April 30, 2024
The Hot Blog
amit on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
Christian on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
YancySkancy on: Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Hcat on: Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: I Should Be Doing Box Office
Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
Quote Unquotesee all »
It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?
So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.
And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.
There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.
I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.
But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”
My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher
“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.
~ David Simon
One of those weekends where the lead is going to be a ridiculous debate over whether $170 million is a disappointing opening, when the real lead is Disney demolishing the record for fastest studio to $1 billion domestic by an astounding 37 days.
Don’t worry EtGuild, I assume DP will write up a summary pointing out that there is nothing of note about the opening — neither remarkably bad or good.
But he would actually be accurate this time Lane – fair or not, every prognosticator was expecting $200 mill this weekend, especially when you have The Avengers plus the PREMIERE Marvel hero, Spiderman – this going to open lower than Ultron. It’ll probably breeze through $1 billion WW but the MCU brand is clearly maturing…..pretty much where Harry Potter was five or six years ago.
The premiere Marvel superhero is “Spiderman”??? I must have missed that memo, along with everyone else who has gone to movies recently (oh yeah, and SONY!)
The idea that anyone is shocked by this tells you that predicting box office is over. It reminds me of primaries and caucuses-Bernie, Hillary, Trump, Cruz, whoever, ONLY got X amount of percent of the vote, so that is the end for him/her.
It’s a media construction that means nothing to Disney.
A quick cameo of Hulk, who would have clearly been on Team Captain America, taking on the entire Iron Man team would have been worth an extra $20m on Opening Weekend. Would have set up a nice confrontation between him and Black Widow.
Ryan, yes Spiderman sells more merchandise, more comic books, and even more theme park tickets than the rest of the Marvel stable combined….it’s not even close! Of all superhero IP’s, he’s probably only second to Batman.
I’ve been saying this should have been called Avengers 2.5 for awhile now, but truthfully, this is the better and smarter move. Within the Marvel universe, The Avengers is kind of a brand all to itself. And the next chapter in that brand has already been set. To all those prognosticators with their $200m forecast, and want to describe this as a let down, keep in mind the last Captain America opened to $95m, and the Opening Weekend figure will be more than the first one’s entire $176m total run. People keep moving this bar higher and higher.
Marvel brand is experiencing diminishing returns. Big team up films have all fallen since Avengers. This does not breed confidence for Infinty Wars. Current pace of losing 15-20M a pop would set over/under of Infinity Wars part 1 at 155M OW. But by then the panic would be too late.
Bulldog, comparing this to last Captain America opening is not a direct comparison – this was marketed as Avengers 2.5 plus Spiderman – look it’s a strong opening, but let’s not act like Disney is besides themselves about this opening. They spent a boatload just screening this exhaustively over the past month and they got the critics in their corner early on too…..they were expecting to top the first Avengers.
Maybe they’ve just reached the ceiling. If they consistently open $150-170 million, that’s not a bad place to be. Everything has a ceiling. Avengers may have been it. WB should be scared.
Am I wrong to suspect Dr. Strange could be the first big Marvel flop? Unless the Cumberbatchers come out in force, maybe. I love the Marvel films but not remotely excited for that one, and the trailer didn’t seem to play to the audience I was with today. More excited for Black Panther now, after CA:CW.
Good grief. 8 years and 13 movies into the most ambitious project in Hollywood and a $175 million opening sparks talk of panic and coming failures that have been predicted for the entire decade (Thor! Guardians! Ant Man!)
These claims of impending doom at Marvel have been going on for so long on this blog, they’re taking on almost mythic status, like a Republican Party health care plan, the impending release of Dr. Dre’s Detox album, or an ISIS/Al Qaeda attack on US soil.
I could see Dr. Strange doing well…kind of like Inception. And Cumberbatch has seemed on the verge of movie stardom for a while. Oh yeah, and it’s Marvel. The only real way it wouldn’t succeed is if Marvel disowned it.
Yes Geoff, we all said it was Avengers 2.5 because most of the Avengers were in it. But there was no marketing campaign that said that this was an Avengers movie. They were smart. They left out a few Avengers and no Nick Fury. They played both sides, and was able to have their cake and eat it too. This wasn’t the Avengers assembling to battle a common enemy. That’s what the Avengers do.
And they won the most important battle of all, they beat BvS both financially and critically so they claim bragging rights.
