First Avenger Now with 2011 over saturation of Superhero movies Captain America MUST be delayed

[wobbly]

Potter comes out the week before? If they were head to head I'd say that's bad news, but a weeks breathing space isn't a disaster (another week would have better though).
Also don't know too many people who will go and see movies at the theatres more than once. I've only seen a handful of films more than once myself (and a couple of them was because I was worse for wear after a good few beers the first time around )

With Cap, if it's marketed well, the early reviews are good and so on, I can see it having a solid opening, and if the word of mouth that follows is good then it should do fine.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

But then it would've gone up against Favreau's Cowboys and Aliens, and I don't think its a good idea to piss off a guy who's directing one of your franchises.

Its gonna be marketed well because from what I heard, it was Universal that was handling (or mishandling) the TIH marketing.

 

[Hotwire]

Kind of a stand off. Maybe Potter will move up a week?

 

[Spider-Vader]

It's the last movie in the series. It's not going anywhere.

 

[Tony Stark]

Well, to begin with, you're dead wrong. None of the Potter films have ever been nominated for best picture films at the oscars. And it would frankly be an insult to the other films if the first two were. And the childrens acting in this just isn't that good. It's not bad, but I've seen much better child acting. They seemed wooden at times. Not to mention that Columbus use of accuracy to the book for the sake of accuracy hurt the film greatly, and he didn't actually understand the spirit behind much of it.

For example, in COS, Fred and George have a scene where they walk by Harry, who is standing at a fence looking sad about the whole heir thing, and say two lines nearly line for line from the book. Something to the effect of "Look out! There goes the heir of Slytherin." "Yeah, extremely dark wizard there!" The lines were delivered very dryly, and in this context they were teasing Harry for the sake of teasing.

In the books they would follow Harry around shouting these things as a way to show how ridiculous they thought it was, and Harry thought it was funny. The movie captured none of the intention, nor spirit of Fred and George. I would have rather the movie come up with an original scene to show Fred and George's humor rather then dragging line for line dialogue from the book that's used poorly.

And I see no reason why you think HBP was edited poorly, or that it looked horrible. In fact, I find it surprising you're suggesting this, since even the detractors of the film praised the cinematography. The cinematography in HBP is easily some of the best in the series. The movie looked amazing.

In terms of the movie being horrible, you're largely in the minority on this. HBP currently stands at an 83% on rottentomatoes. That's higher then both of Columbus' movies, and the third highest rated film of the series. The general public likes Yates' movies. Again, you have to seperate a movie's quality as an adaptation and as a film on it's own.

Which brings me back to my original point. To worry about Harry Potter instead of Cap is foolish. The general public, on average, largely enjoyed the last movie. Barring Part One being horrible (highly unlikely) Part two is going to be huge.

I stand corrected on the oscars, it was considered for best picture, but didn't make the cut, for some reason I was remembering it had.

Without delving into a full HP discussion the first film grossed 974 million vs. 933 for HP6, You calculate inflation over 8 years and the first one blew the 6th out of the water, and the first was a Thanksgiving release, not even a summer release.

The 6th film was a total injustice to the book. As a stand alone movie, it has no ending, they cut out Dumbledore's funeral, the scene of the Weasley's house burning down never happened, and the most important part Alan Rickman who should have been featured in the film was given the bare minimum screen time.

I may be in the minority, but the film was crap and had none of the magical wonder of the films. I hope HP 7 is much, much better.

Since the last two Potter films all had 60% drops in week 2, releasing Cap a week after if the movie is promoted well isn't a big deal, although I agree that more space should have been given. However there's still a chance Cap could get pushed back into August.

 

[Tony Stark]

It's the last movie in the series. It's not going anywhere.

No it won't change, but Cap can change.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I stand corrected on the oscars, it was considered for best picture, but didn't make the cut, for some reason I was remembering it had.

Without delving into a full HP discussion the first film grossed 974 million vs. 933 for HP6, You calculate inflation over 8 years and the first one blew the 6th out of the water, and the first was a Thanksgiving release, not even a summer release.

The 6th film was a total injustice to the book. As a stand alone movie, it has no ending, they cut out Dumbledore's funeral, the scene of the Weasley's house burning down never happened, and the most important part Alan Rickman who should have been featured in the film was given the bare minimum screen time.

I may be in the minority, but the film was crap and had none of the magical wonder of the films. I hope HP 7 is much, much better.

Since the last two Potter films all had 60% drops in week 2, releasing Cap a week after if the movie is promoted well isn't a big deal, although I agree that more space should have been given. However there's still a chance Cap could get pushed back into August.

