Who WON'T see this movie in the theatre?

[Timstuff]

I won't be seeing this movie in theaters, because it sucks. If the movie was good, I would not care if I'd seen the workprint or not, because good movies deserve to be seen. This movie was half-rate junk, and I see no reason to sit through it a second time. I might rent it through Netflix eventually, but I have little to no interest in seeing it over any time soon.

 

[L3G3NDK1LLER]

I will be seeing this in the theater...just with my free movie passes so Fox doesnt get my money. Thank God for Monsters Vs. Aliens film reel getting destroyed during my viewing...

 

[Electrix]

I won't be seeing this movie in theaters, because it sucks. If the movie was good, I would not care if I'd seen the workprint or not, because good movies deserve to be seen. This movie was half-rate junk, and I see no reason to sit through it a second time. I might rent it through Netflix eventually, but I have little to no interest in seeing it over any time soon.

...and you keep coming back to tell us this nearly a month after you watched it. Talk about free time!

 

[chaseter]

Your way of thinking is a bit off. Studios protect their movies whether they are good or bad. It is only a bad movie by your standards anyhow.

Someone stole the film and put it online. Fox and everyone involved were in damage control mode and were encouraging people not to watch it online. You would do the same if you were in their position.

Damage control doesn't involve lying because you are going to get caught eventually. They started out fine by trying to hunt down the person that did this. But, when you start making excuses for a film by lying then I have no pity for them and he hilariously got called out on it a week later which is pure gold and I hope he realizes that. It is bad that their film leaked, nobody wants that, but when you know you made something subpar and you are creating lies to hide that fact then I don't care.

If Rothman truly thought this was a masterpiece of cinema he wouldn't have said oh 10 minutes are missing because he would have been confident in that it would have still done stellar at the box office. He saw the bad things being said about it and he and his producers quickly started saying a lot is missing. It could be equated to if your child does something horrible in public then you make excuses or try to hide the fact that it is your child. If you child does something amazing in public then you want to profess that they are your child.

DBZ gets leaked and it gets horrible feedback and they limit its release. Now why would they do that? This is the same except this is their flagship franchise and now they are ****ting their pants.

 

[Electrix]

Damage control doesn't involve lying

Yes it does. Damage control is anything that helps stop the damage. By telling people there is more footage they will have been interested in seeing it on the big screen. Someone has just stolen their movie that they have spend over $150 million on. Trying to discourage people from seeing it is EXPECTED from them.

This is the same except this is their flagship franchise and now they are ****ting their pants.

They may have been once the leak happened. But I highly doubt they are now:

http://screenrant.com/wolverine-outselling-iron-man-ticket-sales-rob-6939/

MovieTickets.com is reporting that “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” is currently outpacing ticket sales for “Iron Man” 3-to-1 at the same point in the sales cycle (nine days prior to the film’s release). Both films boast release dates during the first weekend in May during the last two years. “X-Men” releases Friday, May 1, 2009. “Iron Man” released in 2008 on Friday, May 2.”

http://hollywoodinsider.ew.com/2009...+the+film+remains+high,+despite+Internet+leak

A tracking report containing consumer research statistics shows a high "wanna see" rating for the film, which is said to be the No. 1 choice for young men and guys aged 31 and older. Those two demographics are key to boosting the first-weekend numbers for a male-targeted superhero franchise film like Wolverine. This is quite a dramatic turnaround for a movie that was hit with a crisis scenario two weeks ago, when a full-length, unfinished copy of the movie was uploaded onto the Internet and subsequently downloaded by more than 100,000 viewers free of charge. That could have translated into a lot of lost ticket sales, and, indeed, some industry observers predicted the effects could be catastrophic for the big summer tentpole. But this research seems to contradict that line of thinking and support those who wondered aloud whether the leak might actually turn out to be a positive development for the X-Men spin-off by generating heaps of free publicity.

http://torrentfreak.com/x-men-leak-downloaded-over-a-million-times-090406/

Interestingly, most people think that the leak will actually do the movie good, as a poll among our readers indicates that 40% would be more excited to see it in the movie theater or on DVD, even if they had downloaded it. Only 6% of the respondents believe that the leak will be detrimental to the film’s success.

 

[chaseter]

Fox should have fed Rothman to some starving wolverines for some good damage control.

 

[Deaths Head II]

I don't see how lying helps that much. If they couldn't keep the movie from leaking, they probably wouldn't be that good at keeping the truth from leaking.

