The big comparisons have been Transformers and Man of Steel. Both of those films largely fall into that category that you're attempting to defend, despite some people enjoying the product.
-
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 Box Office 0801-0314 - I am Groot. You're welcome. Looks like a TV show.
- Thread starter xaosslug
- Start date
- Status
The big comparisons have been Transformers and Man of Steel. Both of those films largely fall into that category that you're attempting to defend, despite some people enjoying the product.
Went to See Guardians last night and the movie theater had a person dressed up like Leonardo* in the lobby, taking pictures and signing autographs.
*Your traditional Leonardo. Not the Leonardo in this movie. Probably didn't want to scare the children.
Manmademan
Member
and who is saying this? who are you talking to? and as for the creator, it's rare that a film creator will tell you "fuck it, don't bother, I made a bad movie." What do you expect him to say? Edit: This actually happened once, BEFORE the film came out. a cookie to anyone that can tell me what movie I'm thinking of.
Yes, silly as fuck to rely on the opinions of hundreds of people who do nothing but review movies professionally. What was I thinking?
You can certainly think TMNT1 is better than 90% of the MCU and DC movies, no one's going to stop you. but given that your opinions run counter to the majority and by a significant margin, it's simply more likely that you in particular have bad taste. It happens. Someone, somewhere out there bought and Enjoyed Superman 64, I'm sure.
Again, using critical reception as a barometer man of steel has a much, much, much better reception than Transformers or Turtles does.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
remember when people said a talking raccoon was just too fuckin' weird for people to buy into
did they forget the very next week was a perennially popular franchise about giant talking turtles trained in ninjutsu
did they forget the very next week was a perennially popular franchise about giant talking turtles trained in ninjutsu
Guardians had the largest Thursday previews, which is padding that Friday drop. If you take out previews you get this:
Thor: The Dark World - Down 58% from opening Friday
Captain America: The Winter Soldier - Down 56% from opening Friday
Guardians of the Galaxy - Down 54% from opening Friday
metalslimer
Member
Jeez so much bickering over a stupid Turtles movie.
No it doesn't.
T.M. MacReady
NO ONE DENIES MEMBER
Manmademan
Member
really?
Man of Steel: 56%, Average Rating 6.2/10,
TMNT: 20%. Average rating 4.3/10,
Transformers: 57%, Average Rating 5.8/10,
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen: 19%, Average Rating 3.9/10
Transformers
ark of the Moon: 36%, Average Rating 4.9/10Transformers: Age of Extinction: 18% Average Rating 3.8/10.
You might have an argument for Transformers 1, which is about the same, but 2, 3, and 4 are substantially worse. The series has been bad for a very long time now. Turtles is right down there with it, because why mess with a winning formula?
a secret-boss
Banned
Not surprise
There's alot kids when I saw the movie
I don't think it would have made that big a difference (+50%) in the first weekend. What is more likely is that a well received film would have a much better shot at $200M domestic. This is the right time of year for legs if the WOM is there. We might not get another $100M domestic film until October.
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
It seems even though Guardians have good word of mouth it is not translating into seats in cinemas, and it will plummet further next week.
I stopped caring about professional reviews when I realized they do not reflect the opinion of the masses. RT has both a critical aggregate and an audience, non professional review system. it is my opinion that reviewers should be honest about how they feel about a film, but that in aggregate it should mirror the audiences reactions as well. Somewhere in the professional reviewers selection process they are either given a bias, or are selected for a bias (again not individually but in aggregate) that makes their reviews not reflective of audiences enjoyment. Now with really good movies and really bad movies they match but the entire middle ground is full of disagreements. In other words I cannot trust that I will agree with their assessment because, in the case of the turtles, 80 percent of the reviewers didn't like it, and only 35% of the audience don't like it. That means I am more likely to disagree and like it than to agree and not like it.
I really don't feel like getting into a Rotten Tomato percentage argument as it's now a branch of initial discussion.
The poster mentioned that Man of Steel was not in these category of films and not a cash grab, then I was told Man of Steel has a "much, much, much, much, much?" greater aggregate.
After doing so, I glanced and noticed that Transformers was a giant "much, much, much, much" 1% better than Man of Steel.
Hurray!
The poster mentioned that Man of Steel was not in these category of films and not a cash grab, then I was told Man of Steel has a "much, much, much, much, much?" greater aggregate.
After doing so, I glanced and noticed that Transformers was a giant "much, much, much, much" 1% better than Man of Steel.