The first star wars grossed much more then Empire Strikes back. Yet ESB is considered by most to be better. The first Spider-man grossed more then Spider-man 2. SM2 is considered by most to be better. Gross does not reflect what people feel the quality of the movie is. If it did, Transformers 2 would have to be considered one of the best movies made in the past decade.

Empire Strikes Back also ended on a cliffhanger ending, does that mean it is a bad movie as well?

And again, the Weasley's House burning down and the cutting DD's funeral should not effect your judgement of the movie as a FILM. In the film version of Jurassic Park Hammond is not an egotistical *****e bag who doesn't care if his kids get killed. Muldune dies, while he lives in the book, Grant and Ellie have a romantic relationship that never existed in the novel, and they don't have to go into the Raptors nest at the end of the movie.

But I didn't mind that, because I judged the movie solely on it's basis as a FILM. Not an ADAPTATION. Faithfulness to source material do not effect the quality of a film. The Bourne Identity movies are very well made movies. They are HORRIBLE adaptations. But as films, they're well made, well crafted, and well acted.

HBP was not, in any imaginable sense, a bad movie. It had a compelling story, good acting, wonderful cinematography, and some breathtaking action scenes. Was it amazing? No, but it was a good movie. A good adaptation? Not all that great, but it could have been much worse.

And the HP films have had a fairly consistent drop off rate for the past few movies. However, we want to keep in mind that this is the last film of a cultural phenomenon, and for beasts like this, the first and last films always gross the most. DH2, if done well, will gross quite a bit. And that could hurt Cap, but hopefully not too much.

As long as he's not advertised as crappily as TIH was.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

The first star wars grossed much more then Empire Strikes back. Yet ESB is considered by most to be better. The first Spider-man grossed more then Spider-man 2. SM2 is considered by most to be better. Gross does not reflect what people feel the quality of the movie is. If it did, Transformers 2 would have to be considered one of the best movies made in the past decade.

Empire Strikes Back also ended on a cliffhanger ending, does that mean it is a bad movie as well?

And again, the Weasley's House burning down and the cutting DD's funeral should not effect your judgement of the movie as a FILM. In the film version of Jurassic Park Hammond is not an egotistical *****e bag who doesn't care if his kids get killed. Muldune dies, while he lives in the book, Grant and Ellie have a romantic relationship that never existed in the novel, and they don't have to go into the Raptors nest at the end of the movie.

But I didn't mind that, because I judged the movie solely on it's basis as a FILM. Not an ADAPTATION. Faithfulness to source material do not effect the quality of a film. The Bourne Identity movies are very well made movies. They are HORRIBLE adaptations. But as films, they're well made, well crafted, and well acted.

HBP was not, in any imaginable sense, a bad movie. It had a compelling story, good acting, wonderful cinematography, and some breathtaking action scenes. Was it amazing? No, but it was a good movie. A good adaptation? Not all that great, but it could have been much worse.

And the HP films have had a fairly consistent drop off rate for the past few movies. However, we want to keep in mind that this is the last film of a cultural phenomenon, and for beasts like this, the first and last films always gross the most. DH2, if done well, will gross quite a bit. And that could hurt Cap, but hopefully not too much.

As long as he's not advertised as crappily as TIH was.

He won't be advertised as bad a TIH was because it wasn't Marvel handling the advertising. It was Universal that handled the marketing, not Marvel and Paramount.

 

[Vartha]

Kind of a stand off. Maybe Potter will move up a week?

Doubt it, tho Potter's supposed to be 3D (hp8) so if anything it could be delayed. (even tho they've said HP7 won't be 3D because it'd delay it futher)

 

[Tony Stark]

The first star wars grossed much more then Empire Strikes back. Yet ESB is considered by most to be better. The first Spider-man grossed more then Spider-man 2. SM2 is considered by most to be better. Gross does not reflect what people feel the quality of the movie is. If it did, Transformers 2 would have to be considered one of the best movies made in the past decade.

Empire Strikes Back also ended on a cliffhanger ending, does that mean it is a bad movie as well?

And again, the Weasley's House burning down and the cutting DD's funeral should not effect your judgement of the movie as a FILM. In the film version of Jurassic Park Hammond is not an egotistical *****e bag who doesn't care if his kids get killed. Muldune dies, while he lives in the book, Grant and Ellie have a romantic relationship that never existed in the novel, and they don't have to go into the Raptors nest at the end of the movie.

But I didn't mind that, because I judged the movie solely on it's basis as a FILM. Not an ADAPTATION. Faithfulness to source material do not effect the quality of a film. The Bourne Identity movies are very well made movies. They are HORRIBLE adaptations. But as films, they're well made, well crafted, and well acted.

