Jump to content

Deadlines? What Deadlines?

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Deadlines? What Deadlines?

  1. 2 hours ago, Corvinus85 said:

    Out of the best picture list, I haven't even heard of the bottom two. I think there might have been a snub or two there.

    So Top Gun: Maverick gets best picture nod, an adapted screenplay nod (adapted from what?), visual effects, but fails to get a cinematography nod. Weird.

    Three MCU movies this year, only Black Panther got a nod for visual effects. I would have picked Multiverse of Madness. Not that it matters, Avatar is winning that category.

    From the Daynjah Zaowen, Mellon Farmer. 


    Wow! these awards shit heads sure are nominating the hell out of that there All Quiet on the Western Front movie, huh? :D

  2. 2 hours ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

    No, but that is irrelevant to my comment. Sure  it's technically amazing, but it lacks any actual story... 

    How's that movie gonna peel your face off if you don't watch it in a theater? C'mon, man!

    Of course it has a story. The story is: Top Gun... but older (and dryer). 

    2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

    I saw it on a plane. Beat that! 

    Also the movie is massively overrated. 

    Yeah, yeah, "To teach Tom Cruise a lesson". We know.  

  3. 9 hours ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

    Having now watched Top Gun: Maverick...I enjoyed it well enough, but do not understand the hype at all. Yes, it's a much of a recruitment film as the first one was, but the first one had at least the hint of an actual story behind the characters and the action. This one has significantly less of that. 

    I'm guessing you didn't see it in a theater.

  4. 7 hours ago, Darryk said:

    Well he got the opportunity to write a Star Wars movie, which many people would do for free, and made it completely about himself and his own political views instead of respecting the Star Wars universe,

    And his Knive's Out movies are basically screaming "look how smart I am!"

    I don't know about any of that. I thought the Knives out films were fine. I liked the second one a lot more than the first, but I still think they're overrated. TLJ is a whole different topic. 

  5. 1 hour ago, DMC said:

    Not sure what you mean by the "is that your final answer" bit.  Is Meghan preventing you from getting on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire or something?

    As for her and Harry's Netflix show "tormenting" you, LOL.  Just don't watch.  I haven't.  Hell I haven't been on Netflix since finishing the new season of Crown, which I'm pretty sure happened before all this shit.  I do love how you still feel the need to whine about it though.  Quite revealing - and amusing.

    Ah, so you're a The Crown watcher eh? Hmmm...

    how much do you want to be that those guys are furiously rewriting next season to be more harry centric?


    So, of some to-do takes place within 100 miles of them, and they aren't invited... Um, were they supposed to get an invite? Isn't their community currently being beset by flooding or fires or something?

    This is reaching. 


  6. 1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

    Quote the parts behind the paywall please

    Waitaminnit. No it isn't.


    EXCLUSIVE: ITV CEO Carolyn McCall has said there is “no place on ITV” for Jeremy Clarkson’s Meghan Markle comments and stressed that Who Wants to be a Millionaire? “does not provide a platform for his opinions.”

    In a letter sent on December 22 and published for the first time today by Deadline, McCall responded to Scottish lawmaker John Nicolson’s call to drop Clarkson from his Who Wants to be a Millionaire? hosting duties, which Clarkson has been helming for five years. 

    “Your concerns are completely understandable,” wrote McCall. “Everyone at ITV is very aware of our responsibilities as a Public Service Broadcaster and I’d like to be clear that the comments made were Jeremy Clarkson’s own and are in no way endorsed by ITV. There is no place on ITV for the comments made in that article.”

    Deadline has revealed McCall’s letter as ITV weighs up Clarkson’s future on Who Wants to be a Millionaire?. Only one series – due to be filmed next month and air over the summer – is left on his current contract, although ITV Director of Programs Kevin Lygo said he would continue as host during a press briefing in late December, around the time McCall sent her letter.

    The December 16 column, which was retracted by The Sun and is the British newspaper regulator’s most complained-about article of all time, included the former Top Gear host saying he “dreamed of the day when [Markle] is made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while the crowds chant ‘Shame!’,” in a callback to a Game of Thrones scene.

    McCall, who hasn’t made any public statements about the former Top Gear host’s column, said Who Wants to be a Millionaire? “is not a platform for [Clarkson’s] opinions,” while stressing that he is not employed by the broadcaster.

    Nicolson, who has long campaigned on issues in the UK culture and media space, had written to McCall in the aftermath of the column’s publication with a call to drop Clarkson, whose comments he said went against ITV’s Statement of Programme Policy and Social Purpose Strategy. Around 50 MPs sent a similar open letter to the Rupert Murdoch-owned The Sun on 18 December, which swiftly retracted the column.

