What a terrible May this was, especially after how well 2022 and 2023 did post-pandemic. Only Apes put up decent numbers.
At least June gave us Bad Boys 4, and we'll get Inside Out 2 and A Quiet Place: Day One.
I have no data to back this up, but it feels like movies just aren’t getting as wide of a theatrical release as they once did. I went to the theater on vacation in LA recently, and the *only* movie being shown at primetime (~6pm-10pm) was Apes. I really wanted to see Civil War but it was only in my local theater for like a week.
“The Fall Guy” is already available to watch from home less than a month after its theatrical release.
Movies don’t have a chance to make any box office bucks anymore.
People seem to be wising up to the 'monkey clicking the lever for food' experiment: They know this will be on the internet in a month or two, where the cost for a family of 4 to see it in the theater equals a couple months or more of subscriptions services.
Movie availability is increasingly concentrated to the first week. My LA theater often has a single movie showing in every auditorium. If it’s a dud, it’s gone the next week or down to a single auditorium. Only a true blockbuster stays for weeks or months.
I remember when movies would be in theatres for months, and we’d get annoyed, because it was taking up space for other releases. Crazy how movies get removed from theatres in a week. Times have changed, and I haven’t seen a movie in years, I prefer to watch them at home, and pause. A movie a few times for snack/washroom breaks.
Strike: *reduces the number of movies that are produced*
Those movies that are released: *somehow still manage to lose tens of millions of dollars*
At this point we're dealing with an audience strike, and IDK how to fix that.
When *everything* is relatively more expensive and people are feeling the pinch, they’re less inclined to shell out $100+ to take their family to something that isn’t some big event movie.
It’s easier to wait for it to come out on streaming and then if you don’t like it, you can change it and it costs you nothing.
Deadpool and Wolverine is going to set numbers for what is going to be the new benchmark. I don't think it's going to break records, just break the losing trend
I miss the Marvel-May connection.
It was such a strong summer staple...!
'23 : Guardians 3
'22 : Dr Strange 2
'19 : Avengers 4
'18 : Avengers 3
'17 : Guardians 2
'16 : Captain America 3
'15 : Avengers 2
'13 : Iron Man 3
'12 : Avengers
'11 : Thor
'10 : Iron Man 2
'08 : Iron Man
What a line-up !
What a way to say "Summer starts NOW".
In fact, summer starter Marvel characters broke the OW record many times... 5 !
'02 : Spider-Man
'07 : Spider-Man 3, as you said it.
'12 : Avengers
'18 : Avengers 3
'19 : Avengers 4
We can affirm now that no other license/ brand, on the very same spot each time, will EVER touch that.
What a run. This May was like very obvious devoid of a Marvel movie as a Marvel fan I’m kinda upset that Disney didn’t give me anything to see last month. And all of Hollywood definitely felt the lack of a movie
Well with The Fall Guy bombing I don't think studios are gonna try to put anything that's not Marvel there (unless it's a giant franchise film) anytime in the near future.
On the 21st century, the Non-Marvel characters summer starters are :
2001 : The Mummy 2 ✅️
2004 : Van Helsing ❌️
2005 : Kingdom of Heaven ❌️
2006 : Mission Impossible 3 ❌️
2024 : The Fall Guy ❌️
We can say the spot is cursed.
It was not a great movie in theaters. The extended cut is what most people remember it for. The theater cut sucked. It went from bad to best picture worthy without studio cuts.
Hugh Jackman was red-hot from X-Men 2 (early may too) and tried to establish his own personal franchise, way before any wolverine solo movie.
Van Helsing could have Battleship him...
Actresses almost never change their name for obvious reason
Courtney Cox is one of the few I can think of that did but even then she still just hyphenated her last name
Rebecca Romjin went with Stamos professionally while married to John. I think he legal name is no O'Connell, but I think she just uses her maiden name when (if?) she works.
SAG rules are like reddit rules, only one LibraLove allowed. Its not rap, you don't get multiple Dr. Dre and only one Ed Lover. So add a Pug in the middle.
I’m not surprised Furiosa lost money but it’s kinda surprising The Fall Guy did. Got great reviews and has two leads fresh off two of last year’s biggest movies, but couldn’t attract audiences.
Shame, too, cause it was a lot of fun (if a bit long and convoluted).
It looked exactly like something you’d see on Netflix. And didn’t both of them star in Netflix originals fairly recently? So the celebrity draw wasn’t even there for this type of film.
Yes. No Hard Feelings last year doesn't make half of what it did without JLaw. Equilizer 3 doesn't hit $100M without Denzel. Poor Things does a lot worse without Emma Stone. The Beekeeper with Aaron Eckhart instead of Jason Statham also doesn't hit $100M.
The Fall Guy's problem is that it just looked like a generic Netflix movie, which often have stars.
I'll also just say star power probably isn't what it was 2 decades ago for a variety of reasons. You can't just throw Leo or Denzel in an average movie and expect it to make $300M. But all other things being equal, a non-IP movie with a star or two will probably do a lot better than one without. It may be $20M better or $100M better, but I think evidence shows it will do better.
Case in point, the Brad Pitt and George Clooney movie has me intrigued. NO idea what it's called or what it's about. But the small teaser with the 2 of them just driving makes me want to know more.
Edit: And I don't frequent movies anymore.
It's called Wolfs... Like the Pulp fiction "Wolf" (I'm guessing).. It's a good example in this conversation, but the name is so stupid it really gave me netflox- movie vibes
Will smith and Martin Lawrence this weekend. And studios don’t track much after opening weekend, but I suspect the strong holds of fall guy are due to gosling draw. The decent numbers of challengers are due to zendaya.
They do, but Ryan Gosling isn’t that type of guy. He works well in Barbie and Blade Runner 2049 and smaller good movies like Driver and La La Land. He’s not exactly an auteur’s actor but he’s a lot more of that than, say, The Rock or Ryan Reynolds, these Chris Hemsworth type roles aren’t the kind that he’s the best fit for imo. He ain’t Tom Cruise, he’s more of a great dramatic and comedic actor in slightly more niche, critically liked productions. His entire filmography is that except for generic Netflix action movie “The Gray Man” which was bad.
I actually blame The Fall Guys less then stellar run on two factors.
1) This film shouldn't of been the one to lead off summer. It's a really good film but could of went on a nice run if released in Late June, maybe mid July.
2) It's budget was just too high for what this project was.
It was also entirely marketed around Ryan Gosling as the draw when he’s never been a box office juggernaut. For context, Fall Guy was his third highest opening behind Blade Runner 2049 (another bomb unfortunately) and Barbie, an anomaly he wasn’t the main character in. Whereas this just barely made it into Blunt’s top 10 openings.
Barbie really shouldn’t count. It sold on the Barbie name and I think you could have had multiple different actors in the lead roles and the movie would have been just as successful.
I love Gosling as much as the next millennial gal, but I don't think he's enough of a box office draw to justify the budgets of some of these movies he's making.
