What you can expect in 2017 :


STAR WARS EPISODE VIII

TRANSFORMERS 5

FAST AND FURIOUS 8

JUSTICE LEAGUE

WONDER WOMAN

GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY 2

THOR 3

SPIDER MAN: HOMECOMING

Looks like alot of these Dec movies have not been hits so far :

PASSENGERS with Chris Pratt, Jennifer Lawrence; grossed only 30 M so far, cost 110 M to make

ASSASSINS CREED. 22 M so far

FENCES with Denzel Washington. 11 M

COLLATERAL BEAUTY with Will Smith. 18 M

quote:

Originally posted by Tommy C:
Looks like alot of these Dec movies have not been hits so far :

PASSENGERS with Chris Pratt, Jennifer Lawrence; grossed only 30 M so far, cost 110 M to make

ASSASSINS CREED. 22 M so far

FENCES with Denzel Washington. 11 M

COLLATERAL BEAUTY with Will Smith. 18 M

Rogue One took all the money, but I have no intention of ever seeing it, not even on DVD. The reason is simple, but if I explained any more, it would be a big SPOILER. For those who have seen it, I'm sure you can guess.

As for the others, Fences will probably grab Academy Award nominations for Washington and Davis, but it is a filmed stage play on characters who are miserable. It was never going to win large audiences.

Assassins Creed was barely promoted at all. I don't know if it is bad, its based loosely on the game, but the studio just threw it out. I guess they didn't think it was any good.

Will Smith will probably have to complain about not getting nominated again this year. At least he shouldn't be. Collateral Beauty is the stupidest excuse for a movie I've heard in a long time. If you saw his Seven Pounds, this is great companion piece to that morbid and unpleasant film.

Finally Passengers may not have taken off just because of audience burn out. Those looking for science fiction would see Rogue One first. Both Pratt and Lawrence have been overexposed lately, especially Lawrence. Then there is the fact that this is basically a two character film and it even has an ethical question at its heart, which kind of takes away from the excitement and fun you would expect from space ship adventures. And maybe that's the bigger problem. Between Star Wars and Star Trek and the Martian and Arrival, people have just gotten tired of space movies.

Rogue One has now made 440 M and has surpassed Captain America as the # 2 film of the year

Will it beat Finding Dory which has made over 485 M in the U.S. ?

Think you need to start a 2017 Movies thread Tommy, but just to add to the Tom Cruise discussion, his new summer movie will be of all things The Mummy.

This is not a remake of the last trilogy or even the old Boris Karloff mummy. It's a brand new female mummy and Russell Crowe as the bad guy. At least one trailer is out already and I have to say that all the action looks quite forced and Cruise looks way too old as a soldier type.

Having virtually no information at all, I am going to say that this will be a bad movie. In part because the trilogy is not that old and was pretty good. We shall see.

Rogue One is now closing in on 450 M in the U.S. as of Jan 3, so maybe it will beat Dory within the next few weeks

So when it does, that means the Star Wars line will boast the biggest single movie of 2015, 2016, and 2017 (as Episode 8 will be simply gigantic).
I wonder what will end up being more lucrative for Disney in the long run: buying Marvel Comics or buying Star Wars?
They are printing money with both.
I doubt even Walt could have dreamed of this.

Disney has the 3 biggest movies of 2016:

Finding Dory
Rogue One
Captain America 3

Also, # 5 on the list (Jungle Book), # 7 (Zootopia), and # 10 (Doctor Strange)


So Disney had 6 of the 10 highest grossing films of the year !

Rogue One is now at 477 M, only 9 M behind Finding Dory

Disney's Moana is now at 225 M, soon to surpass "Fantastic Beasts" as the # 11 film of the year

So Disney will soon have 7 of the Top 11 films of 2016

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:

Rogue One took all the money, but I have no intention of ever seeing it, not even on DVD. The reason is simple, but if I explained any more, it would be a big SPOILER. For those who have seen it, I'm sure you can guess.

