Priscilla and Lisa Marie both gave it an enthusiastic thumbs up.

Early reports say it is set to break $30M.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
Priscilla and Lisa Marie both gave it an enthusiastic thumbs up.

Early reports say it is set to break $30M.

Yeah that's what they are saying and the fight for #1 will be with Top Gun, not Jurassic like I thought. Bet there's a surge in Elvis record sales too.

I'm not surprised that the Presley ladies are enthusiastic. They hear the coins dropping. You know that the Estate has to have a piece of the action for the movie and all those songs. However now that the film is out, fact checkers have already come up with a half dozen questionable or totally made-up scenes to pad the narrative. The definitive Elvis was already out there, but why stop at the truth.

When I was talking to my mom about the movie, I mentioned that his wife and daughter gave the movie a positive review. My mom commented simply, "They were paid." Well, I'm sure the Presley estate was involved. Attendance at Graceland is probably not what it used to be as his biggest fans are now in their late 70's to mid-90's. They don't fly much anymore and don't like long drives away from their cats either.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
Priscilla and Lisa Marie both gave it an enthusiastic thumbs up.

Early reports say it is set to break $30M.

Yeah that's what they are saying and the fight for #1 will be with Top Gun, not Jurassic like I thought. Bet there's a surge in Elvis record sales too.

I'm not surprised that the Presley ladies are enthusiastic. They hear the coins dropping. You know that the Estate has to have a piece of the action for the movie and all those songs. However now that the film is out, fact checkers have already come up with a half dozen questionable or totally made-up scenes to pad the narrative. The definitive Elvis was already out there, but why stop at the truth.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
However now that the film is out, fact checkers have already come up with a half dozen questionable or totally made-up scenes to pad the narrative. The definitive Elvis was already out there, but why stop at the truth.

That was my comment when I first saw the previews. It looked more like a tale of Elvis with artistic liberty. I like the Moulin Rouge style but realistic it is not.

I can't see Lisa Marie or Priscilla getting paid for their opinion. The money into rights and the estate would have to be paid regardless.

Crazy close right now. Box Office Mojo has Maverick on top by just $176K

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
I can't see Lisa Marie or Priscilla getting paid for their opinion. The money into rights and the estate would have to be paid regardless.

Not as such straight payments, but what if they got a piece of the backend profits? Certainly increased sales of Elvis music would flow from a successful movie and the soundtrack would filter some more in if it was in a deal with the Estate.

It would surely not be in their best interests to dump on the movie and besides, Col. Parker is playing the villain here and Elvis is his victim. A convenient way to make Elvis, not a flawed human being, but someone not responsible for his mistakes. I understand that Priscilla comes off saint-like too, which does not hurt her any. The musical numbers are impressive, although I agree that the actor doesn't really look like Presley without the clothes and the signature moves.

Something I had to look up was, does Austin Butler do the singing or is it dubbed? The answer is mostly, but not all, him. The young Elvis's songs are all supposed to be sung by him alone. The older Vegas Elvis songs are partially Butler, but they also blended in or overdubbed the original Elvis recordings. So the Estate would have to get paid for allowing that remix of some music.

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

All true but the Presley women not only have a name to promote but also one to protect.

Also, given what the estate brings in every year it's not like it is riding the struggle bus. The film right charges and profits would be negligible by comparison.

I agree a potential surge in Elvis music could be a nice little boost. Would be surprised if the film creates all that many new fans.

Was just looking at the Jurassic World numbers. Jurassic Park III ended up at roughly half the domestic box office of the first film. Jurassic World Dominion seems to be following in the same path although I doubt it will reach the half way point.

So the final tally is Elvis by a nose, 31.1M to Top Gun's 29.6M. Better than I expected.

Had to rewrite this whole thing. Now next weekend is 4th of July and the only big new addition is Minions: The Rise of Gru. No idea, but I guess kids will go.

Now Thor: Love and Thunder is out July 8th, got the date wrong. I thought this was a direct sequel from Endgame for Thor and that it would be more serious than my last favorite Thor Ragnarok, especially because Christian Bale is the baddy. Bale never learned to smile in a film, he only wants to brood. I don't think the man even knows how to make fun of his intense method role playing.

T was half right, as I just took a look at the trailers. Thor and his crew look downright goofy and trying too hard to be funny, but Bale's Gorr the God Slayer is in another movie. So okey dokey.

So it's Marvel, but it has lingering competition and Disney didn't top the charts last time. I don't even have a general opinion on this one, as I could be wildly wrong either way. Personally, I'm not interested in seeing it right now, but that's just personally.

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

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
Thor and his crew look downright goofy and trying too hard to be funny,

Had the same thought watching the trailer wondering if it didn't go too far. Waititi should stumble in his success at some point.

Ragnarok was blended nicely.