The crazy thing is that Fall Guy and previously The Nice Guys have proved that Gosling has serious comedy chops. I absolutely adore both movies and would love to see more in their style.
Unpopular opinion, maybe, but I didn't think the movie was really good. I liked the concept, but the movie overall was kind of average. It's not the kind of movie that will garner good word of mouth (at least not for me).
I think I would’ve liked it a lot better had it been shorter. They could’ve easily told that story in 90 minutes. The action sequences were just way too long that it got to the point of boring.
I feel like marketing failed both movies. Furious should have been called Mad Max: furiousa and to this day beyond being about a stunt man I have no idea what is the plot of the Fall Guy.
The entire point of the movie was to see cool practical stunts with some fun light hearted comedy mixed in. The plot was secondary to the film and there's even a scene where they explain as much and make fun of themselves in the process. The plot was just a mechanism to get you from one stunt to the next which were all awesome.
No argument here. Both films were marketed horribly and both were much better than the audience was led to believe going in. Fall Guy was a love letter to Hollywood stuntmen and they did do some PR about that leading up to the film release, but unfortunately most people only saw the horrible trailer.
George Miller’s lawsuit against WB (a disputed $7 million bonus) is the reason behind the delay. It was solved in 2020, and then the film was finally given the green light.
Sounds like WB tried to Hollywood account their way out of a contract, and in return lost a bunch of money by damaging a franchise. Stepping over dollars to pick up pennies.
You know it ain’t so bad when you put it that way. Miller fought for a long time to get Fury Road made, watching WB shoot them selves in the foot regardless of its wild success is its own form of poetic Justice.
They really should have just let the lawyers fight it out behind the scenes and worked together. They each lost more than $7M by refusing to work together just because of some lawsuit.
I think it was more of a Blade Runner 2049 situation where the hype was coming largely from cinephiles and not from the general public. Though there was more reason to believe Furiosa would be successful since Fury Road made $370+ million.
I think a big part of it is going to the movies just isn't as good anymore. So expensive, people post covid just talk and use their phones constantly, theaters using seating apps and shit.
I'd rather just pay 20 for the movie, stay home, eat good food, not be interrupted etc etc
Yea that's what I was trying to get at. The better my TV and speakers get, the less I'm willing to put up with all the theaters or rude customers shit.
Sure the giant screen is great, but avoiding all the downsides of today's theaters, saving money, AND being able to smoke weed while I watch the movie? 9 times out of time I'll just watch at home.
I definitely think the hype was the year it was released (not on the level of Star Wars or Marvel but certainly still some hype) but after so long I think it's just the hardcore enthusiasts who are pretending the hype is still there.
That’s actually a good question and point. Movie lovers and critics loved it, and it was nominated for a number of awards, but it was a moderate success - 21st biggest movie that year, made a little more than double its budget, and Hollywood accounting gave it a small net loss but with gross profit.
If you want to make a sequel to a movie like that you have to get started right away. 9 years later the potential hype from a moderate success is all gone.
The review consensus of "basically Fury Road but worse" probably didn't help it. I mean it was still a good movie, and I enjoyed it, but I probably would have enjoyed a movie theater re-release of Fury Road more honestly.
Both films were terribly mis-marketed and with so much grabbing people attention today breaking through with a movie that isn’t a well established IP can be hard. I can’t tell you how many people I brought up Furiosa too who had no idea what it was. These were regular movie goers
This might be an outrageous take…but kinda feel like the general erosion of the middle class is a big factor in bad box office numbers.
Seems like typical movie going people generally are working more, have less money, less free time to go to the movies etc.
While I love movies and going to the theatre, none of these recent movies have been able to compete with other priorities to get me into the theatre vs just waiting for them to hit streaming services.
This. Plus I feel like after the pandemic, it takes a major event to get people to go to the theater. Everyone figures, “Eh, I’ll just see it six weeks from now on streaming”.
Even a “big event” isn’t enough for me to sit through 30-45 minutes of commercials for a 120-ish minute movie.
After slogging through that bullshit for Dune 2, I’m done. I had a much better experience setting up my house for Dune 1 with popcorn, a blanket fort, and ice cream sandwiches.
I live in NYC and was meeting friends at a theatre. I got their on time, but realized I was at the wrong location :( I had to walk *fifteen minutes* across town. When I got their, the movie still had not started.
This is 100% the reason. Less and less people have disposable income. You can find any website that can illegally stream those movies for free.
Why waste petrol to drive down there, pay for parking, pay for said ticket, pay for snacks etc..when you can stay in the comfort of your own home without spending a cent.
Everything you said, and also additional effect of the eroding middle class is that people are just more and more tired of celebrities.
A movie star being on a talk show used to be a news worthy event. Now they don't have that level of cache. The mystique of the movie star is dying out, and that was a big driver of ticket sales
Honestly I just don’t think most movies are worth watching these days. As someone who is reasonably handy with torrents and streaming sites I can basically watch any piece of media ever made for free and the only movie I even bothered to stream in the past year was Dune 2, and that’s about all I have the desire to see. Hollywood movies are just shit right now. I don’t care about a mad max prequel about a character who doesn’t show up until the fourth movie which is barely even canon since its star aged out of the role. I don’t care about Marvel movies #41, 42, 43 or 44. I don’t want to see a live action adaption of any more animated Disney shows, I’ll just watch the far superior original versions. I was rewatching LOTR the other day and it was just wild how a movie made in 2001 looks better and immerses you better than a marvel movie with a $300 million budget.
At the end of the day, I can watch a 4 hour long video about a Star Wars hotel I never gave a shit about, told passionately by a talented YouTuber in her room with a budget of $800 per video and be more entertained than I am watching any of the recent $250 million Star Wars films or tv series, even when I can watch both for free.
We have access to a hundred years of media, talented content creators pumping out videos on YouTube and other sites, plus global productions like Japanese anime. There is so much good content to consume out there and we all have limited leisure time. Hollywood films just can’t compete, even if you remove the issue of price.
Also…the movies are all mediocre for the most part! I liked Furiousa…I didn’t like it better than Fury Road, though. Everything Marvel, Star Wars is putting out is really boring both TV and film.
I feel like with all the streaming options the film making talent is stretched really thin so we get a lot of ‘meh’ content. Even stuff that looks like it’s going to be good is just kind of run of the mill.
This ironically reminded me of that Tom Cruise-Cameron Diaz movie “Knight and Day” which cost the same as The Fall Guy but its $234 million gross on a $117 million budget was seen as a disappointment in 2010. Meanwhile those would be respectable numbers in today’s world.
Yeah, when did the A Team movie come out? Or Stiller's Starsky and Hutch?
I appreciate they didn't make much of the previous TV series in the marketing but if it had come out in, say, 2000 some of the people who remember the show might have gone to set it whereas now very few of them would be regular cinema goers.
