Deadpool was a success because the people who made it did what everyone who makes superhero movies *should* do. They read the comics and said "I'll make this movie." They didn't read a three paragraph wikipedia summary of decades of stories and say "I'll make this movie." Anyone who intends to write, direct or star in a superhero movie should be required to take a test about the source material, and if they fail they're locked in a bunker full of comics and only let out to try the test again.
It's what these people fail to see... the people that made Deadpool (including Ryan Renolds) were all FANS of the Deadpool comics... they knew what they were working with, that's why deadpool so well reflected the comic version of himself. There should be a role in the movie industry were they hire someone to read the original book and any time the director says "that's good, but what if" (or anything similar), the person should hit them over the head. MAKE them stick to the original story, because directors and executives like to make changes which corrupt the material and should not be trusted.
+G3HP Exactly I loved Deadpool so much because Ryan Reynolds and the team put love and care into the movie. you see Hollywood no matter how money you put into a movie unless the director really understands good story telling it will flop. Honesty I was sad they didn't bring up django, that movie was awesome
I have never read a more true, on the money and absolutely correct statement about the exact problems everyone else keeps doing it wrong. Unfortunately this particular criticism is always taken like "geeks whining." Forget the formula, think about what exactly does Marvel do? Most of my family looked at my reading comics after about 21 the same as parents give that special needs child that knowing little smile. Now my youngest sister can tell you the origin of Captain America, Thor and Iron Man as if they read those masterpiece edition Marvel used to put out all the time back in the day. They're posting comic art on their social media and asking me "When's Captain Marvel coming out?" or "When's Black Panther coming out." Because Marvel is reaching into the very comics they are making movies about and translating what made them successful in the comics to film. DC keep trying to translate Dark Knight and Watchmen. Everyone else, I'm right there with you. They're reading a paragraph from Wikipedia. There's no way Deadpool was made without the makers actually reading the damn comics. You can't write that Deadpool based off his appearance in one of the 20 Spider-man animations. When you stick to the source things tend to work out. So how come DC keep running from their source except the two they should stop running to?
The reason Logan was so successful was because the story, the directing and the performances were great. The R rating was just the super violent cherry on top. The movie could still have worked with a PG-13 rating but not nearly as well.
TheRodentMastermind Yes, that’s true. The characters and the story are what make this movie (and every movie) work. The gruesome violence is just a tool the filmmakers used to help tell their story. It’s not essential but the film would feel weird if the action was like in an MCU movie.
What about that bit where Professor Xavier is blasting everyone with his senility powers and Wolverine has to anchor himself to the wall by stapling dude's heads to the plaster?
Why they keep making Tarzan, Peter Pan, King Arthur, Robin Hood, Sherlock Holmes, etc, movies? Two words: Public Domain. They don't have to pay for the rights to the characters. It's also why Disney makes movies based on theme park rides. They already own the rights. I'm surprised this video didn't point these facts out.
But then they obliterate those savings (the savings from dipping into the public domain instead of licensing new characters) by spending enormous and/or unrecoverable budgets on those films. The point was that an interesting premise and solid writing (storytelling and dialog) and decent camera work can do more for a box office success (a movie that is profitable to make) than an enormous budget of showy effects and lackluster writing. Some big budget successes might sound good ($900M at the box office!) but others flop horribly. Instead of the "safe bet" being to rehash old stories again and again, the "safe bet" should be to write good, original stories and produce them on realistic budgets that reflect the spending of the core demographics of each story and/or genre. Like not spending Harry Potter money on a Spiderwick, for instance, since I'm sure the book sales can give any idiot an understanding of their relative popularity, and thus the likelihood of success of each franchise in film.
One word: Classis. RIght, Peter Pan and Tarzan are classics for children more than adults, but Robin Hood may be somwhere in between as well as for afults and Sherlock Holmes is no doubt adults' classic. But they're not the only one.
