Weekly Box Office and Film Discussion Thread

Drtooth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
31,717
Reaction score
6,706
So I left to go see Wreck-It-Ralph again (Frankenweenie wasn't playing at a good time).
I actually enjoyed watching the movie this time much more than the first time I saw it.
It helps to have an audience that's really into it and is laughing and all. It was a lot of fun to sit through that showing of the movie. Also, this was on a bigger screen than the other place and better sound. :smile:
I missed Paperman again. I actually only came in at the scene where Ralph is in Tapper's.

Would you believe I almost had the worst experience watching that film, and missed a good chunk of Paperman, because I had to complain? You see, I don't see how this happened, but the 3-D was screwed up. The depth was reversed so the background popped out from the foreground. I never saw that before, and trust me... I almost got a seizure from the Monsters Inc trailer as a result. If I didn't say anything, I'd have seen the movie the wrong way and hated the experience and walked out. And as I've often said, 3-D is best for CGI movies.

Just watched Brave last night. Now, that wasn't much of a story compare to the recent princess films, I thought. Though, I find it interesting that they didn't really have a villain in this one. They were pretty much being the villains themeselves.
Brave was trying as hard not to be a Disney princess film as possible. It felt more like a fairy tale than the others, and they went for a "she doesn't find her prince" ending. I commend them for that, and refusing the Disney Princess formula. Unfortunately, it's that formula that usually works. This movie's main audience are those who were turned off by that formula (and I kinda am), and it worked best for them. There was something very big missing from the film, but I don't know what it is. The only real villain was a bear, and while he was established as a threat, he didn't come off as much of a big bad as he could have. And it needed a LOT more witch. Something tells me if this exact story was independently animated and released by a different company, people would have given it a little more respect. But because it's Pixar, people probably wanted it to be deeper and cuter. Personally, I'm glad it was a change from the usual "cute thing learns a lesson" movie, and also glad that it was the first not sequel since Up... but it didn't really out shine itself like Pixar films tend to do.
 

Muppet fan 123

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2011
Messages
3,656
Reaction score
1,488
Would you believe I almost had the worst experience watching that film, and missed a good chunk of Paperman, because I had to complain? You see, I don't see how this happened, but the 3-D was screwed up. The depth was reversed so the background popped out from the foreground. I never saw that before, and trust me... I almost got a seizure from the Monsters Inc trailer as a result. If I didn't say anything, I'd have seen the movie the wrong way and hated the experience and walked out. And as I've often said, 3-D is best for CGI movies. .
What the?
How can that happen? Did you complain and get your money back?
They should refund you on that, since that's not what the movie is supposed to do.
 

Drtooth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
31,717
Reaction score
6,706
What the?
How can that happen? Did you complain and get your money back?
They should refund you on that, since that's not what the movie is supposed to do.
Nah, they fixed it as soon as I brought it up. It was fine by the second half of the Paperman short.
 

KremlingWhatnot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
602
Reaction score
119
This Weekends Estimates, This Is For The Twilight Fans Of Muppet Central, I Know I'm Not
1 N The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2 Sum. $141,300,000 - 4,070 - $34,717 $141,300,000 $120 1
2 1 Skyfall Sony $41,500,000 -53.0% 3,505 - $11,840 $161,337,000 $200 2
3 15 Lincoln BV $21,000,000 +2,123.9% 1,775 +1,764 $11,831 $22,419,000 $65 2
4 2 Wreck-It Ralph BV $18,312,000 -44.5% 3,622 -130 $5,056 $121,479,000 $165 3
5 3 Flight Par. $8,615,000 -41.7% 2,612 +565 $3,298 $61,336,000 $31 3
6 4 Argo WB $4,070,000 -38.5% 2,210 -553 $1,842 $92,022,000 $44.5 6
7 5 Taken 2 Fox $2,100,000 -47.7% 2,063 -424 $1,018 $134,624,000 $45 7
- 8 Pitch Perfect Uni. $1,260,000 -51.0% 1,122 -269 $1,123 $62,000,000 $17 8
- 9 Here Comes the Boom Sony $1,200,000 -52.4% 1,350 -694 $889 $41,019,000 - 6
- 6 Cloud Atlas WB $900,000 -66.1% 920 -1,103 $978 $24,894,000 - 4
- 19 The Sessions FoxS $900,000 +65.0% 516 +388 $1,744 $2,803,000 - 5
- 10 Hotel Transylvania Sony $900,000 -62.5% 1,248 -1,318 $721 $142,700,000 $85 8
If There Are Any That Is :sympathy:
 

newsmanfan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2011
Messages
2,886
Reaction score
1,661
-----------
Only proof that the Twilitter crowd has disposable income and zero discernment in its spending.

--------------
 

Drtooth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
31,717
Reaction score
6,706
At this point, Twilight's only audience are people who swear that they're there to make fun of it.

Well... I guess liking a movie ironically is better than watching Honey Boo Boo ironically. Plus, MST3K and Rifftraxx... watching movies ironically has become an artform.

Though, again, I said they swear they watch it ironically. I have a hunch some of those who say they are only say that to hide the fact they genuinely enjoy something so awful on so many levels.
 

robodog

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2011
Messages
440
Reaction score
182
I always hated Twilight on general principal but yesterday I got a glimpse of one of the movies for the first time. It was on in the background while I was on the computer. It was worse than I ever thought it could be. It was just so bland. Soulless. It was like the actors were sleepwalking through the thing. It was like watching zombies try to act. No, scratch that. Watching zombies try to act might be entertaining. There was absolutely nothing entertaining about this. It was depressing.
 

Drtooth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
31,717
Reaction score
6,706
The first movie was all on the terrible first director. It shouldn't have been that much worse than the source material, but... I dunno. I'm no expert on the films or the books since I dislike the concepts behind them and those films overall. But even fans say the first movie was terrible and it was all on poor direction. Lots of movies die due to horrid direction. Look at The Last Airbender. It suffered from being a humor devoid truncation of the first season in 90 minutes (essentially like a Harmony Gold dub for home video), but it could have been saved if the direction wasn't clumsy, ignorant of how action and special effects work, and in general wooden.

Twilight in general is like that poser goth girl that made terrible poetry to pretend to sound deep. Twilight's first director was the mother that buys her the wrong goth music CD for Christmas 2 years later, after the daughter's goth phase ended. Understanding barely anything about something that's not even sincere about it.
 

robodog

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2011
Messages
440
Reaction score
182
I still say that the vampires in Twilight aren't really vampires. They're sparkling fairies who choose to call themselves vampires in order to look cooler. Someday some real vampires are going to find out about this slander and come in and clean house, slaughtering every single one of those posers. That's how the series should end.
 

Drtooth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
31,717
Reaction score
6,706
The books supposedly came out of someone's dream. And let's face it... we've had dreams that felt either more epic, funnier, or scarier at night than when we were awake and able to rationalize them. She must have terrible dreams then. Other than that, they're a bunch of old trashy romance novel cliches with vaguely mystical crap shoved in.

But once the movie's over, that's it for Twilight. Everyone else has moved on to the worse 50 Shades of Grey.
 
Top