Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 89
  1. #61
    Extraordinary Member Jokerz79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    5,439

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Comic-Reader Lad View Post
    Yeah, I agree that the other studios cannot and should not avoid Disney.

    I think the trick is not to release movies that are in the same genre as a nearby Disney release.

    For example, it was great that Warner released Aquaman in December. Yes, it had to compete with Mary Poppins Returns, but the two movies are so different that Warner had the superhero territory staked out for itself for December and January.

    It was quite a different story with Shazam in March. Shazam was sandwiched in between two major Marvel movies -- Captain Marvel and Avengers: Endgame. The family audience showed up for Shazam -- trouncing Disney's own Dumbo in the process -- but the larger audience avoided it, not because it was a bad movie, but because their superhero movie itch was going to be scratched by the two Disney-Marvel offerings. If Shazam had been released this August instead, I believe it would have become a much bigger hit -- especially since Fox's own New Mutants, originally scheduled for August, is once again on the shelf and will probably never get a theatrical release, but end up on the Disney+ streaming service instead.

    I think Dark Phoenix also fell victim to scheduling in addition to the bad reviews. Remember, Venom had atrocious reviews, but did exceptionally well because it had the superhero field all to itself for October through late December. Once Fox realized they weren't going to release New Mutants in August, they should have moved DP there. I'm not saying it would have hit Venom's heights, but I'm pretty sure it would have successfully cracked $100 million domestic. Right now, after Endgame, I think most people are superheroed-out. When Spider-Man gets released next month, the audiences will have their batteries recharged and be ready for another super-flick.

    As I've said in the OP, Disney is the 800-pound entertainment gorilla, so if the studios want their movies to succeed, they do have to schedule them a bit smarter, but they shouldn't completely run and hide from Disney.
    Shazam was definitely the better film IMO and did better profit wise due to a way lower budget but I don't know if I would say Shazam "trounced" Dumbo having only made 12 million more than it.

    Also unlike Dark Phoenix Venom had good word of mouth with being an entertaining film.

  2. #62
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by motherofpearl1 View Post
    I think a lot of them have got to the state where they believe that pick a popular franchise and/or popular characters, and they'll watch it regardless.

    Many, myself included, hated X Men 3...but it was the most financially successful of the first three films.
    Same thing happened with Spider-man 3. It made the most money out of the Raimi films, but the general consensus is that it's the worst out of the three.

  3. #63
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    938

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by motherofpearl1 View Post
    Disney's takeover of so much is worrying. Once one giant owns everything it can afford to let the quality drop.

    Apart from Lion King I have zero interest in any of these films. And I used to be a cinema addict.
    Yet the opposite is happening. They continue to push the boundaries of high quality, entertaining film making.

    I worry about the monopoly effect but it's hard to worry about a dip in quality. We'd probably get better quality from everything if Disney ran the whole show. I don't want that, I'd rather the other studios stop being so awful.

  4. #64
    A Wearied Madness Vakanai's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jetengine View Post
    To put it bluntly Disney is winning because their being smart and inventive whilst the other studios are floundering using older models or assuming the audiences are dumb.
    ...how is remaking every single last one of their animated classics into a live action movie smart or inventive? And what new model should other companies be trying to not flounder? What do you think the old model was?

  5. #65
    A Wearied Madness Vakanai's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Theleviathan View Post
    Yet the opposite is happening. They continue to push the boundaries of high quality, entertaining film making.

    I worry about the monopoly effect but it's hard to worry about a dip in quality. We'd probably get better quality from everything if Disney ran the whole show. I don't want that, I'd rather the other studios stop being so awful.
    Are the remakes really that freaking great? Does everything else really suck that much compared to new versions of old classics?

  6. #66
    Astonishing Member AJBopp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    3,982

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vakanai View Post
    ...how is remaking every single last one of their animated classics into a live action movie smart or inventive?
    I'm confused . How is that not smart and inventive? It's never really been done before, and it makes a ton of money. Inventive. Smart.

    It doesn't just mean "new stories"
    Why yes, I AM a Mark Goodson/Bill Toddman production.

  7. #67
    A Wearied Madness Vakanai's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJBopp View Post
    I'm confused . How is that not smart and inventive? It's never really been done before, and it makes a ton of money. Inventive. Smart.

    It doesn't just mean "new stories"
    Kind of feels lazy and the opposite of creative to me. Less inventive and more soulless idea dreamt up in some boardroom meeting that works only by playing off people's nostalgia for past movies. Obviously it worked, and they're making bank, and hell you could even argue it is smart from a greedy corporate standpoint, but if you think it's inventive then we'll have to disagree on the very meaning of that word.

  8. #68
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    938

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vakanai View Post
    Are the remakes really that freaking great? Does everything else really suck that much compared to new versions of old classics?
    Yes. And what they're making originally or adapting is pretty damn great.

  9. #69
    King of Wakanda Midvillian1322's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    7,227

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vakanai View Post
    Kind of feels lazy and the opposite of creative to me. Less inventive and more soulless idea dreamt up in some boardroom meeting that works only by playing off people's nostalgia for past movies. Obviously it worked, and they're making bank, and hell you could even argue it is smart from a greedy corporate standpoint, but if you think it's inventive then we'll have to disagree on the very meaning of that word.
    Something like the Aladdin remake has way more soul then most the movies that have come out this year. You can call the Execs who decided they wanted it made lazy but the people who worked on that movie defiently werent there for a greedy soules cash grab.

