Fantastic Four reborn! - - - - Part 13

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]475165[/split]

 

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]474293[/split]

 

[spideyboy_1111]

I disagree. If the number of people who felt that way and didn't see Amazing Spider-Man because of Spider-Man 3 is small enough, then it's not a statistically significant factor. If twenty people commit an act of theft because they hallucinated that a green space man told them to, that's not a factor in what causes crimes to be committed in any meaningful sense.

Sounds like an assumption to me... Im going to need facts

 

[The Question]

Sounds like an assumption to me... Im going to need facts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_significance

 

[spideyboy_1111]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_significance

You missed the point and therefore the obvious point you claimed the assumption that the spider-man 3 reaction to amazing spider-man was minuscule. How do you know? Where did you gather that information? I need facts that it was so small that its pointless to count. And what is your description of "too small" and how do you knowiif it fit within those parameters? Is your opinion credible enough to be fact? I need sources, facts, and reasons why this data can't be big enough to be a factor other than your opinion. Thanks

 

[The Question]

You missed the point and therefore the obvious point you claimed the assumption that the spider-man 3 reaction to amazing spider-man was minuscule. How do you know? Where did you gather that information? I need facts that it was so small that its pointless to count. And what is your description of "too small" and how do you knowiif it fit within those parameters? Is your opinion credible enough to be fact? I need sources, facts, and reasons why this data can't be big enough to be a factor other than your opinion. Thanks

I never claimed that.

You said that people not seeing ASM because of SM3 was a factor.

I said that you don't know it was a factor.

You said that we know that some people didn't see ASM because of SM3, so it is indisputably a factor, the question is just how large a factor.

I said that if the number of people who didn't see SM because of SM3 was small enough, then it wouldn't be a factor in any meaningful sense because the number is too small to be statistically significant.

I never made the statement that the number of people who didn't see ASM because of SM3 was too small to count as a factor, I said that it is possible for something to be too small to count as a factor, therefor we don't actually know if it was a factor. I apologize for being unclear.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

I disagree. If the number of people who felt that way and didn't see Amazing Spider-Man because of Spider-Man 3 is small enough, then it's not a statistically significant factor.

this is what we call an opinion.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Regardless... It wasn't one person. It was several

 

[The Question]

this is what we call an opinion.

But I didn't say that was the case. I used the word "if." I was saying that it's possible that the number of people who felt that way was small enough that it doesn't count as a factor. Which I don't think is a matter of opinion, because again:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_significance

Statistical significance is a thing.

Regardless... It wasn't one person. It was several

Okay. I didn't say that wasn't the case.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Regardless.... Still your opinion in order to apply that logic.


The main point is that previous films reception DOES effect subsequent films as a factor to there success. Its undeniable that they do factor into what is the equation of a sequel ( or reboots ) success or failure.

Its not always a major factor. But certainly part of the sum of the whole

 

[The Question]

Regardless.... Still your opinion in order to apply that logic.

Not really. It's a major foundational principal that most of science is built upon.

The main point is that previous films reception DOES effect subsequent films as a factor to there success. Its undeniable that they do factor into what is the equation of a sequel ( or reboots ) success or failure.

Its not always a major factor. But certainly part of the sum of the whole

And as I've said, I don't think that's certain. It is possible that there are instances where that factor is so small that it effectively doesn't matter.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Not really. It's a major foundational principal that most of science is built upon.



And as I've said, I don't think that's certain. It is possible that there are instances where that factor is so small that it effectively doesn't matter.

You've already show your lack if knowledge upon what is ire usnt scientific principle of fact anyway.... Considering you've discounted almost everything anyone has said... Even though all fact is gathered from experience and educated hypothisis.

You can disagree with it all you want. But in the end you're the one decided what is or isn't a countable factor.

 

[The Question]

You've already show your lack if knowledge upon what is ire usnt scientific principle of fact anyway.... Considering you've discounted almost everything anyone has said... Even though all fact is gathered from experience and educated hypothesis.

No it's not. Fact, from a scientific standpoint, is gathered through peer reviewed studies that follow the scientific method. Personal experience and "educated hypothesis" aren't scientific at all.

You can disagree with it all you want. But in the end you're the one decided what is or isn't a countable factor.

No I'm not. Scientific standards of data analysis are what decide that.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

No it's not. Fact, from a scientific standpoint, is gathered through peer reviewed studies that follow the scientific method. Personal experience and "educated hypothesis" aren't scientific at all.



No I'm not. Scientific standards of data analysis are what decide that.

And the scientific method involves multiple people observing behavior of the same subject (coupled with previously educated data to help them already have some knowledge on similar subjects) compiling data and when many of the same observations add up... It becomes assumed fact .

Which is exactly what we are doing. We have all shared personal experiences, our own observations, even our own opinions... (and guess what... They're lining up!) therefore it is likely that our theory has played at the very least some what of a significant role.

 

[The Question]

And the scientific method involves multiple people observing behavior of the same subject (coupled with previously educated data to help them already have some knowledge on similar subjects) compiling data and when many of the same observations add up... It becomes assumed fact .

