The mere fact that this abortion of a film is probably gonna out gross LEGIT good movies like Transformers One, The Wild Robot, and The Substance (likely all three combined) is the true crime. Dammit folks, go see these films instead!165 million after two weekends worldwide. Unlikely to hit 200 million for the entire run. 450 million minimum to break even. 250 million loss.
-
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.
diffusionx
Gold Member
i don't remember that time.
box office discussion was always part of movie fandom.
Last edited:
I saw it this weekend. I get free tickets from a friend to the cinema he manages. It stunk. One, for a musical, it's not very musically inclined. There were no show stopping numbers, and for a sequel it was like nothing actually happened. I feel like if they wanted to make it a musical, they should have gone all in. Turn it up to 11. Have a crime spree like Bonnie and Clyde with giant musical acts while they're doing it. Instead we got a very subdued lady gaga just whisper singing to Joaquin. It could have been amazing in another universe, sadly what we got was trash.
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
chromhound
Gold Member
Watched it yesterday and all i can say is what the fuck?
Ulysses 31
Gold Member
Both answering questions no one really asked.
Last edited:
SJRB
Gold Member
Both both answering questions no one really asked.
They are also both named after a character that is in the movie for naught but 5 seconds.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Huge drop in Joker 2 sales after weekend 2. Currently at $165M global. Who knows what it'll end up at, but even $200M might be a stretch. International sales seem better than US/Can domestic sales. No way it hits $250M. Joker 1 did $1 billion gate receipts.
Record drop % in a comic movie in history. About -80% drop vs weekend 1. It dropped worse than the Marvels sequel.
-1-Full.jpg)
www.the-numbers.com
Record drop % in a comic movie in history. About -80% drop vs weekend 1. It dropped worse than the Marvels sequel.
Joker: Folie à Deux (2024) - Financial Information
Financial analysis of Joker: Folie à Deux (2024) including budget, domestic and international box office gross, DVD and Blu-ray sales reports, total earnings and profitability.
www.the-numbers.com
Last edited:
FunkMiller
Gold Member
Nah. Neither deserved to do well. Furiosa is better, but nobody wanted a prequel without Mad Max in it.
Shubh_C63
Member
I did. I loved Furiosa movie so much it hurts watching it as successful as Joker 2.
Stitch
Gold Member
‘Joker: Folie à Deux’ to Lose $150 Million to $200 Million in Theatrical Run After Bombing at Box Office
"Joker: Folie a Deux" was positioned as a box office smash but is now poised to lose $150 million to $200 million in its theatrical run.
variety.com
SJRB
Gold Member
‘Joker: Folie à Deux’ to Lose $150 Million to $200 Million in Theatrical Run After Bombing at Box Office
"Joker: Folie a Deux" was positioned as a box office smash but is now poised to lose $150 million to $200 million in its theatrical run.
Imagine thinking people are unwilling to pay 17 for a movie ticket but are willing to drop 20 on a digital rental, lmao.
AJUMP23
Parody of actual AJUMP23
It happens all the time.
Most are probably not sitting home alone watching, so that would be at least $34 for theater tickets versus $20 for streaming.
Putonahappyface
Gold Member
SJRB
Gold Member
Inviting the homies to come watch this movie is an efficient way to end friendships.
Shubh_C63
Member
Well I guess I am in the minority then. George Miller is a terrific director and Furiosa deserved better.They're both trash.
Doczu
Member
Nah man. At first i was "i never asked for this", but it ended with "i never asked for this but it was a treat"They're both trash.
Evil Calvin
Afraid of Boobs
How the hell is that movie a $459 million dollar movie? Is there even any CGI or special effects?
If you mean Joker 2 at a 200mill budget, I've no idea. Not seen it, but I bet it does have lots of backdrop CG for location at the very least, if not entire CG dream sequences or whatever. But seems to me that Todd Phillips just RAN DC DRY because he was being almost maliciously bad with the budget. He knew he had a blank check, had agreements with folks no longer there perhaps, so he had no oversight and just went nuts.
Can't wait to read the "tell all" production diary of this film. Sure to be far better than the movie itself.
Bloobs
Al Pachinko, Konami President
Nah, Furiosa is mid at best.
diffusionx
Gold Member
This is the same conversation that keeps happening with videogames.
Everything is like 30% more expensive today than it was in 2020, just as a starting point. But since the original was more of an art type film and this was a crass marketing exercise, everyone wanted to get paid. As an example, Phoenix cost $20M for this movie version $4.5M in the last one. Gaga supposedly got $12M. So just those two actors are probably 3x the cost of the entire cast of the original movie. And then it goes from there.