Stray - logan wasnt a great movie because of the R rating. It was a great movie because it was a great story with great acting. Take away the R rating and logan is still a great movie. You could make xmen origins wolverine nc -17 and its still going to be a flaming pile of cat vomit. The reality is for the most part we just really like super hero movies. The rating, with only a couple of noteworthy exceptions, is nearly irrelivant in every way. think im wrong? Cool, make capt marvel an R and tell me it becomes one of the top 3 marvel movies. Pfftt.. Do that and tell me it stops being one of the top 5 worst marvel movies lol
Not really. The new Ghostbusters did bad because: 1. Nobody really wanted a remake of Ghostbusters. 2. It had a trailer that made it look like a straight to DVD movie. 3. It is mediocre at best. 4. Their whole marketing campaign was "Watch this movie or you are a misogynistic sexist pig" (even if you are a woman). The lesson Hollywood should learn from that is STOP INSULTING YOUR AUDIENCE. And work on your posture man, my neck hurts from just looking at you.
I agree with you on your first two points. I just want to say that it did not do bad at the box office. its under preformed. a 150m budget and 100m in ads for one studiedly expensive film.
It didn't make it money back, so it did bad at the box office. Even without marketing movie needed 300m to make it even. So they just lost their money.
commander O'Shovah 150m plus 100m equals 300m to you? C'mon on lets not make numbers up. The reason he said underperformed at the box office is because it is looking to break 220m (already 217m) so they lost 30 million.................except amazon DVD preorder sales are at star wars 7numbers and merchandise is sailing a lot. Can't claim it failed to make a profit.
I entirely agree with you on all those points mate. NOBODY wanted the remake, the trailer was sh*t, the movie itself was not anything to talk about and they insulted the auidience who kinda had a right to be offended that they would even f*ck with such a masterpeice. The lesson Hollywood needs to learn is that if you're gonna reboot a movie series, don't remake the first movie with genderbended characters and way too over the top CG.... although they won't see this anyway cause their vision is blocked by all those dollar signs.
Alexander Demkin theaters give back half of money at best. So movie must make double it budget to get money back. I said I was not counting marketing. So they lost 80millions just on movie budget without marketing
Bend It Like Beckham is a woman-led sport movie that is pretty well-loved and actually like... a really good film with a lot of poignant things to say about culture and gender.
I think the next Hollywood blockbuster should be a rated-R teen musical about a post-apocalyptic Earth ruled over by dragons that can only be saved by Squirrel Girl. Damn, I should get to writing this, I'll make bank....
Luis Medina It will be based on whatever current ride they have that Disney will later re-purpose to make this new movie's ride, since Squirrel Girl is Marvel and hence, Disney. You know they would make this a ride, but won't make it from scratch so will use a current ride and rebuild it.
Lawrence Riederer They're actually bringing her into the MCU with a new TV show called New Warriors, loosely based on the team from the comics. Squirrel Girl is supposed to be one of the main team members, which is one of the areas that it differs from the comics. I'm sure another thing it will differ from is causing that suburban explosion that kickstarted Civil War in the comics, lol.
Something game designers should learn too: a good idea is everything you need. But no, let's keep releasing sequels of mediocre slash crappy FPS and action/adventure games every year, where the only difference is just slightly better graphics. *sigh* At least games industry has indie developers, but movies are usually too costly to, not necessarily make, but to advertise.
Imo, yes and no. Their point that story matters more than genre still stands; Logan did well not because it was an R-rated superhero movie, but because it was a well-written, original, genuinely touching story about how even the world's most powerful people can't fight the clock forever. They were just wrong about what was in that particular movie, not the overarching conclusion about Hollywood's blindness.
@@ezekielmartin4323 -"even the world's most powerful people can't fight the clock forever" wasn't that what Gilgamesh was about? A superman finding his limits? Maybe that's why Gilgamesh, oldest story ever, is still interesting while the records of trade found with it are forgotten.
@@xyaeiounn Perhaps so. After all, the Hero's Journey still never fails to draw an audience, even millennia after its inception. Perhaps rather than the birth of new stories, the purpose of storytelling is to reincarnate the best among them.
@@ezekielmartin4323 There's something in that, good stories last because they do something we need them to. A bad story poorlyl told doesn't get much improved by hundreds of millions of dollars.
To be fair, all we got from it being rated R was drawn out images of him inflicting damage on people we already know that he does. (Or however the quote went.) Ohh, and he dropped more F bombs.
