Ken Aldred Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Oh man... That looks rubbish, fake, and reminds me of the dummy from 'The Corbomite Manuever' episode of Star Trek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzzetta Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Reed and Sue seem out of place in today`s modern world. The Human Torch can be replaced with the original android Jim Hammond from 1939. The Thing is probably the only one of the four that has any value left. So I think Marvel really only wants the FF back because the Silver Surfer, Doctor Doom and Galactus is where they will make their big money. Not only can the Torch be replaced... he already has. Just in case Marvel cannot use the name, "Human Torch" even by giving it to the Jim Hammond android as shown in an Easter Egg in Captain America: The First Avenger, they already have their back up plan. Have you seen the latest Inhumans? Dante - also known as Inferno of the Inhumans... I bought about five or six copies of FF45 years ago, I figured that Marvel would eventually do stuff like this if they did not have the rights to the characters that they wanted. I never thought it would go this far though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JazzMan Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 What's Stan Lee's cameo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzzetta Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Ok now here is the real big question... Is Kevin Feige ok? I am hoping that he did not laugh himself to death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 He's likely currently choking on a pretzel from his jaw dropping in amazement over how poor the movie is. Someone might want to call 911 just to be on-call Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paperheart Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 What's Stan Lee's cameo? He declined? that would have been quite a tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaybuck43 Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Correct. No Stan lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fantastic_four Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 What's Stan Lee's cameo? He declined? that would have been quite a tell. Fox hasn't used him in years. He wasn't in the last two X-Men films either, but supposedly he's already filmed his cameo for the next X-Men film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zosocane Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 (edited) Ok now here is the real big question... Is Kevin Feige ok? I am hoping that he did not laugh himself to death. Kevin Feige isn't laughing. He doesn't want anyone to remember he was an executive producer for the 2005 and 2007 Fantastic Four films, and co-produced Elektra. There is a certain amount of trial and error in getting super hero films right. By the way, FF now at 11% (Catwoman at 8% still in command for Worst Comic Book Movie of All Time). Ant-Man at 80%. Edited August 6, 2015 by zosocane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockMyAmadeus Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Mission-Impossible did $55MIL it's opening weekend with a big name star and tons of great reviews.... MI: 5 has a 93% rating on RT. We saw it last weekend and I think it might be the best of the franchise. It's a home run movie. And it looked it from the very 1st trailer. no offense but I think anything with Tom Cruise is likely to be a home run. The guy is box office gold Tom Cruise's domestic vs budget, last 4 movies... Edge of Tomorrow - $100MIL BUDGET: $178MIL (-$ 78MIL) Oblivion - $ 89MIL BUDGET: $120MIL (-$ 31MIL) Jack Reacher - $ 80MIL BUDGET: $ 60MIL +$ 20MIL Rock of Ages - $ 38MIL BUDGET: $ 75MIL (-$ 44MIL) That's a Domestic loss total of $133 MILLION over his last 4 movies.... Surprising.......especially because I saw 3 of those movies at the theater! Those films actually lost a lot more than that. Remember: theatres account for around 50% of the box office take. A film needs to essentially DOUBLE its budget just to break even. If the budget for Edge of Tomorrow was $178 Million, it needed to gross around $356 Million to break even. Worldwide, it grossed $369M, which means it *just barely* made a profit. More than double, which is why a 2.5X of budget is a safe bet. - Marketing expenses (not accounted for in the production budget) - Accounting for any creator or actor revenue share - Regional revenue share variances across foreign markets Yes, that's what "essentially" and "around" means. It's not meant to be a precise accounting. Every film varies. The "double production" concept is a rough estimate that Hollywood has used effectively for decades. Most profit sharing by talent comes when the film makes...ta da!...profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bronze_rules Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 FWIW, a non comic fan watched it (I couldn't make it) and found it very entertaining. I sounded like a negative curmudgeon with my 'I heard it was terrible,' commentary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gatsby77 Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Yeah, that's spot-on. I _love_ David Goyer, but he's come a long way from Kickboxer 2 & Demonic Toys. His first comic book flick? Nick Fury -- the David Hasselhoff TV movie. But in my mind he's redeemed himself by giving us the Blade trilogy (which helped spearhead this comic book movie renaissance) and the Nolan Batman trilogy. Man of Steel was flawed, but far better than Superman Returns. There's a certain amount of trial & error in getting superhero films right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco685 Posted August 6, 2015 Author Share Posted August 6, 2015 Mission-Impossible did $55MIL it's opening weekend with a big name star and tons of great reviews.... MI: 5 has a 93% rating on RT. We saw it last weekend and I think it might be the best of the franchise. It's a home run movie. And it looked it from the very 1st trailer. no offense but I think anything with Tom Cruise is likely to be a home run. The guy is box office gold Tom Cruise's domestic vs budget, last 4 movies... Edge of Tomorrow - $100MIL BUDGET: $178MIL (-$ 78MIL) Oblivion - $ 89MIL BUDGET: $120MIL (-$ 31MIL) Jack Reacher - $ 80MIL BUDGET: $ 60MIL +$ 20MIL Rock of Ages - $ 38MIL BUDGET: $ 75MIL (-$ 44MIL) That's a Domestic loss total of $133 MILLION over his last 4 movies.... Surprising.......especially because I saw 3 of those movies at the theater! Those films actually lost a lot more than that. Remember: theatres account for around 50% of the box office take. A film needs to essentially DOUBLE its budget just to break even. If the budget for Edge of Tomorrow was $178 Million, it needed to gross around $356 Million to break even. Worldwide, it grossed $369M, which means it *just barely* made a profit. More than double, which is why a 2.5X of budget is a safe bet. - Marketing expenses (not accounted for in the production budget) - Accounting for any creator or actor revenue share - Regional revenue share variances across foreign markets Yes, that's what "essentially" and "around" means. It's not meant to be a precise accounting. Every film varies. The "double production" concept is a rough estimate that Hollywood has used effectively for decades. Most profit sharing by talent comes when the film makes...ta da!...profit. Amazing Spider-Man 2 did 2.3X budget. So by a 2X assmption, this thing was a hit movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Mission-Impossible did $55MIL it's opening weekend with a big name star and tons of great reviews.... MI: 5 has a 93% rating on RT. We saw it last weekend and I think it might be the best of the franchise. It's a home run movie. And it looked it from the very 1st trailer. no offense but I think anything with Tom Cruise is likely to be a home run. The guy is box office gold Tom Cruise's domestic vs budget, last 4 movies... Edge of Tomorrow - $100MIL BUDGET: $178MIL (-$ 78MIL) Oblivion - $ 89MIL BUDGET: $120MIL (-$ 31MIL) Jack Reacher - $ 80MIL BUDGET: $ 60MIL +$ 20MIL Rock of Ages - $ 38MIL BUDGET: $ 75MIL (-$ 44MIL) That's a Domestic loss total of $133 MILLION over his last 4 movies.... Surprising.......especially because I saw 3 of those movies at the theater! Those films actually lost a lot more than that. Remember: theatres account for around 50% of the box office take. A film needs to essentially DOUBLE its budget just to break even. If the budget for Edge of Tomorrow was $178 Million, it needed to gross around $356 Million to break even. Worldwide, it grossed $369M, which means it *just barely* made a profit. More than double, which is why a 2.5X of budget is a safe bet. - Marketing expenses (not accounted for in the production budget) - Accounting for any creator or actor revenue share - Regional revenue share variances across foreign markets Yes, that's what "essentially" and "around" means. It's not meant to be a precise accounting. Every film varies. The "double production" concept is a rough estimate that Hollywood has used effectively for decades. Most profit sharing by talent comes when the film makes...ta da!...profit. Amazing Spider-Man 2 did 2.3X budget. So by a 2X assmption, this thing was a hit movie. Probably not the best example as that was a guesstimated budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paperheart Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 (edited) Mission-Impossible did $55MIL it's opening weekend with a big name star and tons of great reviews.... MI: 5 has a 93% rating on RT. We saw it last weekend and I think it might be the best of the franchise. It's a home run movie. And it looked it from the very 1st trailer. no offense but I think anything with Tom Cruise is likely to be a home run. The guy is box office gold Tom Cruise's domestic vs budget, last 4 movies... Edge of Tomorrow - $100MIL BUDGET: $178MIL (-$ 78MIL) Oblivion - $ 89MIL BUDGET: $120MIL (-$ 31MIL) Jack Reacher - $ 80MIL BUDGET: $ 60MIL +$ 20MIL Rock of Ages - $ 38MIL BUDGET: $ 75MIL (-$ 44MIL) That's a Domestic loss total of $133 MILLION over his last 4 movies.... Surprising.......especially because I saw 3 of those movies at the theater! Those films actually lost a lot more than that. Remember: theatres account for around 50% of the box office take. A film needs to essentially DOUBLE its budget just to break even. If the budget for Edge of Tomorrow was $178 Million, it needed to gross around $356 Million to break even. Worldwide, it grossed $369M, which means it *just barely* made a profit. More than double, which is why a 2.5X of budget is a safe bet. - Marketing expenses (not accounted for in the production budget) - Accounting for any creator or actor revenue share - Regional revenue share variances across foreign markets Yes, that's what "essentially" and "around" means. It's not meant to be a precise accounting. Every film varies. The "double production" concept is a rough estimate that Hollywood has used effectively for decades. Most profit sharing by talent comes when the film makes...ta da!...profit. Amazing Spider-Man 2 did 2.3X budget. So by a 2X assmption, this thing was a hit movie. Probably not the best example as that was a guesstimated budget. and if you look at the detailed analysis deadline.com did, this movie was shockingly profitable: Calculating in all expenses, Deadline.com estimated that the film made a profit of $70.38 million.[109] Edited August 6, 2015 by paperheart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzzetta Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Rotten Tomatoes' Top Critics have it at 6% Others have it at 9% Will it go lower? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLiamSturgess Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 I can't help but wonder if a few of these critics are going so low for fear of criticism for rating it in the middle territory. I've seen a couple of critics say it's still worth watching. Still, I am actually second-guessing if I want to pay $25 for ticket and popcorn to see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogami Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Happy birthday, Chuck! For your birthday, I got you the right to voice your opinion of this film in this thread. (Even though everyone else has enjoyed the same privilege unmolested) Anyway, hope you like it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gadzukes Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 (edited) I actually went to Facebook and posted to my friends to NOT go to this movie. Let's try to have it fail bad enough that Fox will sell the rights back to Marvel. Many responded to me that even though they know it'll probably be bad, they want to go anyway. Edited August 6, 2015 by gadzukes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunsicker Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 At this point my expectations for this movie have been set so low that the movie can't help but surprise to the upside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
