CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › CHUD NUMBERS: Box Office Discussion Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CHUD NUMBERS: Box Office Discussion Thread - Page 657

post #32801 of 34590

King Arthur seems like a weird fit for Ritchie anyway, much like the Clive Owen -version was for Antoine Fuqua. Maybe for the next Camelot -flick hire a director whose cv isn't the complete opposite of it?

post #32802 of 34590

David Lynch's King Arthur! (Ends with a grinning Arthur, possessed by Morgan le Fay, beating his head against a block of ice whilst muttering "How's Guinie?!" )

post #32803 of 34590

I'm pretty sure David Ayer has a King Arthur film in development. "I'm Arthur, motherfuckers! King Kong ain't got shit on me!"

post #32804 of 34590

Zack Snyder was one of several filmmakers trying to remake Excalibur (one of his favorite films) including Bryan Singer and Guy Ritchie himself.

post #32805 of 34590
I'd actually be okay with a Snyder take on Excalibur.
post #32806 of 34590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virtanen View Post

I'm pretty sure David Ayer has a King Arthur film in development. "I'm Arthur, motherfuckers! King Kong ain't got shit on me!"

"So that's it huh? We some kind of...Knights of the Round Table?"
post #32807 of 34590
That'd be great. Behold! Subtext!
"I'ma tell you somethin'. This is what this is. We knights. Goin' medieval 'n shit."
"...umm, yeah? That's right, Art."
post #32808 of 34590

Apparently The Mummy is looking to open at forty million which would be pretty bad if Tom Cruise hadn't proved himself to be a marathon runner rather than a sprinter when it comes to B.O returns. (It's also going to help that it opens in China on the same day. I hear Cruise is quite popular in that part of the world.)

post #32809 of 34590
Stephen Sommer's Mummy crossed with a Cruise-style action film with Russell Crowe as Dr Jekyll (did I dream that a pic of him as Mr. Hyde had been released or was that real?) completely failing to interest so many of you baffles me. That shit sounds gonzo. Granted, they're selling it poorly but really....there's been so many good trailers for bad movies and vice versa that this Mummy's trailer doesn't faze me. If anything, the trailers seem to have gone out of their way to not show much. There's no telling how action packed the actual film may be. So $40-ish million opening ain't so bad if WOM works in it's favor. I guess it's so easy to be optimistic for this because it's such a seemingly harmless movie. If it's good, then yay! If not *shrug* it'll exit stage right quietly and that'll be that. It's like the opposite of Wonder Woman and Justice League. If (and I know that to so many there already is no 'if') those suck....it's gonna sting more. I don't think I've ever seen a movie that was under more pressure to deliver than Justice League.

ETA: A quick google search shows me that I didn't hallucinate that Mr. Hyde pic. I don't know if it's mid-transformation or if that's the end look but to me that's the coolest looking thing I've seen from this movie so far..
post #32810 of 34590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraid uh noman View Post

Stephen Sommer's Mummy crossed with a Cruise-style action film with Russell Crowe as Dr Jekyll (did I dream that a pic of him as Mr. Hyde had been released or was that real?) completely failing to interest so many of you baffles me. That shit sounds gonzo..

See, to me it sounds like orange sherbert and broccoli, two ok tastes that taste pretty bad together. What these ads are promising me is not something crazy or weird, but a watered down combination of things that are alreadyvery familiar, and won't fit next to one another without reducing them both to generic riffs. Add Kurtzman as a first time director, and I think a unambitious C+ oddity is the absolute best case scenario.

Or more accurately, a complete train wreck is the best case scenario.
post #32811 of 34590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post

See, to me it sounds like orange sherbert and broccoli, two ok tastes that taste pretty bad together. What these ads are promising me is not something crazy or weird, but a watered down combination of things that are alreadyvery familiar, and won't fit next to one another without reducing them both to generic riffs. Add Kurtzman as a first time director, and I think a unambitious C+ oddity is the absolute best case scenario.