Because all the shows you like did not exist at one point. They tried out new things and guess what, some of them worked. Those are your After Hours, OPCD, Spit Take and so on. But for these shows to exist they have to try out new Ideas and see the responses. Also, if all the "awful content" did not exist, you would find something awful in the remaining content. It's human nature.
Because coming up with atleast 1 video every single day that is interesting,well thought out and fantastically written/acted/narrated is fucking difficult...even shows that air 12 episodes once a year have filler episodes...Their filler videos are bearable and their good videos are fantastic so in short...idk pipe the fuck down?
***** I will admit, they did try to make it Harry Potter, not realizing that while Rowling went for symbolism and world building, Handler (Snicket's real name for any who happen upon this) was focused more on satire and dark comedy, and honestly, don't the Baudelaires almost FEEL like parodies of overly depressed characters like Harry Potter and that ungodly Mary Sue, Percy Jackson? All too perfect people who get shit on by the world for no reason other than our amusement?
To be fair... the R-rated Wolverine could mean that we get a fight that would involve Wolverine regenerating entire sections of his skin through the fight or something like that... and honestly... it was kind of annoying that in literally EVERY X-MEN movie ... Wolverine's claws would remain bloodless despite him literally stabbing people with small swords.
Wolverine and Human Torch are two heroes I never got behind. Too bloody-minded, never mind what actually gets shown on the penned page. A Spiderman can struggle with the concept of having responsibility for the consequences of his actions and occasional missteps. With Wolverine and Human Torch, there never were any consequences.
With all honesty, I don't even want to see THAT. And it has nothing to do with the fact that I am not so turned on by him and his looks (I am more into "sweet pretty boy with a fragile smile and sixpack", in short bishounen).
It has nothing to do with the “type” of movie. It has everything to do with uninspired writing and plots. Any genre can be a hit, just stop rehashing overused tropes and plots. That being said....it’s not easy to pull new ideas for movies from a hat that’s bled out.
***** How to Train your Dragon: Budget $165 million Box office $494.9 million How to Train your Dragon 2: Budget $145 million Box office $621.5 million But of course, if you believe America is the only country on the planet, box office numbers always look much worse.
+Héctor (Hector Navarrete) that's changing now that China is becoming bigger movie audience. Hell Warcraft might get a sequel because of its success in China.
Not necessarily more women, but better films with stories that revolve around women. Somehow the film industry doesn't understand that all we want is for films to be good.
+Justin Greenleaf oh I see your confusion. I was agreeing with the other person about the better stories but I meant to clarify that it is ALSO necessary to have more stories about women (starring women lol) and better stories for those that already center women
Hollywood doesn't fucking read anymore. That's the problem. It's obvious when you realize that the different remade remakes of once book-based movies are actually based off EACH OTHER nowadays, rather than the original material.
Ender's Game flopped because it was terrible. The book was fantastic; the movie... Not so much. That said, no one could have made that movie well. It was too mental. Some books can't be made into movies.
I don't think enders game failed because it was "too mental" or because the book can't be made into a movie. It's just the ideas of ender's game have been mined by other movies, that there really inst much that is original about enders game now, its the same reason that the giver failed. When you don't give an audience anything new on an original movie, then it's doomed to fail.
MrAndersonmm: The main reason Ender's Game didn't convert well to cinema is because of all the internal dialogue in the book. If a movie retains the internal dialogue it comes off looking hokey and if they edit it out it leaves the plotline sorely lacking. I had this trouble after reading Dune and then watching the 80's movie. They retained most of the internal dialogue but it just didn't have a plausible feel to it. Maybe it's just me.
I actually did like Ender's game. Not as good as the book, but then, what movie is? It was probably as close as we could get to displaying the book, so I'm happy with what we got. Going into the characters' heads is still something that's so difficult to do in film. Not impossible, but clearly not easy.
_> Probably one of the best Marvel movies ever made._ Probably because most Marvel movies are retarded turds. Any semi-retarded semi-turd comes off as "best" after that.
