Bohemion Rapsody Trailer was amazing
What do you people have against Cap1. It's good.
Hey I enjoy the third act of TFA more than most!No it doesn't. Stop lying guek.
"The movie's got to do $750 million, $800 million to break even. If they get anywhere close to that, they'll consider it a win."
Interesting tidbit in an article about the behind the scene problems of Suicide Squad by The Hollywood Reporter:
That's a whole lot of money. I think it's possible but not very likely.
honestly nope
I've been saying from the start, but every trailer after the first looked like a bunch of cluttered mayhem and cgi destruction nonsense, couldn't make out whatever story the movie was supposed to have
even the bohemian rhapsody one was pretty lame, I mean, who puts that song for a movie trailer
Damn, looks like the budget was a lot bigger than the $175 million reported.
Norton Hulk was good though.
Interesting tidbit in an article about the behind the scene problems of Suicide Squad by The Hollywood Reporter:
That's a whole lot of money. I think it's possible but not very likely.
Interesting tidbit in an article about the behind the scene problems of Suicide Squad by The Hollywood Reporter:
That's a whole lot of money. I think it's possible but not very likely.
Unless reshoots were stupid expensive, I have a hard time believing that numberInteresting tidbit in an article about the behind the scene problems of Suicide Squad by The Hollywood Reporter:
That's a whole lot of money. I think it's possible but not very likely.
Interesting tidbit in an article about the behind the scene problems of Suicide Squad by The Hollywood Reporter:
That's a whole lot of money. I think it's possible but not very likely.
Interesting tidbit in an article about the behind the scene problems of Suicide Squad by The Hollywood Reporter:
That's a whole lot of money. I think it's possible but not very likely.
"[Ayer] wrote the script in like, six weeks, and they just went," he says, arguing that the whole process would have benefited if Ayer, 48, had been given more time to work. But another source closely involved with the film says once it was dated, pushing back the release was not an option: "It's not just that you've told the public the movie is coming, you've made huge deals around the world with huge branding partners, with merchandise partners. It's a really big deal to move a tentpole date."
Unless reshoots were stupid expensive, I have a hard time believing that number
Interesting tidbit in an article about the behind the scene problems of Suicide Squad by The Hollywood Reporter:
That's a whole lot of money. I think it's possible but not very likely.
I could neverm ever fucking understand why everyone was so excited about this movie based on the trailers, as if it was going to be some masterpiece. The cringe-worthy trailers didn't give me the slightest bit of excitement to see the movie. This has been hyped for like 2 years, so one might think that they had something strong to hype. Pathetic.
This was not bad. I enjoyed it but could've used another round of editing. Not nearly as bad as people claiming.
Interesting tidbit in an article about the behind the scene problems of Suicide Squad by The Hollywood Reporter:
That's a whole lot of money. I think it's possible but not very likely.
AgreedI have a hard time believing the legs on this will be as bad as BvS. The average rating on RT is higher and I can see this being one where people won't care about the problems as much.
I don't get this. If it needs to make $750-800m just to break even, how would only getting close to that be considered a win? Wouldn't they be losing money if they come in under the break even point?
Case in point:
I don't get this. If it needs to make $750-800m just to break even, how would only getting close to that be considered a win? Wouldn't they be losing money if they come in under the break even point?
Or better yet, we finally get to see the teen Tony story arc play out on the big screen! Yeah?
I definitely think a number of the earlier Marvel films got cut a lot of slack by American reviewers, getting higher grades than they deserve. Probably riding a high of superhero films being made fashionable to appreciate by Nolan and Disney laying on the production value. For instance, I'm pretty sure most people with no particular fanboy leaning and in hindsight would actually rate Thor 2 higher than Thor 1 on account of having at least interesting art direction, though both are beyond mediocre. Iron Man 1 was great, but they must have really loved RDJ to not give the sequels a fat D-. Avengers is pretty bad as well, the only commendable thing is that it doesn't completely unravel as you might expect.
In that sense I can understand DC fanboys who feel shortchanged by the simple reason that the appropriate superhero apathy has set in so that critics are back to properly critiquing the men in tights films again.
Interesting tidbit in an article about the behind the scene problems of Suicide Squad by The Hollywood Reporter:
That's a whole lot of money. I think it's possible but not very likely.
I think some things have started to fatigue critics, like the "big bad from the sky" third act or thoughtless destruction porn glossing over civilians. The difference is that Marvel movies have reacted to that and begun changing things up in that regard (Ant-Man, Civil War), while BvS and SS are still moving on that same track.
But more than that, I also think movies like the first Iron Man and the first Thor have a sense of charm and personality that, say, Snyder's last two movies don't have. And that holds up better than any aged genre tropes.
I mean, at the end of the day, quality is quality. Deadpool and Civil War broke out with good reviews because they were good. BvS did not get good reviews because it wasn't good. If Suicide Squad is getting bad reviews, I'm willing to bet it has more to do with because it's also not a good movie, than any other subconscious reason going through critics' heads.
You mean like last year's Avengers: AoU?
There's no conspiracy against DC, but there is a bias that critics have.
You mean like last year's Avengers: AoU?
There's no conspiracy against DC, but there is a bias that critics have.
With the current WB board it would be rebooter worse. It's best to just wait until those clowns are out and then start thinking of soft Flashpoint reboot.So, how long until the DC universe is rebooted?
So, how long until the DC universe is rebooted?
This doesn't make any sense. Why would critics have a bias for Marvel? What reasoning is there for that?
I keep seeing hurt DC fans postulate this theory, and they never offer any explanation for it beyond 'Marvel movies have a higher RT'.
Marvel movies aren't all critically acclaimed, and with Age of Ultron/Thor 2, this was proven true. With those two particular films, sure they didn't get 33%, but they were competently made, scripted, paced, and edited films, and little more than that. They were average blockbusters, like Ghostbusters. They're not bad enough to warrant a sub-50s rating, but they're not good enough to get above 60s/70s. They're passable to decent. 66% is not a good rating, it's 7% from being Rotten, lol.
Only with truly good MCU films like CW, TWS, or GOTG, do critics start giving it high ratings, because they're actually good films.