Or more accurately, a complete train wreck is the best case scenario.
If I'm looking forward to a movie and it turns out bad, it really doesn't bother me much but for some reason this one will bother me even less than that if (when?) it sucks. I don't know why that is because I'm genuinely curious to see just what the hell this is gonna be like. As horror, yeah.....definitely watered down to nothing. But as a sort of modern day swashbuckling, FX driven action movie? Yeah, I'll give it it's day in court. Unless it gets just unanimously putrid reviews. And Russell Crowe's character intrigues me.

I just hope there aren't too many giant sand faces flying around.

Kudos on that orange sherbert/broccoli combo though. That was genuinely disgusting..
post #32812 of 34590

Your faith in Kurtzman troubles me, Fraid. We might have to lock you away in one of CHUD's less-used forums for a while and give you some time to think about choices you're making in life. 

post #32813 of 34590
It's not faith. His involvement doesn't make me hopeful. But his involvement isn't enough to make me just write it off totally yet either. I'm definitely gonna be listening closely to what people say once they've seen it..
post #32814 of 34590
So, $36-million for COVENANT, down 29% from PROMETHEUS' OW. On the bright side, the budget was only $97-mill and International is shaping up to be decent enough.

But does this mean Ridley's prequel trilogy dreams go up in smoke?
post #32815 of 34590

There's FOUR "Wimpy Kid" movies?!?!?!?

post #32816 of 34590
Ridley Scott's next movie will be a prequel to the Wimpy Kid quadrilogy.

Wimpmetheus.
post #32817 of 34590
And then James Cameron will take over with the simply titled WIMPY KIDS.
post #32818 of 34590
Ridley Scott's final film, as demetia sets in will be a film dealing with Teump era bullies beating up an African American band student, and his eventual comeuppance and rise to power in his high school:

Black Wimp Down
post #32819 of 34590
Meanwhile, Neil Blomkamp's Wimplien 5 goes unmade.
post #32820 of 34590
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmNerdJamie View Post

Zack Snyder was one of several filmmakers trying to remake Excalibur (one of his favorite films) including Bryan Singer and Guy Ritchie himself.

The best, or most interesting Arthurian film that I'd heard about in the past few years was a Neil Marshall script that was basically a heist film about a group of knights hired by Guinevere (I think) to retrieve / steal back her dead husband's sword.That actually sounded pretty cool, but I think Marshall may have given up on it ever being made.
post #32821 of 34590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Episode29 View Post

And then James Cameron will take over with the simply titled WIMPY KIDS.

 

Yeah, but that's not gonna be for another 20 years.

post #32822 of 34590
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post


The best, or most interesting Arthurian film that I'd heard about in the past few years was a Neil Marshall script that was basically a heist film about a group of knights hired by Guinevere (I think) to retrieve / steal back her dead husband's sword.That actually sounded pretty cool, but I think Marshall may have given up on it ever being made.


Marshall really does have some bad luck regarding projects getting made.

post #32823 of 34590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraid uh noman View Post

Stephen Sommer's Mummy crossed with a Cruise-style action film with Russell Crowe as Dr Jekyll (did I dream that a pic of him as Mr. Hyde had been released or was that real?) completely failing to interest so many of you baffles me. That shit sounds gonzo.

 

I was semi-interested right up until they showed sexy multi-eyed "mummy" lady laying waste to yet another cityscape. I didn't see any mummies in any of the trailers.

post #32824 of 34590
I wanna see it. I really do! I gots my reasons.

But holy hell are they selling it poorly..
post #32825 of 34590
I already bought my ticket to "The Mummy: Live Die Repeat."
post #32826 of 34590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Episode29 View Post

So, $36-million for COVENANT, down 29% from PROMETHEUS' OW. On the bright side, the budget was only $97-mill and International is shaping up to be decent enough.

But does this mean Ridley's prequel trilogy dreams go up in smoke?

 

 

I certainly think his original plan of 5-6 more movies goes up in smoke.  The demand just isn't there.  As a fan of Covenant, I hope the international numbers can help the film turn a profit, as I'd like to see what Scott and Logan have in mind for a sequel. 

post #32827 of 34590
Covenant probably won't do $100m, which isn't amazing but it'll probably make a bit of money all in.

