verslibre wrote:[
I highly doubt one of these Star Wars movies is going to lose money. The solo films probably won't even have the same budgets. But the fanboys and fangirls (and their kids, and their parents who loved the OT) will be out in force. You're going to be standing in line behind four chicks and two guys dressed as Slave Girl Leia at the Subway near the theater.
I wonder how many times people said such and such wasn't going to lose money but it did. I know you will see that reaction for the sequels. But, that reaction should not be thought of as guaranteed for the spin-offs, like "Rogue One".
Monker wrote:verslibre wrote:Because it SUCKED.
Yep. And, so could Rogue One....you just don't know. I know I'm not sold on it. Sounds like it should be a made for TV movie/mini-series instead of being released to theaters.
Actually, it sounds like it's closer in tone to Ron Moore's Battlestar Galactica. You might end up liking it and seeing it seven times.
Like I said, it should be a mini-series and not in the cinema.
In other words, restore it to the version that people dubbed "a Star Wars rip-off."
Absolutely. As was proven in court, if BSG ripped off SW, then SW ripped off everything that came before it.
Yeah, they share archetype characters. So what? If you really look at the STORY, it is not much like SW at all.
The version Richard Hatch wanted to bring back.
No. I believe he wanted to do some type of sequel...not reboot the series.
The Cylons could be seriously upgraded from football players in chrome to some seriously scary CGI bots. The reboot chrome cylons were good and are an example of what could be.
The reboot also did Baltar totally wrong. He was supposed to personify evil. He was a deceiving Judas type character who flipped sides on a whim...and you really didn't know what he was thinking, but he always had a plan. He was not a disturbed prophet who has frequent wet dreams..and was really fumbling his way through things with the help of his dream girl.
I also liked the Lucifer bots in the old series...they should be brought back.
And, they should explore the "Chariots of the Gods" theme a bit more.
The things the new series did right: Starbuck. Ironic that the most controversial character, IMO, was the best decision Ron Moore made. I didn't care that Starbuck was a girl...she kicked butt. And, it added a lot of drama between her and Apollo, who was also done well. The President...having her 'inherit' the office from being secretary of education, or whatever, was perfect. And, again, the contrast between her and Adama was great. Adama was also played well.
I loved the mini-series and I thought it had potential. My issues with BSG were the writing and the direction the series too after the mini-series. The snapping of the baby's neck was the first bit of never-ending shock drama that the series relied on. Almost every single episode that followed relied on that type of drama to keep up the emotional impact. That drove the story more than anything else. The characters became less important as the story went on. What became important, it seemed to me, was adding a rape or murder in nearly every episode. Then we get to the Pegasus, where all of this was common place. We meet a 6 whose only purpose aboard ship was to be raped. They took this form of lazy drama about as far as they could possibly take it.
IMO, the rebooted BSG is one of the most over rated series ever.
Hey, I like both the '70s and '00s series, but the update was great. I attended the very first panel at SDCC when Moore's BSG was barely a thing. I was against the body-hopping at first, too, but once I watched the inaugural miniseries I was sold. It was a great series and when it was at its best it was far and away better than Star Wars.
Monker wrote:Star Wars followed by Independence Day may resurrect the big scifi blockbusters and take money away from comic book movies. Not everybody is going to see six or so movies every summer.
Or maybe ID4: Electric Boogaloo will suck. It's another sequel that was intended to happen many years ago, anyway. I'm sure Emmerich & company are much more confident after the success of Jurassic World.
Monker wrote:Oh, please. Most, or maybe even ALL of them, were not even in wide release in the US.
Godzilla (1998) — US release.
Godzilla: Millennium aka Godzilla 2000 — US release.
Godzilla: Final Wars (2004) — limited US release.
Godzilla (2014) — US release.
You'd have been better off mentioning the gap between Godzilla 1984 (released here as Godzilla 1985) and the 1998 film.
Monker wrote:And, BTW, I mentioned King Kong vs. Godzilla months ago and you all critiqued it as virtually impossible.
I thought they were going to stick to a darker slant on the home-grown movies but I guess they want to revisit it. Not sure how they're going to explain a giant ape (radiation, I assume) because otherwise the movie should be over in two minutes. Godzilla would step on Kong on the way to the pond.
Monker wrote:LOL...you're just wrong. Studios do not take a potentially huge blockbuster and move it from late fall or summer to Spring. It's a rarity that those movies hit big. I'll admit they take more chances...and BvS is one...but it is NOT the norm.
Like I said, not the case, anymore. Spring is March, April, May. Are you referring to MARCH only? Because a number of movies released in "Spring" have done well.
Monker wrote:verslibre wrote:Since we're generalizing, the list includes Pan, Cinderella, The Last Witch Hunter, Seventh Son, Fallen, Maleficent, The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies and so on. Lots of fantasy being produced. Maybe it's not all "Dark Fantasy" or "Heroic Fantasy" or "Fairy Tales," but when it comes to CBMs, we're not saying "Mutants," "Men in Tights," "Supernatural Superheroes," etc.
Yep...which is EXACTLY why I say that fantasy is on the edge.
So 5-6 CBMs = overkill while 5-6 fantasy movies = "on the edge"? I see.[/quote]
"
