• 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 Est. [OT] 10•7-9•11 - Jackman & rock'em robots sock Clooney

Status
Not open for further replies.

G-Fex

Member
I called it that this movie would be number 1 and actually good, andyou all laughed at me. Jokes on you movie gaf!
 

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
Deku said:
And the Ides of March didn't exactly get great reviews. A radio show was discussing how, having run out of leads, Hollywood is just cherry picking pretty but mediocre actors and shoehorning them as leads in as many movies as possible hoping it sticks.
When has this not been what Hollywood does?
 

Deku

Banned
Dan said:
When has this not been what Hollywood does?

They used to have good bankable leads.

The 3 people they're pushing now are Will Smith, Ryan Gosling and Ryan Reynolds. at least those 3 were mentioned in the piece I listened to.

I suppose the dearth in talent has revealed the lie.
 

Dresden

Member
Deku said:
They used to have good bankable leads.

The 3 people they're pushing now are Will Smith, Ryan Gosling and Ryan Reynolds. at least those 3 were mentioned in the piece I listened to.

I suppose the dearth in talent has revealed the lie.
Will Smith is as bankable as it gets.
 

jtb

Banned
I disagree about Will Smith, he's not really a star due to Hollywood shoving him down our throats (a la Ryan Reynolds and the like), but one who's really understood which projects will get him the most box-office appeal as possible - and then done those projects. Which is also why he's the only star with a genuine draw, because he isn't a Hollywood creation, but rather someone who mastered the system.
 

Tron 2.0

Member
lazybones18 said:
$54k for Human Centipede 2!

It has nowhere to go but up!
The original only pulled in ~$180,000 during its run, so the sequel will definitely outgross it.

The per screen average certainly doesn't look stellar for a limited release, but apparently the majority of the theaters were only showing it one or two showings a day around midnight.
 
the walrus said:
I disagree about Will Smith, he's not really a star due to Hollywood shoving him down our throats (a la Ryan Reynolds and the like), but one who's really understood which projects will get him the most box-office appeal as possible - and then done those projects.

Now, now, now, now once upon a time in the west
Mad man lost his damn mind in the west
Loveless, givin up a dime, nothin' less
Now I must put his behind to the test (can you feel me)
.......
 
the walrus said:
I disagree about Will Smith, he's not really a star due to Hollywood shoving him down our throats (a la Ryan Reynolds and the like), but one who's really understood which projects will get him the most box-office appeal as possible - and then done those projects. Which is also why he's the only star with a genuine draw, because he isn't a Hollywood creation, but rather someone who mastered the system.

agreed, Will Smith doesn't feel 'pushed' on us at all. He clearly made it his own way.

Now Ryan Reynolds, Sam Worthington and Chris Evans on the other hand....
 
lazybones18 said:
$54k for Human Centipede 2!

It has nowhere to go but up!

Butt of course.

Tron 2.0 said:
The original only pulled in ~$180,000 during its run, so the sequel will definitely outgross it.

The per screen average certainly doesn't look stellar for a limited release, but apparently the majority of the theaters were only showing it one or two showings a day around midnight.

I can assure you, it definitely outgrosses the first film.
 
27mil? what is the budget for Steel? with that advertisement campaign, i am sure those were disappointing numbers...

Edit: wiki is great, $127 million budget...this has fail written all over it, didn't they start to plan the sequel?lol
 

jtb

Banned
B_Rik_Schitthaus said:
Now, now, now, now once upon a time in the west
Mad man lost his damn mind in the west
Loveless, givin up a dime, nothin' less
Now I must put his behind to the test (can you feel me)
.......

We all make mistakes. Can't fault the guy for making like... what, 10 100m+ movies back to back after that. Fuckin ridiculous.
 

Tron 2.0

Member
Count Dookkake said:
Butt of course.

I can assure you, it definitely outgrosses the first film.
jIWfZ.gif
 
the walrus said:
We all make mistakes. Can't fault the guy for making like... what, 10 100m+ movies back to back after that. Fuckin ridiculous.
Nah, I agree with ya'. But think its impossible to work out how Smith is so successful, he managed to bring a mainstream audience to 7 pounds and The Pursuit of Happyness.
 
Real Steel actually made money?

Unreal.

That movie looks like some executive pitched it as 'think "Rocky" meets "Transformers" with Wolverine in the lead role' and the large sack of cash with the "$" on the side was handed over.

The previews make this look horrible.

If Ye Olde Resident Evil, er I mean, 3 Musketeers: 3D makes money...holy fuck...
 
ryutaro's mama said:
If Ye Olde Resident Evil, er I mean, 3 Musketeers: 3D makes money...holy fuck...
Saw a 3 Musketeers trailers where the only word spoken was "We are the three Musketeers" spoken in a American accent, Laughed my ass off.
 

charsace

Member
Deku said:
They used to have good bankable leads.

