Because James Cameron inexplicably demanded it.
-
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.
Wkd BO 0505-0717 - Baby Groot & fam show IRL Groot & fam who's Boss
- Thread starter xaosslug
- Start date
Because James Cameron inexplicably demanded it.
I guess being Tarantino's BFF is a really big perk.
vinnygambini
Why are strippers at the U.N. bad when they're great at strip clubs???
Freeza Under The Shower
Member
Between King Arthur and The Lost City of Z there is no shortage there. He's not bad in Arthur either, apparently, it's just the movie being a mess.
Aside from that, and not aimed at quoted post, you guys sure flip-flop a lot between "star power don't matter" and "this star is now totally unbankable because flop". You can't do that if 'star power' is irrelevant, it's just luck. (a leads to b also means b leads to a, so saying 'bankable' means star power is relevant again somehow). Also, if you look up actors on imdb, you'll find that everyone, even Charlton Heston, has a history of wins AND duds. (edit: Charlton, not Charles.
)edit: also, on Aladdin, the "sand and sandals" genre is presumed to be quite dead at this point, so that one will have to wing it on being a Disney remake, not on what it actually is.
Well I know that. I meant more in the sense that hopefully it wasn't just the writing that sunk King Arthur.
Honestly, I bet they do. He hasn't made a great movie in years. UNCLE was good, but Disney is going to make sure Aladdin is better than good.
Dash_Riprock
Member
Given how "Safe" Disney is with their megafranchises, it would be a bigger shocker for me it Richie wasn't sacked at this point.
I wouldn't mind this.
Doesn't Besson essentially produce the movies himself? Also he produced Taken and directed/produced Lucy.
World needs cockney Aladdin tho
NealMcCauley
Member
Honestly when Ritchie was announced I wondered if Disney got him and Danny Boyle mixed up.
Faveau aced Book though, plus, he did Chef which was underlooked but praised,
Ritchie has had a spottier track record over Fav.
Discotheque
Banned
Jungle Book was mediocre as hell.
Id rather they just tell Ritchie to make a cockney take on Aladdin than give it to somebody like Favreau or the beauty and the Beast guy. Hiring some arab teen from London for the role would rock as well. It would be a nice twist on Aladdin that would make sense considering he's a streetwise thief, and would keep the movie from feeling redundant like these disney remakes so often do
They have a good thing going here, I hope they follow through. King Arthur could have been fantastic if it wasn't a mish-mash of ideas and tone and stuck to those snatch-esque moments we saw momentarily
Id rather they just tell Ritchie to make a cockney take on Aladdin than give it to somebody like Favreau or the beauty and the Beast guy. Hiring some arab teen from London for the role would rock as well. It would be a nice twist on Aladdin that would make sense considering he's a streetwise thief, and would keep the movie from feeling redundant like these disney remakes so often do
They have a good thing going here, I hope they follow through. King Arthur could have been fantastic if it wasn't a mish-mash of ideas and tone and stuck to those snatch-esque moments we saw momentarily
MHWilliams
Member
This is a thing I didn't know I wanted until now. Ritchie would be perfect for Suicide Squad.
Jungle Book is fucking garbage and there's no possible way King Arthur could be any worse, but it did make a ton of money, so Fav and Disney knew what they were doing with that one.
And Chef is alright, yeah. And Iron Man is still in the upper echelon of comic flicks, so Fav will always get a pass from me.
There's actually a recent interview floating around where he claimed to be interested in the project, but was too busy with future commitments, which I'm guessing included Aladdin
Lemme try to track that interview down
https://variety.com/2017/film/news/...e-king-arthur-legend-of-the-sword-1202410742/
This is random as fuck, but I think he would have made a great Spider-Man.
And Chef is alright, yeah. And Iron Man is still in the upper echelon of comic flicks, so Fav will always get a pass from me.
There's actually a recent interview floating around where he claimed to be interested in the project, but was too busy with future commitments, which I'm guessing included Aladdin
Lemme try to track that interview down
https://variety.com/2017/film/news/...e-king-arthur-legend-of-the-sword-1202410742/
Hey, that actually sounds like great casting
This is random as fuck, but I think he would have made a great Spider-Man.
PhoncipleBone
Banned
If WB just got the fuck outta the way and let him go full Ritchie, he would make a killer Suicide Squad film. Just let him overindulge in his worst/best tendencies.
Then get the John Wick guys to make a Deathstroke film.
Freeza Under The Shower
Member
for a moment I thought you meant Aziz Ansari (different person, I know) and figured 'nah, his first wish would be the logical wish to make: "I don't give a shit about your three wishes, just make me white!" .. *poof* donzo!'. I mean, in today's world, that really should be the first thing you wish for. It's like a golden ticket where you get to pretend it doesn't exist.