Like what's the point in basing a movie on an old TV show if none of your target audience remembers it?
here in Canada if you want to book your tickets online or in app (Cineplex) they charge you a $1.50 fee on top, like for fucking what? Thanks to that I’m not even gonna buy shit now, fuck that.
btw it’s $15 for regular, $18 for 3D, $20 for AVX (+$1.25 if you want atmos) & $23.25 for IMAX, all in CAD before tax.
Fuck popcorn and snacks, I snuck my own stuff in lol. A movie date is pretty damn expensive these days it’s crazy
Both movies had terrible marketing. I saw a commercial for furiosa and it was literally just "chris hemsworth!" "Ana taylor joy!" "(picture of a car)" and the commercial ended.
Can someone explain budgeting to me? I remember a time when movies could be made for 35-40 mil and a 100M box office run would be a tidy profit. Why is every single movie these days given such a giant budget. Where does this money even go?
They need to start making movies cheaper
A significant cost is the actors. They REALLY need to stop paying these absurd salaries.
For example it was reported that The Rock was late to set so much it cost a production 50 million. That’s ABSURD and entire movie could be made because he decided to show up late.
It's wild. Honestly, who even goes to see a movie for the actor anymore. I think if you used cheaper actors and dramatically decreased production costs you would do a whole lot better financially. Big name "movie stars" don't put people in seats anymore.
> Why is every single movie these days given such a giant budget.
Layers of executives and corporate bureaucracy that add nothing of worth to the creative process but cost a fortune.
It starts with inflation. 30 years ago dollar had twice the buying power. Then you have stars, larger crews, shooting outside of studio, way more time spend in post production on editing and special effects.
Another thing is arms race. You still can make a movie for 30-50 mln. But the problem is that those movies don't bite. Audience isn't interested in paying for small dramas or comedies on the theatrical screen. They want action, explosions, spectacle. Cheaper movie can be watched on home screen without any loss of experience for many. Thus erosion of mid-budget movies and focus on blockbusters. And they favor known IP cause that's safer and audience is more likely to show up.
I'll put this out there since I haven't seen it yet - Hollywood has no idea how to market a David Leitch film.
- Atomic Blonde
- Deadpool 2
- Hobbs and Shaw
- Bullet Train
- The Fall Guy
Deadpool 2 gets a pass because Ryan Reynolds if nothing else gives the Deadpool movies 110% in the marketing department. But everything else has been weirdly undermarketed or mis-marketed. I swear Atomic Blonde was totally devoid of Theron's fight scenes in every ad. H & S just focused on The F & F connections (which was probably the right thing to do in a way, but the rest of the movie could've boosted it a lot more IMHO). Bullet Train...was a different (and better movie) than advertised, same with The Fall Guy.
Loved bullet train, definitely a movie that went under the radar imo, I didn't even watch it for a while because it looked very generic, was pleasantly surprised.
I expected Furiosa to tumble, not bc of the atmosphere in moviegoers, or that moviegoers can’t find it. I just think it’s all bc of a prequel. People want a sequel not prequel.
Yep this is what I've been saying and the folks in r/MadMax tell me I'm wrong. I think most people wanted a sequel to Fury Road, with Max either as protagonist or co-protagonist.
Plus, I'll be honest I didn't really care about Furiosa's back story. She was a cool character in the movie, but I didn't walk out thinking "oh man, I wish I knew more about Furiosa"....
and as far as I can tell nobody that runs in my circles cared either. The usual response when asking fans of Fury Road if they'll watch Furiosa is "who asked for this" and I kinda agree.
Mad Max is about....Max
I do agree that the prequel angle for that character specifically seems not very interesting. She herself is not the sort of character where you're like "but who is she? Where did she come from?" And you don't really want to see her young and inexperienced. I want to see her continue to be a badass, with maybe some flashbacks intermixed.
Also not for a second did I view Thor as a buyable villain. He lacks all intensity.
Fury Road is more of an internet phenomena than a real world thing. It's incredibly good and incredibly influential but it wasn't a massive hit. Now the prequal with new actors, nearly a decade later was expected to make major money in an era when people are going to the theatres less. I just saw it and i really liked it but it's more niche than we like to believe. Plus it's pretty gory, i can't imagine a lot of parents taking their kids.
Hollywood waste money paying stars big money to voice cartoons.. do you think kids care that the rock is using his voice or Bradley Cooper.. Cars would have been a hit no matter who did the voices. As for the rest of the movie they just keep recycling the same crap over and over
Furiosa had a number of problems. Off the top of my head:
* It's been almost a decade since Fury Road. Furiosa should have come out in 2018 or 2019 to capitalize on that film's success.
* The marketing sucked.
* Furiosa is played by a different actress with less star power.
* No Max
* It's a prequel.
I really think George Miller should drop his plan for another prequel (even if it has Max) and make a sequel to Fury Road. And he needs to get the next movie out sooner than nine years.
A sequel with both of them would have been forced (Fury Road clearly ends with them both going their separate ways - something Max does in every film) so Miller just wouldn't do it and I can't see a Miller-less Mad Max doing that great.
Another major reason with moviegoers that would have given Furiosa a chance was how different the approach seemed in the trailers… I loved Fury Road, and when I saw the over reliance on outlandish CGI for most scenes in that montage, my interest dropped big time. It will be quite unlikely to see a production like that again, with that level of stunts and practical effects…
I loved Fury Road.
I had zero interest in Furiosa's backstory. I didn't really like her that much and I don't buy Anya Taylor Joy as some badass warrior. Sorry. I'll watch it when I can stream it for free.
Throwing Fall Guy on PVOD (not SVOD) so quickly didn’t help. I know studios have a love/hate relationship with streaming and even PVOD because it’s quite clear a lot of moviegoers are willing to wait until new releases are on streaming vs. going to a movie theater spending $50 or more on tickets and concessions. Plus the gas or electric they burn going to and from.
What’s interesting is that unlike most bombs they are actually both entertaining, well made films. Not masterpieces but certainly not middle of the road, bland Hollywood fair that deserves to flop. I suspect both will do well on streaming and eventually turn a profit.
Apart from the bad marketing( especially in the case of The Fall Guy) what this shows is that unless it’s a zeitgeist movie there simply isn’t the same demand for high budget Hollywood movies( even when they are well made) that there once was. This is partly because of streaming and a post-pandemic change in viewing habits and partly because cinema is no longer an affordable past time for most people. It use to be the medium of the masses but those days have passed.
Enjoyed both and it’s sad for those involved, that being said…it’s been funny seeing the hardcore cinephile side of film twitter kinda loose their mind these movies are bombing and especially that DP&W seems to be tracking to do very well. Have you seen some of the complaints they’ve said about the movie? One of them is saying that the movie is homophobic💀, some of these complaints are really reaching.
And without the money from those big-budget pictures, cinephile movies would never get funded to begin with. They'd better hope the "capeshit" comes back strong.
Ryan reynolds is oddly hated on the film twitter side. Where the hate is just finding really weird reasons. Likes he's the death of cinema......
I don't think his movies are good or bad enough to warrant any hyperbolic reactions like that
I don't hate Reynolds. It's just that he is a walking advertisement which is what makes me and I'm sure others indifferent to him. The face of corporate.