I don’t know why people think that because you dump more superheroes into a movie then more people are supposed to show up. It’s the same people going to see all of them. People who love Spider-Man don’t just like Spider-Man, they love the genre, so expecting extra isn’t really logical. And the last Spider-Man movie limped over $200m. It’s Spidey that needs the boost.
Unless this thing falls like BvS which looks unlikely to make twice its opening weekend gross, we’re talking over $400m here. And it basically has three weeks until any serious competition shows up in Alice and X-men. So Ultron’s $460m may actually be in play if this thing shows any kind of legs.
How come when folks who are paid to project numbers get it wrong, it’s the fault of the movie? I could ask the same thing about Wall Street earnings projections.
“How come when folks who are paid to project numbers get it wrong, it’s the fault of the movie?”
THIS.
Palmtree stole my thunder with Strange. It’s a weird, trippy, Inception style movie. People still dig a head trip, and Strange has always been promised to be a fucking heady head trip.
Geoff, it’s a good movie, and some next level Marvel filmmaking. It’s not hard to get critics on your side, when you aren’t shoveling shit at them. Your point about people believing it to be bigger than the Avengers, ignores this comes from expectations, from people forgetting we aren’t getting Star Wars opening from Marvel… until everyone joins up together in Infinity War pt. 2
Oh yeah. If they are changing the Infinity War movie titles, then the Thanos movie, formerly Infinity War pt. 1, opening to 155m would be pretty impressive. Pt. 2, is going to mark the first time in 4 years, that all of the Avengers are together on screen, and with the Guardians. Infinity War pt. 2, is the one chance Marvel has, to beat Star Wars opening weekend. Until then, this is a good fucking opening. It’s going to be higher than expected/assumed, because these movies are Saturday and Sunday movies. People are working Friday, and head out Saturday and Sunday, to enjoy the hell out of Marvel.
“And they won the most important battle of all, they beat BvS both financially and critically so they claim bragging rights.”
I don’t have Disney/Marvel offices bugged but I’m gonna guess that they would disagree that this is a.) the most important battle of all and b.) even a little important.
@JS
“If they are changing the Infinity War movie titles, then the Thanos movie, formerly Infinity War pt. 1, opening to 155m would be pretty impressive. Pt. 2, is going to mark the first time in 4 years, that all of the Avengers are together on screen, and with the Guardians. Infinity War pt. 2, is the one chance Marvel has, to beat Star Wars opening weekend.”
If the next Avengers movie barely gets to 155, the next one ain’t beating SW. It doesn’t work like that.
Amblin, a Thanos movie is going to be a solid earner, but it doesn’t scream, “Worldbeater,” like a team up of all of the Marvel characters, saving the earth together. It’s the second movie, that has the biggest chance of beating Star Wars. That’s Marvel’s moonshot.
Oh yeah, people watch shows with multiple characters all the damn time. Team up movies are not on the decline. They are what they are. It’s still awesome to see Scott vs Pete… AT-AT style. That’s good shit, and you don’t get that shit, with origin movies!
The “Thanos movie” will be an Avengers movie, branded and sold as such. It will feature most of the characters that will probably be in part two. People aren’t as invested in the storyline as you are, they don’t care that the good stuff isn’t until next time. If the first movie can only hit 155, it means the second one is in trouble.
I have to admit I’ve really avoided Cap America Civil War marketing, trailers and info about said film as best as I could. It was only as I was watching that I remembered, ‘oh yeah, I read that character was going to be in a Marvel film,’ or “that’s right, I forgot s/he was mentioned a while back” and so for me the movie was made more enjoyable by seeing all the additional characters. I think having it be like The Avengers, abridged student edition, builds towards a better potential word of mouth. I went in thinking I was just going to see another Capt Am film but came out thinking I had seen more of one of those rare event films.
Now, I’m not sure where I’d rank it in terms of the superhero films of the past 15 years but it at least avoided the potential to be “just another comic book movie.” While I agree w/EtGuild2 that people have been throwing dirt on marvel/superhero films for too long now, I do wonder what they are going to do to mix things up. It can’t just be introduce more characters if the model of the films remain relatively the same. Batman Begins was great because it wasn’t just a scene in a lab or strange incident that gives rise to a person w/totally new abilities but a whole genesis film. But then the next thing you know, all superhero films feature brooding characters in a protracted introduction that’s really not necessary.