Which is exactly what we are doing. We have all shared personal experiences, our own observations, even our own opinions... (and guess what... They're lining up!) therefore it is likely that our theory has played at the very least some what of a significant role.

No it's not. What you're describing doesn't even come close to the scientific method. It's 100% anecdotal. There are no control groups, there is no peer review, there are no sample sizes large enough to yield sufficient data, there's no documentation of findings, no assessment of all possible variables, or any kind of rigorous testing or analysis. It's a bunch of people sharing their personal experiences and anecdotes. Which is perfectly fine, but it doesn't prove anything, and it is in no way scientific.

 

[The Overlord]

No it's not. What you're describing doesn't even come close to the scientific method. It's 100% anecdotal. There are no control groups, there is no peer review, there are no sample sizes large enough to yield sufficient data, there's no documentation of findings, no assessment of all possible variables, or any kind of rigorous testing or analysis. It's a bunch of people sharing their personal experiences and anecdotes. Which is perfectly fine, but it doesn't prove anything, and it is in no way scientific.

How do we scientifically determine why a movie does poorly at the box office, no one makes studies about such things.

Here's a good question, if you saw a movie with an IP you were not familiar with and you hated it, would you be in a hurry to see the sequel or care about a reboot when it came out? I think a lot of people would say no. The general audience is not familiar with the comics, so they only judge the FF franchises based on the movies that come out and 2007 was not that long ago.

 

[EssayM]

Not really news, but a fun bit of speculation about Fox's mystery Marvel project:

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1724549/marvel-mystery-movie-fox.jhtml

If only that last one could actually happen....

 

[spideyboy_1111]

the last one is so far off base it's not even funny...

for one, it wouldn't be a FOX film.... so they wouldn't be setting the date for it.

hopefully it's X-force or Deadpool since they've been teasing us with those films for far too long now

 

[The Question]

How do we scientifically determine why a movie does poorly at the box office, no one makes studies about such things.

We can't. That's my point.

Here's a good question, if you saw a movie with an IP you were not familiar with and you hated it, would you be in a hurry to see the sequel or care about a reboot when it came out? I think a lot of people would say no. The general audience is not familiar with the comics, so they only judge the FF franchises based on the movies that come out and 2007 was not that long ago.

Me personally? I'd do my research about the IP to learn what the source material is like and to find out who the talent on the reboot is and if the reboot looks like it would be any good. That's actually what happened to me with the Judge Dredd movie, I saw the Stallone film, didn't care for it, got into the comics, and then went to see "Dredd."

But I'm a huge mediaphile who thinks and cares about movies and comics and nerd culture stuff way more than the average person does, how I personally would react to that scenario doesn't speak to wider trends. Which is my point.

I'm very likely to give IPs a second or third chance in the cinema. I'm also very likely to remember not especially noteworthy bad movies I saw seven years ago and associate them with the potential quality of a reboot. That says nothing about other people, that only says anything about me.

The General Audience, on the whole, might remember the Tim Story movies well enough and have disliked them strongly enough to effect their opinion of a new film, and they might be close minded enough to not give a new installment of a franchise that hasn't made very good movies a chance even if every person involved in the production is a new guy, but they also might not, and we don't have any solid evidence to go off of one way or the other. Which is the only point I've been trying to make for a while now.

Now, full disclosure: I don't think it's a significant factor. I don't think that the GA is as aware of movie franchises or remembers the Tim Story movies as well as the folks on these boards do. I feel like that's projecting the fandom's way of thinking onto non-fans or casual fans. But I don't have any data to back that up, it's just my opinion on the subject.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Sigh. This discussion is useless. Please move on to another topic. This is just arguing for the sake of arguing, and it is annoying other posters. I factually have compalints about this discussion. Scientific method says people hate it. So, stop it.

 

[Donut]

Only way to do that is to temporarily shut down this forum until the movie starts filming or it is confirmed to be not happening. There is just nothing to talk about. Especially nothing positive. So until such time this forum will sound like a broken record

 

[Spider-Fan]

Only way to do that is to temporarily shut down this forum until the movie starts filming or it is confirmed to be not happening. There is just nothing to talk about. Especially nothing positive. So until such time this forum will sound like a broken record

Nope. People just need to end this discussion and move on to another topic. We've seen all we need to from the Dredd discussion. So, everyone needs to move on.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Here's a new topic: We're 29 days until the start of filming. Have we heard who will be Doom yet? Have there been any confirmed or rumored cast members other than the 4? Have the 4 even been officially confirmed?

I was just doing some Google searches and I'm having trouble finding any real news.

 

[Dark Raven]

Here's a new topic: We're 29 days until the start of filming. Have we heard who will be Doom yet? Have there been any confirmed or rumored cast members other than the 4? Have the 4 even been officially confirmed?

I was just doing some Google searches and I'm having trouble finding any real news.

Doom:

Accept no substitutes!

 

[Donut]

All right here is another topic. What is that guys obsession with that woman