SOZINN's Posts
Nairaland Forum › SOZINN's Profile › SOZINN's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 (of 77 pages)
Kaycee7:I legit forgot to share this trailer, and I was truly astonished by the positive comments and posts from individuals who initially criticized the concept of this project but are now eagerly anticipating its release. Witnessing this shift in sentiment genuinely brings a smile to my face. The fact that this trailer garnered 5 million views within 6 hours is no joke. At its current pace, it is poised to reach the 20 million mark much quicker than Captain America 4, despite expectations that this project would be the less popular of the two. Following Florence, my next favored cast member is Lewis in the role of Sentry. He is a talent that is, in my opinion, vastly underappreciated. Although I had anticipated him to undergo more physical transformation for this role, I defer to Marvel's vision for their characters in the contemporary era. What I firmly believe is that if this project delivers on its potential, those who initially criticized it will undoubtedly change their tune and speak favorably of it. |
pu7pl3:Common get out of here. Oga planning committee. 😂 |
pu7pl3:You've always been a clown. When someone chooses to defend what he's passionate about then you remember that there's no cash handouts involved and he's not on the planning committee with the executives. You and this your consistent bullshit, whenever you don't agree with someone we start seeing crap like this. 😂 |
pu7pl3:Whose giving the cheques for all the DC characters you're fighting tooth and nail for their adaptation? Lol bloddy clown 😂😂😂 |
Kaycee7:Lol. Is @BlackManta even seeing this? |
NobleStag007:I swear |
doyin01:Props to him for even adding a few losses in the edit to make it look real. The ones I normally see is winning all through. 😂 |
Chibudollar:Even the film poster looks like trash. |
NeoWanZaeed:Shut up. |
OhBritannia:This is the first time I've seen you rate a movie this low, this project must be shit. |
joseph1832:Okay so that means he'll just stay away from Nairaland from now on. |
abduleez1:Don't worry, he will not use nairaland today. ![]() |
@BlackManta
|
abduleez1:Lol, you dey mind them, the few masquerading as the many. |
BlackManta:E be tins bro. $1b for this current Hollywood industry no be here. How far, you go deactivate na. |
BlackManta:And by your words will you stand!!! Who is the clown now? |
So, Deadpool and Wolverine crossed the $1b mark on Sunday night. ✔️
|
BlackManta:I genuinely hope you keep your word. |
dominique:Them no dey buy class for market. |
phr0nesis:This one go still tank like craze. |
Some people should be getting ready to deactivate now. The MCU steady serving these DC folks shame. #DeapoolandWolverine |
joseph1832:Lol where did you pick these buzzwords you're ranting? |
Deadpool and Wolverine - $900M - ✔️ |
Where are those people that said that Deadpool and Wolverine would not cross $800m? I thought the MCU is dead, whose watching this stuff? Even since DC's The Flash flopped whenever their fans hear the word "cameo" they always associate it with failure. $1b is not far off, I'll check in with y'all soon. |
NaijaMemes:You didn't even add Xmen 97, lol. Shalaye no too much. If you look at where they're making noise, it'll be like Marvel hasn't released a good project since Endgame or like they've committed equal atrocities as DC in the CBM industry. Now they're making box office predictions for a movie that's coming out in 2026, just taking up space to make it look like they're talking. |
blingxx:Do you have someone better in mind? |
Damn, if WB don't stop, this year will go up in flames.
|
10thDentist:While I would avoid using the term "laundering," I understand the point you are making. The decision of production companies to pay substantial amounts to star actors for their roles in movies can be influenced by various factors, but I will focus on the two most common reasons. Firstly, the nature of the role itself plays a significant role, like in the case of Joaquin Phoenix, for instance, his exceptional acting talent is a primary consideration. His popularity serves as an added advantage, but I have observed that his talent is often required more for certain roles than his fame, or at least the two are equally important. The second reason is that a more popular face helps establish a connection with a larger audience. However, the dynamics have shifted recently. Advertising costs for some movies are high because a significant amount has already been allocated to production expenses. Convincing executives to invest $30 million in marketing a movie is challenging if the production budget alone isn't around the $60 - $65 million range. When dealing with a high-budget project, every effort is made to ensure its success at the box office. Therefore, there is an interconnectedness between the substantial spending on casting, which is a significant contribution to production cost, and the utilization of various means to generate widespread attention, all aimed at preventing commercial failure and thus inflating the total budget to unconventional figures. I hope this clarifies the matter for you. |
Illusioneffect:Earlier today an article was published by @TheDirect, which reported that the initial responses from test screenings of the movie were predominantly positive. Would you mind sharing your source? |
"The Fall Guy" being an Intellectual Property (IP) film based on the original series that aired for five seasons in the 1980s makes its underperformance at the box office even more amusing to me. The fact that prominent executives invested approximately $140 million in an original concept initially struck me as peculiar when I read that rumor. This may be due to the observation that only a few original projects receive even half of that budget for production. Lol. |
abduleez1: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: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. |
