|
Post by bartlesby on May 29, 2024 9:00:48 GMT
Finding an audience doesn't mean making money. It does mean making money, unless movie theaters are offering free screenings. See the edit. I'm not sure what sort of movies you're suggesting but historically, some of the greatest films were not financially successful. Fast and the Furious 15, however, will make millions of dollars by name alone.
|
|
|
Post by merh on May 29, 2024 9:03:27 GMT
I was gonna go see it tomorrow. Loved the Mad Max films Thanks for saving me money. jeffersoncody It is a good movie. The action is cars, motorcycles, etc. So the argument must be a woman can't drive a car as well as a guy? Isnt that stupid as fuck?
|
|
|
Post by SixOfTheRichest on May 29, 2024 9:04:55 GMT
Interesting movies still get made. It's just that they're a risk and most of them don't do well. We're not back in the days where people had a few channels of television. Now we're inundated with media at every waking second. The problem is the environment. Movie studios have one goal: Making money. For decades, one almost fail-proof recipe for that was: Sequels, spinoffs or prequels to successful movies. But maybe this has run its course. Just like turning successful Young Adult novel series into movie franchises. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Harry Potter, Twilight, Hunger Games: License to print money. Eragon, City of Bones, Vampire Academy: Not so much. I believe if movies offer good entertainment, they will find an audience.Some excellent films can fly under the radar and since when were the general public or mass herd of mainstream moviegoers the voice of reason in taste? Do I feel that Furiosa has been a box office disappointment because its focus is on a female lead, yes! Do I avoid many films because of the sledgehammering girl power is tough agenda, yes! Even Max seemed to play second fiddle to Furiosa in Mad Max: Fury Road, yet it didn't really distract too much from the futuristic scenario that Miller has created with his Mad Max films. He spawned a lot of low to big budget wasteland action/horror imitations, yet he still takes the pip.
|
|
|
Post by Lux on May 29, 2024 9:05:58 GMT
Dune and Godzilla are major franchises. Mad Max has always been niche. Even then, they didn't exactly set the world on fire. Maybe people are finally getting tired of endless prequels, sequels and spinoffs to long franchises. I don't know how well Dune 2 and Godzilla did compared to previous movies from that franchises; but superhero movies are struggling as well. Last year we had Barbenheimer. Both are stand-alone movies. The year before, Top Gun Maverick and Avatar 2 were successful; both sequels to decade-old movies. Maybe Hollywood simply needs to make interesting movies in order to attract an audience. So you reply to someone that people are getting tired of sequels when that person was replying to someone else that confirmed sequels did well this year.
|
|
|
Post by merh on May 29, 2024 9:10:00 GMT
Furiosa didn't flop. It underperformed according to some expectations. And other movies without girl bosses also underperformed this year. No need to watch the video linked in the OP. That said: I never watched a Mad Max movie and have no intention to do so. My kid argues films cost too much these days making it harder for them to recoup their budget. It feels like there is a reset going on. Hollywood has been trying to recover since the whole theaters closed during the pandemic. The media press keeps looking for blockbusters to "save movies" but Hollywood is still in regroup mode. Disney pulled back/rethought their output so we aren't seeing 3 Marvel & numerous Star wars projects, etc. A lot of people seem to prefer to stream movies anymore.
|
|
|
Post by merh on May 29, 2024 9:25:03 GMT
We don't know yet if it will flop. It's flopped. A movie about a cartoon cat is doing better at the box office. Domestic 2024 Weekend 21 May 24-26, 2024 1 - Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga $26,326,462 2 - The Garfield Movie $24,006,629 3 IF $16,145,804 Strange. Looks like Garfield made a couple million less than Furiosa.
|
|
|
Post by merh on May 29, 2024 9:28:52 GMT
That last part just isn't true when you see how successful Dune 2 and the Godzilla Kong sequel did at the box office this year. People go to the theaters but they won't for Furiosa. Dune and Godzilla are major franchises. Mad Max has always been niche. Even then, they didn't exactly set the world on fire. Hell, they dubbed Mel Gibson in Mad Max for the US release
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on May 29, 2024 9:30:10 GMT
So the argument must be a woman can't drive a car as well as a guy? Isnt that stupid as fuck?
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on May 29, 2024 9:32:05 GMT
It's flopped. A movie about a cartoon cat is doing better at the box office. Domestic 2024 Weekend 21 May 24-26, 2024 1 - Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga $26,326,462 2 - The Garfield Movie $24,006,629 3 IF $16,145,804 Strange. Looks like Garfield made a couple million less than Furiosa.
