I thought I read that they didn't shoot a Gustin scene.
Spoilers The Flash (2023) -Review and Discussion Thread
- Thread starter thribs
- Start date
I thought I read that they didn't shoot a Gustin scene.
Cavill definitely shot scenes for the film, but i'm not certain Gustin ever made it before cameras.
The studio excuse was they didn't have the budget for it.
Seems really foolish... they promoted DCFU stuff with the CW actors. It wiuld have been fair (and actual postive buzz) if they reciprocated.
When Ezra Miller appeared in Crisis' even naysayers like me who scoffed at his his "Multiverse!" Plea actually had to give it up to him. We would have returned that positive buzz.
I'll wait till it gets a free release on HBO Max in the Netherlands. I'm really curious, but not curious enough to spend money on it.
Now.... Does this make me part of the problem with movies not making enough money? Probably. However, I still pay to go see a movie in theaters IF I feel it looks interesting enough from the trailers. And with interesting, I mean a movie that looks like it has plot and engagement. Not just Michael Keaton returning as Batman. Even though that is awesome as fuck.
Now.... Does this make me part of the problem with movies not making enough money? Probably. However, I still pay to go see a movie in theaters IF I feel it looks interesting enough from the trailers. And with interesting, I mean a movie that looks like it has plot and engagement. Not just Michael Keaton returning as Batman. Even though that is awesome as fuck.
C+ on this scale, I guess. I liked parts of it but a lot of it is incredibly dumb with terrible GCI.
I overreacted. There is, ofcourse, no way for me to know if this movie has a plot. And it most likely ofcourse has one.
Lets define what a "plot" is...
Plot? Barry 1 wants to save his mommy and daddy.
Plot? Barry 1 wants to go home.
Plot? Barry 1 wants to rebuild the Justice League and save the world from Zod.
Plot? Barry 2 wants to save his girlfriend.
Plot? Old Barry 2 intercepts Barry 1 to start this chain of events, as to where he meets his girlfriend and almost nearly saves her, and will save her if he time travels better. Which means that there was a Barry minus 1 who was killed and replaced by "stuff" or Old Barry 2, who we never met.
If Old Barry 2 is really old Barry minus 2, what happened to Old Barry 2?
If Old Barry 2 is really old Barry minus 2, what happened to Old Barry 2?
I had planned on seeing it in theaters but could not go opening weekend and planned to go the next weekend. But after seeing that it was underperforming I realized that it would be streaming soon and then on blu ray. So I will just wait.
I watched the movie again. It's an unique kind of awful where even the central message is terrible.
I'm still trying to wipe the Barbie trailer from memory. It has to rank among the worst ideas ever committed to film, and Gosling as Ken? I'd laugh if that was not such a bad visual miss.
Initial projections have it opening between $100-110 million to Oppenheimer's $50 million. Which would be the fourth or fifth highest opening of the year depending upon the final weekend tally. So clearly there's a market for light, frothy fun.
Like the Mario Bros, Barbie is a brand known and loved around the world. The movie will be huge.
Oppenheimer was never going to be a mega blockbuster. I would guess it would make around the same box office numbers as Dunkirk--with a resurgence in interest and maybe even a re-release if it gets some Oscar nods.
yeah...it would be hilarius as an SNL sketch...but main Ken looks older than me! (And i am 50!)
Yeah, Barbie is a known brand...but so was "Where the Wild Things Are", and our whole family hated it. This kinda gives me those vibes (ish).
We shall see in the 2nd week if there is a dropoff or not.
if it does really well, it will be interesting... because then 1/2 of the top 6 movies will have a portion of a fanbase that is really young (and the other 1/2 aimed more for teens + others... and then Mission Impossible)
If Oppenheimer does that projected $50 million...it would still be doing pretty good. Definitely interested in hearing the reviews and the feedback especially from younger viewers
Oppenheimer is not really expected to be a blockbuster, so its not comparable to expectations of a Barbie film, but the subject alone certainly makes it one of the most interesting films of 2023.
Being a global toy or game brand is not always a guarantee. There have been quite a few big toy and game-based, live action films that were not, such as Masters of the Universe (1987--a major flop), Super Mario Bros (1993--another flop), 2007's Bratz (major toy phenomenon, but a bigger movie flop), Dungeons and Dragons (2000--yeah, more of the same), 2012's Battleship, and this year's Dungeons and Dragons: Honor Among Thieves coughed up $208.2 million against a $150 million dollar budget. While the Transformers was profitable enough to launch a series, and this year's animated Super Mario film succeeded, they might be considered more of the exception, not the rule.
Then, there's the content: if the Barbie movie is more of a send-up of the toy line's inherent qualities (similar to the Brady Bunch movie), some might find that charming. If it subverts those same qualities, then I can imagine it sinking quickly, and some parents may not want their Barbie-buying kids seeing that.
Ryan Gosling is a more celebrated sex symbol than Margo Robbie.
Meanwhile Marvel's Shang Chi is also Ken.
Where the Wild Things Are was a horrible adaptation of a beautiful, simple story. What's more, outside of a few English speaking countries (and maybe Europe), WtWTA is not really well known internationally. Kids from all over the world know Barbie. I agree that it will be interesting to see if there is a major drop off after the initial opening. I don't plan on seeing this--my kids are not interested and neither am I.
Similar threads