Whatever the leaked Wolverine movie caused to be siphoned off the boxoffice I’m sure was nothing in comparison to an out & out bomb that may’ve hit fox if they can continued on the once talked about path to give more of the X-Men their own title. I enjoyed Dark Knight because it was a crime movie, Capt Am 2 was a thriller but does this latest Capt Am film, along with Bat vs Supes represent a trend towards superhero ensemble films? I thought the play between the characters’ superhero strengths against each other was well thought out here (not withstanding the point of would they even bother to battle each other? Why not say “if you want ’em, YOU go get them!”) but if Hollywood execs get so scared that they can’t make a film w/out 5 main characters, how long before these films run the genre into the ground? Just showing the trailer for Central Intelligence w/The Rock and Kevin Hart, all I could think was “oh joy, a big budget buddy action film w/generic plot & premise, what is it, 1995???” I suppose the world will never outgrow its supply of 13 yr old boys but how many of these films can come out before people just shrug and think, ‘eh, I’m good’?
Did the movie seem unnecessarily long to anyone besides me? I also wonder do they have to make a film be more than 2 ½ hours to give the impression it’s an event film to bolster sales. I’m not saying that this is the beginning of the end of Marvel I wonder how potentially limiting or genre killing would it be if the conclusion following the success of The Avengers and BvS and now Civil War is that “there’s gotta be 5 superheroes, potential romance between two, defying of orders, and at least 2:25 of running time.” If the marvel studio does blowup on itself, I wonder who’ll shoulder the blame, over saturation of the genre or studio execs unable to decide w/out fear.
Re: INFINITY WAR speculation.
*HUNGER GAMES PART 2 opened well behind its predecessor
*TWILIGHT PART 2 opened slightly ahead of Part 1
*HARRY POTTER PART 2 crushed part 1
Nobody knows anything.
Triple Option, you raise some very interesting points. Can they ever now go back to making a Captain America film with just Captain America? And when that film makes a likely $250 to $300m will it be deemed a failure because it failed to live up to the box office levels of Civil War?
They haven’t shown any indication they’ll make a Part 4 movie with the same cast. Evans seems willing, but they apparently haven’t even approached him about re-upping, stoking the continual speculation of killing off Steve Rogers. They seem happy to use RDJ on a working basis, putting him in CIVIL WAR AND SPIDERMAN.
2020 would be the earliest for a Part 4, and given the groundswell of support for a BLACK WIDOW movie, the liklihood of GUARDIANS 3 and the hopefullness for SPIDEY and STRANGE sequels, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
Is there some sort of curse re: superhero part 4’s that stops studios from doing one now? BATMAN & ROBIN, SUPERMAN QUEST FOR PEACE, and the drama behind Raimi’s SPIDERMAN 4 make me wonder. They’ve avoided part 4 with the original XMen cast by placing them in a “new trilogy” and Wolverine 3. They’ve avoided a Part 4 Avenger movie by doing CIVIL War and calling Part 4 the second half of Part 3.
JS it IS a good movie, marginally better than BVS which is why its fairly obvious that Disney/Marvel played the fans and critics fairly effectively over the past month for so many of them to be deeming it a “masterpiece.”
Saw it last night and was ready to have a blast just like all of the reviews told me I was going to and here’s the main issue that none of the YouTube reviewers nor Marvel fanboys are going to admit for at least six months when all of the dust settles from the big hype over both films: Civil War pretty much has all of the same storytelling/editing issues and covers most of the same narrative ground as BVS except for ONE thing……it’s funnier. It’s the truth – the audience saw it with was primed when it started and pretty much exhausted when it was over.
Not a fan of Zack Snyder and I think he has pretty much dropped the ball on all things Superman, but I wouldn’t trust the Russo Brothers to go beyond their sitcom roots with any of these films moving forward – Civil War had some fun scenes but they padded the running time to almost 2.5 hours and deflated the tension they were going for with the rest of the narrative.
And when did I or anybody say that Disney is “panicking” over this opening?? 🙂 Of course they’re not…it’s a fantastic opening and the movie will probably make $1.2 billion worldwide at least. But you look at the trendlines for this franchise and it’s clearly maturing in popularity, just from a very high ceiling….a ceiling that most other franchises would probably kill for, including Warner Bros/DC. Less than five years from now, we’ll be back to one Marvel film per year….and up to two Star Wars films per year. 😉
And no there, there is NO Marvel flop on the horizon – if it was going to happen, it was going to happen with Guardians or Ant-Man….they’re pretty much in the clear when it comes to international: as long as they keep the salaries and budgets in check, they’ll be fine with $500 million WW guaranteed for each installment for the foreseeable future. Dr. Strange will probably make its money back.
