-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
‘Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny’ Whips Up $130 Million Loss For Disney
Very few do, actually, and stuff like Twilight and Hunger Games suceed for very different reasons than a male driven action film. Yet studios continue to chase that female demo and just pass over the solid, reliable male demo time and time again. Bizarre and bordering on malicious, really.
Last edited:
Laptop1991
Member
I didn't hear or read anything good about it, so i didn't bother watching the film, a big fan of the first 3 but since then they can't make a good film, i hope the game is good.
belmarduk
Member
It won't. There was a big reveal for it a few months ago. Indiana Jones will not be 80 years old in the game... which would be more successful if it were Multiplatform... but that's neither here nor there.
kunonabi
Member
Actual concept art before things went completely south.
Honestly, Short Round needing Indy's help was probably the only scenario where Jones leaving his comfortable life would make sense.
Kenpachii
Member
The movies are just to late really, ford is to old. Crystal skull he was already to old, and the new one honestly what where they even thinking.
They should have stopped after the third one, and if they kept on going they should have done it far sooner right after it and just make 4-5 movies out of it and call it a day.
They should have stopped after the third one, and if they kept on going they should have done it far sooner right after it and just make 4-5 movies out of it and call it a day.
Last edited:
ZehDon
Gold Member
Sorry, I shouldn't post vague crap like that. What I was insinuating was that, in order for Disney to make up as much money as possible to offset their USD$130m loss - not even touching on the expected profit, the odds that Microsoft's exclusive game remains exclusive is pretty low. Disney will want to milk that game for as much money as they can, and, like the shenanigans they pulled with EA over the Star Wars license during the BF2 non-sense, they're not afraid to squeeze to get what they want.
Last edited:
Cyberpunkd
Gold Member
I never understood why they can’t just pull off a Bond and get another actor to play Indy. Fit, not too young (let’s say mid 30s), with witty humour. Make it like National Treasure, a quest for adventure without serious undertones and you have a guaranteed summer hit. How hard can it be?
Sleepwalker
Member
Here's the thing, no one cares about shalla bal aside from people that actually read the comics.
Shalla-Bal (Earth-9997)
5 appearance(s) of Shalla-Bal (Earth-9997) 2 image(s) of Shalla-Bal (Earth-9997)marvel.fandom.com
The average joe which is the majority and who disney wants to get money from just want to see the characters they are familiar with, such as the silver surfer.
Personally I dont care for much for marvel nowadays anyhow. Just find it amusing how they keep messing up the simplest of things just for the sake of it.
Heart_Attack
Member
To my surprise, I didn't hate the movie. But it had way too much CGI and the Fleabag girl was horribly miscast. The script also was mostly miss than hit. What it did nail, it had the heart/feel of an Indy movie, and the score was fucking good. Mads was good with the shit he was given.
FunkMiller
Gold Member
Shalla-Bal (Earth-9997)
5 appearance(s) of Shalla-Bal (Earth-9997) 2 image(s) of Shalla-Bal (Earth-9997)
Yes. Yes. I’m sure the reason they’ve gone with this casting is purely so that FINALLY the great character of Shalla Bal is introduced to the audience!
Dr.Morris79
Gold Member
If this had some competent writers and zero phoebe, it could have been better?
One look at who's in control over there though, nothing will be good.
Last edited:
LimanimaPT
Member
It hurts to see Indy mistreated like this. Movies simply are not what they used to be.
I really can't tell what it is that movies had and don't have anymore. Indy 1 is such an incredible movie. Great original script, great characters, great music, great everything. I could give tons of other examples. Take Ghosbusters, another great example. I went to see Frozen Empire, and... fuck that. Who the fuck writes this pieces of shit?
Movies used to be good, now they just suck, most of them.
I really can't tell what it is that movies had and don't have anymore. Indy 1 is such an incredible movie. Great original script, great characters, great music, great everything. I could give tons of other examples. Take Ghosbusters, another great example. I went to see Frozen Empire, and... fuck that. Who the fuck writes this pieces of shit?
Movies used to be good, now they just suck, most of them.
I've been trying to figure out why older films just resonate more even when they are lame B flicks. Something about the film quality, the style of camera work with those big physical cameras, virtually all on set effects. I think there defintely is something with scripts as well, a whole generation seems to have forgotten proper foreshadowing, classic 3 act structure, having support characters...support the leads, and some sort of writing shorthand for setting up characters super quickly and creating villains that spice up the show rather than detract from it.
kunonabi
Member
Yeah, basic script writing has gotten really bad. Which isn't to say there aren't still extremely well-written films but the sort of general base level of competency has dropped considerably.
Ulysses 31
Gold Member
It's gotten a lot more "tell, don't show" with sometimes characters even telling others their traits rather than those being shown through their actions.
What A Shame...
Banned
5 appearances? Lmao.Shalla-Bal (Earth-9997)
5 appearance(s) of Shalla-Bal (Earth-9997) 2 image(s) of Shalla-Bal (Earth-9997)
This is clearly a case of producers rifling through an entire comic catalogue looking for a character to fit their agenda.
tkscz
Member
Forbe's math doesn't make sense to me. If they spent $387.2 million just for production, you can easily assume marketing was around the same, but we'll low ball it and say $200 million, then whatever the movie brings in, theaters take a cut, let's low ball that to 30%, which can be credit back some by Britain's movie credit of 25%, so we'll say an extra loss of 5%.
