU wants nothing but awe and reverence from its patrons while the MCU is content with a smile, a gasp or a quick rush of adrenaline when one of their heroes manages the impossible - yet again. SaveSave
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Oct 15, 2017 5:55:30 GMT
Honestly, the "dance off" is a perfect analogy of the MCU and DCEU's respective attitudes. One is Peter Quill: laid back and willing to have fun, and very popular as the result. The other is Ronan: always mega serious and absolutely perplexed by the behavior of its foe. It thinks little of all the insane stunts the MCU pulls, resting assured in its position of dominance right up until the moment its enemy's combined forces are able to wield the Infinity Stone and vaporize it. Say what you will about the MCU - it's kiddy, safe, formulaic, etc.; what it has going for it is a sweeping sense of adventure like the swashbuckling serials of old. I really think that's the key to it all for them. There are so many places to go; the Nine Realms, the Microverse, a floating (or flying) fortresses, a seedy, crime-ridden metropolis, etc. The MCU isn't designed around a series of money shots set against post-apocalyptic landscapes and rain-soaked streets. The DCEU wants nothing but awe and reverence from its patrons while the MCU is content with a smile, a gasp or a quick rush of adrenaline when one of their heroes manages the impossible - yet again. SaveSaveI assume you thought the prequels were utter shit, though. Innit?
|
|
barkingbaphomet
Junior Member
all backlit and creepysmoking
@barkingbaphomet
Posts: 2,252
Likes: 1,006
|
Post by barkingbaphomet on Oct 15, 2017 7:36:22 GMT
I assume you thought the prequels were utter shit, though. Innit?
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Oct 15, 2017 7:50:27 GMT
I assume you thought the prequels were utter shit, though. Innit?
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Oct 15, 2017 17:36:53 GMT
Say what you will about the MCU - it's kiddy, safe, formulaic, etc.; what it has going for it is a sweeping sense of adventure like the swashbuckling serials of old. I really think that's the key to it all for them. There are so many places to go; the Nine Realms, the Microverse, a floating (or flying) fortresses, a seedy, crime-ridden metropolis, etc. The MCU isn't designed around a series of money shots set against post-apocalyptic landscapes and rain-soaked streets. The DCEU wants nothing but awe and reverence from its patrons while the MCU is content with a smile, a gasp or a quick rush of adrenaline when one of their heroes manages the impossible - yet again. This is a nice thought, Lord Death Man, and I do want to agree. (I also love that poster, though I cut it out for space reasons.) But (and you knew there was a "but" coming, right? ), if that's what the Marvel people are intending, I must say I didn't get that feeling all that often. See, I think one of the highest criteria for a superhero flick is the sense of wonder. "You will believe a man can fly," and all that. Superheroes, like the heroes of old (Perseus, Theseus, Heracles, et al.), represent the best part of ourselves--that which still believes in honor, decency, morality, chivalry, humanity, desire to help one's fellow man. It is for this reason that I find Man of Steel an utter disaster and, by and large, The Dark Knight not the masterpiece it's often claimed to be. While this analysis may seem peculiar or idiosyncratic, I would say that the very essence of the superhero is that he is, indeed, a hero; remove that point, and you lose the raison d'être of the character and the film. If you swap out these ideals for the cruelty of day-to-day life, then the result is not a superhero movie; it may well be a great film noir or drama, but not a superhero flick. Indeed, in (e.g.) a noir, the point is that there are no heroes. I have experienced that sense of wonder in perhaps a half-dozen comic-book movies: Superman, Batman, Batman Returns, Spider-Man, Spider-Man II, and Iron Man, with a little star for Captain America, which I also enjoyed. Going outside of DC and Marvel Comics, I had the same sense in The Rocketeer and Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, both of which are superb. (Directly connected is just sheer fun, to be experienced rather than analyzed.) You said it best here: it's a concept that describes "...a smile, a gasp or a quick rush of adrenaline when one of their heroes manages the impossible..."--something, I should note, that one may also feel with (e.g.) Indiana Jones or James Bond. Now! As an inveterate lover of the "swashbuckling serials of old," my biggest problem with the Marvel movies is that the majority don't have this quality. I felt more a propensity for universe-building and in-jokes in The Avengers than any true sense of joy--a sense that it was, again, made by committee rather than by individual. As I've written elsewhere, the formula seems to be "blow something up; say some supposedly witty one-liner; join together with friends ('the power of friendship'!); have some big twist in the 3rd act; then repeat." Quite frankly, I find that dull, plain and simple, and not akin to the swashbucklers I love so much. Again, we're all speaking in generalities here; I'm very fond of the movies I cited above. Nor is this (as it has been made to be by some posters) a DC/Marvel thing; I find DC and Marvel equally responsible, for different reasons. To be frank, I dislike the DC movies now a bit more than the Marvel movies, as I would rather have that formula, annoying though it is, than the sophomoric existentialism extant in DC's latest product. (I haven't seen Wonder Woman, which seems [from what I hear] an exception to this trend.) I fully agree with you that the key to these movies is a sweeping sense of adventure, a smile, a laugh, an exhilarating joie de vivre and wonder--I only wish that DC and Marvel would agree with us. OK, bring on the flying fruit, folks. "Hee, hee, hee... Beware! Save Save"
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 15, 2017 20:21:20 GMT
As I've written elsewhere, the formula seems to be "blow something up; say some supposedly witty one-liner; join together with friends ('the power of friendship'!); have some big twist in the 3rd act; then repeat." To be fair, that can apply to a lot of movies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2017 21:41:39 GMT
As I've written elsewhere, the formula seems to be "blow something up; say some supposedly witty one-liner; join together with friends ('the power of friendship'!); have some big twist in the 3rd act; then repeat." To be fair, that can apply to a lot of movies. Think the Mods would be willing to get rid of Salzmark?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2017 21:44:39 GMT
