Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by thunder97, Jul 16, 2017.
come on now
Agreed! As I told those co-workers "when you watch a movie in the theater the movie itself is the last thing you pay for. You pay to be in a box alone, no family to bug you, no work calling you. You are paying for the peace of mind to watch the movie. A few weeks ago I watched the 2014 Godzilla and every ten minutes the family came asking me for something they need help with. Wouldn't have to worry about that in theaters.
Depends on the movie; most romantic comedies (other than Deadpool) or character dramas aren't really enhanced by the big screen experience. Stuff like Transformers, Wonder Woman, Spider-Man, The Avengers and Justice League are worth seeing because their spectacle and overall design are built around it.
I personally put people trying to manage their money as the primary reason, coupled with being a bit gunshy in regards to quality, percieved or otherwise.
I personally think the effect of movie sharing over the net is exaggerated; the biggest problem is probably word of mouth getting around quicker than anyone wants it too.
I think a couple of things are going on here with Homecoming. While Guardians 2 and Wonder Woman show super hero movies can still do great this Spider-Man is the third big screen version of the character in 16 years. That is what caused the fatigue IMO. But that wasn't the only problem.
In addition to that fatigue the MCU is going the way of the main marvel comics and a lot of social aspects were pulled into Homecoming and the word got out quickly. People are just tired of that. A lot of people I talked to; when discussing the movie this was the first thing people mentioned. Not the story, not the acting, not the special effects - the social stuff. Overall it's unfortunate because Tom Holland is IMO the best big screen Spidey we've gotten. He looks young, he can do the humor. He was good. And Michael Keaton was great (he almost always is). So there were good parts to the movie. I'll be interested to see where things go with the MCU going forward. I think this may be the beginning of the decline after Infinity War.
On the other hand DC/Warner Bros seems to finally be getting their shit together. Interesting times.
I think Bumblebee will be a good test to see if the Transformers films still have legs and how they do with a different director and I just looked up the director worked on Kubo which was an amazing film. Bumblebee also looks to be a smaller film without big stakes and this could work. Deadpool and Logan have shown that can work. Plus, an 80's setting? I can't wait to see what happens.
Actually Homecoming didn't turned out that great as you say. Critics expected higher from it, but it turned out very simple and outside story of a new hero in the team with bad guy to beat to show the skills and ofcourse with Tony Stark - probably the only thing in Marvel universe, that makes over 50% of people to go in theatres and watch the movie.
Nah, normal drop among marvel movies (and X-men films) tends to be 50s, Suicide Squad was 67%, Logan was 56%.
Wonder Woman? An absurdly good 43%.
Though to chill the doom and gloom, Homecoming's at 61% according to box office mojo, not 72%. It's got a disappointing drop, not an 'everything is on fire' one, and toss in that it was cheaper than the two 'Amazing' movies and looking to make as much as the first one (which earned a sequel) so it's projecting to be a moderate success, maybe better if foreign helps. This is, "Aw, we're not making all the money," disappointment, they're still making money and putting the franchise on solid ground.
Uh, bombed? Toby McGuire's first one made the most money out of any Spidey movie! Well reviewed too. That's not a cult following, that's just being popular ^^
That said, this one should do fine as well, and DVD sales will, yea, be a thing.
As for The Last Knight... well, even a major hit in DVD sales and such isn't going to do much to nudge the needle, the situation is so big.
First week is just key these. Usually a movie has one week in imax before the next one the following weekend. Then factor in that prices at theaters are far too high and a movie will be out on bluray/dvd within 2-3 months. The outlook for any movie being a hit for continous weeks is rare.
This may have an obvious answer, but do theatres keep movies on screens if they have proven and consistant attendance beyond what might be the normal showing window?
They do- they either remove at a slower rate than normal or, less commonly, add screen.
Right now, Wonder Woman has 2,700 screens to TLK's 2,300. Wonder Woman's been out 19 days longer and they started with similar amounts.
Isn't Wonder Woman still showing in the majority of large theaters after a few weeks? But a month is probably tops for any movie these days. Not like the old days where a movie would spend several months in the theater and Hollywood didn't crank out movies like an assembly line.
Think about it Rain Man was the top grossing film of 1988. Fucking Rain Man.