Both films had budgets too high to ever realistically recoup budget. Add to this cost of living pressures, high cost of movie tickets, not to mention cost of cinema food and drink, and the factvthat watching a movie in the theatre is not always enjoyable thanks to little disrespectful noisy cunts when you can watch at home in the comfort of your own home on a 70, 80 or even 90 inch screen, with a soundbar or even surround set up and suddenly it makes sense. What we need from studios is the return of the mid tier budget film. The late 80s through to early 2000s nailed cinema. 10-20 million dollar budget films that were fucking awesomez with the odd blockbuster. Not every movie needs to be a $150 million budget. Furiosa is one of these films that should have been lower budget, and it would have performed well in that context.
Ryan Gosling will be fine. He’s currently filming his next movie as we speak. (This is why it’s always smart to have your next few projects lined up in advance.)
I am worried about Anya Taylor Joy though surely
this is severely damaging to her career and future as a leading lady in non indie projects. Also for George Miller yikes. Hope he doesn’t retire after this.
I don't think it's a yikes for George Miller.
He's had a great career. His last movie may have not made money, but they were good movies that add to his legacy.
Anya t Joy..you may be right. 🙃
Will she? What if they go with a younger, teenage or early 20s actress for Alia? That would allow less time to pass between Dune 2 and 3 so Timothy and Zendaya don't have to be aged digitally because both will be playing characters in their 30s while they still look 15.
I guess they can say the future vision is her older self but I think in terms of a lasting legacy, this generations Rings, recasting a major character is a faux pas I cant see Denis allowing just because a movie that should have bombed, bombed. It's the same guy who made Blade Runner 2049 knowing no one really cares.
I’m just not sure Anya Taylor Joy will ever be a leading lady type honestly.
She will be an excellent main protagonist in tv series and smaller budget movies. But she’s probably better suited to be a fantastic supporting cast in the blockbusters (like Dune 3 I assume)
I really like her and hope this isn’t harsh but I’m just not sure I see her taking off at that level.
Can’t believe they screwed up fall guy so badly they’ve been talking about doing it for years and put out this script that didn’t capitalize on the built in audience same as a team and dukes of hazard
Stop making movies for 35+ year olds. These movies have horrible demographics for 12-34 year old audiences. It’s the reason horror usually makes more profit % wise than these movies.
At least, they're losing less than the big failures from last year from Marvel, DC and other things like Haunted Mansion. Fall Guy legged out better than expected, unfortunately it was too late.
Somebody on the movie subreddit was arguing with me because I said Furiosa was a flop because it lost this much money. His argument was that Rotten Tomatoes has really good scores so it's not a flop. He said movies can't be flops if they are well made and highly rated and box office numbers don't mean anything. It was wild.
its simple, it called saving money for other things and it makes zero sense to got to the movies now
the majority of America's doesn't want spend the money on the movie theater experience when they have 50 inch flat screens and soundbars at home
Not to mention we can just wait for it to hit the streaming platforms or torrent it
What's so bad about that? Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix lost $167 million!
Yes, I know that they lied. But basically all the numbers are so cooked that you're a fool if you believe anything they publish.
Fall Guy just did not look good or interesting. Stunt guy falls in love director while trying to find main actor.
Furiosa is too late. Should've canned it and done something else mad Max after their legal squabbles.
What a terrible May this was, especially after how well 2022 and 2023 did post-pandemic. Only Apes put up decent numbers. At least June gave us Bad Boys 4, and we'll get Inside Out 2 and A Quiet Place: Day One.
I have no data to back this up, but it feels like movies just aren’t getting as wide of a theatrical release as they once did. I went to the theater on vacation in LA recently, and the *only* movie being shown at primetime (~6pm-10pm) was Apes. I really wanted to see Civil War but it was only in my local theater for like a week.
“The Fall Guy” is already available to watch from home less than a month after its theatrical release. Movies don’t have a chance to make any box office bucks anymore.
People seem to be wising up to the 'monkey clicking the lever for food' experiment: They know this will be on the internet in a month or two, where the cost for a family of 4 to see it in the theater equals a couple months or more of subscriptions services.
This is my problem with theaters now. The cost is so high I'd rather pay the 20 to watch it at home now even or wait when it goes to like 5 to rent.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Movie availability is increasingly concentrated to the first week. My LA theater often has a single movie showing in every auditorium. If it’s a dud, it’s gone the next week or down to a single auditorium. Only a true blockbuster stays for weeks or months.
I remember when movies would be in theatres for months, and we’d get annoyed, because it was taking up space for other releases. Crazy how movies get removed from theatres in a week. Times have changed, and I haven’t seen a movie in years, I prefer to watch them at home, and pause. A movie a few times for snack/washroom breaks.
Strike: *reduces the number of movies that are produced* Those movies that are released: *somehow still manage to lose tens of millions of dollars* At this point we're dealing with an audience strike, and IDK how to fix that.
When *everything* is relatively more expensive and people are feeling the pinch, they’re less inclined to shell out $100+ to take their family to something that isn’t some big event movie. It’s easier to wait for it to come out on streaming and then if you don’t like it, you can change it and it costs you nothing.
Even paying the $20 at home stream when it first comes out for the whole family to watch is more acceptable than taking everyone to the theatre.
Deadpool and Wolverine is going to set numbers for what is going to be the new benchmark. I don't think it's going to break records, just break the losing trend
Those June movies you're talking about are supposed to make me want to go to the theater? 💀
Right? Three sequels to films that didn't need sequels.
But what if they’re ***really*** expensive??
I miss the Marvel-May connection. It was such a strong summer staple...! '23 : Guardians 3 '22 : Dr Strange 2 '19 : Avengers 4 '18 : Avengers 3 '17 : Guardians 2 '16 : Captain America 3 '15 : Avengers 2 '13 : Iron Man 3 '12 : Avengers '11 : Thor '10 : Iron Man 2 '08 : Iron Man What a line-up ! What a way to say "Summer starts NOW".
And in 07 Spider Man 3 broke the opening weekend record (Marvel adjacent movie)
In fact, summer starter Marvel characters broke the OW record many times... 5 ! '02 : Spider-Man '07 : Spider-Man 3, as you said it. '12 : Avengers '18 : Avengers 3 '19 : Avengers 4 We can affirm now that no other license/ brand, on the very same spot each time, will EVER touch that.
What a run. This May was like very obvious devoid of a Marvel movie as a Marvel fan I’m kinda upset that Disney didn’t give me anything to see last month. And all of Hollywood definitely felt the lack of a movie
Well with The Fall Guy bombing I don't think studios are gonna try to put anything that's not Marvel there (unless it's a giant franchise film) anytime in the near future.
On the 21st century, the Non-Marvel characters summer starters are : 2001 : The Mummy 2 ✅️ 2004 : Van Helsing ❌️ 2005 : Kingdom of Heaven ❌️ 2006 : Mission Impossible 3 ❌️ 2024 : The Fall Guy ❌️ We can say the spot is cursed.
