SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING starring Tom Holland (7/28/17) 3 3

[Prince Namor]

4 hours ago, Drummy said:

My limited take on this issue is that, while I think the film is well-made with a fine lead (3/4 stars for me), it suffers from the following in terms of overall box office:

1.  It's not really new material despite Marvel's efforts.  It doesn't have the anticipation of the Raimi films, and lots of kids have already seen Spider-Man in the theater in the recent past.  The novelty factor, even with Tom Holland, isn't in play as much as Marvel hoped.

Then why did it have the 5th biggest July opening in history? Clearly people DID want to see it. The 5th biggest July opening in HISTORY.

4 hours ago, Drummy said:

2.  It has a lot of competition this summer -- there are many excellent (or at least fun family) films out right now -- I've seen three in the past 10 days (Baby Driver, The Big Sick, and Dunkirk) that were all worth seeing in the theater.  Its legs would have been better without all these options.

As I showed above, the other 4 biggest openings movies in July all had very stiff competition. They continued to perform above expectations and made well over $300 Million domestically.

4 hours ago, Drummy said:

3.  The movie starts really early in Peter Parker's 'career', so there's no nostalgic fan service in play.  No Bugle, no JJJ, no MJ/Gwen problems, no origin story (already done twice), no Green Goblin, etc.  My guess is that the sequel will have a lot more 'traditional' SM stuff that people enjoy from our generation's youth.

So... word of mouth of people who have seen it are not as nostalgic about it? I'd agree with that. I think that's my point all along.

The movie doesn't have legs - because even though people don't hate, in fact they kind of like it - they don't like it enough to see it a second time/tell friends they HAVE to see it now. Word of mouth is 'meh'.

4 hours ago, Drummy said:

I'd say financially it's a disappointment, but only compared with some of the high fliers from the past 5 years or so.  Marvel Studios won't be thrilled with the box office, but I also think they feel they made a really good movie to build on.  Their casting in particular continues to be outstanding.

Dan

Financially it's NOT a disappointment, but in terms of expectations, I think it very much IS. It made it's money... it's just not 'Batman' numbers. Which let's face it - 'Batman' numbers is what Spider-man should be doing.

[Drummy]

Hey Chuck!

Not trying to argue against any of your ideas you presented earlier; my three points taken together were meant to suggest that while people did want to see it, it didn't have the expected legs due to those three dynamics.  I agree word of mouth is probably along the lines of, "Yeah, it was really fun.  Holland is great. See it if you can." rather than something like the first Avengers had('It's so freaking amazing, you HAVE to see it!  I'm going again this weekend.').

And my disappointment comment was very much in line with yours -- a disappointment only in comparison to what I'm sure Marvel was hoping for from its flagship character in the mid-summer.

Dan

[Prince Namor]

2 minutes ago, Drummy said:

Hey Chuck!

Not trying to argue against any of your ideas you presented earlier; my three points taken together were meant to suggest that while people did want to see it, it didn't have the expected legs due to those three dynamics.  I agree word of mouth is probably along the lines of, "Yeah, it was really fun.  Holland is great. See it if you can." rather than something like the first Avengers had('It's so freaking amazing, you HAVE to see it!  I'm going again this weekend.').

And my disappointment comment was very much in line with yours -- a disappointment only in comparison to what I'm sure Marvel was hoping for from its flagship character in the mid-summer.

Dan

Yep.... when people ask me, I generally say, "It was fun...it's not Spider-man 2 or anything, but it was ok."

[reddwarf666222]

12 hours ago, Drummy said:

Hey Chuck!

Not trying to argue against any of your ideas you presented earlier; my three points taken together were meant to suggest that while people did want to see it, it didn't have the expected legs due to those three dynamics.  I agree word of mouth is probably along the lines of, "Yeah, it was really fun.  Holland is great. See it if you can." rather than something like the first Avengers had('It's so freaking amazing, you HAVE to see it!  I'm going again this weekend.').

And my disappointment comment was very much in line with yours -- a disappointment only in comparison to what I'm sure Marvel was hoping for from its flagship character in the mid-summer.

Dan

He is hoping for Batman numbers on what is essentially a teenager film. This film does not translate well for an adult audience. It's essentially throwing Spidey into American Pie. The film is performing great considering the bump it got from joining the MCU which is why it is doing better than the last few films, but at the same time underperforming because of the mediocrity of the last Spider-Man film. Quite honestly we could of made a SuperPro film in the MCU and got good returns at the box office. I got asked what this film was by coworkers and all I said was the film was great throw Anthony Michael Hall into a Spidey suit, imagine John Hughes directing the film in a Ferris Bueller style, and a great 80s soundtrack. The film was a fresh take on Spidey and appreciated

[Artboy99]

On ‎7‎/‎24‎/‎2017 at 6:37 PM, ComicConnoisseur said:

I think price has a lot to do with it as well. It cost me $50 to see Spider-Man Homecoming. 

I think people think they can get a better deal just watching the movies at home on their big screen tvs with Netflix or Amazon Prime.

It is the same thing with sporting events as when I go see the Red Sox or Patriots play we are talking a minimum of me ponying up $500 for the game,while I could watch them on my big screen and order out for chicken wings and pizza at a much better price.

So I spent $50 to see Spider-Man makes me think next time just order on demand for $5.99 on Comcast.

I think I am not the only that feels this way about blockbuster movies and sporting events now.

You get a better deal staying at home.

Staying at home is more comfortable as well. I find the seats at theaters are uncomfortable after awhile.

At home I don't have to deal with obnoxious other people who wear to much cologne/ perfume (which causes some breathing issues for me), aholes that check their cellphone during the film, talk loudly, get up far to frequently, etc.

 

[fantastic_four]

4 hours ago, reddwarf666222 said:

It's essentially throwing Spidey into American Pie.

Now I feel ripped off that I didn't get to see Peter humping a pie.  

[media_junkie]

1 hour ago, fantastic_four said:

Now I feel ripped off that I didn't get to see Peter humping a pie.  

You must have left before all the credits were done.

[Bosco685]

[Real Frantic One]

Considering what was done with Spidey in this movie with the techno suit, I am curious to see what Marvel will do with Iron Man when RDJ leaves the role. Will they have him get burned by a radioactive iron and become a super laundryman? Only time will tell.

[Bosco685]

Two large markets still remaining.

Remaining Release Schedule:

- Japan: 7 August 2017(Tokyo) (premiere)

- Japan: 11 August 2017

- China: August 2017 (??)

--------------------------------

China:

- Amazing Spider-Man: $48,818,164

- Amazing Spider-Man 2: $94,430,000

Japan:

- Amazing Spider-Man: $39,276,607

- Amazing Spider-Man 2: $30,253,480

--------------------------------

These two countries alone should rocket Homecoming well over $700MM. And more. Although, again, the black market impact on China due to the far-out potential date is a threat.

Edited July 30, 2017 by Bosco685

[chrisco37]

Just got back from seeing the movie.  I thought it was great.  Lots of fun.  It was clever how they tied it into the MU proper.  I thought they kept to the spirit of the old material (yeah, there were some changes, but I can accept them as they're trying to intro him to the big picture).

Only complaint would be a little too video-gamey with some of the web-slinging.

My 9-yr old daughter loved it. My non-comic fan wife loved it.  I don't think they made the movie for the"fanboy".    They made it to try and create new fanboys.  

Wonderful movie.  I just loved it.  

[Gatsby77]

I've said it before, but this was the kind of fresh start and fresh take Spider-Man needed.

Biggest strike against it is they didn't wait to release it three years from now, when general audiences could have forgotten more of the last two movies and be more primed for a re-boot.

This film has already surpassed the last two films domestically and will finish comparably worldwide.

But it had to overcome negative vibes from three lousy Spider-Man films in a row.

This was a great start to a new chapter. And one that history will treat kindly.

Now if only we could get the powers-that-be to wait at least another 8 years before even attempting a 5th FF movie...

[NewEnglandGothic]

On ‎7‎/‎27‎/‎2017 at 10:27 AM, Artboy99 said:

Staying at home is more comfortable as well. I find the seats at theaters are uncomfortable after awhile.

At home I don't have to deal with obnoxious other people who wear to much cologne/ perfume (which causes some breathing issues for me), aholes that check their cellphone during the film, talk loudly, get up far to frequently, etc.

 

Don't forget the "narrators."

These are the stalwart folks who try to impress their friends with spewing off random Wikipedia or film continuity dribble before and after the movie. They mean well as the constantly mix up "Arrow" with "Hawkeye" and call "Black Widow" Scarjo. It's always best to move as soon as you see one of these folks as they will inform their friend/family/date who is good and who is bad throughout the movie. If they are alone and engage in a half- history discussion from 2008's "Iron Man," it's best not to make further eye-contact and move your seating.

I knew once continuities were starting to be established in these films (DC and Marvel,) the narrators would rise.  

[Straw-Man]

3 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

Two large markets still remaining.

Remaining Release Schedule:

- Japan: 7 August 2017(Tokyo) (premiere)

- Japan: 11 August 2017

- China: August 2017 (??)

--------------------------------

China:

- Amazing Spider-Man: $48,818,164

- Amazing Spider-Man 2: $94,430,000

Japan:

- Amazing Spider-Man: $39,276,607

- Amazing Spider-Man 2: $30,253,480

--------------------------------

These two countries alone should rocket Homecoming well over $700MM. And more. Although, again, the black market impact on China due to the far-out potential date is a threat.

 

holding pretty well now.  looks like it'll slip past 300MM; should be around 290 this time next week, and i'm sure it can dribble out another 10MM over the rest of the run,

[ComicConnoisseur]

1 hour ago, Straw-Man said:

 

holding pretty well now.  looks like it'll slip past 300MM; should be around 290 this time next week, and i'm sure it can dribble out another 10MM over the rest of the run,

Solid hit.  Would expect the sequel to do better at the box office now that word a mouth is out that this was a decent movie. 

[drotto]

2 hours ago, ComicConnoisseur said:

Solid hit.  Would expect the sequel to do better at the box office now that word a mouth is out that this was a decent movie. 

I liked the movie much more than I expected.  I thought everything ws well done except for one thing......

 

Spoiler

MJ in the movie was terrible.  I have no issue them casting a non type actress to play the role.  That was not my issue. But everything else about the charater from the name change, to the way she acted was terrible.  MJ has always been the nice popular girl that is able to see through the insecurities and akwardness of Peter to see the person benieth.  Basically the nerd gets the popular girl.  Why did they change her into a boarderline unlikeable, outcast, snarky, SJW?

 

[fantastic_four]

9 hours ago, drotto said:

MJ in the movie was terrible.  I have no issue them casting a non type actress to play the role.  That was not my issue. But everything else about the charater from the name change, to the way she acted was terrible.  MJ has always been the nice popular girl that is able to see through the insecurities and akwardness of Peter to see the person benieth.  Basically the nerd gets the popular girl.  Why did they change her into a boarderline unlikeable, outcast, snarky, SJW?

You're in luck because Mary Jane wasn't in the movie.  Zendaya was another character.

[AnthonyTheAbyss]

2 hours ago, fantastic_four said:

You're in luck because Mary Jane wasn't in the movie.  Zendaya was another character.

Yeah, they really messed up that "joke".

They could fix it in the next Spider-man movie and bring in Michael Jordan.  Have Zendaya get an autograph and say "I'm your biggest fan".

[Vorpal]

Saw the movie with my wife and son yesterday, and we had a great time! It was just a fun movie.

 

I really appreciated the smaller scale of the film as well as its heart. They did a good job making Peter's teen struggles feel real, and Keaton's Vulture made for a great semi-sympathetic villain. Zendaya's character was great; I hope that she actually turns out to be the new MJ! The comic book version of Mary Jane has been done, and it's tired. Besides, gimme a snarky nerd-girl any day of the week   My wife even enjoyed it, and she's admittedly sick of superhero movies (didn't even see Civil War). Overall, time and money well-spent.

Edited July 31, 2017 by Vorpal

[drotto]

6 hours ago, fantastic_four said:

You're in luck because Mary Jane wasn't in the movie.  Zendaya was another character.

Except at the end she has a line during the academic club meating where they name her the new leader of the team, and I am paraphrasing somewhat.  My name is Michelle but my friend's call me MJ. I clearly heard the line, and my wife did also. So even if she is a new character the writers seem to be replacing the traditional MJ with this new character.  You can't use those initials in the Marvel Universe without poeple having that thought.