• 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.

Ghost in the Shell bombs at the box office

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

border

Member
TDLink said:
The Martian did very well. He is only a producer on Blade Runner 2049 though, yeah. But Denis Villeneuve has also proven he's a good director and his last few films have all done well.
Click to expand...

The Martian did well, but it also had a very successful book backing its awareness. Ridley Scott isn't a hack, but I don't think it's fair to call him bankable. In the last 10 years, his movies have been kinda spotty in terms of both critical and commercial success. I would be particularly wary about giving him a film in the cyberpunk genre, given that successful cyberpunk movies are few and far between.

I have much more faith that Denis Villeneuve will be able to deliver a good movie at a reasonable budget. Scott spent $200 Million dollars to make Robin Hood, and it was still mostly forgettable.
 
E

Einchy

semen stains the mountaintops
I wanna live in the alternate reality where this movie is visually unappealing cus that must mean every movie is the best thing ever.
 
B

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
ReiGun said:
I need to watch the entire movie to know I didn't like what I saw in the trailers? I don't even know what the RT score for the movie is.

You enjoy the movies looks? Awesome. Glad for you. I did not find what was presented appealing and, given the WoM, I'm not alone in this stance.
Click to expand...

I literally haven't heard that word of mouth. I've heard people saying its pure eye candy, which is what I saw with my own eyes today.

I'm not saying this quote from a fluff publication on a piece of promotional material is gospel (not at all, it's marketing).... but this is a thing that people are saying about the movie, and I agree:

17635209_1894286047480626_7377546108816203016_o.jpg
Click to expand...


Familienoberhauptvogel said:
The CG environments looked like crap. Every pan across the city really took me out of the experience.
Click to expand...

You sound like me talking about CG Tarkin lol.

I get it, but I don't share it. I was entranced by the visuals.
 
R

ReiGun

Member
Chumley said:
Then you should say you found the trailers visually unappealing. Not the film, since you haven't seen the film.
Click to expand...
I was speaking in general terms since we were talking about the general audience's reaction to the film.

I mean, even in this thread, you have people talking about how the film looked unappealing. It really shouldn't be too much of a stretch to say others outside the thread felt this way and it turned them off the movie.

BocoDragon said:
I literally haven't heard that word of mouth. I've heard people saying its pure eye candy, which is what I saw with my own eyes today.
Click to expand...
Then we run in different circles cause I've heard people say the movie looked "weird." "Visually unappealing" can mean different things. Maybe people didn't like the art style, or like your man up there, didn't like the cg environments.

Whatever it means, the visuals clearly didn't grab a lot of people. Hence why this thread is here
 
C

Chumley

Banned
BocoDragon said:
I literally haven't heard that word of mouth. I've heard people saying its pure eye candy, which is what I saw with my own eyes today.

I'm not saying this quote from a fluff publication on a piece of promotional material is gospel (not at all, it's marketing).... but this is a thing that people are saying about the movie, and I agree:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I mean say what you will about it but the one thing that even the people who despise it should agree on is that it's a visual powerhouse. The last live action movie that looked even a little bit like this was Blade Runner.
 
X

xJavonta

Banned
dh4niel said:
Uh, what? It's one of the most well known, popular and influential anime films of all time. It's only second to Akira. The problem is it sucked and had a negative reception from the get go.
Click to expand...
Pretty much no one I know knows what it is. Outside of the typical nerd circles, anime is no different than manga.

Not to mention the movie apparently sucks. But plenty of shitty movies have done well in the box office. Like Suicide Squad. It's awful, but did well because most people actually know some of the characters.
 
E

Einchy

semen stains the mountaintops
ReiGun said:
I was speaking in general terms since we were talking about the general audience's reaction to the film.

I mean, even in this thread, you have people talking about how the film looked unappealing. It really shouldn't be too much of a stretch to say others outside the thread felt this way and it turned them off the movie.
Click to expand...

If someone came out of this movie thinking that it was visually unappealing then they either REALLY hate cyberpunk in general or their opinion on visuals should not be taken into account anymore.
 
R

ReiGun

Member
Einchy said:
If someone came out of this movie thinking that it was visually unappealing then they either REALLY hate cyberpunk in general or their opinion on visuals should not be taken into account anymore.
Click to expand...
Could be. Maybe the cyberpunk aesthetic doesn't gel with modern audiences. Maybe people are poor judges of visual style.

Whatever it is, some people don't like the way the movie looks. Which is a problem if it's selling itself on its visual style.
 
B

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
ReiGun said:
Then we run in different circles cause I've heard people say the movie looked "weird." "Visually unappealing" can mean different things. Maybe people didn't like the art style, or like your man up there, didn't like the cg environments.