Honestly, the "dance off" is a perfect analogy of the MCU and DCEU's respective attitudes. One is Peter Quill: laid back and willing to have fun, and very popular as the result. The other is Ronan: always mega serious and absolutely perplexed by the behavior of its foe. It thinks little of all the insane stunts the MCU pulls, resting assured in its position of dominance right up until the moment its enemy's combined forces are able to wield the Infinity Stone and vaporize it. Say what you will about the MCU - it's kiddy, safe, formulaic, etc.; what it has going for it is a sweeping sense of adventure like the swashbuckling serials of old. I really think that's the key to it all for them. There are so many places to go; the Nine Realms, the Microverse, a floating (or flying) fortresses, a seedy, crime-ridden metropolis, etc. The MCU isn't designed around a series of money shots set against post-apocalyptic landscapes and rain-soaked streets. The DCEU wants nothing but awe and reverence from its patrons while the MCU is content with a smile, a gasp or a quick rush of adrenaline when one of their heroes manages the impossible - yet again. SaveSaveExactly. The DCEU as whole could stand to take itself less seriously. "The DCEU wants nothing but awe and reverence from its patrons." Which is exactly the wrong attitude to approach it with. They've seen to have lost the plot amid the overly dramatic poses. Ever notice how Superman never wanted to be seen as a god and always insisted he was "just a concerned citizen trying to help." And Batman definitely never wanted the attention.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Oct 15, 2017 21:54:15 GMT
To be fair, that can apply to a lot of movies. Think the Mods would be willing to get rid of Salzmark? why, because he is an intellectual? Do you feel threatened by that again? And do you seriously think the moderators are appointed to execute your extremist tendencies, is that is what "moderating" stands for in your opinion...?
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Oct 15, 2017 21:58:53 GMT
So Disney/Marvel is lifting the review embargo only 5 days before the premiere? That doesn't sound very confident at all. What are you talking about? It comes out Oct. 27 in the UK and Nov. 3 here in the U.S.
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Oct 15, 2017 22:22:36 GMT
If the public likes Thor 3, it will help JL.
That's how this works. The fanboys don't seem to understand that. They actually seem to believe that a good movie by one studio will hurt the other studio and a bad movie will help the other studio.
They understand that WW being good will help JL...but somehow don't fathom how that works for other SH movies.
Don't they understand why there is a "super hero movie boom"? Was it because:
1-studios made SH movies the public liked
2-studios made SH movies the public didn't like
This isn't like selling a customer a car or a TV. In that case, one company wins and the other companies lose. The customer only buys one car and one TV. With entertainment, the market can get bigger or smaller depending on how much the customers enjoy the product. They will allocate more money for movies if they enjoy the movies.
Remember before the SH movie boom when there weren't many SH movies? They started making more of them because the public liked them. The market got bigger because the product was pleasing the customers. DC started making more of them too so DC fans should be happy that Marvel improved the market.
So Marvel fans....did BvS burning the public help Civil War? Of course not. The public goes to see a SH movie and doesn't feel like it was worth the money....does that make them more or less likely to want to spend that money again a month later? This should be self evident. Marvel didn't "win" because BvS was bad....it hurt CW. Remember how CW came in under tracking for its opening weekend?
So if the public likes Thor 3....does that make them more or less likely to want to spend that money again 2 weeks later? Not sure how everyone is missing this stuff.
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Oct 15, 2017 22:32:33 GMT
Honestly, the "dance off" is a perfect analogy of the MCU and DCEU's respective attitudes. One is Peter Quill: laid back and willing to have fun, and very popular as the result. The other is Ronan: always mega serious and absolutely perplexed by the behavior of its foe. It thinks little of all the insane stunts the MCU pulls, resting assured in its position of dominance right up until the moment its enemy's combined forces are able to wield the Infinity Stone and vaporize it. Say what you will about the MCU - it's kiddy, safe, formulaic, etc.; what it has going for it is a sweeping sense of adventure like the swashbuckling serials of old. I really think that's the key to it all for them. There are so many places to go; the Nine Realms, the Microverse, a floating (or flying) fortresses, a seedy, crime-ridden metropolis, etc. The MCU isn't designed around a series of money shots set against post-apocalyptic landscapes and rain-soaked streets. The DCEU wants nothing but awe and reverence from its patrons while the MCU is content with a smile, a gasp or a quick rush of adrenaline when one of their heroes manages the impossible - yet again. That's an interesting idea. If Marvel is selling more kids tickets that makes Spider-Man's rise to the top of the box office over other SH movies even more impressive. Kids tickets are cheaper so you have to sell more of them to make the same money. This reminds me of something Taika Waititi said recently. Good for him.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Oct 15, 2017 22:36:53 GMT
As I've written elsewhere, the formula seems to be "blow something up; say some supposedly witty one-liner; join together with friends ('the power of friendship'!); have some big twist in the 3rd act; then repeat." To be fair, that can apply to a lot of movies. Very true. As noted, it isn't exclusive to comic-book movies, but they do seem examples of this trend (which I find worrying). I like films with plot and character, and usually a sense of fun. (Though I don't love dramatic psychological issues or so-called "realism," I'm not inherently adverse to them except when they become overwhelmingly pretentious.) I tend not to like big explosions or pyrotechnics if they're intended to compensate for these virtues.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Oct 15, 2017 22:38:09 GMT
harpospokeAye, good for him. I hope more directors follow his lead.
|
|