Will Fanboys Ever Learn?

[Infinity9999x]

^^Only disagreement there was the comment about SM3 being truly hated by everyone. It was truly hated by nerds, the general public where "meh" about it. But in many ways, that's more of a problem. Because now you're going to have the general public who liked the old series going "why did you replace Tobey?" and the general public who really disliked the last one staying away because they won't trust it.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

If the X-men FC and Spider-man trailers are good they should do pretty good at the box office. Not as good as X3 or SM3 but still good.

 

[chaseter]

While we're here, I stand by my Spider-Man and X-Men: First Class predictions.

I completely agree with you and I have said the exact same thing on both boards a thousand times over. Of course I was called wrong and dumb but I would consider those people fanboys.

Look at Batman Begins for a solid example. A reboot movie coming off of a tired franchise and two terrible movies, Batman & Robin and Batman Forever. Batman Begins, while a good movie, made only $200 million domestic. I think X-Men will make around the same amount and Spider-Man will make a little more. The Spider-Man reboot will not break $300 million and the X-Men reboot won't break $250 million. They could be amazing films as you said and as I have said...that isn't going to affect the weariness of the GA who accounts for much more than fanboys and fangirls.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

^^Only disagreement there was the comment about SM3 being truly hated by everyone. It was truly hated by nerds, the general public where "meh" about it. But in many ways, that's more of a problem. Because now you're going to have the general public who liked the old series going "why did you replace Tobey?" and the general public who really disliked the last one staying away because they won't trust it.

Spider-Man 3 broke the opening weekend record with $151 million and had no virtually no competition for its first two weeks in theaters. Yet it still topped out at $335 million - well less than the first two films which did $403 million and $375 million each. That's not a "Meh!" reaction from the general public. That's a "This movie sucks!" reaction from them.

 

[bullets]

Every blockbuster movie is costing 200mil to make now and that's just ridiculous. Even a Reese Witherspoon comedy cost 120mil to make! I just can't wrap my damn mind around it. And Hollywood is shocked when these movies fail???

They had no interesting premise , It was just another run of the mill rom com . Rudd and Wilson are funny but this didn't have much of a chance . Meanwhile Witherspoon doesn't have to work anytime soon.


I think Tron: Legacy was pitched with the idea they could do a lot of merchandising. Most people hadn't seen the original so the consensus
among people I know that went to see it is cool visuals , meh story.
I liked it though . I had hoped it would do better

 

[jmc]

I don't get why studios are spending ridiculous amounts on these movies in the first place. $120 million, $150 million, $200 million, it's absurd, you look at the likes of District 9 that's made for pennies in comparison and looks just as good and in some cases better than any 100 million dollar epic. There's a reason no-one in Hollywood wants to gamble on originality anymore, because for some reason the studios feels as if they have to throw a crap load of cash into 'blockbuster' film in order for it to succeed. It's time Hollywood started to tighten it's wallet.

 

[dark_b]

I don't get why studios are spending ridiculous amounts on these movies in the first place. $120 million, $150 million, $200 million, it's absurd, you look at the likes of District 9 that's made for pennies in comparison and looks just as good and in some cases better than any 100 million dollar epic. There's a reason no-one in Hollywood wants to gamble on originality anymore, because for some reason the studios feels as if they have to throw a crap load of cash into 'blockbuster' film in order for it to succeed. It's time Hollywood started to tighten it's wallet.

but it doesnt look the same.

how would you make Tron on the location where they filmed District 9? you would have to use teh shaky cam to hide a lot of CGI problems . problems that were there since it was a 30 mil movie. this is not a complaint. you just can not make everythign with 30 .


i find it hard to belive that every sumemr blockbuster costs to much even with no big names.

 

[chaseter]

Well known actors are big reason why budgets are so bloated. When stars pull in $20 million or more a movie and you have a couple or a few big names in your flick then you can see where a big chunk of the budget goes.

 

[jmc]

But you don't need over $100 million either. The point I was making with District 9 is that a little can go a very long way. Most of these films don't need the ridiculous budgets they're given.

 

[C. Lee]

Spider-Man 3 broke the opening weekend record with $151 million and had no virtually no competition for its first two weeks in theaters. Yet it still topped out at $335 million - well less than the first two films which did $403 million and $375 million each. That's not a "Meh!" reaction from the general public. That's a "This movie sucks!" reaction from them.

I have trouble understanding logic like that. You say it made $335 million (a damn good amount of money) and yet say the audience thought it sucked. Sounds like someone liked it....and sounds like you didn't like it so you say that it's making less money (but close to the same amount) made it a sucky movie. I would say it was a not as good as but close to the other movies movie.

 

[JAK®]

I have trouble understanding logic like that. You say it made $335 million (a damn good amount of money) and yet say the audience thought it sucked. Sounds like someone liked it....and sounds like you didn't like it so you say that it's making less money (but close to the same amount) made it a sucky movie. I would say it was a not as good as but close to the other movies movie.

It's the fact that the movie broke records in it's opening weekend and then screeched to a halt, ultimately doing less than the first two movies. This is how audience reaction is judged, not by the total, but how it reached that total.