Kids movies are almost always a money maker
And can't we all agree that the leash on Box Office openings has definitely gotten shorter?
|
|
|
Post by merh on May 29, 2024 10:01:58 GMT
Why Furiosa FLOPPED - Hollywood Girl Bossed Too Close To The Sun merh , jeffersoncody Why would I listen to a whiney guy critic? I have had a problem with critics since Cleveland Amory, the resident critic of TV Guide in the 1960s & 70s seemed to hate everything I liked. Furiosa isn't a girl boss. She is a survivor. MEL GIBSON IS THE ONE WHO DROPPED OUT OF MAD MAX screenrant.com/mad-max-mel-gibson-franchise-return-response/You going to force him back into the damned Franchise? He was around 22 when he made Mad Max. He had something like 16 lines in that film. (Taylor-Joy had something like 40 lines.) He was born in 56 so he is 68 now, but maybe he's hit the point where he doesn't feel like putting his body through the abuse that he once did. Or maybe he prefers directing these days. Less wear & tear on the joints. He is one of the people I feel hit a rough patch/mid-life crisis. That whole bit with his second wife was messy, wasn't it? Not unlike Johnny Depp.
|
|
|
Post by merh on May 29, 2024 10:05:27 GMT
Domestic 2024 Weekend 21 May 24-26, 2024 1 - Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga $26,326,462 2 - The Garfield Movie $24,006,629 3 IF $16,145,804 Strange. Looks like Garfield made a couple million less than Furiosa.
Kids movies are almost always a money maker
And can't we all agree that the leash on Box Office openings has definitely gotten shorter?
One parent takes the kids to the movie, giving the other a break. Or maybe one parent takes a group of kids, giving all the other parents a break. Back in the day of Blockbuster, there was rent the kid flick to give the parent a couple hours peace.
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on May 29, 2024 10:09:26 GMT
He is one of the people I feel hit a rough patch/mid-life crisis. That whole bit with his second wife was messy, wasn't it? Not unlike Johnny Depp.
She cost him his Laker tickets............and a whole lot more.
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on May 29, 2024 10:13:35 GMT
Kids movies are almost always a money maker
And can't we all agree that the leash on Box Office openings has definitely gotten shorter?
One parent takes the kids to the movie, giving the other a break. Or maybe one parent takes a group of kids, giving all the other parents a break. Back in the day of Blockbuster, there was rent the kid flick to give the parent a couple hours peace.
yep, it almost has nothing to do with the actual quality or appeal of the movie........it's just something to keep the kids occupied for a little while.
Absolutely. Good marketing idea. Especially with multiple TVs/players in the house. Our poor are so poor these days.
You can probably recall a time when just having a TV was a luxury.......or maybe it was just the Color TV component?
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on May 29, 2024 10:35:03 GMT
It does mean making money, unless movie theaters are offering free screenings. See the edit. I'm not sure what sort of movies you're suggesting but historically, some of the greatest films were not financially successful. Fast and the Furious 15, however, will make millions of dollars by name alone. Since the beginning of movies, in fact. Fantasia, Citizen Kane, Sleeping Beauty... But there were more reruns at the time. Movies weren't that front loaded. Today we have home video and streaming services. Years ago, I heard that the Theatrical release was considered the teaser for the Blu Ray. But streaming services are struggling as well. Serves them right. My point still is: People will go to the theaters if they believe it's worth it.
|
|
|
Post by notoriousnobbi on May 29, 2024 10:46:08 GMT
Interesting movies still get made. It's just that they're a risk and most of them don't do well. There are still festivals in Berlin, Venice, Cannes, Toronto, Tokyo, San Sebastian, Sundance in Utah, ... where a lot of movies that take more risks are presented. And the American Media IS too full of having to promote Hollywoods products that there seem to be no slots left for the coverage of the festivals I mentioned above. 'Girl Boss' Greta Garwig being Jury President in Cannes and Sean Baker's "Anora" winning just days ago there ... seems to have no impact here. Berlin, some months ago - wouldn't have been mentioned here if there hadn't been that little 'antisemitic' scandal happening. Sure, most of these movies do not attract a mass public, but (in case they get a good promotion) can earn their money, too. And they often need the Cinema Situation for this helps focusing on the movie (compared to the streaming situation at home). And they are important for repeatingly settings nee Bars. Movies like "Triangle of Sadness" "Poor Things" "Perfect Days" and many more even would work as Open Air Event.
|
|