Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2020 0:11:59 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by dazz on May 11, 2020 16:58:16 GMT
A general rule of thumb if you have to use tv, rentals, and dvd sales as evidence of a movie's success it wasn't one. That's just the icing on the cake. BUDGET: $178,000,000 BOX OFFICE: $542,537,546 And a marketing budget of likely over $100,000,000, then the Box Office totals China: $120,765,096 minus between 2/3's or 3/4's, lets go two thirds to be genrous to be generous which is what the return from China falls into, that means the movie made just $40,255,112.51 from China, then it grossed another $266,329,961 in other international markets, so then that's then taking away about 60% as is typical for international sales, puts international returns to $106,531,984.40, and then domestically it grossed $155,442,489 now take away the about 45-50% domestic releases get, again lets be kind and say 45% leaves it with $85,493,368.95, which combined totals up to $232,280,465.86 on a combined low ball expense of $278,000,000...don't know if you have learned to count yet but that's over $46,000,000 more than the film took back from the theatres, hell even with DVD and Blu-ray sales the movie still fails to turn a profit, relying solely on TV rights to turn any sort of profit, and that's with me being generous on the numbers, which fits with what Scabab said about it not being on Deadlines most profitable list.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on May 11, 2020 22:51:05 GMT
I never really understood the appeal of the character. Apocalypses' personality, motivation, and strategies were all done better with earlier X-Men villains. His ascendence to badass-of-the-minute status during the 90s always seemed like a regression in the genre to me.
Why would any character created during that era need to have the first letter of their name emblazoned on their belt?
When I look at Apocalypse, all I see is a novel powerset and lazy and clichéd biblical references.
No disrespect to anyone who thinks he's the bee's knees, though, it takes all kinds.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2020 23:14:12 GMT
I never really understood the appeal of the character. Apocalypses' personality, motivation, and strategies were all done better with earlier X-Men villains. His ascendence to badass-of-the-minute status during the 90s always seemed like a regression in the genre to me. Why would any character created during that era need to have the first letter of their name emblazoned on their belt? When I look at Apocalypse, all I see is a novel powerset and lazy and clichéd biblical references. No disrespect to anyone who thinks he's the bee's knees, though, it takes all kinds. The letter A is overkill lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 12, 2020 14:19:16 GMT
I never really understood the appeal of the character. Apocalypses' personality, motivation, and strategies were all done better with earlier X-Men villains. His ascendence to badass-of-the-minute status during the 90s always seemed like a regression in the genre to me. Why would any character created during that era need to have the first letter of their name emblazoned on their belt? When I look at Apocalypse, all I see is a novel powerset and lazy and clichéd biblical references. No disrespect to anyone who thinks he's the bee's knees, though, it takes all kinds. Great post. I agree with you A LOT. The cinematic version was 1 million of times better and more meaningful than the comic book counterpart. They took a lame bidimensional nineties villain and turned him into a Cronenberguesque sci-fi character. 10/10.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 12, 2020 14:20:43 GMT
For a not hyperhyped Disney-produced MCU comic book movie, that is truly tremendous. Must be nice living in that paralel universe that you live in. The one where this crap is actually a great movie, Oscar Isacs deserves an Oscar and the movie is a tremendous success Must be nice living in that parallel (TWO "L") universe that you live in. The one where some crappy MCU movies are good movies, and better than this quintessential X-Men movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on May 12, 2020 15:13:26 GMT
I never really understood the appeal of the character. Apocalypses' personality, motivation, and strategies were all done better with earlier X-Men villains. His ascendence to badass-of-the-minute status during the 90s always seemed like a regression in the genre to me. Why would any character created during that era need to have the first letter of their name emblazoned on their belt? When I look at Apocalypse, all I see is a novel powerset and lazy and clichéd biblical references. No disrespect to anyone who thinks he's the bee's knees, though, it takes all kinds. Great post. I agree with you A LOT. The cinematic version was 1 million of times better and more meaningful than the comic book counterpart. They took a lame bidimensional nineties villain and turned him into a Cronenberguesque sci-fi character. 10/10. I can't follow you there as far as Apocalypse's depiction in the film except to say that Isaacs is a talented actor. As for his comic book counterpart, he did at least help the then stagnating Warren Warrithington character move into the 90s as Archangel. Apocalypse's, kidnapping, torture, mutilation, and indoctrination of Angel are trauma-inducing even when reading it today.
|
|
|
|
Post by miike80 on May 12, 2020 16:37:58 GMT
Must be nice living in that paralel universe that you live in. The one where this crap is actually a great movie, Oscar Isacs deserves an Oscar and the movie is a tremendous success Must be nice living in that parallel (TWO "L") universe that you live in. The one where some crappy MCU movies are good movies, and better than this quintessential X-Men movie. Sure,whatever makes you feel better |
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 12, 2020 17:34:14 GMT
Great post. I agree with you A LOT. The cinematic version was 1 million of times better and more meaningful than the comic book counterpart. They took a lame bidimensional nineties villain and turned him into a Cronenberguesque sci-fi character. 10/10. I can't follow you there as far as Apocalypse's depiction in the film except to say that Isaacs is a talented actor. As for his comic book counterpart, he did at least help the then stagnating Warren Warrithington character move into the 90s as Archangel. Apocalypse's, kidnapping, torture, mutilation, and indoctrination of Angel are trauma-inducing even when reading it today. Arguably, before Apocalypse and X-Factor, Angel was the only lame and useless X-Man in history.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on May 12, 2020 21:52:01 GMT
I can't follow you there as far as Apocalypse's depiction in the film except to say that Isaacs is a talented actor. As for his comic book counterpart, he did at least help the then stagnating Warren Warrithington character move into the 90s as Archangel. Apocalypse's, kidnapping, torture, mutilation, and indoctrination of Angel are trauma-inducing even when reading it today. Arguably, before Apocalypse and X-Factor, Angel was the only lame and useless X-Man in history. I wouldn't exactly call him lame myself but, your opinion is probably the new norm amongst NEW X-Men fans. I think his limited power set offered writers too much of a challenge, and they often pigeon-holed him as the rich playboy. Cyclops, Marvel Girl, Beast, and Iceman were allowed to grow and expand their affiliations beyond the X-Men.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on May 13, 2020 0:36:26 GMT
Arguably, before Apocalypse and X-Factor, Angel was the only lame and useless X-Man in history. I wouldn't exactly call him lame myself but, your opinion is probably the new norm amongst NEW X-Men fans. I'm a fan since 1986.
|
|