Conser pov Not every Marvel.. They do make bad film but they make good ones to. Like most publishers. Iron Man. (Although I'll give you 2 and 3.) Deadpool. Guardians of the Galaxy. (2 wasn't good but it wasn't shit either) Dr. Strange. I will also give you any Hulk film ever. But then that's just Film what about TV? Their many Netflix series' are strong.
You are right, Marvel does make some quite decent adult-oriented shows and films (unlike DC that's bidding on "retarded kids only" target audience). The majority of them are still retarded. Including Logan, which seems to be a victim of executive meddling and deliberate dumbing down of the script - like first half was written by an intelligent and mature scriptwriter, and second half was written by a dimwit.
Failure to Dragon, The Pink Dragon, Nanny McDragon, Dragon at the Museum, National Dragon, The League of Extraordinary Dragons, Pete's Dragon, the Jungle Dragon, Dante's Dragon, The Dragon Witch Project, and my personal favorite, Dragon's of the Caribbean.
The Dragon Avengers ft Iron Dragon, Captain Dragon, the incredible Dragon Hulk, Hawk Dragon , Dragon widow, and Thoragon, lead by Dragon Fury........ Spider Dragon, vision Dragon, Dragon Panther, Dragon Falcon and my fav the winter Dragon
How could you forget about Dredd when you were mentioning R rated movies?! One of the best R-Rated comic book movies that's come out in the past half decade and nobody knew it had come out thanks to Lions Gate barely advertising it, and that's the reason why we're not getting a sequel.
Well the whole angle of Dredd was pretty much a rip off of The Raid, which Dredd was cool, but give me more awesome martial arts over more guns any day.
The plot of the movie is climb a giant building and kill everyone along the way, they just took the raid and put a dredd skin on it, maybe not literally but, but since the raid came out first it definately seems like it to most people. Both fun movies though.
Oh my bad they didn't rip off The Raid... The people behind the Raid just made a better movie, for cheaper, faster, while telling a better story than Dredd... Not sure that's any better... Plus The Raid got an AWESOME sequel; which does not seem to be in the cards for Dredd.
Because Logan was a good story. It wasn't "awesome" solely because it was rated R. So I think you missed the point that this video spelled out multiple times.
If they had made Whip It about a roller derby team that had to fight dragons to save there twon, not the world, It would have been so much better. Also jimmy fallon gets eaten by a dragon. Not in the movie I mean really gets eaten by a dragon.
Divergrent wasn't that great of a book. It was okay. But then they deviated so far from the books with Insurgent that it was like. Yeah, you are gonna ruin what little good this book had with this. There was like 45 minutes of stuff in the movie that wasn't in the book. Like really? You aren't even trying to make an adaptation at that point.
The entire concept is ridiculous. No one (except *maybe* limited cases on the Autism spectrum? I'm guessing here) fits into a single category of behavior and ideals. Everyone has elements of multiple. But even if we forget that simple fact, if there were a world where that was true and someone somehow showed signs of multiple traits they would not be *divergent*, they would be *convergent*. What an idiotic premise designed to appeal to a very narrow teenage window of ignorance and confusion.
Jon Miller You seem to not have bothered reading the series Let me point out that the entire city was populated by people genetically altered for eliminating harmful traits and then tried on to reverse the alteration It is an scientific experiment that the story takes place in
Because Cracked has some pretty strong political biases that they like to drizzle in almost all of their videos as reasoning for certain ideas when it could be explained by a multitude of other factors and it turns many people off who have conflicting political views but would otherwise still enjoy videos subject. For example their quip about women lead comedies and sports movies, I don't like Melissa McCarthy movies _because_ she's a woman, but because she is actually really fucking funny, as opposed to Ghostbusters whose whole schtick is what if ghostbusters but women. Besides McCarthy and somewhat Christian Whig just aren't as funny as the original movies cast. As for women sports movies, women are objectively inferior to their male counterparts in almost every single athletic competition and are just not as entertaining to watch. So a movie based on such would probably not do as well with the exception of the few female dominated sports like cheerleading (aren't we on Step Up # 17 by now) and graceful dancing stuff like figure skating or gymnastics. It's not as simple as just "men hate women"
Holy Jebus... it's a comedy channel, lighten up a little, everyone has biases. If you take political views or "agendas" so damn seriously all the time it's a wonder you can enjoy anything at all...
