Snyder Throws a Sucker Punch - Part 2

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]348371[/split]

 

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]267166[/split]

 

[Tron Bonne]

I saw this last night with my Girlfriend and she loved every aspect of the film, as did I. I thought it was a ingenius portrayal of action and something I have never seen on screen. It was something that I think will gain a following long after it is out of theaters. Its a good movie and its CREATIVE the one thing this board constantly *****es about is Re-makes and how all the creativity is gone in Hollywood, well guess what Snyder, Abrams and Nolan along several others are the future of the film industry. This film is creative in ****ing doses and its awesome. I will say that the story was pretty simple and the plot was thin but what the **** were you expecting from this movie? It's not gonna be your next action/fantasy masterpiece its going to be a stylized action/fantasy movie with heaving bussoms and skimpy outfits. Plus with this movie being so clearly aimed at a certain audience I expect the studio will make there money back, my theater was about 3/4 full and I saw a later show so yeah I expect this to be seen as a success and I anxiously await Superman: Man of Steel from Snyder because if he even does 1/10th the action he did in this movie it will be worth it.

8/10

Nah, it's estimated box office for the weekend is only about $20 Million. Unless it has some astounding legs, like superhumanly, it'll be an underperformer in that aspect.

 

[Hush]

Nah, it's estimated box office for the weekend is only about $20 Million. Unless it has some astounding legs, like superhumanly, it'll be an underperformer in that aspect.

Even if that is the case, Warner Bros has all but disowned this film from what I understand and with Potter here to cushion this blow in the summer it won't matter much. I imagine this film didn't cost nearly that much to make so what it brings in here and internationaly will be fine with them.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

I guess there were certain scenes cut? I watched an interview with Synder the other day where he talked about a scene where Emily Browning did her own singing for the film. Plus, I watched the first trailer again and I see scenes where some guy is singing on stage and another with a bunch of women with fans dancing.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Even if that is the case, Warner Bros has all but disowned this film from what I understand and with Potter here to cushion this blow in the summer it won't matter much. I imagine this film didn't cost nearly that much to make so what it brings in here and internationaly will be fine with them.

The production budget was $80 million, and with marketing, it was probably well over $100 million. I doubt it'll be just fine for them with that much money pumped into it if it doesn't bring in at least some profit :/

I guess there were certain scenes cut? I watched an interview with Synder the other day where he talked about a scene where Emily Browning did her own singing for the film. Plus, I watched the first trailer again and I see scenes where some guy is singing on stage and another with a bunch of women with fans dancing.

There was around 18 minutes cut, I believe.

 

[dark_b]

budget is over 100 million. fact.

 

[:eek:]

budget is over 100 million. fact.

$82 million is what I've seen on some sites. Box Office Mojo and on Wikipedia for example

 

[Tron Bonne]

That's the production budget; it doesn't include the marketing budget.

 

[Heretic]

This proves one thing though...guys will not pay to see hot women in a movie.

I realized this when Katie Holmes, at the time THE dreamgirl for American males, went topless in The Gift and the movie saw no box office bounce whatsoever from males.

However, with all the other geek stuff thrown in, this is also a bad sign for geeks...the message being that if you cater your movie to the geeks, it will under perform. Watchmen, Scott Pilgrim, Sucker Punch...the message being sent is that you can base your movie on geek concepts, but if you want to make money you'd better cater to general audiences. I HATE that idea, so I will give this movie my money.

 

[Hush]

So if it makes 50 here and 50 overseas it will do fine.

 

[dark_b]

That's the production budget; it doesn't include the marketing budget.

when was the last time a budget on an internet site was included with the marketing? come on .

 

[SuperFerret]

This was catered to geeks? Could've fooled me.

 

[Tron Bonne]

So if it makes 50 here and 50 overseas it will do fine.

It'll do fine in the sense that it'll essentially break even, but it'll still underperform since it'd make no profit.

 

[dark_b]

So if it makes 50 here and 50 overseas it will do fine.

it depends if you like the movie or not. if you like the movie then the BO will be enough. we fanboys like to think that the studio made their money back when we like a movie. i know strange since its not our money but what can you do.

the reality is that WB knew for some time know that they wouldnt make a lot of money with Sucker Punch. they needed a director for Superman and they hired Snyder.