They would've lost about $224 million on this movie and that's low balling it. Forbes try to make it up by saying DVD/Bluray sales and merchandise sales boosted it but I'm not seeing a lot of merch going out for this movie and Disney barely does physical media, out right removing it in Australia. And I low balled that number considering Advertising/Marketing can go up to double the production cost, and theaters usually take 50% of the revenue. Realistically, on the lack of merch sales that they had to spend money to make, they probably lost $400 - $500 million on this movie as an entire project goes.
They would've lost about $224 million on this movie and that's low balling it. Forbes try to make it up by saying DVD/Bluray sales and merchandise sales boosted it but I'm not seeing a lot of merch going out for this movie and Disney barely does physical media, out right removing it in Australia. And I low balled that number considering Advertising/Marketing can go up to double the production cost, and theaters usually take 50% of the revenue. Realistically, on the lack of merch sales that they had to spend money to make, they probably lost $400 - $500 million on this movie as an entire project goes.
Grildon Tundy
Gold Member
I'm with a lot of you on this one: loved the first three; the fourth was disappointing; even with Mangold directing, I haven't bothered watching the newest one.
South Park should re-air their 2008 Indiana Jones episode, just replacing "Crystal Skull" with "Dial of Destiny" every time.
South Park should re-air their 2008 Indiana Jones episode, just replacing "Crystal Skull" with "Dial of Destiny" every time.
xrnzaaas
Member
Crystal Skull came out way before the woke virus so Indy didn't have to make room for strong female characters. At least that's that. Similar situation with Terminator... T3 and even Genisys aren't that bad if you compare them to Woke Fate.
I still wouldn't rewatch Indy 4 (or 5) and I'm sticking with the original trilogy (plus The Fate of the Atlantis game).
I still wouldn't rewatch Indy 4 (or 5) and I'm sticking with the original trilogy (plus The Fate of the Atlantis game).
ResurrectedContrarian
Suffers with mild autism
The Fate of Atlantis is indeed a more faithful Indy product than the last 2 films by a mile. Fantastic game that was clearly made by actual franchise fans, imagine that.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
I think some of it has to do CGI everywhere. So whether the CGI is done great or bad everyone inherently knows it’s there so some of the magic of a movie is lost. You know in the back of your brain it’s most green screen effects.
Movies back in the day could be low budget, have good or awful bad plastic props and laughable digitized explosions but you accepted it as is and the actors were really there in the desert or ocean in a real life setting. So though it’s a movie and probably 20 safety crew off camera you kind of felt the action and actor underwater or sweating in the jungle.
Even though the effects are archaic, I still think some of the big battles in old SW movies in outer space or Hoth are the best action scenes I’ve seen. I’m not a Star Trek fan, but wrath of khan 1982 is a great movie. There’s not even a lot of pure space ship battle scenes but what they did was great.
Modern day space scene would be 100 graphic artists doing mega battles with 500 spaceships all blasting each other at once for 10 minutes straight.
Last edited:
I do wonder if there is less stress in film making now so the performances are not as good. What was a high stakes single take set piece then is a "well, we'll just fix it in post" ho-hum moment now. I gotta think wearing a ping-pong ball studded suit to an all green draped studio where you "act" against more ping pong balls on sticks just isn't the best way to get into character
The Volume shows promise but even then, it seems like it is mostly for wide open spaces or empty rooms. The loss of elaborate sets, rich backdrop paintings, and funky in camera costumes and effects hurts the craft for sure.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Ya. One of the old guys in LOTR (I forget which one) even broke down supposedly on set saying all this green screen shit is not real theatre.I do wonder if there is less stress in film making now so the performances are not as good. What was a high stakes single take set piece then is a "well, we'll just fix it in post" ho-hum moment now. I gotta think wearing a ping-pong ball studded suit to an all green draped studio where you "act" against more ping pong balls on sticks just isn't the best way to get into character
The Volume shows promise but even then, it seems like it is mostly for wide open spaces or empty rooms. The loss of elaborate sets, rich backdrop paintings, and funky in camera costumes and effects hurts the craft for sure.
If I was an actor doing Mo cap and green screen acting I’d probably at some some point hate it and just wing it too. Seems like a complete 180 what acting is supposed to be if it’s all faked and post production editing can hammer out the rest.
CGI only goes so far too as even detailed stuff just gets too crazy and unbelieveable. I don’t care how awesomely detailed a giant Marvel fight in downtown or a farm field is. It’s way too much, people and spaceships zooming around at a physics defying motions and is basically cartoon but with real life looking textures and green screen Mo cap. The complete opposite of organic real settings.
Yeah, it gets me everytime when Faveraus Lion King is called "live action". WTF, like he has trained animals on set or something???
CGI to remove safety equipment, to extend a real set, hide modern stuff in a period piece, that's OK. Cg for guns I just gotta accept though I dislike it. But CG to slap an actors face on a body double or do an entire action scene is just BS. CG nudity....oh hells no!
CGI to remove safety equipment, to extend a real set, hide modern stuff in a period piece, that's OK. Cg for guns I just gotta accept though I dislike it. But CG to slap an actors face on a body double or do an entire action scene is just BS. CG nudity....oh hells no!