Hurray!
Manmademan
Member
wow, you aren't kidding. September is a graveyard.
That's fine and I respect your skepticism of critical reviews- however user reviews are even less reliable, since pandering to the lowest common denominator is a well worn strategy proven to work. Television is awash in absolutely awful reality television that garners a lot of eyeballs, but no critical acclaim. There's probably a balance to be had between the two, but I'm more likely to lean "critical reception" if there's a stark discrepancy between the two.
Still, in the case where there is overwhelming consensus that a product is bad (or good) it's rare for the actual quality of that product to be too far off- especially when you're aggregating hundreds of reviews. Even with game reviews on metacritic which are known to be bought and paid for the absolute low end (in the 30-40% range) is unquestionably toxic product.
Pop-O-Matic
Banned
Leonard Part 6
Manmademan
Member
That's EXACTLY the one. Good job.
so, let me be clear- by "transformers" we're pretending that only one film was made in 2007, and there aren't three absolutely abysmal films made right after that, including this year?
There are a few that could conceivably hit $100M domestic in the next 6 weeks, but I don't see anything I would call a lock by any stretch.
...then you shouldn't compare it to Transformers if you don't want to be wrong.
Goal posts.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
I looked at the September wide releases...what the fuck at this Dolphin Tale 2 movie Morgan Freeman are you serious my nigga...
Manmademan
Member
Sin City, maybe? If that one is R, no way though.
Hey, a man's gotta eat
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
It's actually not that rare for the creator of a property to bash an adaptation of their work, but the one that stands out for me is Alan Moore. (V For Vendetta, Watchmen) But he's insane, so whatever.
Killing_Joke
Member
Did you not see the post i quoted?
Since you love using RT so much. Did you happen to see the general audience reception is at 65%? 78k votes compared to 87 "professional" movie reviews. Guess that doesn't count.
They're not movie experts dude. Just like IGN and Polygon aren't gaming experts. They're no different then you or I except they get paid for their reviews while we just bitch back and forth on here. Yes, Turtles is getting bad reviews. That doesn't mean it's a bad movie or a heartless studio cash grab. So i'm not exactly sure what your agenda is.
Manmademan
Member
It's happened rarely that I can think of AFTER the movies were out of theatres, but not before the initial run even starts. outside of Leonard Part 6, it's completely unheard of.
Alan Moore is a special case, since while the films are adaptations of his work, he's not involved in the making of the actual product. Bill Cosby STARRED in Leonard 6 and was going on tv shows telling people to stay home and not waste their money.
I already addressed general audience reception vs. critical reception. if that's a better barometer for you, feel free to use it.
and are you comparing polygon and IGN to The Chicago Sun-Times and the Boston Globe? I think I've heard just about all I care to hear from you.
I think he has entered the Robert De Niro/Harrison Ford "I don't give a shit as long as you pay me" phase of his career.
Rated R, and a 9 year late sequel to a film that did like $75M domestic.
Discotheque
Banned
Saw that trailer in theaters, goofiest shit I've seen all year
He has been in that stage for probably close to twenty years now. Not a surprise.
Hey, no problem with you wanting to lean towards that metric, but it raises the question: what are reviews there for? If they are there to predict the audiences enjoyment of a film than they aren't doing a particularly good job. Perhaps this lowest common denominator thing is an illusion, a spectre invented by a review system to wave away the discrepancy.
People watch reality tv because they enjoy it, the people that enjoy it cross demographic lines (with different shows targeted at different audiences). They include both educated and uneducated people across income levels. Instead of simply chalking it up to lowest common denominator perhaps more attention should be given to why they are popular, and give a voice to that. As I said, word of mouth is not terrible with the turtles film, most people enjoy it, though they may say it isn't a good movie. If I can't predict that I will enjoy it based on critical reviews because they disagree with the 'lowest common denominator' (which sometimes I am apart of and sometimes I am not) then what are the reviews good for.
Even if you go by that, Man of Steel is at 76% audience approval, and all of the Marvel movies are over 70%. Also, TMNT just opened yesterday. Audience numbers always drop over time as non-fans start to vote.
That said, you can't really use the same comparison for movies aimed at children. Look at the Alvin and the Chipmunk movies. Reviled by critics. Mediocre at best user ratings. Close to $600M at the domestic box office for the trilogy.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
...the hell happened in here?