HBP was not, in any imaginable sense, a bad movie. It had a compelling story, good acting, wonderful cinematography, and some breathtaking action scenes. Was it amazing? No, but it was a good movie. A good adaptation? Not all that great, but it could have been much worse.

And the HP films have had a fairly consistent drop off rate for the past few movies. However, we want to keep in mind that this is the last film of a cultural phenomenon, and for beasts like this, the first and last films always gross the most. DH2, if done well, will gross quite a bit. And that could hurt Cap, but hopefully not too much.

As long as he's not advertised as crappily as TIH was.

Empire had an ending HBP did not, they just did a fade out. Like I say you can't pretend this exists in a vaccum. The ending to the book was moving and heart warming, the ending to the movie was lame.

Second of all if it weren't for Chris Columbus' successon the first two, none of the others would have been made.

You saying the kids acted better in the later ones seems a bit silly. They were kids, they acted like 10 year old kids, because (and brace yourself) they were kids!!!!

Now let's just agree to disagree and move on, this is a Cap thread.

To the point that Cap should move, yeah it probably would be best if they moved him back. They still have time to move it, but I'd like to first see how they're going to promote the movie.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Empire had an ending HBP did not, they just did a fade out. Like I say you can't pretend this exists in a vaccum. The ending to the book was moving and heart warming, the ending to the movie was lame.

Second of all if it weren't for Chris Columbus' successon the first two, none of the others would have been made.

You saying the kids acted better in the later ones seems a bit silly. They were kids, they acted like 10 year old kids, because (and brace yourself) they were kids!!!!

Now let's just agree to disagree and move on, this is a Cap thread.

To the point that Cap should move, yeah it probably would be best if they moved him back. They still have time to move it, but I'd like to first see how they're going to promote the movie.

How did HBP not have an ending? The plot for the movie was resolved. Harry found out what Horocruxes were, he was set on the path to destroy them, he accepted his fate to battle Voldermort, and the Ron/Hermione conflict was resolved.

And I'm not talking about kids acting like kids. That's fine. I'm talking about kids sounding like they're kids delivering lines, and not seeming natural and genuine. They weren't horrible, but movies like Stand By Me and Let the Right One In have child acting that's much better.

Again, you need to keep in mind the difference between adaptation and a film by itself. Difference from source material does not make a movie bad. It makes it different. I have no problem with you disliking the movie, but don't say it's a bad movie. Technically, plot wise, and acting wise, it was quite good.

However, you're right, we are derailing the thread a bit. I do agree that I would like Cap to be moved back. However, I am happier that Marvel and Paramount will handle advertising. Universal's campaign for TIH was horrible.

 

[Suzanne78]

I swear... I was riding such a high today, with the pics of Chris Evans in the suit and everyone on the 'net seemingly talking about Captain America, and then I venture out onto Box Office Mojo and the "THIS IS GONNA UNDERPERFORM!!" talk. It's like getting doused with cold water.

 

[Suzanne78]

double trouble posting... ugh!

 

[AndrewGilkison]

I swear... I was riding such a high today, with the pics of Chris Evans in the suit and everyone on the 'net seemingly talking about Captain America, and then I venture out onto Box Office Mojo and the "THIS IS GONNA UNDERPERFORM!!" talk. It's like getting doused with cold water.

It's kind of hard to track the box office of a movie that is a year away from release, so maybe you should just take those people with a grain of salt.

 

[Infinity9999x]

So, I caught Deathly Hallows a few days ago. As a Potter fan I loved it, but it's also looking to be possibly the most successful film in the franchise since the first, which again makes me uneasy about Cap in summer.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

I'm a potter fan and I hated it, so we'll see...

 

[Infinity9999x]

I'm a potter fan and I hated it, so we'll see...

That's too bad. I enjoyed it quite a bit. Either way though, it's doing very well at the B.O. and it's had an overall positive response from fans/critics. Which makes me think that the last installment will be huge, which could be bad for Cap. Though I still love HP, so I don't want it to do bad. I just wish Cap had at least another weeks breathing space.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

The movies have just never done it for me... I think they should have made it as a really high budget BBC tv series and done one series per book. That would have fit the narrative alot better.

I'm not worried either way about the release. Plenty of big blockbuster movies get releases close together, and the good movies still tend to do well. I think Cap will only suffer if it's ****e.

 

[Infinity9999x]

The movies have just never done it for me... I think they should have made it as a really high budget BBC tv series and done one series per book. That would have fit the narrative alot better.

I'm not worried either way about the release. Plenty of big blockbuster movies get releases close together, and the good movies still tend to do well. I think Cap will only suffer if it's ****e.