    As ITV mulls Clarkson’s future, Amazon Prime Video is likely to part ways with the 62-year-old once the current seasons of The Grand Tour and Clarkson’s Farm run down next year, according to a Variety report earlier this week. 

    Clarkson issued a lengthy apology for the column on Monday, which was roundly rejected in a statement by Markle and her husband Prince Harry.

    The letter in full

    Dear Mr Nicolson,

    Thank you for your recent letter regarding the comments made by Jeremy Clarkson in his Sun newspaper column.

    Your concerns are completely understandable. ITV has no editorial control over Jeremy Clarkson’s independent journalistic output in The Sun or anywhere else he chooses to publish.

    Everyone at ITV is very aware of our responsibilities as a Public Service Broadcaster and I’d like to be clear that the comments made were Jeremy Clarkson’s own and are in no way endorsed by ITV. There is no place on ITV for the comments made in that article.

    It is also worth adding that Jeremy Clarkson is not an ITV employee and that when he appears on ITV it is as a quiz show host on a show which does not provide a platform for his opinions.

    I hope that reassures you about ITV’s position and thank you again for making your concerns known.

    Kind regards,


  7. 1 hour ago, DMC said:

    Meghan Markle clearly lied about 9/11, the JFK assassination, Obama's birth certificate, January 6th, and of course the Suez crisis.  In fact, everything Billy Joel sang about was Meghan Markle's fault.  Source:  Rupert Murdoch.

    She kidnapped the Lindbergh baby, Caused the '29 stock market crash, then used her time machine to travel to Calvary 2,000-odd years ago to drive in the nails. Sweet suffering JESUS, SHE DROVE IN THE NAILS!!! 

    1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

    Quote the parts behind the paywall please

    Sadly, the wall of paying is an obstacle to me too I'm afraid. 

  8. 1 hour ago, polishgenius said:

    TROS has 52% on Rotten Tomatoes, Book of Boba Fett 66%. Love and Thunder got 63%, Eternals has 47, Multiverse of Madness has 74. All of them worse than Way of Water.

    Too generous, too generous, way too generous, a bit harsh, too generous. I agree that they're all worse then Avatar 2. B) And according to the coveted vegetable consensus, Captain Marvel scores higher than Avatar 2. Um, OK.

    On the list of overrated DC films: The Suicide Squad, Shazam!, Wonder Woman, Definitely WW84, Birds of Prey. Are they good or bad? Each to their own, but definitely overrated. "Best DC film since TDK" has been published so many times its practically become a running joke in the CBM community. 

    Regardless, what I'm addressing is the apparent lack of story, characters, "too derivative" etc, criticisms that gets leveled at the Avatar films. Criticisms that could be leveled far more credibly at every one of the films you describe. 

  9. A.I. rewatched for the first time in a long time. Much more interesting than I remember. 

    High Life A very somber, slow burn of a Sci Fi film with people on a space ship for some reason and they're all simultaneously very alienated and really, really horny. Juliette Binoche... does things. I'm sure there's a subtext there that I'm missing. 

  10. 1 hour ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

    I think the majority of Avtr2 critics ive heard are just trying to come off as edgy and attempting to appear as trendy with thier exaggerated complaints.

    If they genuinely don't like the movie that's fine. But this media ecosystem has, for a decade, heaped unalloyed praise on every new MCU, Star Wars, and "fill in the blank" franchise reboot. Some of those films are genuinely good.  Many are overrated. Many are downright boring and incredibly derivative. So I'm not having it. 


    ive seen kids literally addicted to watching SpongeBob and Avatar hours a day whenever parents were otherwise occupied.

    Those are some pretty amazing kids. We need to get a team under them and put them to work immediately. 

  11. 6 hours ago, IlyaP said:

    As in - Endgame made a lot of its money quickly, whereas A2 could keep going and overtake it if it maintains the current consistent pace it's at. 


    4 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

    Could it? I was under the impression it was being pegged for about 2.5 max. But who knows, Cameron film don't perform normally. 

    It's possible I guess; but it has a long way to go. It might get there by the end but I'm doubtful.

    29 minutes ago, Kyoshi said:

    I'm finding the conversation very interesting because I've always wondered how it gets decided that movies are impactful/audiences actually connect with them, because I must be one of few people who were genuinely waiting for this film. My whole family, in fact. We've already had repeat watches because we genuinely enjoy the franchise, can connect with the strong environmental themes, and are eagerly awaiting the so-called Ash people rumoured for Avatar 3.

