-
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.
Jaydogrules
-
Posts
11,543 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
CGC Journals
Gallery
Events
Store
Posts posted by Jaydogrules
-
-
On 10/22/2022 at 9:12 AM, Bosco685 said:
But have you researched Gail Simone yet? Inquiring minds want to know.
I have !
Props to her and thanks for keying me in on her.
-J.
-
Who cares about critic or audience scores?
Let's talk about the money.
Even if this gets to $65MM for the weekend, that's still less than half what batman made , on the same budget, and only $10MM more than what Shazam made 3 years ago on half the budget which didn't have "The Rock" in it.
These certainly are "flop" numbers in the making.
-J.
-
Looks like a RAW copy of the Wolverine 1 Campbell Wolverine dressed in deadpool's costume variant just popped for $8,000 on ebay.
I think only a raw copy of the 667 Dell'otto at $8500 a few years back exceeds that for a modern variant raw.
-J.
-
On 10/21/2022 at 5:10 PM, Larryw7 said:
The changes to Subby, plus not recasting Black Panther, makes this a "wait for Blu-ray" movie for me.
Yup.
They'll bury T'challa (at least for now in this dumb movie) but they'll recast red hulk for a thunderbolts movie because we all know how important and historic that character is.
Funny, I just dont see that ending well for marvel.
-J.
- thegiftedone45 and Larryw7
-
1
-
1
-
On 10/19/2022 at 1:56 PM, Timeless icons said:
Fresh Pickup
Outstanding book !
@ArchaeosLookong good in the slabs. The big #10 got a 9.8. Nice !
-J.
-
On 10/21/2022 at 12:42 PM, Dr. Balls said:
I think there’s going to be a big misfire on WF. The marketing is extremely disjointed, all over the place and lacks any sort of coherence. I don’t know if that’s a reflection of the film, but it’s not generally a good thing when $100M (guessing) in marketing can’t convey the general premise concisely.
It seems very much like a DC movie: too many differing ideas, visuals, expressions and overwrought points they are going to try to wedge into one film. It looks completely different from Black Panther, which was an amazingly balanced movie.
That's what happens when you make a pointless movie with no stars, and no characters people know and/or care about.
-J.
-
On 10/21/2022 at 8:29 AM, paperheart said:
BTW, the $9.2M Shazam total included $3.3M from prior Sat screening so it's not a fair comp IMO.
Wait what ?
This was originally supposedly tracking for $75MM+, now it "might" get to only $50MM??
-J.
-
On 10/21/2022 at 1:00 PM, jsilverjanet said:
I love it when reviews only matter when it comes to negative DC movies but they don't matter when it's about a Marvel movie
huzzah!
I don't know, people pretty much ripped Thor and Dr. Strange and most people were generally positive about Batman.
I personally disliked all three for different reasons and have now decided that I'm not even going to bother with Black Adam.
-J.
-
On 10/21/2022 at 4:16 AM, Bosco685 said:
I see.
So it basically was exactly what it sounded like
- a "review" penned by a WB executive.
Well thank you for the info on her at least.
-J.
-
On 10/21/2022 at 3:34 AM, Bosco685 said:
Gail Simone review
I don't know who this person is , but her review sounds like it was written by a desperate WB exec.
-J.
-
On 10/20/2022 at 3:37 PM, paperheart said:
And to think, this screened as about as well as the canceled, $90MM Batgirl.
I assume they just didn't want to pizz away any more money on that one after the ~$350MM production P&A they pizzed away on this one.
I still have no idea why this was ever made, and why for God's sake for so much money.
-J.
-
All I want to know is , has Scott mendelson at forbes loved it yet ?
Has Luiz on Twitter posted a meme of dollar bills falling all over Dwayne Johnson yet ?
Haa deadline blamed "covid" or streaming yet?
-J.
-
Unfortunately this show , like many others recently of a certain ilk, attempted to excuse its bottom feeding writing and overall "quality" by blaming the viewers/fans for not liking it and literally turning them (and kevin feige, ie, "the man") into the villain in the end.
And they're actually talking about a season 2?
If they're not replacing the cadre of vapid, unqualified, juvenile neurotics at every level of this failed, misguided production, don't bother.
-J.
- PovertyRow, jcjames and MR SigS
-
2
-
1
-
On 10/13/2022 at 2:21 PM, eastriver400 said:
That was also my first instinct. But watching fans react to the Rock and realizing just how many followers he has worldwide has me thinking otherwise.
Also, so far it looks good. Like REALLY good.
Look at Peacemaker. Relatively unknown character. But John Cena is in the main role so John Cena fans tune in. Show turns out to be great. Word of mouth makes it hit (even here on the boards). I have a feeling this "Peacemaker effect" just might happen again with Black Adam.
Just like Peacemaker, Black Adam is a relatively unknown character but this time the Rock is the main draw. If it turns out to be as good as it looks so far then again..... word of mouth and BINGO, a hit!
Who knows really, but if it is as good as it looks, 750+ isn't that far fetched.
How is it not far fetched? When Shazam, the movie that this has inexplicably been spun off of, only made about 365mm? When no Dwayne movie, outside of Fast and Furious movies has made anywhere near that? And those all had huge China dates (which this is not likely to get , or any Russia)? When batman, a character everybody knows , just barely made that? When Thor, a MARVEL character that everybody knows about, just barely made that ?
@marmat Here's what it's based on - 700mm (
) minus 200mm for no China or Russia, minus 50mm because nobody knows who Black Adam is, minus 50mm because DC movies pretty much always under perform, if not outright flop = $400mm. But I'll give it a 100m buffer because it has little to no competition for the first few weeks of its existence, so 400-500mm. Maybe.
-J.
-
On 10/13/2022 at 11:18 AM, eastriver400 said:
Based mostly on how much and how well the Rock is promoting the movie.
This has absolutely no chance of hitting 700mm regardless of how much promotion Dwayne does.
More realistically, 400-500mm, maybe.
-J.
- Larryw7 and theCapraAegagrus
-
2
-
On 10/13/2022 at 8:20 AM, eastriver400 said:
Not too long ago, I would have thought 750 is a bit too enthusiastic. Now I believe its a real possibility.
Based on what?
-J.
-
Batman 608RRP joins the $10k+ club, a very exclusive club indeed for modern variants.
And in another news, a freshly graded Dell'otto 667 9.8 is coming up in thr next comiclink signature auction in a month or so:
-J.
-
On 10/9/2022 at 6:20 PM, D84 said:
My problem was the random people being killed for each part of the box that was solved. In the previous movies, only people who deserved it were killed.
Oh yeah, and the ending was lame.
I really wanted to like this one.
Oh well, Werewolf by Night was good.
They not only deserved it they WANTED it. That was one of the rules - you had to be a willing and knowing participant in the "game".
They definitely changed up the mythology on that one, to the movie's detriment.
-J.
- D84 and Xenosmilus
-
2
-
This wasn't that great.
It was 30 minutes too long, surprisingly bloodless, and nowhere near gory enough.
Yes, it is better than the last 3 or 4 hellraiser movies , but that isn't a very high bar.
Sure, if you've never seen a hellraiser before or haven't seen most or all of them, you might think this is decent horror.
But if you have seen most or all you will easily spot many of the familiar plot tropes and ideas that the series has already done. Lots was taken from hellbound for example, as well as from hellseeker, and hell on earth. there was even some 13 ghosts vibe mixed in. The "new" pinhead was nothing to speak of beyond him (it) being played by a female this time, you may not have ever known that if they didn't tell us. Pinhead has always been quasi-androgynous, the deep voice notwithstanding. I found the make up effects disappointing, kind of rubbery and fake latex looking, and a step down from the practical effects from the earlier movies.
All in all, much like the other recent 80s movie franchise reboot, Prey I put this in the bottom half of the series. All of the first four hellraiser movies are better than this , even hellseeker and Inferno are better than this.
-J.
- Dr. Balls and conan09279
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 9/27/2022 at 7:22 AM, thegiftedone45 said:
3 hours wow...
Ugh.
I suppose the latest line of thinking in Feige's office now is- "If you liked Batman at 3 hours, you'll absolutely LOVE three hours of nothing but superfluous comic relief and side characters that nobody cares about".
This is one pointless, misguided , shameless, blatant money grab of a movie that I am actively hoping flops.
#notchallanoticket
-J.
- thegiftedone45, kimik and Larryw7
-
2
-
1
-
So I found it to be more of a rehash than anything, and the main plot line rather generic and pedestrian. I also thought they spent way too much time on the support staff in the present, one of the main appeals of the original is that we never really knew what the present that Sam Beckett came from looked like and we saw virtually nothing of the staff. That made us identify with exclusively with Sam and his plight and his friendship with Al.
But then I got the last two minutes and that definitely pulled me in. The
decision to bring in Al's daughter
was an inspired way to bridge the two shows and certainly leaves the door open to
trying to look for Sam again as well and brining back Scott Bakula, at least for a guest appearance here and there
which I'm sure he will do if the show can survive the rather disappointing ratings that it premiered with.
The Al's daughter connection is especially awesome in that she only exists because of Sam's final selfless act for his friend in the last episode of the original series. Good stuff there.
I'll definitely stick around for the ride for now.
Also, the Dean Stockwell title card at the end gave me a little lump on my throat.
-J.
-
Unfortunately, looks like Scott Bakula was offered the role, received a --script, and then passed.
They ultimately had to rewrite it to remove Sam from the storyline.
Bummer.
Maybe Scott just didn't think it would be right to do it without Dean....
-J.
-
On 9/14/2022 at 2:50 PM, Bosco685 said:
I am so glad years ago when I saw you weaponizing box office results for your narrative I learned to do my own detailed analysis. Thank you!
You do realize when we compare the first 6 movies between the two franchises, the DCEU comes out on top - right? WB Studios executives were just too goofy to pick up on that.
I know. I know. "But the MCU came out earlier and had to fight to gain attention comic book movies were a serious business." I gotcha covered. 41 earlier movies - including the Blade, X-Men and Spider-Man franchises laid solid groundwork. And right before Iron Man we had The Dark Knight to kick off 2008.
Your budget for aquaman is still wrong- it was 200MM, not 160MM- thus negating your entire point.
But even with the wrong budget for aquaman, warner spent an average of about 45MM more per movie, to reach a comparable result as Disney, while Disney was trotting out what were, at the time, B and C list characters (Thor and Iron Man), and Warner was using its most famous and recognizable right out the gate (Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman).
Hence, why Warner felt the need to course correct.
Granted, things only got worse after the course correction (Birds of Prey, flop, WW 84, flop, The suicide squad, flop).
-J.
- a "review" penned by a WB executive.
BLACK ADAM starring Dwayne Johnson (TBD)
in The Movie Forum
Posted
Anything can appear "successful" if you put a half dozen qualifiers on it.
Taken as is , given Dwayne's alleged star power and all the raving fan reviews, relative to what it cost, this is a pretty terrible result.
-J.