PJ Edwards said “But by then the panic would be too late.” insinuating that this is the beginning of the end.
The problem with writing about “trendlines” for this movie is the “trendline” for the Captain America series is showing explosive growth. It’s just some people aren’t treating it as a CAP movie. There’s an argument to be made either way. (If Guardians 2 grows 40% from the first one is that evidence of growth or evidence of the “MCU ceiling?).
The larger problems with “trendlines” is you have something like FAST AND FURIOUS, where a 4th installment, arguably the worst quality wise in the franchise by a good bit, showed explosive growth out of nowhere, and then continued to defy expectations and make analysts look like idiots by going higher and higher to the point where they have the biggest international movie of all-time not involving James Cameron. HUNGER GAMES went the other way. BOND has been all over the place. IRON MAN doubled in its 3rd go-round from its “ceiling.” The DESPICABLE ME spin-off tailed off domestically, but skyrocketed internationally to within spitting distance of the animated record. We like to pretend franchises perform predictably, but unless it’s HARRY POTTER or horror, there’s no evidence that’s the case.
The larger “problem,” for this genre is that you have a finite number of people on this planet who go to see movies, at least until India and the 3rd world take off more. TFA, Titanic and Avatar were once-in-a-generation events that either pushed the medium forward in a big way technologically, or reunited the core actors from the most beloved movie in the medium’s history.
Etguild, it’s not a Cap movie – I saw the movie and it was EXACTLY like it was marketed: Cap plus most of the Avengers plus Spiderman. So in that respect, it was a small drop from Ultron.
And I would agree with you about trendlines for almost all franchises EXCEPT the MCU – unlike all of those others, this is a franchise that is releasing TWO films year with heavy cross-promotions with TV and Netflix series….checking the pulse of a franchise like that is much more obvious because it is ALWAYS out there continuously.
Right…but it’s not an AVENGERS movie either, since you’re missing 2 of the 4 core Avengers. Does Spider-Man make up for this? I have no idea. Regardless, it makes sense that it’s going to be the biggest “”solo”” opening ever, but not quiiiite live up to something with Avengers in the title. To expect a movie clearly fronted by Chris Evans to be the biggest superhero opening of all-time shows that the narrative has run off the rails, if anything.
Agree that the saturation makes it more visible, but I still don’t clearly see a trend….I see something that’s re-written every 1-2 years. The narrative is that AVENGERS 1 was the breakout, then IRON MAN 3 exploded thanks to what people called “The AVENGERS effect.” This “Avengers effect” apparently really manifested itself internationally….with no explanation as to why it a US-based espionage thriller benefited exponentially more than an intergalactic romp. Then you have GUARDIANS blowing away expectations…but you can still pretend it was due to “the Avengers effect.” Then AVENGERS 2 underperforms along with ANT-MAN performing as you’d expect a troubled production to, and CIVIL WAR not being the biggest superhero movie God ever created, and suddenly the “Avengers effect” is clearly limited. This is all an example of creating a narrative and then dictating results so that they fall into that narrative…until eventually the MCU equivalent of FAST 4 comes and blows it to smithereens, or people remember that Planet Earth’s population is only so large.
Etguild, I’ll agree that the narrative can change very quickly and that Disney is going to exhaust every effort to keep the brand fresh but this IS an Avengers movie – yeah you don’t have Hulk, Thor, or Nick Fury but you have the original four PLUS the introduction of Black Panther PLUS the reintroduction of Spiderman….plus Vision, Scarlet Witch, War Machine, and Falcon none of which were even in the FIRST Avengers film. 🙂 Seriously a good third of the film’s screentime is devoted to that second batch of newer Avengers and Iron Man/Tony Stark gets almost as much screentime as Cap. And I will say this: Downey is fantastic in the film, his best performance in this universe since
the first Iron Man.
I agree with what you’re saying Geoff, but I’d implore you to consider the possibility that when you’re talking about appealing to 25 million Americans on opening weekend, not all of them are rabid comic-book movie fans, or even comic movie fans at all. There are indeed people out there whose eyes glaze over re: this stuff, but tag-along when it feels like a singular event, i.e. Heath Ledger is dead, Paul Walker is dead, dinos are back, it’s Harry’s last ride, we’ve never had a superhero team-up, etc. What matters on movies with Cap, Iron Man or Guardians in the title is the legs/multiplier.
