abduleez1:


Of course some IP films will surely fail.
While I understand your point, the number of failed franchise films can't be compared to new original films. The facts and figures is disproportionately skewed to favour IP films. You can't even count 10 original films that have been critically acclaimed and done fantastically at the box office for last 5 years. I can easily count over 20 off the top of my head for IP films.

Also the excuse of poorly written films doesn't stick here. There's been a deluge of top quality original films released in the past few years and yet no widespread love. How many original films can you count that has surpassed at least $300mn worldwide in the last 5 years??
Yet, Mediocre IP films will still clear that milestone real quick unless it's god-aweful utterly bad.

If a much maligned Aquaman 2 movie can make over $400mn at US box office with all the doom and gloom flop predictions and the end of the DCEU, then audiences don't really know what they want. Cos this support is outrightly lacking for newer films.

Even at that all this wouldn't really be a problem for me. It's the annoying talk of "no original content" in town that annoys me. Audiences shouldn't complain about shït and instead vote with their wallets as they consistently do. It's a business as you've rightly said and studios are only following the habits of audiences which is always rooting for the nostalgic movies— 'the familiar' at the expense of "risky" original films. You complain of no original films yet when they arrive, no support. As an executive producer of a big movie studio what does that tells me?


Here's a few movies that was quite received well (and in theatres) both critically and from audience response yet none has made money even close to an averagely successful IP films with $350mn WW. 👇🏽👇🏽

It is evident that we have differing interpretations of what constitutes commercial success. I cannot accept the figure of $300 - $350 million that you are presenting as a benchmark because the movies you mention vary significantly in terms of budget. You are grouping movies with budgets as low as $10 - $15 million, which received minimal marketing, together with movies that had budgets exceeding $100 million solely for production costs, in order to meet the $300 million threshold. Additionally, there are a considerable number of original films with budgets as low as $6 million. When considering their production budgets and applying a multiplier of 2.65x to 2.8x, it becomes apparent that most original films were already successful prior to their digital release. However, this analysis excludes films for which budget details were not publicly disclosed, making it challenging to draw definitive conclusions.

Furthermore, I would argue that, in terms of percentages, the number of commercially successful original films can be compared to the number of commercially successful films based on existing intellectual properties (IPs). It is important to note that studios often make little effort to inform audiences outside of the United States and Canada about the existence of a significant number of their original films. Moreover, the fact that a movie might not generate ten times its budget in box office earnings or become widely discussed should not serve as a reason to abandon new ideas, mismanage budgets, or avoid taking the first steps. From my perspective, the horror genre appears to be performing well, and even the romance genre is demonstrating some success.

abduleez1:


In other words people don't really support Original content as they always scream to want.
So in the meantime na go chop; sequels, prequels, spin-offs, IP release taya throughout this decade. It's just starting sef and hasn't hit full gear. Na go complain taya. 😂😂

Your statement seems to imply that big studios have not experienced commercial failures in the past with some of their prequels, sequels, remakes and whatnot. You can only repeat a strategy so many times before it eventually leads to negative consequences. While it is true that employing this approach may allow them to save on marketing costs, its long-term viability is questionable. Box office earnings have declined, indicating a shift in the industry. In such circumstances, it would be prudent for filmmakers to reduce movie budgets and expenses, particularly if the story being told does not necessitate the use of CGI, VFX, or other elements that significantly inflate costs.

It is also crucial for them to prioritize conducting thorough quality reviews and eliminating the release of subpar content intended solely to attract moviegoers. Furthermore, the strategy of assembling numerous star actors and actresses to bolster box office revenue has lost its efficacy. The success of such an approach is not as guaranteed as it once was, considering the various factors that can contribute to its failure. Instead, allocating a fraction of the budget towards acquiring talented minds to develop and review high-quality scripts would be a more sensible investment. Audiences are more inclined to voice their dissatisfaction with poor scripts than with a good movie that lacks star power.

Someone leaked it earlier and he didn't even deny it.

Peaky Blinders is not as good as they say it is.

oyaskii:
i gagged at the bolded last bit 😂. The reason why major studios backed out from picking it up for a bullish cinematic run is so crystal clear now. I hate it when critics don't say the truth, thinking they are helping. This is Dev Patel's directorial debut if i am not mistaken, and it is very okay for him not to get it 100% right, but the near perfect hyping he got from the first screening, made me think, he cooked a sumptuous meal for the ages, but seeing the trailer, i just got a hint it was gonna be generic and i needed not to waste my time on it.

I've observed that many Indians tend to show unwavering support for their movies, irrespective of the quality, similar to the behavior often exhibited by some comic book fans. I have encountered Indian movies in the past that failed to resonate with me or meet my expectations, despite garnering positive reviews online. Consequently, I approach anything originating from Bollywood, which happens to be my least favorite movie industry, with a significant degree of skepticism. However, I held a glimmer of hope for this because of Jordan Peele's endorsement.

