media_junkie

While I will not see this one (didn't like the first one, and I refuse to watch a movie that even has 1 second of Amber Turd) at least this movie does have Jason Momoa to help it. He seems like a charismatic character and a nice dude (unlike that Flash twit Ezra). So that will help it some, but no, much like "The Marvels" I see no way this movie rises to the same box office as the first one.

I mean Marvel Studios/Disney has to be looking at the early projections and realize they have a huge Turkey on their hands, right? Obviously they can't say they have a huge turkey on their hands, but I mean they don't have blinders on internally and think this is going to clear a billion like the first one, right?

Going to take a heck of a lot more than that for this older dude to go to this movie. I didn't care for the first Captain Marvel (so no draw to see Bree again). I personally think WandaVision ended on an extremely lame note (and honestly I thought Monica's role was forgettable, so no draw there). And Ms. Marvel was so far and away not for me I didn't watch it (and based on some of the articles, not many people watched it at all), so again no draw. . Who is the big baddie? If it is the female "Ronan the Accuser", ugh we already saw that villain once (as a dude). Is it Kang? Dude was beaten by a bunch of ants, who cares if there are more of him, just throw an ant farm at him, wham, you win. The director said this movie would be "Really whacky and silly compared to other Marvel movies", well that didn't work in Love and Blunder and it isn't what I personally am looking for. Marvel is (and has been) floundering and they haven't given this ticket buyer a reason to purchase a ticket for this movie.

That is the crazy thing, it is like they are throwing good money after bad. Say this year delay (which honestly I agree is for them to re-tool alot of the movie) doubles the cost of production and now you have a $450 million budget that needs to pull in $900 million just to break even. I think Disney has lost their mind with the diminishing returns of these live action remakes, but balloning budgets.

But why should the SAG get $.57 per subscriber from Disney (for example) when they (Disney) have not turned a single dollar in profit on their streaming services?

So was the SAG symbol patterned off "Saturday Night Fever"?

Studios Reportedly Willing To Push Actors Strike Negotiations To 2024 If No Deal Is Made Soon I mean, if as the article says and even if a deal is made but they (the studios) can't do anything for the rest of the year anyway, then why bother making a deal now?

Or they are telling the lady playing Snow White to zip it and hope all the bad press goes away.

After Love and Blunder I'm not really looking forward to a new Thor movie.

Well that looks creepy.

Doesn't have the *plum* slot of being slapped right in the middle of the two biggest movies of the MCU (with a direct lead in at the end of Infinity War).

I understand everyone has to start from somewhere, but no way in heck would I buy a "key" from someone that has never listed before.

I have no idea how an actor would make a living if they were paid on profitability, I mean based on Studio Math I'm pretty sure "Gone with the Wind" is still in the red (I know it isn't but you guys know what I mean about Studio Math).

No, that isn't what I was saying. If the people want to go out on strike, by all means go on strike to fight for your wages/benefits, however don't be surprised when all of a sudden when you get what you wanted a bunch of you are let go/laid off. The studio/corporation will not lose money, they will make it up either by getting rid of people or raising prices to the consumer.

I mean, is anyone surprised? Sure the studios "agree" to up wages/benefits/whatever, but did anyone actually think that the Studios would take that hit out of their pocket? Come on. The people that are extended are being paid for by the people they are letting go. That is how it was always going to be in any sector (not just movies).

MGM+? Is that yet another streaming sub service?

I get why he said it, toe the corporate line and help the movie gets butts in seats, but IMO that just destroys his credibility. In what universe is the Flash "one of the greatest movies ever made", heck it wasn't even a good movie. How can I as a fan believe in his "vision" for the DCU when he says junk like this?

I wasn't blaming ZS. I loved his 3 movies, Man of Steel, Batman v Superman (Ultimate Cute) and ZSJL. I just personally think superhero movies hit their peak with Avengers Endgame and are now on the down slope to fading out (not completely but way fewer being made than before). Add that to the fact that I and I am thinking others as well consider DC "damaged" goods at the box office. The last 7 movies have been, honestly box office poison or just outright crappy movies (Blue Beetle, Flash, Shazam 2, Black Adam, Suicide Squad, WW84, Birds of Prey).

I'm going out on an early limb and say not much better than Man of Steel (2013). $700 million +/-

I personally think it will not be any better than what went on before.

Does anyone think this movie will still get made?

Yeah I stopped watching and turned it off at the "splits".

I miss the early days of streaming Netflix where it seemed like every movie/show was on it and you only had to go to one place to watch. It is understandable why every studio wants their own platform now based on how well Netflix was doing then, but what they all seem to have forgotten is that one of the reasons Netflix did so well is they had all the content in one place.