Also, consider the fact that most Americans have mothers, and this might not be the preference of choice on Mother’s Day weekend (as well as a convenient excuse to escape explosions and spandex). It’s a holiday that blockbusters traditionally avoid, but thanks to a quirk in scheduling this year, falls on the first weekend in May for the first time since 2010. This movie debuted 50% higher than any movie to debut on Mother’s Day weekend in history. What was the previous record-holder? IRON MAN 2, which also fell short of predictions at the time….$128 million vs $140 or $150 that was being thrown around, and spawned a cottage industry of “Iron Man is no Spider-Man/Batman” articles and proclamations that lasted all of two years.
Etguild, no doubt The Avengers was lightning in a bottle that had more to do with the strength of Iron Man 2 or Captain American: The First Avenger – those articles were right in a way. Iron Man does not even compare to Batman as a pure IP – he’s headlined some hugely successful films but only featuring one actor playing him.
The character of Batman was able to set the all time Opening Weekend Box Office record three different times spread out over 20 years played by three DIFFERENT actors. The character of Batman has inspired several spin-off TV shows based on PERIPHERAL characters within his universe that don’t even feature him as a main character. 😉 Spin-off movies too apparently…..Suicide Squad is pretty much a spin-off film based mainly off of Batman’s rogues gallery, which Sony was trying to do not long ago with Spiderman and The Sinister Six. Iron Man doesn’t even come close to that level of impact.
As far as comic book IP’s go, there’s Spider-man and Batman, then every one else (both Hulk and Superman could make a comeback, but they’ve been relegated to supporting characters for the time being)….and if you think I’m crazy to say so, just ask Disney/Marvel how much money they lost last year on the “Marvel Experience” tour which ran BEFORE they could really use Spider-man in other media.
And Mother’s Day didn’t help and the film is making mad cash now but the window closes in a couple of weeks – Disney launches Alice 2 internationally and Fox is already screening X Men: Apocalypse. The multiplier does matter but this film is not going to have the breathing room that ‘Winter Solider nor ‘Guardians did. Not that it really needs it since it doubled both of their openings.
Another example of getting hung up on placement rather than results and context. I’m not sure how the results of BATMAN and SPIDER-MAN, characters known for decades to the general public, really compare to a character portrayed by a recovering addict coming out of the complete unknown and nearly toppling the all-time box office record within 2 years of being introduced to a wide audience. It turns out decades of storied IP, years of live-action and cartoon series, and streams of merchandise spanning generations are good for a few extra bucks, who knew! (It also turns out you can run beloved characters with those decades of history completely into the ground in a few years’ time).
Yes, the “Avengers effect” elevated IRON MAN big time, yet we’ll never know whether it would eventually have a FAST-esque bounce or not, because we’d need to invent time travel and go back to murder Stacey Snyder and Amy Pascal to find out. In my opinion, all it takes is people to realize….hey, I really like a concept (fast cars! family! multi-culturalism!) or say, hey, I’ve got to see this to be part of the conversation for it to succeed on a macro level. Sometimes all it takes to break a record is a major actor dying mid-production or people deciding they like Johnny Depp in a pirate costume with a funny accent.
I’m not disputing that a strong IP can’t be run into the ground even within a short time frame but you really can’t deny the impact Spiderman has had already….actually more than I ever would have though given that the last Spiderman was only two years ago and poorly received at that. After that last Civil War trailer in March, the ONLY thing anybody was talking about was the new Spider-man…and for the past month, the most consistent thing we have heard out of early screenings is “THIS is the Spider-man we have been waiting for!” And yeah Spider-man has a box office track record that is second only to Batman’s: now six different films over a 15 year period that will have all grossed more than $600 million worldwide and played by THREE different actors.
And if you think I’m harping on that “different actors” mention, there’s a reason for that: Downey now commands at least $50 million each time he appears as Iron Man – no single actor has had that kind of stranglehold on Batman or Spider-man, the characters are bigger than any actor who plays them.
The problem with citing anecdotal evidence, is that reality sometimes interferes. The CinemaScore report cites RDJ, Evans and ScarJo as big must-see factors for Civil War, but not Spider-Man. Did they not poll it? I can’t imagine why, and it’s odd not to include it unless it wasn’t as much of a factor as they’d hoped for.
No quarrel that Batman is still king, but I’d slow your roll on giving Tom Holland’s Spidey financial credit for a movie titled “Captain America” unless you want to start pointing out that Black Widow and Hawkeye average a higher gross per on-screen appearance than any superhero out there. At this point Spidey needs RDJ to co-star just to stop the “every Spiderman movie grosses less than the previous one one” trend next year. As for your point on different actors, do I think a RDJ replacement for IRON MAN could manage what Andrew Garfield did, and produce a gross of $250 million, followed up by a gross of $200 million? Absolutely.