I feel like entering and trying to engage in a box-office thread is tricky unless you know that trying to use the money as a justification for why you enjoyed something is a bad idea. Drawing a parallel between quality of film and money it made is also not a great idea. Winning the box-office is a victory for marketing, not for the film itself.
These things all have to be taken into account if you're going to wade into the pit of numbers that is weekly box-office. It's a hobby that is about the film INDUSTRY, but not necessarily about the appreciation of film as an art. In fact, the best way to get shit all twisted up is to try and draw a straight line between a film's box-office and it's quality as a piece of storytelling and art.
I feel like entering and trying to engage in a box-office thread is tricky unless you know that trying to use the money as a justification for why you enjoyed something is a bad idea. Drawing a parallel between quality of film and money it made is also not a great idea. Winning the box-office is a victory for marketing, not for the film itself.
These things all have to be taken into account if you're going to wade into the pit of numbers that is weekly box-office. It's a hobby that is about the film INDUSTRY, but not necessarily about the appreciation of film as an art. In fact, the best way to get shit all twisted up is to try and draw a straight line between a film's box-office and it's quality as a piece of storytelling and art.
Turtles > Raccoons
THIS IS WAR BOBBY.
YOURE EITHER WITH MONEY MAKERS OR AGAINST THEM.
Killing_Joke
Member
I'm comparing "professional" movie reviewers to "professional" gaming reviewers. A lot of people use these rating sites for bragging. Then once things don't go their way it's a shitty system.
The initial discussion was if they put any care into the project. You want to call the creator a liar and say they did it for the money with no care because it got bad reviews. Fair enough. I just don't agree with you.
Most of the best films of the year make less than $100M domestic. Really, talk about opening weekend, box office legs, etc only really applies to blockbusters, and all blockbusters are made to make money/sell merchandise.
lovely ladies
Member
I agree with this, if the kids enjoyed it and it seems like most of them have as I read the cinemascore was A for kids and a shit grade for people attending over 25. I have yet to see the movie but even if I thought it was the biggest pile of turd I've ever seen, I could still take joy in kids liking something that I liked when I was younger. It would be great if the movie was personally catered towards my tastes but it's not, I don't buy any ninja turtles toys or merchandise (I might still have some of the old Playmates toys somewhere though).
Bobby Roberts
Banned
And all blockbusters, even the ones one might describe as "soulless" because they're not good examples of storytelling and, or lack honest characterization, have a ton of effort put into them. People absolutely care about making that movie.
Caring only gets you so far when it comes to artistic expression, honestly. There's a lot of really shitty artists out there who care DEEPLY about their bad art.
Terms like "cash grab" are almost meaningless when talking about filmmaking in general, but blockbuster films in particular.
Matt_
World's #1 One Direction Fan: Everyone else in the room can see it, everyone else but you~~~
It's not US box office news, but The Inbetweeners 2 Movie opened wednesday in the UK grossing £2.7M ($4.5M) and got the highest opening day ever for a comedy and the third highest opening wednesday behind Harry Potter 6 and Return of the King.
The first film went on to earn £13M ($22M) that weekend so it will be interesting to see how high this one goes
The first film went on to earn £13M ($22M) that weekend so it will be interesting to see how high this one goes
twinturbo2
butthurt Heat fan
I was thinking about seeing this, but there were no sharks in the tornados.
TMNT being number one is worse than Maleficient at number one, but barely.
ryutaro's mama
Member
Once I saw in the trailers that it starred Lori, I was out.
$700M for Turtles confirmed.
BronsonLee
Member
ryutaro's mama
Member
BronsonLee
Member
I still maintain that Heat-GAF took that loss and the subsequent destruction of the house of cards that was that team very well.
...Unlike the rest of the Heat fans
ryutaro's mama
Member
They did major upfront damage control but like Pimp said, they are fairweather. PEACE
There were no sharks, but at one point a tornado hits a fire, and becomes a pillar of fire. That was pretty cool.
twinturbo2
butthurt Heat fan
Goddamnit Twin, why couldn't you have said that about Boyhood?!
Because that one at least looks interesting?
(Just because I whiffed on a prediction and stood by it doesn't make me the anti-Nostradamus, guys.)
BronsonLee
Member
Nah man, peter and co are good people. Miami Will Rise
You say whiffed, we say whiffed then threw the bat into the air by accident, hitting several people in the front row
Also TMNT was always gonna be number one this week, even with GOTG
Too late Pachter.
- Status