Hotel Security
Member
I liked the movie overall but I felt it was way too much CGI. Fury Road was 8 years old and looked more realistic. At the same time, I understand that the Fury Road production was brutal so I guess they decided to use effects rather than filming it. Maybe I'm just not as used to CGI nowadays as much as some but it felt like every scene was touched up, even people's facial features. Overall the movie itself had a nice pace so I feel bad ripping it but it definitely was less-than.
We see more of more of this movies having crazy budgets because they HAVE to use CGI. Worst example is the Dungeons and Dragons movie that came out. That's a fun, silly movie...but it has two or three CGI-fests that I thought were the worst parts of the movie...I just wanted to see the characters cracking jokes. And the movie did well but because the CGI was so damn expensive, it lost money and there's probably no chance of a sequel. All for CGI scenes that were arguably the worst part of the film. And I'm hearing the music sequences in Joker 2 weren't very good either. So it's the same issue. (Though, for Joker 2, I'll bet 1/4 of the budget is paying for Phoenix and Gaga.
Last edited:
That flick was 'just' 100 mill to mkae, so I actually think they got a lot of mileage from the budget. But yeah, all those big sweeping city shots and a lot of the arena battle could have been trimmed. The underdark with fat dragon maybe as well, but that was a good joke. And the drid shapechange chase and the final fight with the red sorceress chick were fantastic and a worthy use of budget.
There is a definite "lower tier" CG used in a lot of these mid films versus the stellar stuff we got 10 odd years ago and is now just reserved for the top films. Go watch District 9 and tell me there is any room for improvement there?!? I think the biggest issue now is time, with a side piece of a director that knows how to shoot CG and make it look like film versus a video game.
Hotel Security
Member
I felt both the shapechanger and fat dragon chases were kind of boring and out of place and just didn't look that real to me. Felt like they were tacked on because the movie HAD to had some elaborate scene. The final battle was fine and fairly clever with the Portal spell but I felt was a little less complicated than the other scenes.
Heck, go watch Terminator 2. That stuff STILL looks good enough now. It's like they're spending more money for worse effects. And I wonder is this really cheaper than sending camera crew out on location?
Last edited:
bitbydeath
Gold Member
Paul Schrader Not A "Joker" Sequel Fan - Dark Horizons
Oscar-nominated filmmaker Paul Schrader is pretty famous for expressing his opinions. The “First Reformed” and “Master Gardener” director has some eclectic taste at times, but isn’t afraid to criticise a project in an industry that often avoids serious judgement. In his targeting sights today is...
www.darkhorizons.com
Hotel Security
Member
^That seems like he doesn't get it. There are tons and tons of great films with characters who are unlikeable or bad people. That doesn't make it a bad movie.
On the bright side, I feel vindicated when I was telling everyone after Joker 1 that he was NOT the comic-book Joker. His character was nothing like the guy.
On the bright side, I feel vindicated when I was telling everyone after Joker 1 that he was NOT the comic-book Joker. His character was nothing like the guy.
Last edited:
Hrk69
Gold Member
How have I not seen this???
I first thought it was some kind of fan-edit but it's actually real? I'm stunned lol
Now I have to digest this. Not sure how I feel about this yet.
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt
Biggest Trails Stan
That was my only issue with The Batman. I felt that scene was just put in there to appease WB. He should have been introduced in the 3rd movie. Nowadays Joker is overused particularly the ones that are inspired by Nolan Joker. I'm hoping that Matt Reeves does Court of Owls for his next Batman film
FunkMiller
Gold Member
FunkMiller
Gold Member
They put it out shortly after the movie dropped at the cinema. Wise to cut it, but it's an interesting look at what they could do with Joker. Of course, he's not really seen in the final movie, so if they wanted to change his look for a sequel they could do.
Evil Calvin
Afraid of Boobs
The first one (Fury Road) had a LOT of practical effects and they prided themselves for not having a lot of CGI
I hope to studios that the obvious take away is to not try to subvert audience expectations so hard. I don’t want this to have any effect on the upcoming trend of R-rated comic book adaptations.
The Last Ronin movie being announced is still unbelievable to me. I believe Sony is working on an R-rated Venom adaptation. Spawn is coming slowly but surely. It’s a relatively interesting avenue to further explore for these movie.