@Et,
“Re: INFINITY WAR speculation.
*HUNGER GAMES PART 2 opened well behind its predecessor
*TWILIGHT PART 2 opened slightly ahead of Part 1
*HARRY POTTER PART 2 crushed part 1
Nobody knows anything.”
Nobody knows anything except from that list we do know:
The 1st parts of Harry Potter & Twilight finales opened *much* bigger than the films that proceeded them in the series. JS’s suggestion that the next Avengers would gross substantially lower than the previous installment while the 2nd part will shatter SW opening BO sounds kinda sorta psychotic. If Infinity part 1 or whatever they call it generates less opening interest than Ultron, that is not a good harbinger. If anything it would seem to mirror what happened with Hunger Games. That shit fell straight off a cliff after “Catching Fire.”
All of this is moot anyway as I’m sure both Infinity movies will wreck BO. Ain’t taking down SW, but so what. “Amazingly great” should never be the enemy of “HOLY SHIT”.
Agreed, though NEW MOON was the biggest opening for TWILIGHT, while the movies that immediately precededed BREAKING DAWN 1/HALLOWS opened opened on a Wednesday, which effs up comparisons. Regardless, isn’t INFINITY WAR 1 the first studio blockbuster to be filmed 100% in IMAX? That gimmick alone should help stoke it.
Yes it is:
http://variety.com/2015/film/news/avengers-infinity-war-to-be-shot-entirely-with-imax-cameras-1201489782/
Observation based on the pic in that article: HOLY CRAP WHO THOUGHT THAT ITERATION OF CAPTAIN AMERICA’S COSTUME WAS A GOOD IDEA? That thing looks like it’s straight out of the Corman movie.
Just a quick question. When RDJ develops a hernia from carrying around all that cash and decides to hang up the armour, whom do you guys see as a possible replacement?
Given that he’s only playing that role now, seems like it’ll be a ways off, no? It’s a really tough call…not many actors have shown the combination of intelligence, wit, humor and strength for the role and you almost have to get someone with a high profile. Jason Sudeikis seems like a solid choice. Chris Pine, and JGL seem like possible longer shots. Childish Gambino aka Donald Glover would be amazing IMO, but he would need to bulk up/raise his profile. If Downey hangs on another decade and he returns to consistent acting, Colton Haynes?
I’m thinking Ryan Gosling.
the kitten from ‘keanu’
as each superhero gets killed off/ages out they are replaced with a cute kitty until the entire cast is fully feline, cat action spectacular! cats look cute in little costumes, and it wouldn’t be any dumber or more contrived at this point – plus it would give them a nifty excuse to move the production out of the large, non-descript parking lot and street currently used to shoot all the exteriors and shake things up, try some new locations like one of those outdoor mesh cat park enclosures, or those huge pet shop warehouses, think of the possibilities. the youtubes would love it
I like Leah’s idea best of all.
I like leah’s idea, too. I haven’t seen Keanu yet, so I can’t weigh in on that choice. But I wouldn’t rule out one of the cats that played Ulysses, the cat from Inside Llewyn Davis. And for Nick Fury, I’m thinking Mischa, the toilet-flushing cat from Meet the Parents.
I dimly recall that, at some point in Superman comics in the 1960s, there actually was Streaky the Supercat.
you guys are good sports
(as a big fan of ‘the cat’ (masuka’s the name) from ‘A girl walks home alone at night’ i’d like to think she’s a real up-and-comer with a shot at the big leagues: super confident in vehicles, happy in an ensemble cast, beguiling expressive eyes – screen acting’s all about the eyes, right, just the complete package)
I think Leah may have just identified the inevitable convergence of blockbusters and viral video. In the future all big budget tentpoles will be elaborate cat videos.
Leahnz, always knew you were a pussy lover. 🙂
Iron Cat, Black Cat, Panther, (no change necessary), Supercat, Batcat, Antcat, Harlequat, Spidercat, Warcat, Deadcat, Darecat….
The possibilities are endless.
Isn’t that basically what we’re getting with the Lego versions of superheroes?
I better get my SHE-HULK movie before the kitties take over.
Psychotic? Over a box office prediction? That’s a fucking HOT TAKE right there, Man.