It would be weird if they didn't work that in in some way though. I know Disney is super safe and all, but this isn't 1993 anymore, so everyone would notice that right of the bat, I hope. They do at least seem to care about acknowledging it, even it is just for market reasons.
OrangeAtlas
Member
King Arthur: Legend of the Sword is the Guy Ritchie-est Guy Ritchie to ever Guy Ritchie and I really enjoyed it for that, but I really don't think I want the same ADHD approach taken to Aladdin. Either reel him in a little bit or take him off the project.
Biggest-Geek-Ever
Member
Saturday updated from Rth
Great Saturday for Guardians 2. At a minimum it will do $61M for the weekend, and with its strong female appeal for an MCU film, it could reach $65M with a Mother's Day boost.
Great Saturday for Guardians 2. At a minimum it will do $61M for the weekend, and with its strong female appeal for an MCU film, it could reach $65M with a Mother's Day boost.
Weekend Studio Estimates:
1) Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 - $63M (-57%) - $246M total
2) Snatched - $17.5M
3) King Arthur: Legend of the Sword - $14.7M (probably an overestimate)
4) Fate of the Furious - $5.3M - $215M total
5) The Boss Baby - $4.6M - $162M total
6) Beauty and the Beast - $3.9M - $493M total
Worldwide Updates
Beauty and the Beast - $1.206B
Fate of the Furious - $1.1193B
Guardians of the Galaxy - $631M
King Arthur - $44M
1) Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 - $63M (-57%) - $246M total
2) Snatched - $17.5M
3) King Arthur: Legend of the Sword - $14.7M (probably an overestimate)
4) Fate of the Furious - $5.3M - $215M total
5) The Boss Baby - $4.6M - $162M total
6) Beauty and the Beast - $3.9M - $493M total
Worldwide Updates
Beauty and the Beast - $1.206B
Fate of the Furious - $1.1193B
Guardians of the Galaxy - $631M
King Arthur - $44M
PhoncipleBone
Banned
So, GotG2 having that normal MCU drop in week 2.
Violence Jack
Member
Holy. Shit.
$14 million OW on a $175 million budget. That likely means sub-$30 domestic total
PhoncipleBone
Banned
Saw Arthur bombing hard, but not that hard.
Disney is projecting a 38% Mother's Day drop for BatB for some reason. Fox has the Boss Baby dropping 20%. As such, there may be some flip-flopping going on with the actuals.
Fox is also going all in on Snatched being the Mother's Day choice of the year with a projected 6% drop. I'm not sure if I see it, but who knows. I am not a mother/daughter.
Fox is also going all in on Snatched being the Mother's Day choice of the year with a projected 6% drop. I'm not sure if I see it, but who knows. I am not a mother/daughter.
DizzyCaffeine
Member
Any projections for Alien's OW yet?
Monster Trucks
Oh god I forgot that existed
And despite Trokil's objections, GITS was definitely a big flop, too.
Of course, it's not a fair comparison since most of Paramount's stuff these days are big flops while Warner Bros, can shoulder flops better since they're exceptions, but it's still funny to see how the crown for the biggest flop is continually being passed around.
It's not 100% confirmed, but some industry insiders have said that it was really expensive. And with Alcon's reputation, it's probably true.
Unless Blade Runner's fanbase became way more massive than any of us realized, I can't imagine this makes a profit.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Came in here to see if people were just deciding to continue BO talk in last week's thread in protest of this week's terrible thread title.
Lights and Waves
Member
RIP Power Rangers I loved that movie so much. I'm definitely buying the Blu-Ray.
Really hoping that magic happens and Netflix decides to fund a direct-to-streaming sequel.
I loved that movie so much. I'm definitely buying the Blu-Ray. Really hoping that magic happens and Netflix decides to fund a direct-to-streaming sequel.
lol yeah, it is pretty bad.
How is Alcon still in business? They seem to overspend on everything, and the last time they had a big hit was The Blind Side, which came out in 2009.
crazy monkey
Banned
Don't they realize that no one gives shit about Arthur movies. Just make low budget for TV movie if needed in England. Seriously.
Blade Runner is an Alcon movie, I don't think WB is doing anything other than distributing. I severely doubt they wasted 200M on BR anyway.
Even TV doesn't seem like that great a place for it, especially after how big a failure Camelot was on Showtime. Then again, maybe it's just a matter of these projects not being that good to begin with, rather than it being an issue with the source material. The last time I can think of a great take on the Arthurian legends was Excalibur, and that's not too terribly far off from its 40th anniversary.