Whatever it means, the visuals clearly didn't grab a lot of people. Hence why this thread is here
Click to expand...

I wouldn't put it down to visuals, per se.

But I can see the finer point that it looked thematically like something not for the masses. That's what I argued earlier. I just don't think the mainstream wants the hallowed "Hollywood adaptation of anime" that geeks have been pining for all these decades.
 
W

wazoo

Member
Poor GRIMES said:
I refuse to believe Sci-Fi is inherently niche in the late 2010s when Arrival made bank last year

Edit:
Interstellar, Gravity, The Martian, Star Wars
Click to expand...

SiFy is not niche, but cyberPUNK is. This genre was created in reaction to the fairytale driven Star Wars phenomena. It is mostly an anarchist genre. Asking for money recognition is a mismatch. Disney and other studios are good candidates for the big megacorps of the cyberpunk stories. Now, they are asking you money about that, pretty funny, no ?

Add cyberpunk to anime, then you get the GITS debacle.
 
C

Chumley

Banned
ReiGun said:
Could be. Maybe the cyberpunk aesthetic doesn't gel with modern audiences. Maybe people are poor judges of visual style.

Whatever it is, some people don't like the way the movie looks. Which is a problem if it's selling itself on its visual style.
Click to expand...

The people who don't like the way it looks were never going to see it anyway. The film full on embraces it's cyberpunk aesthetic in a way no movie has since, like I said before, Blade Runner.

The genre has always been polarizing. People either are absolutely head over heels in love with the cyberpunk style, or think it's weird and unappealing. If the movie can be admired for anything it should be admired for embracing the look of the source instead of trying to scale it back.
 
R

ReiGun

Member
Chumley said:
The people who don't like the way it looks were never going to see it anyway. The film full on embraces it's cyberpunk aesthetic in a way no movie has since, like I said before, Blade Runner.

The genre has always been polarizing. People either are absolutely head over heels in love with the cyberpunk style, or think it's weird and unappealing. If the movie can be admired for anything it should be admired for embracing the look of the source instead of trying to scale it back.
Click to expand...
And I'm not disputing any of that. But in a thread about why the movie bombed, it has to be acknowledged that utilizing a style that even you call unappealing to many is part of that. That's all I'm saying.
 
G

Glass Rebel

Member
Karmic retribution. So much about this only getting made because of ScarJo.

I'm usually not one for Schadenfreude but I will cherish this bomba.

HoyxmJR.gif
 
N

Nanashrew

Banned
I mean, the reason Ghost in the Shell would fully own the style of cyberpunk like Blade Runner did, is because Blade Runner was a blueprint for things like Ghost in the Shell and Armitage III.

Akira and Blade Runner were huge influences.
 
C

Chumley

Banned
ReiGun said:
And I'm not disputing any of that. But in a thread about why the movie bombed, it has to be acknowledged that utilizing a style that even you call unappealing to many is part of that. That's all I'm saying.
Click to expand...

I get you, I've been kind of saying the same thing. The only historical, tangible reason to point to for its performance is the genre. Not casting or marketing.
 
B

border

Member
Glass Rebel said:
Karmic retribution. So much about this only getting made because of ScarJo.
Click to expand...

The movie wouldn't have been made without ScarJo (or someone of similar status). Yeah it bombed anyway, but it still would have tanked with a more ethnically appropriate actress.
 
KonradLaw

KonradLaw

Member
Seems to be doing a lot better outside USA. I hope it ends with decent numbers, because this will be a death sentence to cyberpunk as a movie genre for years to come if it doesn't.
 
C

Chumley

Banned
KonradLaw said:
Seems to be doing a lot better outside USA. I hope it ends with decent numbers, because this will be a death sentence to cyberpunk as a movie genre for years to come if it doesn't.
Click to expand...

Blade Runner 2049 is the last shot. If it underperforms, the genre is dead for another 20 years.
 
G

Glass Rebel

Member
border said:
The movie wouldn't have been made without ScarJo (or someone of similar status). Yeah it bombed anyway, but it still would have tanked with a more ethnically appropriate actress.
Click to expand...

Looks like it shouldn't have been made in the first place. Ofc Hollywood will take all the wrong lessons from this, as usual.
 
L

Loudninja

Member
Chumley said:
It's not an excuse. Scarlett Johansson has headlined box office successes, placing any of the blame on her doesn't make sense if we're going off history.
Click to expand...
Yeah it is an excuse if the only what to make a movie is to whitewash it why bother?I have no idea who this moves was been made for.

It bomb anyway so that gamble did not pay off.