The Starling Girl (2023) - 80%

I rate this movie at 80% because it seemed like the filmmakers struggled to find a purpose for the remaining 25% of the film's duration. The story could have been effectively told within a shorter runtime. After a while, it felt as though random scenes were being inserted that neither contributed to the plot nor led to significant developments. In that regard, it bears similarities to the film "Past Lives," although "Past Lives" was comparatively less tedious. The reason for Lewis Pullman's casting as Sentry is very clear to me now, as he possesses both the physical appearance and acting prowess required for the role.

With dedicated training and perhaps some of that stuff Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson is using, it is easy to envision him donning the cape and embodying the character convincingly. His performance in this movie is commendable, only surpassed by the lead actress, although it is worth acknowledging that the entire cast delivered strong performances. Aside from the acting, the movie is visually stunning, captivating the audience and providing an escape from the real world. Overall, this film serves as a solid directorial debut for Laurel Parmet. Both she and Celine Song have made a remarkable entrance into their directing careers.

Monkey Man (2024) - 55%

This film can be categorized as a generic action movie in which the antagonists consistently make unwise decisions, while a lone protagonist effortlessly defeats them all. Its storyline revolves around revenge, which is a familiar trope. However, what hindered my overall enjoyment of this movie, resulting in a rating below 60%, were the evident indicators of an inexperienced director's signature within the action genre. The excessive camera movements and shaky cinematography during fight scenes were employed in an attempt to intensify the viewer's immersion in the action.

Unfortunately, the repetitive and exaggerated utilization of these techniques eventually became disorienting and fatiguing. Furthermore, the excessive implementation of flashback storytelling further detracted from my appreciation of the film. I want to emphasize that I hold no animosity towards Dev Patel, as I believe he has the potential to deliver stronger performances in his future endeavors. I will continue to follow his career and see what he takes on next. As for the critics who were involved in the movie's initial rating on Rotten Tomatoes, it is possible that their judgment was compromised by the influence of illicit substances.

So how do you sit down?

I don't think I'll ever comprehend why Max decided to renew Velma for a second season. I must admit that their goals are beyond my understanding.

Lana1:
Your disappointment matters not in the grand scheme of things.

Neither does your enthusiasm, review or opinion for that matter.

I just discovered movie box.

New Trailer Tomorrow. #DeadpoolAndWolverine

armadeo:


I agree. The movie was bland as F. It could have been done with a couple of unknowns and less cgi and still have the same results. Rebel moon has nothing new to offer and is complete shit.

This would have been a classic in the 90s and early 2000s.

This was a cliche overdone story

Well, Zack plans to make four more Rebel shit movies.

Zack Snyder's #RebelMoonPartTwo debuts at 14% on Rotten Tomatoes with 7 reviews.🟢

I have observed an abundance of posts circulating, authored by women who exhibit narcissistic tendencies, emphasizing their perpetual need for attention. They insist on regular calls, messages, and constant checking-in. Unfortunately, some men may mistake this behavior for love when, in reality, it signifies a state of obsession. Narcissists crave this attention to reassure themselves of their hold over others, but it is vital to recognize that this is not a reasonable manifestation of love.

Beyond narcissism, such actions also reveal a significant lack of maturity. It is rather foolish to disregard the fact that one's partner has a life beyond the relationship. She should be a part of your life, not the sole focus. If obsession is a requirement for the relationship to thrive, then it is advisable for her to seek losers who possess an abundance of free time and lack ambitions.

But wait, even a relationship with a loser will never succeed in the long run, because no woman desires to spend her future with a man who lacks drive and aspiration. It is akin to wanting to enjoy the benefits of a situation without facing the consequences. In essence, it is like attempting to eat your cake and still have it intact.

phr0nesis:

I knew about before posting.
This is just another potential flop. Replacing well known male characters with lesser known female versions hasn't really worked well for Marvel.

I used to shared similar views, but I've since realized that there's much more to it. Those movies you're referring to had more profound issues. Although I continue to endorse the belief that Marvel and Disney (especially Disney) produced their best work when they didn't consciously focus on promoting diversity as their main objective, but instead, seamlessly incorporated diverse characters into their stories.

phr0nesis:
The panderverse keeps expanding.
The MCU's Silver Surfer

The character in question has a female counterpart in the comic book series who appears frequently and that's the one they want to portray.

This is your reminder that the only response worth your precious time is "yes." Anything else, such as "not yet" or "I don't know, for now" is equivalent to "no." If her attraction to you isn't strong enough to spark her interest in pursuing a relationship with you right away, it's not worth your time and effort to try to change her mind or wait for a decision. Instead, it's better to move on and find someone who is more receptive to your advances.

Lord have mercy.