 

[dark_b]

This proves one thing though...guys will not pay to see hot women in a movie.

I realized this when Katie Holmes, at the time THE dreamgirl for American males, went topless in The Gift and the movie saw no box office bounce whatsoever from males.

However, with all the other geek stuff thrown in, this is also a bad sign for geeks...the message being that if you cater your movie to the geeks, it will under perform. Watchmen, Scott Pilgrim, Sucker Punch...the message being sent is that you can base your movie on geek concepts, but if you want to make money you'd better cater to general audiences. I HATE that idea, so I will give this movie my money.

t we geeks can only make that much money for the BO.geeks will see this movie. but we are not the whole world. so thats why Scott Pilgrim,watchmen,.... dont brake records. we ''geeks '' still supported and pyed money for those geek movies.

they will not stop making them. like they will nto stop making smart movies and dumb movies.

 

[SuperFerret]

Again, how is this a "geek movie"?

 

[Heretic]

Okay, so it cost 82 to make. That doesnt count any of the advertising or all the extras they made to hype it or anything else...it also doesnt count the percentage kept by theaters...

It's not like 100 million is actually breaking even on this thing.

 

[Heretic]

t we geeks can only make that much money for the BO.geeks will see this movie. but we are not the whole world. so thats why Scott Pilgrim,watchmen,.... dont brake records. we ''geeks '' still supported and pyed money for those geek movies.

they will not stop making them. like they will nto stop making smart movies and dumb movies.

Geeks DID NOT go to see Scott Pilgrim. The fact is that geeks wont support a movie that is made for them unless it's a Spider-man or some other name they grew up with or love. It doesnt matter if the film was good...geeks would prefer a terrible Ghost Rider sequel over a good indie comic film.

Geek movies need the support of the community to have a good opening weekend.

 

[Heretic]

Again, how is this a "geek movie"?

Come on man...

The advertising is "HOT CHICKS! DRAGONS! ROBOTS! NINJAS! AND IT LOOKS LIKE A VIDEO GAME!"

It is every teenage geek fantasy come to life. You know this.

 

[Jager X]

Come on man...

The advertising is "HOT CHICKS! DRAGONS! ROBOTS! NINJAS! AND IT LOOKS LIKE A VIDEO GAME!"

It is every teenage geek fantasy come to life. You know this.

That is why I saw the movie. When I first saw the trailer, I did not even know how to comprehend it. It had sexy girls fighting gatling-gun toting samurai, dragons, robots, and zombies. All these things being in one movie just blew my mind. I walked into the theater expecting to be delivered an experience that would make me feel like a kid watching saturday morning cartoons again. And I definitely got that.

 

[dark_b]

Geeks DID NOT go to see Scott Pilgrim. The fact is that geeks wont support a movie that is made for them unless it's a Spider-man or some other name they grew up with or love. It doesnt matter if the film was good...geeks would prefer a terrible Ghost Rider sequel over a good indie comic film.

Geek movies need the support of the community to have a good opening weekend.

a lot fanboys saw SP for free at comic con

not but serious. fanboys watched SP. we are not enough to make SP break 100 millions

 

[Brother Jack]

There is a difference between geek and fanboy. This movie was catering to the latter.

 

[SuperFerret]

Uhhh... no?

I don't think "A.D.D. riddled, throw-everything-in-except-the-kitchen-sink" when I think of "geek movies".

Typically, a "geek movie" is an adaption of a pre-existing property with at least a cult following, or is otherwise unknown or misunderstood by the mainstream audience.

 

[Heretic]

The thing is...EVERYONE claims to be a geek. You have high school cheerleaders saying " I am a geek! I like Twilight, and Hugh Jackman is SO hot!". The term has been watered down. Then when you have a film like Scott Pilgrim or Sucker Punch, it really shows that 95% of people who CLAIM to be geeks really aren't.

Sucker Punch is for the Dungeons and Dragons playing comic book nerds...not the girl who was willing to see Spider-Man because her boyfriend was going with his friends.