Glass Rebel said:
Looks like it shouldn't have been made in the first place. Ofc Hollywood will take all the wrong lessons from this, as usual.
Click to expand...
Yep it never ends.
 
C

Chumley

Banned
Loudninja said:
Yeah it is an excuse if the only what to make a movie is to whitewash it why bother?

It bomb anyway so that gamble did not pay off.
Click to expand...

The gamble was with making a cyberpunk film, not casting Scarlett Johansson. She's a proven commodity, cyberpunk is a proven bomb.
 
E

Einchy

semen stains the mountaintops
Loudninja said:
So tired of this excuse too.

Its the same thing again an again.
Click to expand...

You can think white washing is bad, and rightfully so, but we can also look at reality objectively.

This was a cyberpunk movie based off an anime property, that's a pretty risky endeavour for a studio, do you honestly think it didn't give them more confidence to make this movie knowing that they got a massively popular actress as their lead?
 
N

Nanashrew

Banned
I mean, casting a white person for an adaptation of something niche for an already niche genre does not increase exposure to more people.

ScarJo is an excuse to get it made and she has no clout here because big names don't always sell to people. In fact the excuse from the heads at Hollywood, the Director, and people defending them just keeps diversity out of the medium because "there was no other way."
 
F

firehawk12

Subete no aware
Will the lesson be that women can't star in action films again and Scarjo goes back to being the z-tier sidekick in all the Marvel movies?
 
N

Nanashrew

Banned
firehawk12 said:
Will the lesson be that women can't star in action films again and Scarjo goes back to being the z-tier sidekick in all the Marvel movies?
Click to expand...

With how the dumbasses in entertainment think, they're probably already reworking their stuff and not learning the right lesson. Already seeing the "people don't want diversity" from Marvel Comics after a sales slump.
 
E

Einchy

semen stains the mountaintops
If you don't think everything in Interstellar can happen then you don't believe in love and you're beyond help, you heartless husk of a person.
 
C

Chumley

Banned
Branduil said:
"Proven bomb"
Click to expand...

Right, the one exception in the last 20 years which was only about 30% cyberpunk, had a male lead, and almost entirely marketed itself as an action movie with a twist in scenes set in The Matrix and not the "real world" (the cyberpunk parts of the film).

Blade Runner, Tron Legacy, Dredd, and the Robocop/Total Recall remakes are more accurate examples. They all bombed.
 
F

fabricated backlash

Member
I tried to give this a chance, but ot became obvious that the admittedly well done visual design is about the only thing that brought something to the table.
But under that paper thin layer of optics there's a fundamental lack of understanding of the source material.

I even liked Scarlet Johanson in it, but her whole character (all characters actually) was completely off and failed to live up to the original (manga and anime) characters.

It's another posterchild for Hollywood butchering a foreign property.
 
T

televator

Member
ramparter said:
Interstellar isn't Sci-fi, everything on the movie could be real.
Click to expand...

Hahaha... what in the hell. Ships that can land and take off from enormous gravity wells and extreme environments on repeat missions without maintenance in between or even the vast ammounts of fuel required to even attempt such feats. Hyper cube rooms that reside past the event horizon of a black hole.
 
B

Branduil

Member
KonradLaw said:
Matrix wasn't really cyberpunk though. It has some elements, but only took bits and pieces that seemed cool at the time. Audience seems to be accepting of that. It's when you try full blown cyberpunk does it starts to crumble.
Click to expand...

LOL The Matrix is 100% cyberpunk.
 
KonradLaw

KonradLaw

Member
Branduil said:
LOL The Matrix is 100% cyberpunk.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. it's superpowered action movie when in matrix and postapocaliptic when in in real world.
Cyberpunk is near future where society is changed by cybernetics. None of that happened in Matrix.
If Matrix is 100% cyberpunk then so is Fury Road because Furiosa had cyberarm.
 
N

Nanashrew

Banned
Matrix is a cyberpunk dystopia, showing the far end of their future where they are conquered by their own technology and used as batteries. It mixes other elements too like mysticism, chosen ones, and other elements of sci-fi, but it is a cyberpunk movie.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Joker 2 is bombing at the Box Office
News 4 5 6 7 8
398
27K
NeoGiffer replied
Weekend Box Office - Aug 2 - 4, 2024 - Trapped between a twist and a despicable film
30
1K
Jinzo Prime replied
Weekend Box Office - Jul 26 - 28, 2024 - Alive & Howling
Business
17
1K
jason10mm replied
Borderlands movie only made $31m at global box office vs $115m budget
News 2
55
2K
Sabejita replied
Weekend Box Office - Jul 19 - 21, 2024 - The twist here is we hate Disney shills
Business
36
2K
Valonquar replied
Top Bottom