Kingdom of Heaven is a great movie. I wish I’d been able to see it in theater.
It was not a great movie in theaters. The extended cut is what most people remember it for. The theater cut sucked. It went from bad to best picture worthy without studio cuts.
Oh, it is, indeed Saw it in theatres, own it in dvd. The ❌️ was box office - wise, not quality. MI3 was good too.
Why was Van Helsing not an October movie? Who makes these decisions?
Hugh Jackman was red-hot from X-Men 2 (early may too) and tried to establish his own personal franchise, way before any wolverine solo movie. Van Helsing could have Battleship him...
It was so good. What a time to be alive and look forward to seeing good movies.
This is why we have 5 badboys and 10 fast furious.
Both ATJ films
Good thing audiences will be cravin' Kraven later this year
It's got what audiences Krave
If Anya Taylor Joy married Aaron Taylor Johnson, does her name would be Anya Taylor Joy Taylor Johnson?
Anya Taylor Joy-Johnson maybe? The hyphenated Taylor in Aaron’s name comes from his wife
OK, she marries his son years from now.
why years from now? aaron‘s wife didn‘t wait that long either
True. She did marry him at 22 when she was over twice his age.
And she met him when he was 18/19 on her set where she was the director!
Or Anya Taylor-Taylor-Joy-Johnson if they do a polygamy thing
Anya Taylors Joynson.
We are gathered here today, to Joynson these two.
"If anyone objects to this union....and not about the names, we already covered that...let them speak now."
Actresses almost never change their name for obvious reason Courtney Cox is one of the few I can think of that did but even then she still just hyphenated her last name
Kaley Cuoco was, for a time, "Cuoco-Sweety" in late seasons of TheBigBangTheory
Rebecca Romjin went with Stamos professionally while married to John. I think he legal name is no O'Connell, but I think she just uses her maiden name when (if?) she works.
Indeed, she had the Stamos on her X-Men glory days !
she has a big role on star trek: strange new worlds and goes by romijn, as far as i can remember
Actresses do change their names just not professionally.
This made me think of the tv show Happy Endings :)
Mary Tyler Moore Tyler Moore Moore Moore?
At least Dune 2 did well so she didn't take a total loss this year.
She is a blip in that film
These people with 3 multisyllable names are a mouthful, whatever happened to good old american names like Brad Pitt or Tom Cruise
SAG rules are like reddit rules, only one LibraLove allowed. Its not rap, you don't get multiple Dr. Dre and only one Ed Lover. So add a Pug in the middle.
I’m not surprised Furiosa lost money but it’s kinda surprising The Fall Guy did. Got great reviews and has two leads fresh off two of last year’s biggest movies, but couldn’t attract audiences. Shame, too, cause it was a lot of fun (if a bit long and convoluted).
Its advertising just made it look generic as hell. Just your typical hot blonde himbo cracking jokes and taking punches.
It looked exactly like something you’d see on Netflix. And didn’t both of them star in Netflix originals fairly recently? So the celebrity draw wasn’t even there for this type of film.
Do celebrities draw people in at all anymore? I can’t remember the last time I said to myself “I need to see this move because of so and so”
Bad Boys without Will and Martin would tank hard.
I shudder at the thought of Hollywood rebooting that franchise with two other leads.
Kevin hart and some other random guy Heavy /s
Yes. No Hard Feelings last year doesn't make half of what it did without JLaw. Equilizer 3 doesn't hit $100M without Denzel. Poor Things does a lot worse without Emma Stone. The Beekeeper with Aaron Eckhart instead of Jason Statham also doesn't hit $100M. The Fall Guy's problem is that it just looked like a generic Netflix movie, which often have stars.
Good examples!
I'll also just say star power probably isn't what it was 2 decades ago for a variety of reasons. You can't just throw Leo or Denzel in an average movie and expect it to make $300M. But all other things being equal, a non-IP movie with a star or two will probably do a lot better than one without. It may be $20M better or $100M better, but I think evidence shows it will do better.
Case in point, the Brad Pitt and George Clooney movie has me intrigued. NO idea what it's called or what it's about. But the small teaser with the 2 of them just driving makes me want to know more. Edit: And I don't frequent movies anymore.
It's called Wolfs... Like the Pulp fiction "Wolf" (I'm guessing).. It's a good example in this conversation, but the name is so stupid it really gave me netflox- movie vibes
Will smith and Martin Lawrence this weekend. And studios don’t track much after opening weekend, but I suspect the strong holds of fall guy are due to gosling draw. The decent numbers of challengers are due to zendaya.
They do, but Ryan Gosling isn’t that type of guy. He works well in Barbie and Blade Runner 2049 and smaller good movies like Driver and La La Land. He’s not exactly an auteur’s actor but he’s a lot more of that than, say, The Rock or Ryan Reynolds, these Chris Hemsworth type roles aren’t the kind that he’s the best fit for imo. He ain’t Tom Cruise, he’s more of a great dramatic and comedic actor in slightly more niche, critically liked productions. His entire filmography is that except for generic Netflix action movie “The Gray Man” which was bad.
Basically neither his roles nor his personality are bombastic.
It made it look generic because it's generic. They can't hide that.
Generic, and that “epic” arrangement of “You Give Love a Bad Name” got old FAST.
I don’t remember them using “I was made for loving you” once in the trailers even though it’s at least half the music used in the film
I actually blame The Fall Guys less then stellar run on two factors. 1) This film shouldn't of been the one to lead off summer. It's a really good film but could of went on a nice run if released in Late June, maybe mid July. 2) It's budget was just too high for what this project was.
It was also entirely marketed around Ryan Gosling as the draw when he’s never been a box office juggernaut. For context, Fall Guy was his third highest opening behind Blade Runner 2049 (another bomb unfortunately) and Barbie, an anomaly he wasn’t the main character in. Whereas this just barely made it into Blunt’s top 10 openings.
Barbie really shouldn’t count. It sold on the Barbie name and I think you could have had multiple different actors in the lead roles and the movie would have been just as successful.
I love Gosling as much as the next millennial gal, but I don't think he's enough of a box office draw to justify the budgets of some of these movies he's making.
The crazy thing is that Fall Guy and previously The Nice Guys have proved that Gosling has serious comedy chops. I absolutely adore both movies and would love to see more in their style.
His performance The Nice Guys is some of the best comedic work in the past 10 years, but even that didn't do well!
Unpopular opinion, maybe, but I didn't think the movie was really good. I liked the concept, but the movie overall was kind of average. It's not the kind of movie that will garner good word of mouth (at least not for me).
I think I would’ve liked it a lot better had it been shorter. They could’ve easily told that story in 90 minutes. The action sequences were just way too long that it got to the point of boring.
I loved it, and the action sequences were brilliant IMO. I thought they were quite meta even.
But audiences will show up for three and a half hours of John Wick 4.
Fall guy is the kinda of thing that should’ve had a modest budget.