The Last Ronin movie being announced is still unbelievable to me. I believe Sony is working on an R-rated Venom adaptation. Spawn is coming slowly but surely. It’s a relatively interesting avenue to further explore for these movie.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
There's conspiracy theories saying the director purposely made a shit movie to piss off fans of the first movie and/or so the studio wont want to make a Joker 3.
Let's say thats true. I dont get why?
Why purposely tank a movie, screwing up his career and franchise. If the doesnt want to make a good sequel then dont take the job.
Or his rmoals are so personal, he wanted to piss off people from the first film and ensure nobody else directs a Joker 3??? He's that egotisical?
Let's say thats true. I dont get why?
Why purposely tank a movie, screwing up his career and franchise. If the doesnt want to make a good sequel then dont take the job.
Or his rmoals are so personal, he wanted to piss off people from the first film and ensure nobody else directs a Joker 3??? He's that egotisical?
Fake
Member
Its a hard question because you look at Joker 2 and ask yourself, 'wow, this was trash, but wasn't intentional, was?'
And them you saw series and movies like Star Wars, Star Trek, Borderlands, Indiana Jones and ask what all they have in common. O maybe they have a patern?
Was a time when if you receive a loads of money and make a shit movie, you got your ass fired, the company say the movie never existed and move on.
Today we got flop after flop, nobody getting accountability and somehow they lose tons of movie and still make shit movies?
Wasn't the reason of a bad movie to exist is to directors look at what went wrong and made changes so those same mistakes never happen again?
You can blame people from having conspiracy theories when we never know how those things keep getting worse and worse without make companies bankrupt. Where all this money coming from?
Last edited:
The Cockatrice
Gold Member
They're both trash.
Both are unnecessary movies, both made to shit on male-loved franchises.
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt
Biggest Trails Stan
Angry_Megalodon
Member
There is no conspiracy when that can be seen during the movie, clear as day. This is the most egregious case of self-sabotage I have ever seen.
Why? Pretty easy. Todd Philips is a leftist who thought that the moronic media he was pandering to five years ago would get that the first movie was about social clashes. But most critics didn't get it and advertised Joker as some kind of alt-right incelcalypse, despite Mr Wayne being portrayed as a Walmart Donal Trump and the message of "kill the rich" being predominant in the whole movie.
He hates comic book movies —but doesn't hate appropriating their IPs—. So this time he made it perfectly clear that he despises superheroes and their fandom, again to pander to the same media that trashed him five years ago. That's the only reputation he cares about.
A narcissistic piece of shit, as most people in Hollywood and the legacy media.
I think it's quite possible he didn't want to make the movie, but was contractually obligated to give WB SOMETHING, so he just flamed out in spectacular fashion. So he took his millions and ran.
It's really the fault of WB when they agreed to give him so much leeway and a blank check.
I imagine the elevator pitch of Joker 2 was about as baffling as Joker 1, but since the former made a sweet BILLION, WB just said ok and trusted him.
Phillips will probably never work for WB again but I'm sure he will recover at his Italian villa and in time will go work for some other studio.
Halo is Back
Member
This is what also baffles me the most. The main theme of the movie about social inequality having a direct negative impact on people with poor mental health being left out to dry by society is something they would absolutely eat up. It's not like the movie was particularly subtle about its messaging. Maybe if the movie was titled differently and the main character was a different gender and person of color, I think the whole narrative from the media would be different.
Yeah he still made a billion with Joker 1, he’s going to be fine work wise
DragoonKain
Neighbours from Hell
Tim Dillon was in the movie and unlike 99.9% of actors that no matter how bad a movie is, will promote it and talk it up, Tim has been trashing it and saying Lady Gaga can't act.
Tim is the best.
Tim is the best.
FunkMiller
Gold Member
Tim Dillon was in the movie and unlike 99.9% of actors that no matter how bad a movie is, will promote it and talk it up, Tim has been trashing it and saying Lady Gaga can't act.
Tim is the best.
To be fair to other actors, Dillon is a successful stand up. He doesn't have to worry about not getting any more acting work!
Last edited:
Days like these...
Have a Blessed Day
It took massive cojones to do what he did. I respect that. I'm glad he made this movie.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Nah, he'll need to his time in movie jail first.
They allowed him a couple of hundred mil for the project on the basis that the original returned them over a billion. Who's going to take a chance on him again following a debacle like this - that nobody likes?
SJRB
Gold Member
Tim Dillon was in the movie and unlike 99.9% of actors that no matter how bad a movie is, will promote it and talk it up, Tim has been trashing it and saying Lady Gaga can't act.
Tim is the best.
Lady Gaga won an Oscar 4 years ago. And a Golden Globe.