The 3 people they're pushing now are Will Smith, Ryan Gosling and Ryan Reynolds. at least those 3 were mentioned in the piece I listened to.

I suppose the dearth in talent has revealed the lie.
Ryan Gosling has tons of talent. Will Smith is a decent actor at best. Reynolds is an Arnold type that gets by on his charisma intelligence.
 

Tron 2.0

Member
ElTopo said:
$127 million dollars for that film ? For what is essentially Rocky with robots ? Is that really true ? I haven't watched the film, so I can't comment on the quality, but...spending that much money seems pretty unreasonable.
I think your expectations for what films cost are unrealistic.
 

midonnay

Member
are you guys taking the piss?

look at the amount of movies with 200 million budgets

iirc Real Steel has a 80-90 million production budget with the rest I assume marketing

perfectly reasonable

and yes, it unashamedly rips off Rocky
 

turnbuckle

Member
Slayven said:
I hope Real Steel does well, it reminds me of truly awesome movies of my childhood. Like Robot Jox, Robot Wars, and Arena.
Yup, saw it with the girlfriend and get family. Everyone enjoyed it.
 

Busty

Banned
Talk is that Real Steel's actual budget AFTER the tax rebates is nearer $140/145m so opening to less than $30m has got to hurt. It might build on word of mouth but a $100m domestic gross looks a little out of reach at this point.

Though I haven't seen the film yet judging by the trailer I just don't see how this film (with a name star and a name director) was costing anything less than a $100m even with local tax rebates.

For me the real stories this weekend are Crazy, Stupid Love (which I LOVED by the way) finishing it's run with a very strong $82m and Machine Gun Preacher struggling to build on it's platform release. With barely $250k in BO this $70m (or so) project is really struggling to get any traction as a wide release never mind Oscar bait.
 
Busty said:
Machine Gun Preacher struggling to build on it's platform release. With barely $250k in BO this $70m (or so) project is really struggling to get any traction as a wide release never mind Oscar bait.
Is Hollywood going to learn that Butler isn't any type of draw?
 

midonnay

Member
this film isn't transformers

the cgi is only on the
around 4
robofights with the rest being animatronics....

unless there were scheduling problems, the chasm between the director's claim of north of 80 million and unnamed analysts of 140 million is pretty wide.
 

D4Danger

Unconfirmed Member
B_Rik_Schitthaus said:
Is Hollywood going to learn that Butler isn't any type of draw?

I don't think any actor is that bankable nowadays

not in the same way they were 5-10 years ago
 
If it wasn't for the little bastard in Real Steel, it was a great movie. Seriously, I hate 99% of all kids in movies starring alongside adults.
 

midonnay

Member
ElTopo said:
It's a lot easier to judge this project in hindsight, though I think they might've done better (financially) if they had thrown that sci-fi stuff out.

how much money did transformers make?

Rocky with robots is a nobrainer. I think this movie will have legs.
 
DiatribeEQ said:
She did a great job in the Professional, so yes, she is part of that 1%.

I think the kid acting job that pissed me off the most was Will Smith's kid in The Day The Earth Stood Still.

Mainly because, I was already hating that movie before he hit the screen and once he did, I hated it even more.

It was one of those movies that is so bad that you just sit through it till the end just to see how it will end.

Thank Zod I saw that shit at home and not in the theaters.
 

Tron 2.0

Member
ElTopo said:
I admit they might be, but I just found it baffling that someone would think it's a good idea to spend that much money on a sci-fi Rocky film. They're essentially spending $40-60 million dollars on special effects (or at least quite a lot) and I'm just not sure that a Rocky film gains enough from them to justify it - haven't seen it, quite frankly I didn't even know the film was already running in Germany.

It's a lot easier to judge this project in hindsight, though I think they might've done better (financially) if they had thrown that sci-fi stuff out.
I think the consideration went something like this:

It's a film with a known, successful story formula starring a bankable, but not bank-breaking star, being helmed by a commercially successful director that has potential merchandising possibilities thank to the robots.

There's no doubt that with a $27 million opening it's not going to recoup its cost in theaters, even if the "A" CinemaScore means audiences liked it. But an October release indicates Dreamworks knew what they had.

Hollywood is not in the business of making modest, $60-$80 million films anymore.
 

Jimrpg

Member
im confused - REAL STEEL was amazing!

i hope it does well

how many of the haters have actually seen the movie?

hope u guys give it a chance... this movie is just fun!
 

Jimrpg

Member
DiatribeEQ said:
If it wasn't for the little bastard in Real Steel, it was a great movie. Seriously, I hate 99% of all kids in movies starring alongside adults.

thats because he was angry at his father for deserting him for 11 years

ryutaro's mama said:
Real Steel actually made money?

Unreal.

That movie looks like some executive pitched it as 'think "Rocky" meets "Transformers" with Wolverine in the lead role' and the large sack of cash with the "$" on the side was handed over.

The previews make this look horrible.