Having immersed myself in the world of "Warrior," I think I'm in the perfect mindset to embark on the journey of watching "Peaky Blinders." It feels like a seamless transition, moving from one exceptional 19th century gangster-themed show to another of remarkable caliber.

oyaskii:
It has been cancelled.

Yeah, it appears that the viewership figures fell short of a particular expectation, as I cannot fathom any other reason for such a decision. This makes me appreciate the show even more now.

Killers of The Flower Moon (2023) - 85%

This film had the potential to become another masterpiece from Martin Scorsese, rivaling the caliber of "The Irishman." However, it became overly preoccupied with showcasing Osage culture, leaving little room to adequately develop the third section of its own plot. Consequently, the final act felt hurried, as the movie had already consumed over three hours of screen time. Despite this drawback, the film excels in various other aspects. Particularly noteworthy are the exceptional performances, the immersive setting, and the compelling dialogue. Leonardo DiCaprio and Lily Gladstone truly shine, carrying the weight of this film with their remarkable acting prowess.

Warrior Season 3 (2023) - 90%

Where should I begin? I was utterly astounded. What an extraordinary experience! For more than 5 hours, I was completely engrossed in front of my screen, devoid of any interruptions. This show epitomizes excellence, as it adeptly accomplishes nearly everything it sets out to do. Although there are a few shortcomings in terms of fight choreography and minor plot inconsistencies, they are overshadowed by the overall brilliance of the production. There are numerous aspects of the show that warrant commendation, although I am unable to delve into all of them.

However, one aspect that particularly captured my attention is the exceptional equilibrium between action and drama, executed at a professional level. At no point does one element attempt to compensate for the other. It is not a slow burner. The show has massively evolved since its first season, progressively reducing the inclusion of filler scenes. In previous seasons, fillers may have been employed to meet the desired ten-episode format, but in this instance, the show stands on business from beginning to end, with a strong focus on the narrative. I hope they keep going because I can only envision the writing improving further, raising the bar even higher.

POKER FACE Season 1 (2023) - 75%

Upon embarking on the series, I found out that it was written by Rian Johnson, which provides clarity given the pervasive murder mystery theme throughout each episode. While I do acknowledge the creative efforts invested in this production, with many episodes successfully delivering entertainment and captivating narratives, the series fails to resonate with me personally. I prefer a singular overarching storyline, whether intricate or simplistic, that unifies the entirety of a season as opposed this divergent narrative in every episode. Nonetheless, I remain open to the inclusion of a few entertaining fillers along the way. It's the same reason I couldn't get into Guillermo Del Toro's Cabinet of Curiosities. Heading into Warrior Season 3, my hope is that it maintains the same level of entertainment value as its preceding seasons.

Meksbig:
There is nothing more frustrating than watching a show that progresses because the characters make ridiculously stupid choices all the time.

I'm watching the gentlemen and it just seems like many of the characters just make stupid decisions for plot progression.

Despite making choices that inherently expose them to potential harm, there is a conspicuous absence of genuine danger felt for either of the characters throughout their journey. Their ability to consistently come out unscathed creates an impression of remarkably low stakes or even a lack thereof, despite engaging in one of the most dangerous means of pursuing financial gain.

A million miles away.

Killers of the flower moon.

Oppenheimer.

The Starling Girl.

The Royal Hotel.

Gen V Season 1 (2023) - 85%

These individuals have successfully introduced a captivating assortment of new super-powered characters within the same fictional world, thereby expanding the overall universe in a remarkably commendable manner. This achievement, unfortunately, appears to have been overlooked and undervalued. Establishing a rich and cohesive universe is a formidable task, as the Marvel Cinematic Universe can attest. These guys have evidently discovered a winning formula that resonates both with their own sensibilities and mine. I eagerly await whatever future endeavors they have in store, as I am confident they will continue to impress.

So actors like John Cena or Dave Bautista have "range"? Wow, wonderful. Well it's not the stupídest opinion I've come across today.

The Gentlemen (2024) - 55%

Another serious letdown, comparable to my previous encounter with a Guy Ritchie project. It has become apparent to me that I must temper my expectations whenever his name is associated with any future endeavors. I didn't know whether to start this series of fly into Gen V so I flipped a coin, a decision I now regard as the second most regrettable choice I've made this year, right after investing hours in Netflix's Avatar: The Last Bullshit. Thus far, Gen V has proven to be enjoyable, and I can only hope that POKER FACE lives up to the considerable hype surrounding it.

POKER FACE.

Somewhere out there in the world there is a better series that delivers what the gentlemen was trying to do.

NeoWanZaeed:


TH! Which improvement again..


That shows got nothing lesser than 101/100

It appears that you are easily impressed; I don't think it's a bad thing. The second season is generally regarded as superior to the first. If the first one smashed the scale and left no room for improvement, how did the second get better?