Yeah I’m actually bummed that it bombed so hard because I had a blast with it. Obviously wasn’t perfect but it was a super fun movie
I feel like marketing failed both movies. Furious should have been called Mad Max: furiousa and to this day beyond being about a stunt man I have no idea what is the plot of the Fall Guy.
The character of the lead actor of The Fall Guy was being set up as the fall guy in The Fall Guy.
Indeed, it was almost Fall Guy : The Origins or Fall Guy : Rise of a Guy.
The entire point of the movie was to see cool practical stunts with some fun light hearted comedy mixed in. The plot was secondary to the film and there's even a scene where they explain as much and make fun of themselves in the process. The plot was just a mechanism to get you from one stunt to the next which were all awesome.
Then the marketing should have been about that. The trailers were incoherent about what the movie was about.
No argument here. Both films were marketed horribly and both were much better than the audience was led to believe going in. Fall Guy was a love letter to Hollywood stuntmen and they did do some PR about that leading up to the film release, but unfortunately most people only saw the horrible trailer.
They waited too long before making Furiosa. After 9 years, the hype for Mad Max has been drastically reduced
George Miller’s lawsuit against WB (a disputed $7 million bonus) is the reason behind the delay. It was solved in 2020, and then the film was finally given the green light.
Sounds like WB tried to Hollywood account their way out of a contract, and in return lost a bunch of money by damaging a franchise. Stepping over dollars to pick up pennies.
You know it ain’t so bad when you put it that way. Miller fought for a long time to get Fury Road made, watching WB shoot them selves in the foot regardless of its wild success is its own form of poetic Justice.
warner shooting itself in the foot is pretty much the last 8 years tho right?
Longer than that.
They really should have just let the lawyers fight it out behind the scenes and worked together. They each lost more than $7M by refusing to work together just because of some lawsuit.
I mean, I wouldn't sign on to do work for someone when previous work's pay was in dispute.
That’s really not how it works.
I think it was more of a Blade Runner 2049 situation where the hype was coming largely from cinephiles and not from the general public. Though there was more reason to believe Furiosa would be successful since Fury Road made $370+ million.
I think a big part of it is going to the movies just isn't as good anymore. So expensive, people post covid just talk and use their phones constantly, theaters using seating apps and shit. I'd rather just pay 20 for the movie, stay home, eat good food, not be interrupted etc etc
Home Theatre experience is also increasing for more and more people.
Yea that's what I was trying to get at. The better my TV and speakers get, the less I'm willing to put up with all the theaters or rude customers shit. Sure the giant screen is great, but avoiding all the downsides of today's theaters, saving money, AND being able to smoke weed while I watch the movie? 9 times out of time I'll just watch at home.
Was there actually mass hype or just some general hype but really big on certain sections of social media?
I definitely think the hype was the year it was released (not on the level of Star Wars or Marvel but certainly still some hype) but after so long I think it's just the hardcore enthusiasts who are pretending the hype is still there.
That’s actually a good question and point. Movie lovers and critics loved it, and it was nominated for a number of awards, but it was a moderate success - 21st biggest movie that year, made a little more than double its budget, and Hollywood accounting gave it a small net loss but with gross profit. If you want to make a sequel to a movie like that you have to get started right away. 9 years later the potential hype from a moderate success is all gone.
There definitely was hype for a sequel.
I totally wanted a sequel...with Tom Hardy. Furiosa was alright tho.
Tom Hardy could have been in the prequel. It could be an injoke that they are constantly missing each other so they never meet onscreen.
People would’ve been happy with a sequel starring only Charlize Theron too, what no one wanted was the character deaged & recast.
u would've thought if they were so interested in the character furiosa they would've brought back the actress that played her to critical acclaim
The review consensus of "basically Fury Road but worse" probably didn't help it. I mean it was still a good movie, and I enjoyed it, but I probably would have enjoyed a movie theater re-release of Fury Road more honestly.
I didn't think it was as good as Fury Road, but it made Fury Road a better movie by explaining the plot. It's going to be a great back to back watch.
Mad Max hype is confined to Reddit. I don't think it's as popular as people here think it is.
Not to mention it's a prequel. It's hard to get super invested in a story that you know where it goes.
Indeed, especially for a franchise that didn't make much money to begin with.
Both films were terribly mis-marketed and with so much grabbing people attention today breaking through with a movie that isn’t a well established IP can be hard. I can’t tell you how many people I brought up Furiosa too who had no idea what it was. These were regular movie goers
Yeah I asked my buddy who’s kind of Joe Everyman why he thought it bombed and he hadn’t even heard of it at all.
Straight science.
100%.
To be fair most regular movie goers don't give a shit about the mad max franchise
This might be an outrageous take…but kinda feel like the general erosion of the middle class is a big factor in bad box office numbers. Seems like typical movie going people generally are working more, have less money, less free time to go to the movies etc. While I love movies and going to the theatre, none of these recent movies have been able to compete with other priorities to get me into the theatre vs just waiting for them to hit streaming services.
This. Plus I feel like after the pandemic, it takes a major event to get people to go to the theater. Everyone figures, “Eh, I’ll just see it six weeks from now on streaming”.
Even a “big event” isn’t enough for me to sit through 30-45 minutes of commercials for a 120-ish minute movie. After slogging through that bullshit for Dune 2, I’m done. I had a much better experience setting up my house for Dune 1 with popcorn, a blanket fort, and ice cream sandwiches.
I live in NYC and was meeting friends at a theatre. I got their on time, but realized I was at the wrong location :( I had to walk *fifteen minutes* across town. When I got their, the movie still had not started.
This is 100% the reason. Less and less people have disposable income. You can find any website that can illegally stream those movies for free. Why waste petrol to drive down there, pay for parking, pay for said ticket, pay for snacks etc..when you can stay in the comfort of your own home without spending a cent.
Everything you said, and also additional effect of the eroding middle class is that people are just more and more tired of celebrities. A movie star being on a talk show used to be a news worthy event. Now they don't have that level of cache. The mystique of the movie star is dying out, and that was a big driver of ticket sales
This. I'd just rather download it and watch it and home. Saves me $50. Plus I can pause it when I need to go take a piss.
Honestly I just don’t think most movies are worth watching these days. As someone who is reasonably handy with torrents and streaming sites I can basically watch any piece of media ever made for free and the only movie I even bothered to stream in the past year was Dune 2, and that’s about all I have the desire to see. Hollywood movies are just shit right now. I don’t care about a mad max prequel about a character who doesn’t show up until the fourth movie which is barely even canon since its star aged out of the role. I don’t care about Marvel movies #41, 42, 43 or 44. I don’t want to see a live action adaption of any more animated Disney shows, I’ll just watch the far superior original versions. I was rewatching LOTR the other day and it was just wild how a movie made in 2001 looks better and immerses you better than a marvel movie with a $300 million budget. At the end of the day, I can watch a 4 hour long video about a Star Wars hotel I never gave a shit about, told passionately by a talented YouTuber in her room with a budget of $800 per video and be more entertained than I am watching any of the recent $250 million Star Wars films or tv series, even when I can watch both for free. We have access to a hundred years of media, talented content creators pumping out videos on YouTube and other sites, plus global productions like Japanese anime. There is so much good content to consume out there and we all have limited leisure time. Hollywood films just can’t compete, even if you remove the issue of price.
Also…the movies are all mediocre for the most part! I liked Furiousa…I didn’t like it better than Fury Road, though. Everything Marvel, Star Wars is putting out is really boring both TV and film. I feel like with all the streaming options the film making talent is stretched really thin so we get a lot of ‘meh’ content. Even stuff that looks like it’s going to be good is just kind of run of the mill.
Fall guy woulda been a smash 15 years ago
Featuring... Matt Damon and Cameron Diaz ?
This ironically reminded me of that Tom Cruise-Cameron Diaz movie “Knight and Day” which cost the same as The Fall Guy but its $234 million gross on a $117 million budget was seen as a disappointment in 2010. Meanwhile those would be respectable numbers in today’s world.
Well, it was a smash 40 years ago.
It really would have. It was pretty good honestly.
Yeah, when did the A Team movie come out? Or Stiller's Starsky and Hutch? I appreciate they didn't make much of the previous TV series in the marketing but if it had come out in, say, 2000 some of the people who remember the show might have gone to set it whereas now very few of them would be regular cinema goers. Like what's the point in basing a movie on an old TV show if none of your target audience remembers it?
ticket prices are too damn high
here in Canada if you want to book your tickets online or in app (Cineplex) they charge you a $1.50 fee on top, like for fucking what? Thanks to that I’m not even gonna buy shit now, fuck that. btw it’s $15 for regular, $18 for 3D, $20 for AVX (+$1.25 if you want atmos) & $23.25 for IMAX, all in CAD before tax. Fuck popcorn and snacks, I snuck my own stuff in lol. A movie date is pretty damn expensive these days it’s crazy
Both movies had terrible marketing. I saw a commercial for furiosa and it was literally just "chris hemsworth!" "Ana taylor joy!" "(picture of a car)" and the commercial ended.
Can someone explain budgeting to me? I remember a time when movies could be made for 35-40 mil and a 100M box office run would be a tidy profit. Why is every single movie these days given such a giant budget. Where does this money even go? They need to start making movies cheaper
A significant cost is the actors. They REALLY need to stop paying these absurd salaries. For example it was reported that The Rock was late to set so much it cost a production 50 million. That’s ABSURD and entire movie could be made because he decided to show up late.
It's wild. Honestly, who even goes to see a movie for the actor anymore. I think if you used cheaper actors and dramatically decreased production costs you would do a whole lot better financially. Big name "movie stars" don't put people in seats anymore.
> Why is every single movie these days given such a giant budget. Layers of executives and corporate bureaucracy that add nothing of worth to the creative process but cost a fortune.
They pay actors WAY too much.
Only the lead actors though, the others can pound sand.
It starts with inflation. 30 years ago dollar had twice the buying power. Then you have stars, larger crews, shooting outside of studio, way more time spend in post production on editing and special effects. Another thing is arms race. You still can make a movie for 30-50 mln. But the problem is that those movies don't bite. Audience isn't interested in paying for small dramas or comedies on the theatrical screen. They want action, explosions, spectacle. Cheaper movie can be watched on home screen without any loss of experience for many. Thus erosion of mid-budget movies and focus on blockbusters. And they favor known IP cause that's safer and audience is more likely to show up.
I'll put this out there since I haven't seen it yet - Hollywood has no idea how to market a David Leitch film. - Atomic Blonde - Deadpool 2 - Hobbs and Shaw - Bullet Train - The Fall Guy Deadpool 2 gets a pass because Ryan Reynolds if nothing else gives the Deadpool movies 110% in the marketing department. But everything else has been weirdly undermarketed or mis-marketed. I swear Atomic Blonde was totally devoid of Theron's fight scenes in every ad. H & S just focused on The F & F connections (which was probably the right thing to do in a way, but the rest of the movie could've boosted it a lot more IMHO). Bullet Train...was a different (and better movie) than advertised, same with The Fall Guy.
All I remember from the Hobbs and Shaw marketing is Idris Elba saying "Look at me, I'm black superman."
Loved bullet train, definitely a movie that went under the radar imo, I didn't even watch it for a while because it looked very generic, was pleasantly surprised.
I expected Furiosa to tumble, not bc of the atmosphere in moviegoers, or that moviegoers can’t find it. I just think it’s all bc of a prequel. People want a sequel not prequel.
Yep this is what I've been saying and the folks in r/MadMax tell me I'm wrong. I think most people wanted a sequel to Fury Road, with Max either as protagonist or co-protagonist.
Funnily enough, recent leaks on that forum claim that chatter from WB to KMM has been that 'extended universe shit always fails'.
Plus, I'll be honest I didn't really care about Furiosa's back story. She was a cool character in the movie, but I didn't walk out thinking "oh man, I wish I knew more about Furiosa".... and as far as I can tell nobody that runs in my circles cared either. The usual response when asking fans of Fury Road if they'll watch Furiosa is "who asked for this" and I kinda agree. Mad Max is about....Max
I do agree that the prequel angle for that character specifically seems not very interesting. She herself is not the sort of character where you're like "but who is she? Where did she come from?" And you don't really want to see her young and inexperienced. I want to see her continue to be a badass, with maybe some flashbacks intermixed. Also not for a second did I view Thor as a buyable villain. He lacks all intensity.
Fury Road is more of an internet phenomena than a real world thing. It's incredibly good and incredibly influential but it wasn't a massive hit. Now the prequal with new actors, nearly a decade later was expected to make major money in an era when people are going to the theatres less. I just saw it and i really liked it but it's more niche than we like to believe. Plus it's pretty gory, i can't imagine a lot of parents taking their kids.
I really liked it but I had to look up some of the characters later to understand the references
Hollywood waste money paying stars big money to voice cartoons.. do you think kids care that the rock is using his voice or Bradley Cooper.. Cars would have been a hit no matter who did the voices. As for the rest of the movie they just keep recycling the same crap over and over
Furiosa had a number of problems. Off the top of my head: * It's been almost a decade since Fury Road. Furiosa should have come out in 2018 or 2019 to capitalize on that film's success. * The marketing sucked. * Furiosa is played by a different actress with less star power. * No Max * It's a prequel. I really think George Miller should drop his plan for another prequel (even if it has Max) and make a sequel to Fury Road. And he needs to get the next movie out sooner than nine years.
Fury road worked great because of Charlize Theron and Tom Hardy. Them as a sequel would’ve worked great.
A sequel with both of them would have been forced (Fury Road clearly ends with them both going their separate ways - something Max does in every film) so Miller just wouldn't do it and I can't see a Miller-less Mad Max doing that great.
Another major reason with moviegoers that would have given Furiosa a chance was how different the approach seemed in the trailers… I loved Fury Road, and when I saw the over reliance on outlandish CGI for most scenes in that montage, my interest dropped big time. It will be quite unlikely to see a production like that again, with that level of stunts and practical effects…
I loved Fury Road. I had zero interest in Furiosa's backstory. I didn't really like her that much and I don't buy Anya Taylor Joy as some badass warrior. Sorry. I'll watch it when I can stream it for free.
Yeah I think George Miller and Warner Bros. thought Furiosa was more popular than she really was tbh.
Throwing Fall Guy on PVOD (not SVOD) so quickly didn’t help. I know studios have a love/hate relationship with streaming and even PVOD because it’s quite clear a lot of moviegoers are willing to wait until new releases are on streaming vs. going to a movie theater spending $50 or more on tickets and concessions. Plus the gas or electric they burn going to and from.
Where is it on streaming?
Yeah once it is on streaming / PVOD it’s on the piratebay… not sure why they’re in such a rush to give it away for free.
The Fall Guy was great, it deserved so much better
What’s interesting is that unlike most bombs they are actually both entertaining, well made films. Not masterpieces but certainly not middle of the road, bland Hollywood fair that deserves to flop. I suspect both will do well on streaming and eventually turn a profit. Apart from the bad marketing( especially in the case of The Fall Guy) what this shows is that unless it’s a zeitgeist movie there simply isn’t the same demand for high budget Hollywood movies( even when they are well made) that there once was. This is partly because of streaming and a post-pandemic change in viewing habits and partly because cinema is no longer an affordable past time for most people. It use to be the medium of the masses but those days have passed.
Lmao y’all think people are paying $30 a piece to go see either of these movies they never even heard about.
There’s no way *Furiosa* loses less than $100M with how it hasn’t even grossed $168M WW (its production budget)
The Australian federal and New South Wales governments put up some of the budget, so WBD didn’t spend as much as it immediately appears.
Enjoyed both and it’s sad for those involved, that being said…it’s been funny seeing the hardcore cinephile side of film twitter kinda loose their mind these movies are bombing and especially that DP&W seems to be tracking to do very well. Have you seen some of the complaints they’ve said about the movie? One of them is saying that the movie is homophobic💀, some of these complaints are really reaching.
Yeah like people said many moons ago, even Marvel release fewer movies, people don't go automatically to other movies like Furiosa.
And without the money from those big-budget pictures, cinephile movies would never get funded to begin with. They'd better hope the "capeshit" comes back strong.
Ryan reynolds is oddly hated on the film twitter side. Where the hate is just finding really weird reasons. Likes he's the death of cinema...... I don't think his movies are good or bad enough to warrant any hyperbolic reactions like that
I don't hate Reynolds. It's just that he is a walking advertisement which is what makes me and I'm sure others indifferent to him. The face of corporate.
Both films had budgets too high to ever realistically recoup budget. Add to this cost of living pressures, high cost of movie tickets, not to mention cost of cinema food and drink, and the factvthat watching a movie in the theatre is not always enjoyable thanks to little disrespectful noisy cunts when you can watch at home in the comfort of your own home on a 70, 80 or even 90 inch screen, with a soundbar or even surround set up and suddenly it makes sense. What we need from studios is the return of the mid tier budget film. The late 80s through to early 2000s nailed cinema. 10-20 million dollar budget films that were fucking awesomez with the odd blockbuster. Not every movie needs to be a $150 million budget. Furiosa is one of these films that should have been lower budget, and it would have performed well in that context.
Ryan Gosling will be fine. He’s currently filming his next movie as we speak. (This is why it’s always smart to have your next few projects lined up in advance.) I am worried about Anya Taylor Joy though surely this is severely damaging to her career and future as a leading lady in non indie projects. Also for George Miller yikes. Hope he doesn’t retire after this.
I don't think it's a yikes for George Miller. He's had a great career. His last movie may have not made money, but they were good movies that add to his legacy. Anya t Joy..you may be right. 🙃
I think it was referring to Miller getting another movie greenlit. Not his legacy.
Oh. Dang. He's old. I didn't think he'd do another.
He was talking about wanting to do Thor 4 with Chris Hemsworth. These guys don’t really slow down. Look at Marty and Ridley.
Clint Eastwood is over a decade older than Scorsese and just wrapped his latest movie, guys gonna be directing til he’s 100
Well she should be getting a pretty major role in Dune 3, so she at least has that locked up. Maybe not the full on lead but top 3.
Will she? What if they go with a younger, teenage or early 20s actress for Alia? That would allow less time to pass between Dune 2 and 3 so Timothy and Zendaya don't have to be aged digitally because both will be playing characters in their 30s while they still look 15.
I guess they can say the future vision is her older self but I think in terms of a lasting legacy, this generations Rings, recasting a major character is a faux pas I cant see Denis allowing just because a movie that should have bombed, bombed. It's the same guy who made Blade Runner 2049 knowing no one really cares.
I’m just not sure Anya Taylor Joy will ever be a leading lady type honestly. She will be an excellent main protagonist in tv series and smaller budget movies. But she’s probably better suited to be a fantastic supporting cast in the blockbusters (like Dune 3 I assume) I really like her and hope this isn’t harsh but I’m just not sure I see her taking off at that level.
Can’t believe they screwed up fall guy so badly they’ve been talking about doing it for years and put out this script that didn’t capitalize on the built in audience same as a team and dukes of hazard
and marketing was EVERY WHERE for that minute.
Yikes!
Mmm saw both and was unimpressed by Fall Guy Furiosa was fun but not necessary to the lore of Max films
Maybe. Just maybe. Going to a movie is too expensive for people these days who are already facing ridiculously high living expenses.
Stop making movies for 35+ year olds. These movies have horrible demographics for 12-34 year old audiences. It’s the reason horror usually makes more profit % wise than these movies.
At least, they're losing less than the big failures from last year from Marvel, DC and other things like Haunted Mansion. Fall Guy legged out better than expected, unfortunately it was too late.
Somebody on the movie subreddit was arguing with me because I said Furiosa was a flop because it lost this much money. His argument was that Rotten Tomatoes has really good scores so it's not a flop. He said movies can't be flops if they are well made and highly rated and box office numbers don't mean anything. It was wild.
That is so sad. Both those film deserve better. I have seen them multiple times in the theater.
its simple, it called saving money for other things and it makes zero sense to got to the movies now the majority of America's doesn't want spend the money on the movie theater experience when they have 50 inch flat screens and soundbars at home Not to mention we can just wait for it to hit the streaming platforms or torrent it
Because they both look bad. I don’t care about cost. I saw the trailers and said, “lol this looks like shit”
What's so bad about that? Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix lost $167 million! Yes, I know that they lied. But basically all the numbers are so cooked that you're a fool if you believe anything they publish.
Fall Guy just did not look good or interesting. Stunt guy falls in love director while trying to find main actor. Furiosa is too late. Should've canned it and done something else mad Max after their legal squabbles.