If Ye Olde Resident Evil, er I mean, 3 Musketeers: 3D makes money...holy fuck...

whats your point - puzzle quest is an RPG meets puzzle game.

it was good.

Real Steel was also good.
 

DR3AM

Dreams of a world where inflated review scores save studios
the action in real steal was amazing, everything else, not so much

anyone notice the xbox 720 ad at the end? lol
 

Jimrpg

Member
icarus-daedelus said:
Most people are judging the trailer, which I have to agree was awful. It's good to hear the movie turned out well though.

i suppose most people haven't played One Must Fall 2097 then...

i felt like they made this movie for me... it was everything i wanted it to be.
 

overcast

Member
Happy to see that 50/50 had a good drop. Great movie.

I will wait for Ides of March to go to the cheap theater. Looks interesting.
 
arbok26 said:
whats your point - puzzle quest is an RPG meets puzzle game.

it was good.

Real Steel was also good.

I'm judging it based solely on the trailers and they are horrendous.

Doesn't make me want to go see the film.
 

Takao

Banned
I felt like Real Steel's trailers told me the entire movie, and it told me the movie was going to be bad.

I kind of want to see it, to see if it's bad, or if critics got some weird robo haterade. But I think the robot designs are so ugly, and I don't know if I could support that.
Yes, I just judged the movie on its robot designs. Deal with it.
 

Jimrpg

Member
macuser1of5 said:
ok now I'm sold

they need to make a game like that again fyi.

they did but it was awful :( one must fall battlegrounds...

one must fall 2097 was made back in 1994 by two guys... but they underestimated how much work was required for a jump to 3D for battlegrounds.

one must fall 2097 is available now on freeware.

but yeah this takes the one must fall 2097 concept with robots being piloted by humans because people are more interested in robot boxing in the future. the kid and the dad finds a robot in a junk yard (iron giant) and takes it to underground tournaments (fight club) before he finally makes his way through to the top leagues (gladiator). The last fight as someone says is like Rocky v Drago but with robots. The fights are mo-capped and choreographed with real boxers and sugar ray leonard.

come on people - this is a really good movie and it doesn't take itself that seriously at all.
 

DiscoJer

Member
Takao said:
I felt like Real Steel's trailers told me the entire movie, and it told me the movie was going to be bad.

I kind of want to see it, to see if it's bad, or if critics got some weird robo haterade. But I think the robot designs are so ugly, and I don't know if I could support that.
Yes, I just judged the movie on its robot designs. Deal with it.

On the plus side though, this probably means that a Robot Jox remake is inevitable.

And a movie based on Hungry, Hungry Hippos, only with a different title. Blades of Ivory starring Daniel Craig, with Jack Black as one of the hippos
 
arbok26 said:
come on people - this is a really good movie and it doesn't take itself that seriously at all.

Does one of the following endings happen:

1) Hugh Jackman's robot beats the odds and wins the game and ends with him starting a makeshift family with the kid and his mother.

or

2) Hugh Jackman's robot comes up a little short and loses but Hugh realizes that the most important thing wasn't winning the fight, but rather the people most important in his life--the kid and his mother. He gives up the fight game (until, of course there is a greenlit sequel) and walks into the sunset with his new family.

If the answer is something close to that or dead-on, then there is no point in seeing the film.
 

Jimrpg

Member
ryutaro's mama said:
Does one of the following endings happen:

1) Hugh Jackman's robot beats the odds and wins the game and ends with him starting a makeshift family with the kid and his mother.

or

2) Hugh Jackman's robot comes up a little short and loses but Hugh realizes that the most important thing wasn't winning the fight, but rather the people most important in his life--the kid and his mother. He gives up the fight game (until, of course there is a greenlit sequel) and walks into the sunset with his new family.

If the answer is something close to that or dead-on, then there is no point in seeing the film.

so the first 120 minutes don't matter?

not going to spoil the movie here

but its a sports movie, there's a winner and loser obviously.
 

midonnay

Member
people are not going to watch Real Steel for complex plot....

its for the awesome robofights.

Saying that, its not as stupid as spiderman3/transformers 2,3/iron man 2 etc
 
arbok26 said:
so the first 120 minutes don't matter?

not going to spoil the movie here

but its a sports movie, there's a winner and loser obviously.

Don't worry about that.

There are spoiler tags, you know.

But I think you just answered my question, based on the bolded.
 
ryutaro's mama said:
Does one of the following endings happen:

1) Hugh Jackman's robot beats the odds and wins the game and ends with him starting a makeshift family with the kid and his mother.

or

2) Hugh Jackman's robot comes up a little short and loses but Hugh realizes that the most important thing wasn't winning the fight, but rather the people most important in his life--the kid and his mother. He gives up the fight game (until, of course there is a greenlit sequel) and walks into the sunset with his new family.

If the answer is something close to that or dead-on, then there is no point in seeing the film.
Neither of those endings are correct.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom