Jump to content

Deadlines? What Deadlines?

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Deadlines? What Deadlines?

  1. On 7/1/2022 at 1:07 PM, Winterfell is Burning said:

    And a massive budget. And one of the biggest movie stars of all time.

    I mean, I liked the movie a lot, but let's not act like it's some small film running against juggernauts.

    Cruise' MI franchise films an his recent sci fi efforts have had all of those things and, while they've mostly done well, non of them have done this well.

  2. On 7/1/2022 at 11:37 AM, Rhom said:

    But you still have to have a nostalgic tie back to the 1980's...

    Is it tho? I mean, I guess it sort of does but not in the same way as something like WW84 and Stranger Things. 

    It's also got a lot more going for it than that. I'll say it again, the last 30 minutes of TG:M is fucking intense; in a way that the final battle of most Avengers movies isn't. On top of brilliant visuals and editing, you aren't breaking the tension every 1.5 minutes to inject some meh banter or some sight gag, which seems to be par for the course for a lot of superhero stuff. The characters in this film also don't have the kind of plot armor that goes along with a shared universe franchise.

    I view this film a bit like The Color of Money. Technically, it's a sequel to The Hustler, but you didn't have to see the latter to enjoy the former. I never even made the connection between those two until long after I'd seen it. 

    What's amazing is that there's less separation in time between those two films (25 years) than there is between TG and TG:M.

  3. ...and still going. This thing's got some legs. It's currently trading number one spot with Elvis day to day. 

    I was sure Jurassic World would beat it globally by virtue of the fact that it got a China release and those films tend to do quite well overseas. Based on how it's tracking, I'm not so sure. It's domestic performance is well below JW: Fallen Kingdom and way below Jurassic World 2015. At the rate it's going, it'll top out at $360-$370 mil domestically. If TG:M does $1.1-$1.3b globally, it's pretty unlikely JW:D will do the $750+ overseas it needs to beat that.

    Lightyear is another one that's coming in below expectations. Everyone is keeping their piggy bank moneys for Avatar 2 I guess.

  4. 7 minutes ago, Corvinus85 said:

    I thought it was funny that the guy immediately assumed that the baddies had to be Iran, because nuclear treaties and such, but then the final act takes place in a snowy, forested place that's just off a sea or ocean coast. Yep, that's Iran for sure. :P

    I kind of assumed it was a proxy for Iran; even if it kind of looks like British Columbia. For no other reason than (I think) Iran is the only country still flying F-14's. They inherited them from the Shah's regime. 

    But it's not like I sat in the theater pointing at the screen with a tortured, horrified face because of "the militarism!". Actual propaganda tends to be a lot more subtle. If I was Brett I'd be way more outraged at Captain Marvel and whether or not Stark Industries is a proxy for Lockheed Martin. 

    One of the reasons Star Wars was so popular was because you could read almost anything you wanted into the conflict. For some, the empire represented American imperialism and the plucky rebels were the Vietnamese. For others, the empire was the Soviet Union and the freedom loving Rebels were the freedom loving west. There are no wrong answers here. 

    This is like the the articles published years ago talking about how '300' would lead to war with Iran:

    - Anyone savvy enough to connect ancient Persia with modern Iran isn't going to advocate for war because of a fantasy film.

    - It's been over a decade since and I think it's safe to say that film didn't move the needle on international relations at all.

    - The Iranian governments "outrage" occurred during that 15 minutes in 2007/2008 when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad became the darling of segments of the American left. I have a lot of sympathy for Iran given how they've been screwed by the western powers, but that doesn't mean their government isn't perfectly capable of playing a cynical culture war game. At the time, the Bush administration was using pretty extreme saber rattling rhetoric and there were no shortage of American pundits calling M.A. the new Hitler and using "Munich" analogies. He ended up getting voted out of office BTW. Hardly the next Hitler.  

    - If that movie is supposed to be an allegory between a hypothetical American/Iranian war, The Persian army in that scenario clearly represents the Americans. 


  5. That's awesome.


    And while Brett does have something of a point, you’d figure that a person who has watched over 1,500 movies and written more than 650 reviews would be able to remove himself from the current international political climate for two hours to watch a film about an old guy flying cool planes and running shirtless on a beach for no reason.

    Tell it, sister.

  6. No Green Lantern Corps news? Have they started shooting yet? That's fine. It's fine. 

    The Wonder Twins series cancellation didn't generate much discussion. The Blue Beetle costume reveal seems to fall into the memory hole seconds after it was announced. 

    I'm sure black Adam and Aquaman 2 will be massively successful, because of Johnson's and Mamoa's star power if nothing else. but Shazam 2 is only 6 months away and I'm detecting zero buzz for that film right now. We'll see what happens when a full trailer drops... eventually. 

    13 hours ago, Myrddin said:


    I'm all for more Cavil. His casting was spot on and MoS deserves a real sequel.

    He had a real sequel.

    From the screenrant article


    While Cavill himself has received generally positive reviews for his performances, his depiction of Superman has drawn polarized reviews from critics and audiences alike for being a darker and flawed version of the hero in comparison to his brighter nature in the comics

    "Darker"? I swear that neck snap still has peoples brains scrambled nearly a decade later.

    Actually the vast majority of audiences liked Man of Steel. And does no one remember what happened with Superman Returns? A critical hit that had the Donner DNA all over it and it was an utter failure. How about Green Lantern? How about Batman and Robin? Or 2017's Justice League? WW84? Oh, yeah that movie was going to do a billion for sure. But hey, if they want to rip the guts and heart out of everything and just make goofy MCU clones, they're welcome to it. It's got nothing to do with me.

    How Phillips and Reeves managed to get their films made I'll never know. 

    Also from the screen rant article:


    On the heels of the WarnerMedia and Discovery merger, The Wrap interviewed an anonymous DC studio insider to discuss future DCEU plans. Though unable to detail any actual plans, the anonymous source shared their thoughts on what the studio should do to recapture audience interest, namely bringing back Henry Cavill's Superman for a DCEU revival. See what the source said below:

    "If anything they'll go back to individual movies unless De Luca has some plan. They need to get a f---ing Superman movie off the ground, and if the plan is a shared universe, a Cavill-led Superman needs to be the focal point. [They] should scratch every Superman project in development and start fresh with Cavill."

    Information that includes the phrase "The Wrap" and "Anonymous DC studio insider" is about as reliable as flipping a coin.

    After a baffling WW84 and pretty meh TSS, Birds of Prey, and Shazam movies (which critics loved BTW) I have zero confidence that these guys will deliver anything interesting ever again. 

    ETA: ...and Shazam 2 hits theaters after a year full of MCU and Star Wars content and 1 week after Avatar 2? It's fine. It'll be fine. 

  7. Lack of a China opening will hurt it internationally, but if the second weekend estimates are correct, it's on track to beat Dr Strange 2 domestically. 

    Dr Strange 2 is weird. It opened in 4500 theaters domestically and didn't start shedding screens until the beginning of its 4th week. It has a 74% rating on the tomato meter but it's average critics score is 6.5/10, which suggest a lot of, "Meh, it's OK" reviews. I haven't seen it so I won't comment, but is this just franchise momentum? The thing'll probably cross a billion globally.

  8. 2 hours ago, Veltigar said:

    I know it is crazy to be so happy about a multi-millionaire actor with weird cult ties succeeding, but I’m pleased to finally see a great film break the bank and bring so much joy to people :D

    It's crazy. I've actually bee racking my brain thinking about just why this movie works so well. It isn't just a movie I like, It's a movie I like liking.

    1st: It's a very "non-sequel"; in the sense that it very much stands on its own. You really don't need to see the first film at all to get into this one. There's enough exposition and flashbacks (that conveniently don't have to use de-aging technology) that you're largely up to speed by the end of act one.

    2nd:  Being a "non-sequel", it's a refreshing change to the current CMB and franchise stuff that dominates the box office. IMO, that stuff is is largely tapped out creatively. People watch that stuff now like they watch a soap opera. "What happens in the next chapter?" or "What character will they introduce next?". TG:M on he other hand, doesn't rely on Easter eggs, fan-service,  or throw away cameos. The humor a bit low key but it's genuinely funny and not some Whedon-esque punch-up (which is also getting tired). 

    3rd: No endless debates about canon or comic accuracy or being true to the source material. 

    ETA: not being a CBM or existing franchise film, it was also not really on the radar of the scoop or movie spoiler/speculation economy. Jesus Christ, that's refreshing. 

    4th: The action scenes are incredibly well done. They have a dramatic arc all their own. There is probably a lot more CGI in this film than people realize (eg, the scenes with the SAMs) but it's mixed with a good deal of live action stuff and blended seamlessly. You can feel the G's. The sound mix helps this also. And, I'll say again, the last 40 minutes of the film are intense. Maybe Dunkirk and Triple Frontier are the only films I've seen recently that come close to that. 

    There have been comments about actors in actual planes. There is a shot in the film where you can actually see Tom Cruises face turn to pudding in response to some aerial maneuver. It's either the "2:15" run or the actual attack. He has his mask on so you can't see his jowels die but you definitely see his eyelids go wonky and his cheeks deflate. Stunning. 

    5th: it's extremely well made. There is a serious attention to craft on display. I'll reiterate: likely Oscar noms for film editing and VFX, with a possible win for the latter. 

  9. 2 hours ago, TormundsWoman said:

    Seven help us. They actually saw a Taiwan sticker on prop they didn’t approve of?

    I must research this. Sounds insane. I’d have thought it’s because we once again see the might of the US Navy winning an aerial fight against some other unnamed country that looks to have nuclear power that the Chinese won’t approve of, not some sticker thingy but whatever…


  10. 31 minutes ago, WarGalley said:

    Oh he's still doing his own stunts. Pretty sure the whole Top Gun cast were inside the actual planes (though not actually doing the flying).

    In the last Mission Impossible: Dead Reckoning Part 1 trailer, there's a shot of Cruise riding a motorcycle off a cliff. That most likely him doing it considering he clipped himself to the outside of a plane that was taking off in one of the previous movies. MI: Dead Reckoning Part 2 appears to be the final film of the Mission Impossible franchise but studios aren't going to stop making Cruise-led action movies especially with Top Gun 2 being his highest-earning movie in his career.

    Apparently The last MI film (the one with Henry Cavill; I don't know that frachise) there's an actual shot of Cruise shattering his ankle that actually made it into the film.

    And Tug Speedman can't even cry. 

  11. 4 hours ago, Corvinus85 said:

    Reports saying that the movie has broken the US Memorial Day weekend box office record, with 160.5 mil opening. 

    Edit: edited the figure based on a Deadline article.

    That lines up with what Box office mojo are reporting. That figure is for the 4 days (Friday to Monday).


    Note: that $300m world wide figure does not include China. The film hasn't opened there yet. Apparently the Chinese censors have a problem with a patch or a sticker related to Taiwan or something.

  12. So I looked up the director of Iron Eagle because why not. This guy has had quite an extensive career



    He is considered by some an auteur director, elevating otherwise unremarkable genre films through strong, creative visuals, and atmospheric direction. His horror film The Entity (1982) was declared by director Martin Scorsese as one of the scariest movies of all time, and his Vietnam War film The Boys in Company C (1978) was a major influence on Stanley Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket (1987).

    However, not to disparage the guy, his '80's filmography definitely has a "whatever will support my coke habit" vibe to it.  

  13. 4 minutes ago, Rhom said:

    I just love that the Leader of a nameless mid Eastern country would strap himself into a fighter jet and personally face down the invading infidels. :thumbsup:

    Yeah, that "zeitgeist" Ran was referring to probably involved vicarious revenge against "not the" Iranians, for thumbing their noses at the USA and getting aways with it. Also giving the Russians what for, by god. 

  14. 41 minutes ago, RumHam said:

    I didn't like how the artifact works. It's a map. So why does it also power ships, knock people back, unlock repressed memories, grant visions and do whatever else the plot requires at that moment? Dumb.

    Because THUH POWAH!!!

    Yeah it's... It's the powah. 

  • Create New...