 

[chaseter]

Fanboys have hit a new low:
http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=19410290&postcount=602

 

[chaseter]

But you don't need over $100 million either. The point I was making with District 9 is that a little can go a very long way. Most of these films don't need the ridiculous budgets they're given.

I agree to a point but the film had no names in it and so it didn't make that much either. It made $80 million profit domestic which is good but some films make way more than that with budgets of $150 million with big name actors.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

I have trouble understanding logic like that. You say it made $335 million (a damn good amount of money) and yet say the audience thought it sucked. Sounds like someone liked it....and sounds like you didn't like it so you say that it's making less money (but close to the same amount) made it a sucky movie. I would say it was a not as good as but close to the other movies movie.

Has nothing to do with my personal opinion of said film.

The first Spider-Man broke the opening weekend record back in May 2002 with $114 million and went on to do just over $400 million. It held like glue during that summer.

On the other hand, Spider-Man 3 made $151 million in its first 3 days out, and yet peaked at $335 million. It dropped like a rock the subsequent weekends because word-of-mouth was bad. AKA people hated it.

$335 million is a lot of cash but when your budget is well past $300 million (and that's the "official" number - AKA it was a lot more than that) and it's the lowest grosser stateside after a record high opening, it's not so hot. Glass half-full kinda thing.

 

[jmc]

I agree to a point but the film had no names in it and so it didn't make that much either. It made $80 million profit domestic which is good but some films make way more than that with budgets of $150 million with big name actors.

Any studio exec scoffing at a $150 million+ profit on a low budget sci-fi movie needs to have a long, hard look at themselves in the mirror.

 

[chaseter]

Nobody is scoffing at it. You are saying that films should be made for $30 million bucks and that films that cost $150 million are ridiculous. I can show you movies that cost $150 million to make and made twice as much profit as District 9 did.

The Dark Knight had a budget of nearly $200 million and made a billion worldwide. Half Blood Prince cost $250 million and made $933 million worldwide. On the other hand District 9 cost $30 million and made $210 million worldwide. So now which ones made the most money? TDK made about $800 million. Half Blood Prince made about $680 million. District 9 made about $180 million.

So while I see your point and agree with you to an extent, I don't think it is the winning formula for every movie.

 

[jmc]

Where the hell did I say films should be made for $30 million?

 

[chaseter]

When you said films don't need 100 million and reference D9.

 

[terry78]

What kind of budget are they giving Webb for the new one?

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Nobody is scoffing at it. You are saying that films should be made for $30 million bucks and that films that cost $150 million are ridiculous. I can show you movies that cost $150 million to make and made twice as much profit as District 9 did.

The Dark Knight had a budget of nearly $200 million and made a billion worldwide. Half Blood Prince cost $250 million and made $933 million worldwide. On the other hand District 9 cost $30 million and made $210 million worldwide. So now which ones made the most money? TDK made about $800 million. Half Blood Prince made about $680 million. District 9 made about $180 million.

So while I see your point and agree with you to an extent, I don't think it is the winning formula for every movie.

FYI the studio gets half the box office gross and you forgot to take out marketing cost which are usually 50 million.

Not that any of that disproves your point.

 

[jmc]

When you said films don't need 100 million and reference D9.

No, I did not say make them for $30 million. I referenced D9 to show what can be done on a smaller budget.

 

[chaseter]

FYI the studio gets half the box office gross and you forgot to take out marketing cost which are usually 50 million.

Not that any of that disproves your point.

Yeah I didn't want to go crazy and throw out a million numbers. Even if you cut everything in half, my point as you said still stand valid. You could even account for retail sales. D9 has zero merchandise where as Harry Potter and Batman have video games, toys, etc. You get kids interested in your movie then jackpot

 

[chaseter]

No, I did not say make them for $30 million. I referenced D9 to show what can be done on a smaller budget.

You said that you don't need over 100 million. I could have said any number between 0 and 99.99.

Once again, I agree that some movie budgets are bloated but sometimes it really doesn't matter because the pay off is huge. There really isn't a formula that says the more money you spend the more you will make or the less money you spend then the higher profit returns you will get. It really is a movie by movie basis. I would be sad if Batman 3 was given a budget of 75 million.

 

[chaseter]

HAHA someone on the Spidey boards is saying Raimi ruined Spider-Man and one of his examples from his long list is that Flash's hair was black in SM1 and it should have been blonde. Raimi apparently ruined Flash Thompson.

This thread should be devoted to the utterly bat**** insane stuff people post on this website. Fanboys ruin movies.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

HAHA someone on the Spidey boards is saying Raimi ruined Spider-Man and one of his examples from his long list is that Flash's hair was black in SM1 and it should have been blonde. Raimi apparently ruined Flash Thompson.

This thread should be devoted to the utterly bat**** insane stuff people post on this website. Fanboys ruin movies.

The next 100 pages could be devoted Raimi haters alone.

I don't know who nitpicks more. Raimi haters in the Spidey thread or people in the Bat threads.