    This isn't directed at you, but I personally find most of the criticism against the franchise rather lazy, like one guy made a bunch of bullet points against it and now everyone just sort of picks from that list to argue why the movies are "bad." Stuff like "can you even name the main character at the top of your head?" The answer doesn't matter IMHO. My favourite book of all time is "The Remains of the Day" and I kid you not when I say I couldn't name the main character two weeks after putting it down. Bit it still remains the most profound story I've ever read.

    I guess what I'm trying to say, in a roundabout way, is that people might simply enjoy the franchise. At least enough to explain the ridiculous box office numbers. The story is "simple," sure enough, but some things, IMHO, are allowed to be. I'm South African, my history dictates that I NOT have to imagine overly complex motivations for human cruelty. Humans are shit, for the most part. Especially when you factor in capitalism. A lot of mines and petroleum companies STILL have to be bullied into prioritising human life and the environment over money. Just a year ago (IIRC) the Wild Coast was in danger from Shell. There's nothing complex about that. If someone wrote that story, it really would be that straightforward. So I guess the "it's too simple" argument kind of baffles me.

    This is the right answer. 

    A lot of the "no cultural impact" discussion seems to be centered around some pretty superficial, primarily American phenomena. The lack of memes; the lack of merchandise; the lack of people dressing up like Avatar characters at comic-con. There's more to it than that I guess.

    Fundamentally, I think these people were mostly just trying to fill column inches with words about Avatar before the sequel came out. And yeah, it's lazy.

    But you know what? That's fine. The predictions that the film would fail have aged like milk. The film crossed a threshold of box office success where I get to see where this story goes. I'm good.   

  12. 2 hours ago, IlyaP said:

    Endgame's success was mostly front-loaded, right? As in, it made most of its bank in the first few weeks and then tapered off, unlike Top Gun Maverick and Way of Water, which just keep going, yeah? 

    Yes. I'm not sure what you're getting at.

  13. 8 hours ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

    There are! But none are James Cameron films, none have the hype and marketing and expectation. It's not that it's a better film, it's that it is a more guaranteed film. 

    Marketing and hype and expectation will drive opening weekend ticket sales. Legs are driven by word of mouth. So there's a difference. 

    11 hours ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

    The reason that avatar has such long legs is because it's the Dennys of movies. It isn't most people's first pick or favorite, but when you want to go to the movies (especially in a dead period like the winter) this is the pick that will be guaranteed to be...fine, and worth it in a theater. It makes no impressions and carries no weight. It is the popcorn of popcorn movies.

    Speaking for myself, I'd say it made a hell of an impression. And I'm sorry, but a sci-fi saga where the villain of the story is "humanity" writ large; not the "Denny's of movies". There are however several other releases this year that could contend for that title. 

    5 hours ago, IlyaP said:

    But not Infinity's War sequel. Not yet. That's Avatar's 2 ultimate endgame. 


    Oh, I'm sure there's a cohort of MCU fanboys who are primed and ready with, "well, it didn't beat Endgame" hoo-ha. 

  14. I was wondering about that. She was credited on IMDB for Avatar 2 but didn't appear. Vin diesel also pops up there for some reason. 

    Avatar 2 just overtook Top Gun Maverick world wide, excluding China. It's also overtaken Avengers Infinity War's overseas cume.

    Avengers. Infinity. War. 

  15. 22 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

    Why do Cameron's films seem to defy box office drop off? It's weird. 

    Franchise momentum and hype vs word of mouth I guess. 

    It's interesting comparing domestic box office with opening weekends. The biggest opening weekend was Dr. Strange 2; followed by Wakanda Forever, Jurassic World, & Thor 4.  The three MCU films released this year all made 40+% of their total domestic box office on opening weekend, with DrS2 highest at 45.6%. And by the end of the first month it was basically finished. 

    Domestically, Top Gun 2 and Avatar 2's opening weekends are 7th and 5th respectively. We know how that turned out.

  16. 44 minutes ago, Zorral said:

    That run-down of the insanely relentless tabloid pursuit of Meghan and Everything remotely and/made-up about Meghan show who are obsessed with Meghan and what she may or may not think, or what they think she should think.  Like the obsessive Meghan/women/transgender, etc. haters we see all around, ya think?

    This whole thing starts with an insane (illegal) dirt mining exercise by the Daily Mail, but the fundamental narrative was established early on by Samantha Grant IMO. But she got paid though. She got paid. 

    And make no mistake, "The Firm" helped fuel this by obviously leaking confidences to hostile tabloid media. When the people who are supposed have your back are actively working against you: that's why they got out. 

    Good for them. 

  • Create New...