 

[Nivek]

I remember people doubting Spider-man 3 reviews talking about bad symbiote induced dance numbers...

 

[TNC9852002]

If he would have allowed or forced the film makers to make a good movie he wouldn't need to protect it If a good movie leaks, people will still go see it. If a bad movie leaks, then the lies and pleading comes out in the producers.

You're doing it wrong.

Like people have said before, THIS movie is FOX's flagship movie of the year and to assume that Hugh Jackman, Gavin Hood, Rothman, or anyone else intentionally didn't care or wanting the movie to turn out bad is just preposterous. When you greenlight a movie, there is no guarantee that the movie will be a success. Your job as a FOX CEO or chairmen or producer is to provide the filmmakers the means of what they need to get the movie made and to oversee that everything is going as planned to the best of your ability. Why wouldn't they want this movie to become a success? Good ratings means huge free promotion with word of mouth, DVD sales, and awards. It's just not logical to assume otherwise.

And besides, the movie isn't bad from what I can infer..

It's just not as good as you wanted it to be.

I really can't imagine the circumstances changing at all if the movie turned out to be fantastic.

 

[Lord Blackbolt]

I raise my hand. No way i'm watching this crap movie. They need to end this franchise and restart it.

 

[TNC9852002]

The franchise already ended. This is just a spin-off.

Statistically, I don't think ending a franchise and restarting it gives any guarantees whatsoever towards improvement.

 

[night0205]

Ah, you guys are so funny, what else are you going to see this weekend?

 

[Lord Blackbolt]

The franchise already ended. This is just a spin-off.

Statistically, I don't think ending a franchise and restarting it gives any guarantees whatsoever towards improvement.

Technically spin-off count as part of a franchise. The whole X-men series feels like an aborted baby IMO. Born without any future promise. If Harry potter could have had 6 quality and faithful movies....why not have 6 quality X-men movies. X-men should not be the kind of franchise that only has 3 movies. There's so much promise with it's story you could continue the saga for at least 10 sequel without it feeling boring. All three movies felt exactly the same only with more bigger action and more mutants without the depth

 

[TNC9852002]

Technically spin-off count as part of a franchise. The whole X-men series feels like an aborted baby IMO. Born without any future promise. If Harry potter could have had 6 quality and faithful movies....why not have 6 quality X-men movies. X-men should not be the kind of franchise that only has 3 movies. There's so much promise with it's story you could continue the saga for at least 10 sequel without it feeling boring. All three movies felt exactly the same only with more bigger action and more mutants without the depth

You call the Harry Potter movies quality and faithful? On what basis? Sure, the movies are very decent works at best and sure, they have high production values and for the MOST part, they are faithful to the ONE book they're adapting. So, unless X-Men was novelized into a handful of progressive books with one story, one set of characters, and one main protagonist (people already didn't like the idea of Wolverine being the main character), among so many other factors, you might be onto something, but you can't compare them that way otherwise because they're not the same.

Heck, your analogy towards X-Men is similar to what I feel about the Harry Potter movies. They don't have an incredible amount of depth (unless you look at the movies as a whole) and pretty much every movie felt the same, but that's the point! They're supposed to feel connected.

I will agree on you about the depth in X-Men movies, but surely that's not what's guaranteed to make a better movie. Even in the Harry Potter films, depth has to be divided as the story requires it. You shouldn't force development into a character if it isn't necessary or at least entertaining.

Look. The problem with the X-Men movies started at #1--the cast. The cast was too big, too expensive, and it kept growing. They've been complaining about that since X2.

I'm sure they'll reboot the franchise eventually, but this would be an arbitrary call to do so now. I mean, these movies are still doing a lot better critically and financially than the Fantastic Four films.

So, I agree with you....partly. Harry Potter just isn't a good example, but I get what you mean.

 

[PWN3R]

All I know is that I will not be paying to view this. I watched it online and was utterly disappointed, why pay money to only experience that again? The leak hurt it, plain and simple. Not because it was leaked, but because we all caught a glimpse at the film's quality.

Look at Taken for example. It leaked many months before its US release, yet the general opinion on it was nothing but praise. I was one of the many people who watched it online, yet still went to go see it in theaters when it was released here. I had no problem paying to see a film I'd already watched, because I enjoyed it. Taken went on to have tremedous box office legs.

