Weekly Box Office and Film Discussion Thread

[Drtooth]

It does seem that it is a complicated film to market. Most of the action sequences are all kinda near the end anyway, and they really can't capture the essence of the movie without spoiling the entire plot. Seems that DisneyMarvel knew this would have been an underperformer of a film, though. Seems that there's almost a reason for the lack of merchandising. There's only like 2 super hero suits in the whole thing, so it's clearly not as toyetic as Avengers. Still, you think about how GOTG blew up, along with everything associated to it. Chris Pratt became a star beyond those who are fans of Parks and Rec, and now he's the "it guy". Shame that Ant-Man couldn't have surprised like that film did, especially since GOTG's affects on the movie universe aren't going to be felt as fast as Ant-Man's.

 

[Drtooth]

To the surprise of no one, Pixels is opening up to horrible reviews, most directed at the obvious. It's really a shame since this concept could have worked better. We had a talented director and some of the cast is actually praised in spite of Adam's "Adamness." Seems that if it didn't become some sort of vanity project on the part of Sandler, it would have been good. Or at least had the potential to be good.

That said, I'm far more annoyed at the incessant trailers for "Paper Towns." Now, this is kind of a personal thing for me. I'm always going through something rough no matter what, and anything else I'd mention would be too much information. Now, if there's one thing I do not need, it's to be bombarded by constant commercials about young adults/teens in love showing you "just how good life can be." Yeah. When you're life is kinda a mess the last thing you want to see is young, beautiful, peppy people in love saying how great a journey life is, presumably because they're freaking young, beautiful, peppy people in love. But what do you expect from the saccharine sap writings from the same one responsible for Fault in our Stars? And yes, I got a personal one for that too. Kinda hard to feel bad about imaginary young peppy people in love and one of the imaginary kids has cancer (wait for it) when my neighbor not just came down with it, but got a severe case that had him deteriorate rapidly. I don't want to put the whole story hear, but it was far more tragic than imaginary kids in a story.

 

[JJandJanice]

Saw Pixels last night actually. And...yeah, it's a shame. I was really wanting to like it, but it was ehh at best. And that's me being nice.

 

[Drtooth]

While any movie can be a disappointment, I'm sure most are in agreement that this movie is the ultimate disappointment. If it was surprisingly good despite Sandler, I would have been ready, willing, and able to see this film. But it seems that the entire film was completely wasted on Adam's ever creepy too old for this sort of thing comedy. And that's what the real shame lies (at least the consensus, I don't wanna waste money on this). This could have been a good movie, but all the money spent clearing those video game rights, all those Donkey Kongs and Q*Berts are all for naught because Adam tainted it.

Plus, I get the whole "I blew up a Smurf" bit seems to be Sony moping about how the second movie flopped. Passive Aggressive, really.

Though... uh... the actual creator of Pac-Man was actually flattered that someone portrayed him on film. So there's that, I guess. And HEY! If you don't like this, Wreck-It Ralph 2 is supposedly in the works, so...yeah.

 

[Muppet Master]

Seriously, I wish Pixels was getting better reviews, I mean I expected bad reviews, but not this bad though, the film still got a $9 million total for today, and will end up in the $25 million mark, its budget is $88 million, so I could see it getting around that much for an opening then plummeting, because of bad reviews to like around low 10s, and ending its run either losing several million dollars or breaking even at best it has to do good with the foriegn box office to not be considered a flop.

 

[JJandJanice]

Pixels would be getting better reviews if it deserved better reviews. I was really hyped for that movie but, as Dr. Tooth said, it's an ultimate disappointment.

 

[Drtooth]

Seriously, I wish Pixels was getting better reviews, I mean I expected bad reviews, but not this bad though, the film still got a $9 million total for today, and will end up in the $25 million mark, its budget is $88 million, so I could see it getting around that much for an opening then plummeting, because of bad reviews to like around low 10s, and ending its run either losing several million dollars or breaking even at best it has to do good with the foriegn box office to not be considered a flop.

The numbers are in and Pixels couldn't even do 25 mil. They were more like 23 mil, and the weekend was (as typical for a late July weekend) pretty weak. Ant-man managed to stay on top, even though it was only 24 mil (it managed to at least hit 100 mil this weekend) and Minions continued in a decent third place for 22 Mil (and as a summer kid's movie, it's doing most of its business on these vacation weekdays). I almost wish Pixels opened lower than it did. The international BO will save the film, unfortunately (probably due to redubbing the films stupidity). I agree completely with JJ's statement. It would have got better reviews if the filmmakers didn't Adam Sandler the heck out of the film. This thing had potential, but they blew it carelessly because they wanted to pander to whatever little fanbase Adam still has. And Adam himself is just in this for the money anyway.

 

[mr3urious]

After the disasters that were Bucky Larson and Jack & Jill, there was nowhere for Happy Madison to go but up, and Pixels still looks better in comparison.

 

[Drtooth]

It's hard to say with those movies. Bucky Larson and Jack and Jill were terrible ideas to begin with, and there's no way you could make films with those premises quality by any means unless you do so with a heaping helping of irony. Maybe if they were done by John Waters is what I'm saying. Pixels is a good concept with a great director and great special effects from the looks of it.

But then it goes to that old paradox. What's worse? Something that's inherently awful to begin with or something with potential to be great that's awful? It definitely sounds and (from the trailers) looks better than Adam's latest works. But by all means any interest in the film I had died with a spoiler from TVTropes:

Spoiler

Q*Bert turns into a human woman at the end of the film and winds up marrying and having babies with one of the human characters. Baby Q*Berts...ewww...

Yeah.

 

[Drtooth]

On another subject, I'm looking at these trailers for "Straight Outta Compton," and something doesn't sit right with me about them. In this movie Paul Giamati seems to be...I dunno... NWA's manager or lawyer or something. Whatever he is, it's a role that's supportive of the group. What kinda confuses me is that Paul Giamati is in another music based biopic released close to this one. Only he plays Eugene Landy, the crazy "therapist" Svengali to Brian Wilson in that one. That's something to think about.

Though, to be fair, I'm still wrapping my head around the same actor playing Doc "willing to kill Kermit the Frog" Hopper was chosen to be Santa Claus in Elmo Saves Christmas.