I reckon Scott gets his trilogy capper but probably no more than that. Given that the script's already being worked on and Scott's a known quantity, from the studio perspective it's probably less hassle to just let him do his thing on a modest budget than scrap it and start over.

But yeah Scott's dreams of an annual saga probably aren't happening.
post #32828 of 34590
Why did they release this in May? This was definitely more like August counter programming.
Edited by catartik - 5/22/17 at 1:14am
post #32829 of 34590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Episode29 View Post

So, $36-million for COVENANT, down 29% from PROMETHEUS' OW. On the bright side, the budget was only $97-mill and International is shaping up to be decent enough.

That movie didnt cost $97M. It cost $97M plus probably even more to market it. Studios kind of like to leave that part out.
post #32830 of 34590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post


That movie didnt cost $97M. It cost $97M plus probably even more to market it. Studios kind of like to leave that part out.


True, but whether or not that ends up really mattering is up to however the Studio feels about it and how much they really want the franchise to continue.  If they're looking for a reason to offload Ridley, this is where it likely happens.  MAYBE one more film for a nice trilogy and then drop him.

 

If they're "all in" for Ridley because Ridley, then they'll find a way to play this up as a success.

post #32831 of 34590

Yeah there's not much point in obsessing over the finer bookkeeping details we don't have access to, all you can really go off is what gets made and what doesn't.

 

Prometheus tripled it's production budget and got a sequel, albeit a sequel with some studio reins on it. If Covenant manages to repeat that with it's lower budget they'll probably let him have another roll of the dice, maybe with a lower budget again.

 

If Scott ever seems like a less than safe pair of hands for the series, let's not forget that AVP2 was only ten years ago.

post #32832 of 34590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul C View Post
 

Prometheus tripled it's production budget and got a sequel, albeit a sequel with some studio reins on it. If Covenant manages to repeat that with it's lower budget they'll probably let him have another roll of the dice, maybe with a lower budget again.

 

 

Without spoiling A:C, it would appear that a lot of the same interior/spaceship sets for the film could be reused in a sequel.  Is it possible that those sets have merely been dismantled and not destroyed?

post #32833 of 34590

Also one advantage they have is Alien films can work around the budget a bit more easily than other big franchises. Like it's a lot easier to imagine a stripped down, intimate Alien film than a stripped down, intimate Star Wars film.

post #32834 of 34590
But a stripped down, intimate Prometheus film is a little tougher.
post #32835 of 34590

That's true, but Covenant already scaled things down a fair bit, and thinking about where they could take things next it wouldn't be that hard to have things mainly set in fairly modest locations if it came to it.

post #32836 of 34590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul C View Post
 

That's true, but Covenant already scaled things down a fair bit, and thinking about where they could take things next it wouldn't be that hard to have things mainly set in fairly modest locations if it came to it.

 

The way A:C ends, you kinda assume that it'll take place on the Covenant itself (which, as I mentioned, already has sets built for it that are hopefully in storage) and also on Oligae 6.  Assuming that they keep the Covenant, that'll cut down on a lot of pre-production work.  Maybe Oligae 6 will look like Vancouver.

post #32837 of 34590
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post


The best, or most interesting Arthurian film that I'd heard about in the past few years was a Neil Marshall script that was basically a heist film about a group of knights hired by Guinevere (I think) to retrieve / steal back her dead husband's sword.That actually sounded pretty cool, but I think Marshall may have given up on it ever being made.

 

Yep, Pendragon and it did sound awesome.

 

Interestingly Michael Bay is also an Arthurian nut. When Bruckheimer was developing King Arthur at Disney, Bay was hot to direct... until he realized they were doing the "real" take and not the fantasy and (seeing where that was going to go) backed off. Wisely.

 

Cut to the Arthurian-influenced new Transformers sequel.

post #32838 of 34590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul C View Post

Yeah there's not much point in obsessing over the finer bookkeeping details we don't have access to, all you can really go off is what gets made and what doesn't.