Yet in Wolverine's example, FOX made a bad film. It leaked, the majority complained due to its lacking quality. FOX did damage control, we can't really blame them for that. Yet if the word of mouth had been positive, it would be in a completely different situation then it is now. FOX is sealing holes left and right because the film is ****. I'd bet anything that if everyone loved it, the leak would not have been that big a deal. It would have been awesome free advertisement.

Translation = bad movie

 

[craigdbfan]

You're doing it wrong.

Like people have said before, THIS movie is FOX's flagship movie of the year ...

No its not.

I'm pretty sure its the 200 million (possibly even more) project named "Avatar" helmed by James Cameron.

 

[CelticPredator]

Taken never got leaked. It was released oversees a while ago, and FOX picked it up, cut it down, and distributed to America.

 

[TNC9852002]

No its not.

I'm pretty sure its the 200 million (possibly even more) project named "Avatar" helmed by James Cameron.

lol. Ok, sure...but not even I would think Avatar has the likelihood to make more money than Wolverine. I could be wrong, but I'm not expecting a large difference in profit.

 

[Lord Blackbolt]

You call the Harry Potter movies quality and faithful? On what basis? Sure, the movies are very decent works at best and sure, they have high production values and for the MOST part, they are faithful to the ONE book they're adapting. So, unless X-Men was novelized into a handful of progressive books with one story, one set of characters, and one main protagonist (people already didn't like the idea of Wolverine being the main character), among so many other factors, you might be onto something, but you can't compare them that way otherwise because they're not the same.

Heck, your analogy towards X-Men is similar to what I feel about the Harry Potter movies. They don't have an incredible amount of depth (unless you look at the movies as a whole) and pretty much every movie felt the same, but that's the point! They're supposed to feel connected.

I will agree on you about the depth in X-Men movies, but surely that's not what's guaranteed to make a better movie. Even in the Harry Potter films, depth has to be divided as the story requires it. You shouldn't force development into a character if it isn't necessary or at least entertaining.

Look. The problem with the X-Men movies started at #1--the cast. The cast was too big, too expensive, and it kept growing. They've been complaining about that since X2.

I'm sure they'll reboot the franchise eventually, but this would be an arbitrary call to do so now. I mean, these movies are still doing a lot better critically and financially than the Fantastic Four films.

So, I agree with you....partly. Harry Potter just isn't a good example, but I get what you mean.

I'm not really a potter fan, but I've seen them all, and all I'm really saying is.... the film makers put a lot of work into those movies and I think the quality of those movies, in terms of film making is way better than the x-men movies. They all have a good continunity and flow between the sequels. They made sure to keep the cast and flow from the previous movies. Since singer left, it just feels the series lost a bit of a scope. I might not like everything Singer did, but he seemed to think that X-men was a always continuing series. Whereas the 3rd one was just a quick cash in that really had no thought about the future of the series. I think this movie is also the same.

X-men don't have to be based on a novelized series of books to be faithful. Look at Batman begins and Dark Knight. Different from the comics but still faithful.

 

[TNC9852002]

Yet in Wolverine's example, FOX made a bad film. It leaked, the majority complained due to its lacking quality. FOX did damage control, we can't really blame them for that. Yet if the word of mouth had been positive, it would be in a completely different situation then it is now. FOX is sealing holes left and right because the film is ****. I'd bet anything that if everyone loved it, the leak would not have been that big a deal. It would have been awesome free advertisement.

Translation = bad movie

I hate extremes.

 

[PWN3R]

Taken never got leaked. It was released oversees a while ago, and FOX picked it up, cut it down, and distributed to America.

What I meant to say is that Taken was easily available LONG before it was released here, in the States. Many people saw it, yet still were willing to pay for it on the big screen.

My point is, when Wolverine's BO numbers are revealed, if they are low, FOX is going to play the 'Leak took away the audience' card. Which only goes to show you how most people feel about the film's quality.

 

[JP]

This is like stealing a piece of cake, eating it, and then telling the person who baked it you didn't like it and won't pay for the slice you stole. And then getting mad at the baker for making a cake you didn't like.

 

[Deaths Head II]

This is like stealing a piece of cake, eating it, and then telling the person who baked it you didn't like it and won't pay for the slice you stole. And then getting mad at the baker for making a cake you didn't like.

What if the cake had broken glass in it?

 

[PWN3R]

He should have more pineapple on that cake

 

[JP]

What if the cake had broken glass in it?

There is no broken glass, just different taste buds. Either way, you still stole the cake.