Huh?? Guess I missed something there. I thought Rogue One was amazing! Much better than The Force Awakens in my opinion. Although I do think the Forbes Magazine article is right about one thing. No more Star Wars stories with a Death Star. It has officially been run into the ground.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
Assassins Creed was barely promoted at all. I don't know if it is bad, its based loosely on the game, but the studio just threw it out. I guess they didn't think it was any good.

If you want to see some really good Video game effects to movie translation Assassins Creed is great. If you want a good story that doesn't draw several sighs during the view, don't bother. It's pretty stupid.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
Finally Passengers may not have taken off just because of audience burn out. Those looking for science fiction would see Rogue One first. Both Pratt and Lawrence have been overexposed lately, especially Lawrence. Then there is the fact that this is basically a two character film and it even has an ethical question at its heart, which kind of takes away from the excitement and fun you would expect from space ship adventures. And maybe that's the bigger problem. Between Star Wars and Star Trek and the Martian and Arrival, people have just gotten tired of space movies.

Except for cool visuals, Passengers fails on every level. The story is so absurdly simple it basically equates to the Life Time movie of the week in space. As an attempt to promote a realistic space movie like Gravity or Martian it is boring. As an attempt to put a dark or light action twist to it everything falls short. The circumstances are so extreme you cant even get mad at Chris Pratt for waking Jennifer Lawrence up. Hell, I would have. :-P

I would have preferred it to start soft and nice and then go all Event Horizon on me.

So we agree on everything except on Rogue One, although I think you blew a spoiler on Passengers. Shame on you!

As to what you missed on Rogue One, it's hard to explain my objection without blowing that SPOILER, so don't read any farther if you have not seen it.

Now for the SPOILER ALERT. I am sure that the movie is very good, more than a couple friends tell me so, but I have no interest in it because I already know how it ends.

I'm sure everyone knows that Rogue One connects with the beginning of Star Wars IV: A New Hope, but they may not know how much of a standalone film it is. All I can say is that there will be no sequels from this branch of the Star Wars universe and in that lies my problem.

This is a fictional story. We are not dealing with any historical figures. Rogue One could have wrapped up in any number of ways that would have been more satisfying. The path it chose renders the film moot to me and basically destroys all that came before. Others may not feel that way, but I can't help it. An ending can make or break a movie for me. If I am watching a story about The Alamo that's one thing. If I am spending two hours watching a fictional action movie, somebody has to live.

Ha! I think my Passengers spoiler give away was in the trailer.

I get it, there is a leaked poster on facebook for the sequel of Rogue One and its the original Hildebrandt from Star Wars. I got a nice laugh out of it.

Maybe for me that is part of what made Rogue One so refreshing. Ever since 1977 and Splinter of the Minds Eye, Star Wars has grown and been expected to expand this massive story line as it fingers out to tons of characters. Although there were a few annoyances (like pulling a video game like lever re-aligns the satellite) it felt kind of cool that I was not hanging from the cliff when the credits rolled. Almost like we felt back in the day when Star Wars ended....before they called it episode 4. When you really think about it, Rogue is the story that was directly referenced in the original film.

Seems like there could be some interesting backstory elements but as you say, it was the Star Wars version of the Alamo.

I also felt that Vader's intensity at the end of Rogue was a bit much given the opening scenes in Star Wars.


On a side note the video game like repair features were also a very high annoying factor in Passenger as well.

Rogue One is now the # 1 film of 2016, grossing 498 M in the U.S.

As mentioned, Disney had a great year. It had 7 of the Top 12 biggest money makers

Warner Bros had 2 (Batman vs. Superman and Suicide Squad), Fox had 1 (Deadpool), Universal had 2 (Sing and Secret Life of Pets)

Losers of the year, Paramount (Star Trek was # 15, its only film in the Top 25) and Sony / Columbia (Ghostbusters was #19)

Of course the list would be a bit different if production and marketing costs were subtracted. If you throw that into the equation Dead Pool and Star Wars are in a dead heat right now. Also Dead Pool blows Captain America Civil War out of the water by over $150M.

