• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Gatsby77

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6,490

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Gatsby77

  1. Gatsby77
    I'm not normally one to bet against James Cameron - because I've lost count of the times he's directed a "most expensive movie to-date" that went on to become an iconic blockbuster (I think T2, Titanic and Avatar all qualify). But...at $350 million, that means break-even is like $1 bn.? That's a hell of a bet.
  2. Gatsby77
    Poor Black Adam 2. It's now joined the ranks of: Justice League 2 Man of Steel 2 (twice) Green Lantern Corps New Gods The Trench Deathstroke Gotham City Sirens Deadshot Cyborg The Wonder Twins Batgirl Over 9+ year's DCEU's batting average of announced vs. actually produced is <50%. Meanwhile, WBD's share price is hovering around $9.00, less than the price of a movie ticket.
  3. Gatsby77
    Apparently so.
  4. Gatsby77
  5. Gatsby77
    Worth watching
  6. Gatsby77
    Tom Cruise was among the more notable snubs among this year's Golden Globe nominations.
  7. Gatsby77
    This. It was fun visual spectacle. To see once. But the story was derivative - predicable and boring. "Dances with Smurfs" was accurate. Or, as my buddy put it: "Fern Gully - To the Extreme!"
  8. Gatsby77
    That's a shame. I grew up in Philly, but visited the Cambridge store a few times. The first trip was important, as it allowed me to complete my Tick collection (the original 1-12) and pick up a # 1 signed by Edlund - this was back in the '90s, the pre-eBay era.
  9. Gatsby77
    And miss out on Blue Beetle?? Surely you jest...
  10. Gatsby77
    Agree re. there being very few "major draws" or old-school movie stars these days. Even Robert Downey Jr.'s stumbled in non-Iron Man roles over the last decade. Ironically, for good or ill, the Rock is among them - as he's been the highest-paid or 2nd-highest paid actor each year from 2017-2021 (TBD re. this year, although conventional wisdom is Tom Cruise will take top honors this year). But define movie star another way - the power to get a movie made - and Boseman was on that list. Of the four non-Black Panther films Boseman did since being cast in his superhero role, at least three wouldn't have been made had he not signed on. Sure - maybe Michael B. Jordan slots into one of them as a replacement, but the films were literally built around - and greenlit - due to his involvement. But going back to Gal Gadot - it's a very short list of stars who can command $20 million+ in *non-superhero" roles these days. She has (Red Notice) - and it was not just well-received, but Netflix's most-watched original film ever. Leo supposedly got $30 million for his role in Don't Look Up - he's up there with Tom Cruise. Then you've got Duane Johnson, Will Smith, Mark Wahlberg, Vin Diesel. Anyone else? Maybe Ryan Reynolds - because I'm sure Netflix paid him out for both Red Notice & 6 Underground.
  11. Gatsby77
    Agree about Ezra Miller. By my count, outside of appearing as the Flash, he had two bravura performance (Perks of Being a Wallflower, We Need to Talk About Kevin), then a supporting role in the Fantastic Beasts trilogy. But he's not a movie star (yet). However - see the recent criticism of superhero actors as "not movie stars" by Quentin Tarantino, and the public refutation of that by Samuel L. Jackson, who said, "Chadwick Boseman *is* Black Panther. And he's a movie star." I'd buy that. There's a reason Marvel didn't recast him immediately. He was not only popular as the character, he was well-liked as an actor in general - and a true rising star movie star in his own right. The proof: Every one of his four non-Black Panther roles since first appearing in Civil War received critical acclaim - even if the movie itself was maligned as mediocre or average. Those were: Marshall 21 Bridges Da Five Bloods Ma Rainey's Black Bottom Those films, plus 3 of his 4 appearances as Black Panther, is an incredible run in a short 4-year span (2017-2020). TL/DR: Taratino - and you - are wrong. Sam Jackson's right.
  12. Gatsby77
    Her qualifications were fine when she was cast. And your personal criticisms of her acting and look don't detract from the fact that: 1) She's incredibly popular as Wonder Woman 2) Is a legitimate rising star in roles outside of Wonder Woman (which, for instance, Chris Hemsworth has proven he is not).
  13. Gatsby77
    Next Friday (Dec. 16).
  14. Gatsby77
    ? I think Gal Gadot's as synonymous with Wonder Woman now as Chris Evans is with Captain America. Also - $20 million isn't out-of-line for her for Wonder Woman 3, considering I like pie was paid for both Wonder Woman 1984 and Red Notice. (Yes - I know the other two aren't direct comps because they don't have residuals) But the point remains the same. She was not only paid $20 mill. for her last outing as Wonder Woman, but for her last major non-Wonder Woman role as well.
  15. Gatsby77
    To be clear, I'd watch the mess out of a Hawk World HBO Max series.
  16. Gatsby77
    You're not wrong about The Rock getting dragged on his tweet about this. The top response notes that Captain America's $370 million in 2011 is equivalent to $490 million today. And then there's the ones like this:
  17. Gatsby77
    All of which misses the point. Such a detailed defense of "but it will make a profit eventually through lifetime streaming rentals and domestic & international licensing" wouldn't be necessary if the film had simply...performed in the theater. The very crux of "Methinks ye doth protest too much." It's also an admission that WB will lose money on the film *this year* as it depends on future licensing fees to eventually break even & turn this projected profit.
  18. Gatsby77
    ? Lifetime domestic Home Entertainment & Streaming is listed as $86 million, not $200 million.
  19. Gatsby77
    I believe this analysis, but @paperheart's not wrong. The chart clearly shows $390 million total worldwide box office gross vs. $318 million total costs. (Note: the stated total costs - circled by @Bosco685 - are wrong, as two sources - Variety and Deadline here, have stated P& A expenses of only $80 million, not $100 million). So here, total costs are: $195 mill. + $80 mill. + $43 mill. = $318 mill. The issue is the studio only recoups ~55% of the $390 in worldwide box office, which is $213.5 million. Let's be generous and say they actually recoup 65% of the global box office. That's still only $253.5 million in revenue vs. a $318 million cost. Plus, no one's disputing it might not *eventually* eke out a profit - but no way is it breaking even *theatrically," despite the anonymous studio exec quoted in yesterday's Variety piece claiming that $400 million theatrical was break-even because PVOD revenue would make up for it.
  20. Gatsby77
    Maybe by revenue ratio - but in the pre-press on Black Adam it was clear executives had Aquaman-level hopes for this movie. Again, Aquaman stands as the aspirational goal for DCEU films, as it solely cleared not only $900 million but pushed the envelope up beyond $1.1 billion.
  21. Gatsby77
    https://variety.com/2022/film/box-office/black-adam-box-office-100-million-loss-1235449487/ This is an interesting piece for a few reasons: States Black Adam's cost at $195 million Claims marketing budget was scaled back to $80 million due to lingering pandemic concerns Rather than traditional $600 million theatrical break-even, studio purportedly now claims break-even is just $400 million because of the "home entertainment landscape" - basically, it's expected to over-perform in the immediate post-theatrical on-demand/rental/etc. (where it's already available). I have a hard time believing even $450 million theatrical = break-even for this film. $500 million? Yes, but $450 million's stretching it. Seems a moot point, as I don't think this will hit even $400 million. But are we supposed to believe that studios now think just 2.0 production cost = break-even going forward because of changing viewing habits & shortened theatrical windows?
  22. Gatsby77
    Haha. Yeah - but not what I meant. Example - I've low-key been chasing a CGC 9.8 McFarlane Sig Series Hulk run (330-346) for years now. Think I only have 6 of them right now. They *always* go for far more than their non-sig counterparts. Incidentally, the hardest issue in that run is # 343 - only 2 in 9.8 sig series, and one of those is a Peter David, not McFarlane.
  23. Gatsby77
    I can help validate that argument with my recent eBay buy of a CGC 9.6 (White) Conan # 11. It was the single Signature Series, albeit signed by Roy Thomas, not BWS. Counting it, there are still less than 40 total copies in 9.6 or better - so it's among the hardest of the BWS Conan run to find in grade. GPA shows last two sales in CGC 9.6 blue as $1,681 and $1,600. I picked up this sig series copy for $407. Don't get me wrong - I was ecstactic for the purchase, but also confused - is a Roy Thomas signature considered more a defect than an asset?
  24. Gatsby77
    They directed episodes 1 and 6 (first and last). I like your idea for a Deathstroke-centered Batgirl film. And wouldn't mind if he - rather than the Joker - is the reason she ends up in a wheelchair. Would be refreshing to see a superhero film with real consequences - and I think it would take a lot of non-comic readers by surprise.
  25. Gatsby77
    CGC agrees with Overstreet - that Belit's first appearance was Giant-Size Conan # 1, although Wikipedia argues that's actually Valeria shown in Giant-Size # 1.