I am looking to go and see Thor soon after it comes out as I have a couple of vouchers for my local Cineworld. Right now, I'm avoiding seeing any trailers or reviews, including 'spoiler free' ones, as I'd like to go in without knowing about 90% of the plot/storyline. This approach worked well for the last three films I saw in the cinema, 'Spiderman: No Way Home', 'Matrix: Resurrections' and 'Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness', so I'm sticking with it

quote:

Originally posted by Kevin F:
Right now, I'm avoiding seeing any trailers or reviews, including 'spoiler free' ones, as I'd like to go in without knowing about 90% of the plot/storyline.

I'm just the opposite. I like to know the whole movie beforehand, unless it's a mystery or has some twist ending that needs to be figured out. Even then I sometimes peek because I get too mad when I wind up hating some stupid ending. I have also been known to stop a DVD after 30 minutes to look the movie plot up on Wiki to see if I even want to watch the rest of it.

I always figure commenting on trailers is fair game because this is what the studios are displaying to the public. Maybe a good trailer doesn't guarantee a good film, but if the trailer looks bad when these are picks of the best scenes, that's a big red flag to me. I do try to stay away from dropping any spoilers until long after it's been out. Lots of people follow your idea of avoidance too, although you do seem to be a multiverse fan who probably enjoys all films of that type enough to walk in cold.

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

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
Lots of people follow your idea of avoidance too, although you do seem to be a multiverse fan who probably enjoys all films of that type enough to walk in cold.

I'm first and foremost a collector. Back in the mid-70s through to the mid-80s my main focus was on collecting Marvel comics. I still have most of the issues I picked up back then, something like 1300-1400 comics in all. It's fun to see how the characters and stories back then are depicted in the movies they are making now. As I already know how I think the characters and stories should proceed, I don't need to see the trailers. I find it's much more fun if I don't.

For films I don't know anything about, seeing a trailer can be useful though. Marvel films are sort of a special case, though I also avoided trailers and reviews of the recent Matrix movie as I wanted to find out what they were doing in it as I saw the movie. It helped that I got to see it either the day it opened or the day after.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
I'm just the opposite. I like to know the whole movie beforehand, unless it's a mystery or has some twist ending that needs to be figured out. Even then I sometimes peek because I get too mad when I wind up hating some stupid ending. I have also been known to stop a DVD after 30 minutes to look the movie plot up on Wiki to see if I even want to watch the rest of it.

Sounds like my uncle - every new comic he bought he would read the last page first. Made my head explode.

quote:

Originally posted by Ted Dastick Jr.:

Sounds like my uncle - every new comic he bought he would read the last page first. Made my head explode.

Scanners, great movie, back when I still could watch Cronenberg. Just consider it a yin and yang thing.

When it comes to the MCU I like to know where I am at in the timeline.....just in case I need to watch anything again before I go to the movies.

I get on line and watch trailers constantly. I figure if the movie doesn't have enough material to give me a decent trailer then I should be worried. I typically don't want to know the ending but I have watched some stuff on TV where I felt compelled to wiki it before it was over.

Looks like Elvis is going to pack on another $20M before rolling into the July 4th weekend.

Minions: The Rise of Gru will be breaking the 4th of July weekend records. Some forecasts were only for half of what its likely to take in. Despicable 4 is up in 2024. I wonder what Steve Carell gets paid for this? He's going to want a raise.

I saw Minions yesterday and the theater was full. It was entertaining but not having seen the prior 4 films I had no idea what it was about or who the characters were. Alot of famous people doing voice work: Alan Arkin, Julie Andrews,Dolph Lundgren, Lucy Lawless and even Jean Claude Van Damme. Whatever happened to Steve Carell? Aside from these movies I still associate him with The Office.

Just got back from Jurassic World. Half expected Little Foot to show up and bring the cast into one big fluffy dino-hug moment. The script is pretty much reduced to every pop environmentalist cliché you have ever heard. When the characters are in dino danger you neither care nor believe they actually are.

Definitely time for this series to go extinct.

And yet Jurassic World Dominion has made 824.5M worldwide to date, with almost everyone saying how dumb it is. Why make something good, when it's going to sell just as well no matter what it looks like?

No reason to think it's over either. Wait 3 or 4 years and just restart an arc for another trilogy. Throw in Tom Cruise as a retired fighter pilot protecting a dinosaur reserve from poachers and you'll really have something.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
And yet Jurassic World Dominion has made 824.5M worldwide to date, with almost everyone saying how dumb it is. Why make something good, when it's going to sell just as well no matter what it looks like?

No reason to think it's over either. Wait 3 or 4 years and just restart an arc for another trilogy. Throw in Tom Cruise as a retired fighter pilot protecting a dinosaur reserve from poachers and you'll really have something.

Yeah just like Motley Crue being able to fill a stadium tour after they announced their final tour 8 years ago. I saw the final tour...they were done.