It is so difficult to gauge winners and losers just by the end totals. Some that earned over $100 Mil (X-Men, Star Trek, Ghostbusters, ID4-2) lost money. The Purge: Election Year was made for $10 Mil and pulled in nearly 80. That horrible movie The Witch was made for like 3 to 5 million but pulled in 25 million at the domestic box office. I don't think execs at A24 are crying too much.

I think to measure the true success of a single studio all of their flops have to be added to the equation as well. For example Disney had Finest Hours, BFG, Alice Through the Looking Glass and Pete's Dragon to compensate for.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: mykdude,

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
Of course the list would be a bit different if production and marketing costs were subtracted. If you throw that into the equation Dead Pool and Star Wars are in a dead heat right now. Also Dead Pool blows Captain America Civil War out of the water by over $150M.

It is so difficult to gauge winners and losers just by the end totals. Some that earned over $100 Mil (X-Men, Star Trek, Ghostbusters, ID4-2) lost money. The Purge: Election Year was made for $10 Mil and pulled in nearly 80. That horrible movie The Witch was made for like 3 to 5 million but pulled in 25 million at the domestic box office. I don't think execs at A24 are crying too much.

..and not forgetting all the accounting schenanigans that are put in place before the 'final' figures are officially released :-) Anyone remember the makers of the Lord of the Rings films claiming they made a loss overall so they could avoid paying money to the Tolkien Estate ?

You guys are dead on. The old saying is that numbers never lie. Maybe not, but people do, and people try to make numbers say whatever they want. It's called creative accounting when they get away with it and accounting fraud when they don't.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
You guys are dead on. The old saying is that numbers never lie. Maybe not, but people do, and people try to make numbers say whatever they want. It's called creative accounting when they get away with it and accounting fraud when they don't.

Sure, the raw box office numbers basically say that more people are seeing movie X over movie Y. Which I am sure winning the popularity contest has its value. But it doesn't always pay the bills.

Kevin, I never heard about LOTR doing that although I can certainly believe it. I do remember WB claiming that Harry Potter Order of the Phoenix lost 160 million in spite of earning nearly 1 billion at the world box office. I believe the numbers were used to show that actors with back end profits in their contracts were not entitled to any money.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
Kevin, I never heard about LOTR doing that although I can certainly believe it.

Being stitched up over the LOTR profits is one of the reasons that The Hobbit got held up for so long. The Tolkien estate were not keen on having the same thing happen again. Peter Jackson and several other interested parties also sued New Line over the profits declared:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...ma-over-profits.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/ent...ent/film/4312463.stm

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...-06-rings-suit_N.htm

I see that as a result of two films released late last year, La La Land and Hidden Figures, Star Trek dropped to # 16 in terms of the highest grossing movies of 2016

And Ghostbusters dropped out of the Top 20

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
So we agree on everything except on Rogue One, although I think you blew a spoiler on Passengers. Shame on you!

As to what you missed on Rogue One, it's hard to explain my objection without blowing that SPOILER, so don't read any farther if you have not seen it.

Now for the SPOILER ALERT. I am sure that the movie is very good, more than a couple friends tell me so, but I have no interest in it because I already know how it ends.

I'm sure everyone knows that Rogue One connects with the beginning of Star Wars IV: A New Hope, but they may not know how much of a standalone film it is. All I can say is that there will be no sequels from this branch of the Star Wars universe and in that lies my problem.

This is a fictional story. We are not dealing with any historical figures. Rogue One could have wrapped up in any number of ways that would have been more satisfying. The path it chose renders the film moot to me and basically destroys all that came before. Others may not feel that way, but I can't help it. An ending can make or break a movie for me. If I am watching a story about The Alamo that's one thing. If I am spending two hours watching a fictional action movie, somebody has to live.

I liked how Rogue One ended... didn't mind it at all.

It would be hard to explain going forward...

Plus there are always prequels and origins.