    And somehow it's bad because its they're own movie, but if it was another studio making 10000000000th Robin hood movie that's ok. A movie should be judged by its quality. Dumbo I did not think was good but Burton swung for the fences. Aladdin added and corrected a few things like empowering Jasmine. But Dumbo made they're own movie basically. I'm curious to see where Lion King falls. Shot for shot remake with a few tweaks like Beauty and the Beast. Or if they have some shots for the fans but kinda do they're own thing. I will say as far as the CGI In Lion King. That scene where Scars ear twitches looks amazing.
    Last edited by Midvillian1322; 06-19-2019 at 07:57 PM.

  10. #70
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    1,116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vakanai View Post
    Kind of feels lazy and the opposite of creative to me. Less inventive and more soulless idea dreamt up in some boardroom meeting that works only by playing off people's nostalgia for past movies. Obviously it worked, and they're making bank, and hell you could even argue it is smart from a greedy corporate standpoint, but if you think it's inventive then we'll have to disagree on the very meaning of that word.
    With all due respect you think KOTM is a great film....even though its a remake effectively. Its a mish mash of 2 films.

  11. #71
    Fantastic Member pandafarmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    308

    Default

    I see both points.

    As a casual movie goer, I have zero interest in these films and wouldn't even likely watch them on cable/streaming as I've "already seen it (boring/repetitive)."

    From a business standpoint I think it's absolutely smart for Disney to bring a new generation to the theater to see stories that are indeed timeless. Re-releasing the original animated films would hold zero interest to many of today's kids where traditional animation looks positively antique compared to anything made by Pixar and the like.

  12. #72
    A Wearied Madness Vakanai's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Theleviathan View Post
    Yes. And what they're making originally or adapting is pretty damn great.
    Then mind going into detail what specifically they're doing right, what other studios are doing wrong, and what could be changed here? Just saying Disney rules and other studios suck right now doesn't tell anyone much.

    Quote Originally Posted by Midvillian1322 View Post
    Something like the Aladdin remake has way more soul then most the movies that have come out this year. You can call the Execs who decided they wanted it made lazy but the people who worked on that movie defiently werent there for a greedy soules cash grab.
    Yeah, I was talking more about the execs than the people charged with actually making the movie, since good film or bad most people put their hearts and souls into their projects. Still, it's impossible to get me excited about three remakes a year. If they were spaced out or more of a rarity, I might be interested in an Aladdin remake. But as is I'll probably never see it, because honestly I'm just tired of them. I mean, it's not like I'm the paragon of originality, I've watched as many sequels, prequels, remakes, and reboots as anyone else here, hell I'll probably check out the new Child's Play with smart home gadget Chucky, but Disney has taken it to the next level here and even someone like me is put off. But hey, to each their own, just let me know when they've finally run through all their classics so I can see if there's anything that might interest me again.

    And somehow it's bad because its they're own movie, but if it was another studio making 10000000000th Robin hood movie that's ok.
    Could you explain that better? Not entirely sure I know what the point is.

    Quote Originally Posted by jetengine View Post
    With all due respect you think KOTM is a great film....even though its a remake effectively. Its a mish mash of 2 films.
    Yeah, but difference is they're not remaking every single Godzilla film ever. I'm not actually against doing remakes in general, I'm against doing a whole string of them end on end specifically. I'd feel a lot better about Disney doing these if Aladdin was like the third or fourth remake they did this decade instead of, god what number are they up to now, a baker's dozen? It's the quantity of remakes in particular I find so off putting, not that they're doing remakes at all. Remakes should be infrequent, not the rule.

  13. #73
    A Wearied Madness Vakanai's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pandafarmer View Post
    Re-releasing the original animated films would hold zero interest to many of today's kids where traditional animation looks positively antique compared to anything made by Pixar and the like.
    Do kids these days really have such disdain for 2D animation, or is that just what some of us adults think? Any actual surveys or studies been done?
    (Not arguing, truly curious, possibly morbidly so as a fan of 2D animation; really hoping it's not obsolete to the new generation)

  14. #74
    Fantastic Member pandafarmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vakanai View Post
    Do kids these days really have such disdain for 2D animation, or is that just what some of us adults think? Any actual surveys or studies been done?
    (Not arguing, truly curious, possibly morbidly so as a fan of 2D animation; really hoping it's not obsolete to the new generation)
    Good question, but I know "the masses" tend to like new and shiny in general. I wonder if there have been any studies about that though outside of box office results. I guess it would come down to when the last "normal" animated film came out and how it compared to the likes of DreamWorks and Pixar films.

    EDIT - Disney's last traditionally animated films were 2009's “The Princess and the Frog” and 2011's “Winnie the Pooh.”

    https://www.rotoscopers.com/2015/02/...-2d-animation/

    http://mickeymindset.com/will-disney...d-drawn-films/
    Last edited by pandafarmer; 06-20-2019 at 01:33 PM.

  15. #75
    Swollen Member GOLGO 13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,366

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vakanai View Post
    Is domestic box office success the end all be all sign of quality and good movies here? Really? Great movies flop sometimes, and bad movies make bank sometimes. Profit really shouldn't be part of the discussion on whether this is a good or bad season.
    As I understand it, Legendary is owned by the Wanda Group (Chinese). Their main focus is the international market & particularly China where they are NOT subject to China's quota restrictions on American films. I'm sure they would have loved to have a boffo domestic success, but that's not their bread & butter.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •