MCU's THE ETERNALS (11/6/20) 8 8

[paperheart]

On 11/13/2021 at 2:10 PM, Finhead said:

Slightly? Mid October they predicted $82-102 Million and if fell bellow the first 2 movies of Phase Bore. 

[drotto]

On 11/13/2021 at 5:27 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

Yes. I remember it. Do you? The reaction to the idea of a remake of Ghostbusters with all women was horror and near universal anger. I believe it was the first movie to get widely attacked the way Last Jedi and Captain Marvel would get attacked a few years later. Leslie Jones got death threats. There was a near nationwide boycott of the movie. The actual reviews of the movie weren't bad. I saw the movie in theaters with some kids. I, and they, actually enjoyed it for what it was, a dumb action comedy.

wildly_fanciful_statement.  A few insane people do not make up a majority of the movie going public.  People go and see good movies, they are not widely swayed be a few meaningless, faceless insufficiently_thoughtful_persons on the internet. I could start listing dozens of movies or shows that stared women, or had primarily females casts that are loved by the general public. By your logic, no female led property EVER has been successful because male trolls will not allow it. This argument has been rebutted so many times as to be ridiculous. All the films you list are just not very good.  You may love them, and there are a fair number of people that also like them, but they were not embraced by the general public. If they were better movies, maybe they would have been.

Edited November 13, 2021 by drotto

[@therealsilvermane]

On 11/13/2021 at 5:37 PM, drotto said:

wildly_fanciful_statement.  A few insane people do not make up a majority of the movie going public.  People go and see good movies, they are not widely swayed be a few meaningless, faceless insufficiently_thoughtful_persons on the internet. I could start listing dozens of movies or shows that stared women, or had primarily females casts that are loved by the general public. By your logic, no female led property EVER has been successful because male trolls will not allow it. This argument has been rebutted so many times as to be ridiculous. All the films you list are just not very good.  You may love them, and there are a fair number of people that also like them, but they were not embraced by the general public.

"wild fanciful statement"? You obviously don't remember the news making internet attack on the 2016 Ghostbusters movie, before the movie arrived in theaters, and the racist attacks against Leslie Jones on social media. 

[Gatsby77]

On 11/13/2021 at 5:19 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

And at least in the lady remake, we see the Ghostbusters actually bust ghosts(plural) unlike the first movie where we see them bust one ghost, Slimer, and the rest being a "Ghostbusters" song music montage where we never see them bust a ghost until the finale with Gozer and the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man.

Did..:did you just malign the original Ghostbusters?

It’s hard to explain how big that film was if you don’t remember it.

- $229M domestic (in 1984 dollars)

- # 1 movie of the year

- # 1 for 7 straight weeks

I went away for a month, came back and it was still # 1 - and playing everywhere.

Edited November 13, 2021 by Gatsby77

[Larryw7]

I have to question someone's taste if they think that the remake of Ghostbusters is better than the briliant and hilarious 1984 classic.

[@therealsilvermane]

On 11/13/2021 at 5:10 PM, Finhead said:

Slightly? Mid October they predicted $82-102 Million and if fell bellow the first 2 movies of Phase Bore. 

That was the long range forecast from Box Office Pro. Box Office Pro also long range forecasted Shang Chi to make between $35-55 million. It doesn't mean Eternals is a box office bomb and Shang Chi a magic trick. 

In the days before Eternals' actual release, Hollywood Reporter said the forecast had lowered to $67-69 million because of the mixed reviews. So Eternals' weekend box office actually beat some expectations or was at the low end of expectations after the review embargo lifted.

Edited November 13, 2021 by @therealsilvermane

[drotto]

On 11/13/2021 at 5:41 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

"wild fanciful statement"? You obviously don't remember the news making internet attack on the 2016 Ghostbusters movie, before the movie arrived in theaters, and the racist attacks against Leslie Jones on social media. 

Again a very small group of people.  You are attempting to generalize it to everyone that did not like or want to see the movie. If someone did not like that film your response is they are an  ......ist of some type. You never acknowledge people may have legitimate reasons for not liking it that are personal. I can accept you like films I do not, you should have the curtesy to accept my tastes and other people's tastes are different, without there being some sort of awful motivation. I grantee, the attack on Leslie Jones was by one or a very small group of people.  Are those awful, hateful people that powerful, and well know they can take down a movie with a multi billion dollar marketing machine behind it down? I highly doubt it. That attack did not take down GB 2016. 

 

I also think you greatly over estimate the importance of what happens on the internet.  Does the average movie patron read forums or follow movie news like we do?  I highly doubt it.  The average person has now clue what a small group of frankly awful people do on the internet.  They make decisions based on a few trusted critics, word of mouth, and their own inclinations. 

[Finhead]

On 11/13/2021 at 3:50 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

That was the long range forecast from Box Office Pro. Box Office Pro also long range forecasted Shang Chi to make between $35-55 million. It doesn't mean Eternals is a box office bomb and Shang Chi a magic trick. 

In the days before Eternals' actual release, Hollywood Reporter said the forecast had lowered to $67-69 million because of the mixed reviews. So Eternals actually beat some expectations or was at the low end of expectations after the review embargo lifted.

Whatever fits the narrative.

[Bosco685]

On 11/13/2021 at 5:50 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

That was the long range forecast from Box Office Pro. Box Office Pro also long range forecasted Shang Chi to make between $35-55 million. It doesn't mean Eternals is a box office bomb and Shang Chi a magic trick. 

In the days before Eternals' actual release, Hollywood Reporter said the forecast had lowered to $67-69 million because of the mixed reviews. So Eternals actually beat some expectations or was at the low end of expectations after the review embargo lifted.

You must be a junior Hollywood statistician now as you sure know how to bend facts to fit your narrative 'while thoroughly researching'.

[@therealsilvermane]

On 11/13/2021 at 5:50 PM, Larryw7 said:

I have to question someone's taste if they think that the remake of Ghostbusters is better than the briliant and hilarious 1984 classic.

I didn't say the remake was better. 1984 Ghostbusters is an obvious classic. I just said, in comparison, the lady Ghostbusters actually do on-screen ghost busting which we don't really see in the first movie after the scene with their first job where they bust Slimer.

Not taking away from the 1984 classic, the fact that we see the 2016 Ghostbusters crew actually do a substantial amount of ghostbusting on screen is a plus for the remake.

Edited November 13, 2021 by @therealsilvermane

[Larryw7]

Have you ever heard of Crimebusters? They were stopping crime, not busting criminals open.

 

[drotto]

On 11/13/2021 at 5:53 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

I didn't say the remake was better. 1984 Ghostbusters is an obvious classic. I just said, in comparison, the lady Ghostbusters actually do on-screen ghost busting which we don't really see in the first movie after the scene with their first job where they bust Slimer.

GB 1984 was constrained by the technology of its time.  The effects really do not hold up (BTW I love GB), and handling the ghost busting scenes was because they needed to work around the film making constraints of the time, and stay within budget.  The montage was a clever way of doing that. I argue, that older movies were better because they had to be creative about telling stories and finding creative solutions because they could not just fix it in post with CGI.  Hint, CGI can not fix sub standard writing, and has become a crutch of bad film making. 

Edited November 13, 2021 by drotto

[@therealsilvermane]

On 11/13/2021 at 5:52 PM, drotto said:

Again a very small group of people.  You are attempting to generalize it to everyone that did not like or want to see the movie. If someone did not like that film your response is they are an  ......ist of some type. You never acknowledge people may have legitimate reasons for not liking it that are personal. I can accept you like films I do not, you should have the curtesy to accept my tastes and other people's tastes are different, without there being some sort of awful motivation. I grantee, the attack on Leslie Jones was by one or a very small group of people.  Are those awful, hateful people that powerful, and well know they can take down a movie with a multi billion dollar marketing machine behind it down? I highly doubt it. That attack did not take down GB 2016. 

 

I also think you greatly over estimate the importance of what happens on the internet.  Does the average movie patron read forums or follow movie news like we do?  I highly doubt it.  The average person has now clue what a small group of frankly awful people do on the internet.  They make decisions based on a few trusted critics, word of mouth, and their own inclinations. 

It wasn't a small group of people. It became the narrative. Some of my own male friends were bad-mouthing the movie before it had released and some called me a traitor (in jest, obviously) after I saw the movie in theaters (yes, I'm a dude).

[Bosco685]

On 11/13/2021 at 5:59 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

It wasn't a small group of people. It became the narrative. Some of my own male friends were bad-mouthing the movie before it had released and some called me a traitor (in jest, obviously) after I saw the movie in theaters (yes, I'm a dude).

'gotta start riffing with the hate groups'

[drotto]

On 11/13/2021 at 5:59 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

It wasn't a small group of people. It became the narrative. Some of my own male friends were bad-mouthing the movie before it had released and some called me a traitor (in jest, obviously) after I saw the movie in theaters (yes, I'm a dude).

Then I question your choice of friends, if they would listen to stuff like that. Again, it did not become the narrative, when the media pushed back very hard against those people, in fact almost everyone denounced that behavior.  Does the fact the so many people denounced those comments mean nothing.

 

I am astonished by the power you give to a small group of twits. 

Edited November 13, 2021 by drotto

[@therealsilvermane]

On 11/13/2021 at 6:00 PM, drotto said:

Then I question your choice of friends, if they would listen to stuff like that.

This was 2016, before the #metoo movement took off in 2017. I think a lot of men questioned their stance on things regarding women and maybe had regrets after that.

[drotto]

On 11/13/2021 at 6:07 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

This was 2016, before the #metoo movement took off in 2017. I think a lot of men questioned their stance on things regarding women and maybe had regrets after that.

Show me you numbers also.  How many people constitutes a large number, or enough to control the narrative?  You keep implying this group is massive portion of the population.  Show me your proof. 

 

Plus, the #metoo was mainly proof that the people controlling Hollywood and media are terrible, and do not know how to treat women.  Basically, they were everything and more, that they accusing others of being. The very people that were telling us how to think, and trying to reflect our society, were the worst of the bunch. So were the people that sank these films, from the same circles that made them?

[Gatsby77]

On 11/13/2021 at 6:07 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

This was 2016, before the #metoo movement took off in 2017. I think a lot of men questioned their stance on things regarding women and maybe had regrets after that.

?

I thought we learned 15 years ago that  small vocal groups on social media don’t affect actual box office receipts in the real world.

Example: the failure of Snakes on a Plane

Other examples:

The real-world success of films like Iron Man 3 and Captain Marvel - despite selected fan hate.

The internet =/= real life.

Ghostbusters (2016) wasn’t a huge hit due to its mediocrity, not chauvinist internet trolls.

[@therealsilvermane]

On 11/13/2021 at 6:14 PM, drotto said:

Show me you numbers also.  How many people constitutes a large number, or enough to control the narrative?  You keep implying this group is massive portion of the population.  Show me your proof. 

 

Plus, the #metoo was mainly proof that the people controlling Hollywood and media are terrible, and do not know how to treat women.  Basically, they were everything and more, that they accusing others of being. The very people that were telling us how to think, and trying to reflect our society, were the worst of the bunch. So were the people that sank these films, from the same circles that made them?

omg

First, the #metoomovement took off in 2017 due to the high profile sexual harassment cases involving Harvey Weinstein, a big time Hollywood producer, and Roger Ailes, the head of Fox News. These two high profile cases encouraged women across the country in all places of employment, from Hollywood to pro sports to corporations to bars and even schools, to speak up about their own sexual harassment stories. It caused a national, even global, shake-up and made society rethink the way it treats women everywhere, not just in Hollywood and at Fox News.

The thing with 2016 Ghostbusters wasn't just an organized group of trolls. It was a sentiment that you don't remake Ghostbusters and turn them into ladies. If Ghostbusters had been remade with Chris Rock, David Spade, Adam Sandler, and Andy Samberg for example, it probably would have gotten like 10% of the hate that the actual movie got. Heck, it might have even been cheered on with those guys.

[drotto]

On 11/13/2021 at 6:17 PM, Gatsby77 said:

?

I thought we learned 15 years ago that  small vocal groups on social media don’t affect actual box office receipts in the real world.

Example: the failure of Snakes on a Plane

Other examples:

The real-world success of films like Iron Man 3 and Captain Marvel - despite selected fan hate.

The internet =/= real life.

Ghostbusters (2016) wasn’t a huge hit due to its mediocrity, not chauvinist internet trolls.

GB 2016 failed because it was not what most fans wanted from a story perspective (in addition to being meh). It was nothing awful or sinister. They wanted to see their beloved charcters at best return, if possible, or at least see the story continued in a meaningful way. They did not want to see them replaced, by anyone. People are getting sick of remakes and reimaginations that pale in comparison to the originals.