Prometheus tripled it's production budget and got a sequel, albeit a sequel with some studio reins on it. If Covenant manages to repeat that with it's lower budget they'll probably let him have another roll of the dice, maybe with a lower budget again.

Well there is alot of speculating in here about whether or not this is getting a sequel based on the budget, I didnt start that convo... My point was there's no use doing that unless you know the actual numbers involved.
post #32839 of 34590

I'm sure a $36 million opening is not what Fox had in mind, but considering where this franchise was when Scott returned to it, I can't see the studio moving on from his vision quite yet.  Requiem was an unmitigated disaster, topping out at 41 million for the U.S. box office, in addition to being an atrocious film.  I'd love to see them just reduce the budget and allow Ridley and John Logan go in any bizarre direction they choose to with David and his newly acquired vessel. 

 

If they did decide to move on from Scott's prequel direction, what the hell do you even do with this franchise?  Of course simply leaving it alone may be the preferred answer, but Fox isn't going to do that. Putting it on ice for a few years and then remaking the original, as awful and unnecessary as that would be, would not surprise me. 

post #32840 of 34590

If The Mummy does below expectations, think they'll delay for a few years the rest of the DARK UNIVERSE lineup?

post #32841 of 34590
If they don't have a certain level of acceptable performance that is reasonable and realistic then they're putting the cart WAY before the horse. Maybe it'll be good and perform better than we all think. I wouldn't BET on that but stranger things have happened..
post #32842 of 34590

A little surprised to see Baywatch under performing.

 

The Rock, Babes in swimware. I thought audiences would be all over this.

post #32843 of 34590

I'd say there are three reasons why it's failing.

 

1. Quote:

 Nobody cares about Baywatch. With the exception of David Hasselhoff, Eastern European villages where it still runs in syndication, or Yasmine Bleeth’s lawyer, no one particularly harbors a lingering appreciation for the series that nevertheless lasted 11 seasons, spanning the entirety of the 1990s, yet leaving next to no cultural impact besides its unaccountable global popularity. When Baywatch is remembered at all, it’s for the most superficial of signifiers: Playboy Playmates in red swimsuits running in slow motion across sandy beaches, either toward or away from Hasselhoff’s hairy torso. There are no lasting, iconic characters, no memorable episodes fondly recalled. Baywatch s the rare work of pop culture that was already an empty, kitschy joke as it aired.

 

   2. In the age of the Internet, there are babes in swimware everywhere now!

 

   3. It looked awful. 

post #32844 of 34590
They tried to replicate the success of 21 Jump Street and failed miserably.

Teaming Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum is funny. Teaming The Rock and Zac Efron is not.
post #32845 of 34590

The most notable thing about Baywatch is Joey and Chandler watching it on Friends. 

post #32846 of 34590
Maybe if it was The Rock with a Michael Cera-type. An ex Eagle Scout, moves to LA, wants a noble profession, gets teamed with a badass who is more bark than bite when shit goes down. Ends up looking to wimpy guy to save the day.

Or, I don't know....NOT make a Baywatch movie.
post #32847 of 34590
But how will the International be? It is Baywatch, after all.
post #32848 of 34590
International saves everything these days. That's why Pirates 5 might be the lowest grossing domestically but will probably makes a billion regardless paving the way for Pirates 12.

We won't see a Baywatch 2 though.
post #32849 of 34590
Huh. The trailer for Baywatch looks really funny. And The Rock is always entertaining. Maybe America's just not in the mood.
post #32850 of 34590

lol, Alien Covenant on its way to one of the biggest 2nd weekend drops of all time.  80%.  Worse than Prometheus.

 

Maybe they'll finally put this franchise out to pasture. 

 

Bet Fox wishes they'd made Blomkamp's movie instead.  That would've at least had the return of two franchise favorites, maybe three (Bishop), which would've probably done much better financially.  Nostalgia is all the rage these days.

 

Actually I wouldn't be surprised if Blomkamp gets a surprise call from the studio wanting "to talk".

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: CHUD.COM Main
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › CHUD NUMBERS: Box Office Discussion Thread