Yeah, in my city its down to three showings a day but they're every day. Might try to catch it a fifth time before it leaves cinemas.
I did not know that bit about Rain Man. Thats an interesting notion.
Year before it was Three Men and a Baby. It's hard to pin point where top grossing films went from quality to spectacle, but I'd say it has definitely gotten worse in the ten years.
I did expect that it would have a big drop between 60-70% as every other (unmemorable) blockbuster. Before someone decides to defend the honor of their favorite property, let me explain
People don't go to the cinema as often as they used to, because they can have a similar experince at home a few months after the premiere. Moreover people choose to go to the cinema only a few times a year and they don't aim for the premieres. It's more of an impulse watch: I want to go to the cinema what is on right now? A causal movie goer does not plan their viewing a month in advance. If they had already been in the cinema in June why bother going in July. With summer time an early movie can count for the best reception, because it's available before competition.
In order to get the audience butts into cinema's seats you need to get them interested in the property. Reviews have a negative effect on undecided audience, because if you already decided that you want to see the movie you won't read the reviews. If 70% audience is undecided before premiere that's on you for doing poor promotion of your product.
People watched Batman and Superman, because they were interesed in characters regardless of the quality of the movie. Pirates of the Caribbean hit big BO numbers despite poor reviews, because people were interested in characters (but apparently they grew bored of Johnny Depp in recent years). Almost all MCU movied starring Robert Downey Jr. crossed $1B at box office, but at one point in time people will also grew bored of that character. It appears that they haf already grew bored of Transformers (to tell the truth TLK looked like a generic Hollywood sci-fi blockbuster, so nothing new). To have a successful blockbuster you need to have the audience awarness of the property and capture their interest by offering something new.
Wonder Woman hit all the marks: It was based on a known property, it looked different from other movies and it was a female-lead movie. It was something new. Why watch another Spider-man or another Transformers movie when you can see something that's first of a kind?
Find a different word for ***. Seriously, simply "social" works. The implications of "***" aren't welcome.
Right! Just like Avengers was the first real superhero teamup movie (i.e. team up as in different existing heroes joining together rather than made-as-a-team ones like X-men), Guardians was the first space opera hero movie, etc.. I expect Black Panther to do well because we haven't had a good black-led superhero movie before.
And a thing on both Spider-man and the TF movies, due to them being such well-know properties, they've had a tendency to shift to 'big opening/big dropoff'... but that wasn't how they started. Both the original Raimi Spider-man and TF1 had unusually good holds, under 50% dropoff.
Yea I just don't see Spider Man being in bad shape as a franchise right now even with the 61% drop that isn't unusual for superhero films these days.
The people who watched it seemed happy enough that they will likely return for the next movie. The image of the franchise seems to be turned around from Amazing Spider Man 2 which it's not as easy as people think to turn around a franchise. It should do well on streaming and cable which means that hook for the next movie could pay off in the sequel getting those people who don't want to wait next time.
Sony spent $175 million on the production cost and the domestic box office is currently sitting at $208 million with weeks still to go in the theatrical run. At this point the overseas box office is just gravy not the studio hopes the international numbers can save the movie. Heck the Chinese release date isn't until August so still plenty of money to be made.
I've been to the cinema a lot lately. Saw the Last Knight twice. I enjoyed it more than I expected.
Storywise, Planet of the Apes is the best of the blockbusters and is genuinely funny in places without forced Bay humour.
Wonder Woman is good but I wasn't blown away like everyone else seems to be.
But then as much as I like the first 2 Nolan Batman movies, I thought the third one with Bane was no where near as good. I find the Baymovies more enjoyable than that one.
Spider-Man was lacking somehow though I liked seeing Michael Keaton back on the big screen.
I may have been put off by the hype which does happen with me. Plus for a movie lots of kids are going to see, I thought some of the humour inappropriate.
The irony is that Avengers ripped off so much of Dark of the Moon
You realise Avengers was already filming when DOTM came out?
Nobody does. At least in Hollywood. Unless you found a director who somehow grew up in the 80s and collected the toys, all the directors from Hollywood and beyond will see Transformers as a "japanese cartoon where toys do terrible things to each other" (recognize who said this long before Bay)?
Separate names with a comma.