I can understand that. I've made myself separate movies from the books they're based on when I watch them. That way I can judge them simply as movies. For example, I realize the Bourne movies are very good movies. They're utterly horrible adaptations. I can recognize Spider-man 2 as a very well done movie. But as an adaptation of my favorite character, it left a lot lacking (in my opinion).

And I do agree with you, but at the same time, when a movie ends up being a huge hit, I sometimes think that movies that end up doing modestly well might have made a bit better had they not been in the shadow of the huge blockbuster. Hellboy 2 under TDK. Sherlock Holmes under Avatar.

Of course, they might have done exactly the same. It's hard to judge really.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Well it's only one weeks difference between releases in the States and Canada... Everywhere else it's two weeks, which is plenty of space as far as i'm concerned.

And I wouldn't call Spidey 2 or Bourne bad adaptations at all. I'm not judging the HP movies because they're not EXACTLY like the books, but i see them as bad adaptations... Look at a master of adapting, like Nolan, who changed and adapted things to suit the silver screen, whilst keeping the true core and essence of the comics and character, compared to say Zak Snyders Watchmen, which many felt was TOO faithful and as a result missed the mark (I didn't really mind it though, personally.)

Thats what I find wrong with the HP movies. It feels like they rush along from set piece to set piece, or just leap straight to the key events from the book. I have no love for any of the characters because they're essentially cardboard cut outs who move the key narrative along. In the latest HP movie, the scene where Harry tries to run away and Ron stops him, I was just thinking how inexcusable it was that they are supposed to be best friends, and after 7 movies worth of time to develop them both individually as characters, and their relationship specifically, it just fell flat. On that front, i think they definitely failed. Great special effects, sets, costumes and senior cast (mainly the teachers) but other than that, it just goes through the motions.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I'd rather not debate with Potter fans about the movies (I loved HP DH part 1), but I must say one thing. That's why I never read the HP books. I can enjoy all of the movies released (which I did over the weekend) without the risk of spazzing out because this character or this part of the book not being in the movie. I liked all the HP films and thought all of them were great films.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

But don't Harry and Ron annoy you? I find Rupert Grint and Daniel Radcliffe such stiff and awkward actors.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Well it's only one weeks difference between releases in the States and Canada... Everywhere else it's two weeks, which is plenty of space as far as i'm concerned.

And I wouldn't call Spidey 2 or Bourne bad adaptations at all. I'm not judging the HP movies because they're not EXACTLY like the books, but i see them as bad adaptations... Look at a master of adapting, like Nolan, who changed and adapted things to suit the silver screen, whilst keeping the true core and essence of the comics and character, compared to say Zak Snyders Watchmen, which many felt was TOO faithful and as a result missed the mark (I didn't really mind it though, personally.)

Thats what I find wrong with the HP movies. It feels like they rush along from set piece to set piece, or just leap straight to the key events from the book. I have no love for any of the characters because they're essentially cardboard cut outs who move the key narrative along. In the latest HP movie, the scene where Harry tries to run away and Ron stops him, I was just thinking how inexcusable it was that they are supposed to be best friends, and after 7 movies worth of time to develop them both individually as characters, and their relationship specifically, it just fell flat. On that front, i think they definitely failed. Great special effects, sets, costumes and senior cast (mainly the teachers) but other than that, it just goes through the motions.

I'm not a big fan of SM2 as a Spider-man movie, and I have a whole slew of reasons, but I don't want to derail the thread. Like I said though, I can recognize it's a very well done movie. And the Bourne books, as adaptations, fail pretty miserably. They bear almost nothing in common with their source material other then the basic premise of "secret agent character without a memory" after that they turn into their own beast. But I enjoy the movies as their own thing.

And I don't really mind the characterization of the main trio. I thought it's been all right. Though I agree with you in some instances where the movie definitely feels rushed. The third movie has done the best of being it's own film and a fairly good representation of the feel of the book I thought. And I actually don't mind Grint or Radcliff as actors. I thought they've been fine.

 

[Panthro]

But don't Harry and Ron annoy you? I find Rupert Grint and Daniel Radcliffe such stiff and awkward actors.

Well it's getting off topic but Rupert Grint always annoyed the Hell out of me. Daniel Radcliffe though I think takes too much flack.

So, how about this upcoming Captain America film?

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

But don't Harry and Ron annoy you? I find Rupert Grint and Daniel Radcliffe such stiff and awkward actors.

They don't annoy me at all. I thought they were good actors for the roles, but I don't read the books. I wish Ron would get a bit more development but I think they're great actors for their roles.

I watched all of the HP films last weekend and I saw no problem with Radcliffe's acting, even when he was younger.