The subject is almost always irrelevant, although religion and politics are the exceptions but even then more often than not the complaints voiced are valid. It's about the content of the subject matter that results in backlash. The supportive subjects of "minorities" tends to boil down to people screaming about systemic oppression they can never actually prove or claiming that white straight heterosexual men are too privileged to have opinions. When it comes to women, once again a lot of animosity toward and talk about privileged men, the patriarchy monster, long debunked studies about wage gaps, rape stats and abuse. Going on about over sexualized media representations and turning around saying women shouldn't be judged for wanting to dress in provocative and overly sexual clothes. There are plenty of level headed topics done with these subjects, where facts are used instead of rhetoric and those videos have plenty of support from the communities. Here's a video from liberal lunacy a disabled woman with blair white, a transgender mtf woman discussing black lives matter, doxxing and a bit of light transgender stuff, and while the audience is small, the feedback is overwhelmingly positive. watch?v=Ixm-R6MrtGc Here's a piece by ben shapiro discussing black lives matter, the recent riots and income inequality, once again overwhelmingly supportive. watch?v=__Vj3DXwOBI There are more compilations of similar discussions, although the channels they're on can be abrasive to some and I don't want to muddy my point. The massive difference between these types of videos and the heavily disliked ones are how the topics are discussed. When there's nothing but blame shifting, propaganda and flat out bigotry those videos get backlash. When there are factual discussions centered around dissecting why these things occur, whatever topic that may be, and perhaps even a general discussion as to the potential solutions for these issues that don't involve self-imposed segregation, bigotry or attempting to twist the law to the benefit of one group, people are fine with listening and at least attempting to advance the discussion. Off the top of my head jim jefferies, louis ck, mitch hedberg, stephen lynch, pablo francisco, adam ferrara and dat phan though he seems to have disappeared. None of which typically do or rely on pointing out the flaws of or supporting politics.
yeah, like the idea of "we totally know what is happening" , hes right we totally know and dont need to be babysit by some morons in hollywood just show us the blood.
yeah porn.... but Margot Robbie I mean porn stars of all caliber look gross compared to her and a lot are disgusting in general and not very attractive past the fucking.
I was just addressing what the other guy said in his comment and saying Margot Robbie is above any porn star and I'd rather see her then porn really I could care less about Harley Quinn porn anyway who cares...
Ender's Game and The Host are NOT like The Hunger Games! Ender was written way before, and is a sci-fi classic. The battle things is never the point. The whole point of the book and the movie is that the treath was imaginary and that humans are the bad guys. and the host is not only one of the best portrais of realistic aliens (with a wrong focus, I admit, but that's kinda of Stephanie Meyer's point), but it has nothing to do with saving the world. When the movie starts, the world has already been conquered.
Which unfortunately, Hollywood put Ender's Game (& The Giver, another classic) into pile of "let's make more Hunger Games type movies" without bothering the significance of the story. They focus less on the issues you've brought up and more on "special kids delivers humanity from dystopia" which isn't the point of the original source materials. This isn't the only time Hollywood keeps exploiting whatever is successful the wrong way.
enders game could have been so much better, the books are absolutely amazing. but the movie was an attempt at a quick cash grab, even with Harrison Ford in it.
Oh man, The Host... I like Diane Krugar, but shit, they could have cut a half hour out of that movie and I'd still have the same understanding of it.For crying out loud, I don't actually need to see here cross a field in which to talk to someone, just jump cut to her walking into the room. Also, it was a decent movie until they started doing the whole Twilight love triangle bullshit.
Anthony Sforza That's kinda of the author's thing. She creates super interesting worlds (x-men vampires, supercool immortal alien parasites!) and then focus on the most BORING possible part of that world.
Agreed. There are a few mini-series I've seen in the past few years, but halfway through them the TV executives notice how many people are watching, so they decide to turn it into a proper multi-season TV show. Then it all goes downhill. I'd like to see a good mini-series that will stay a mini-series and not change so the company can profit.
Yes! So many books get massacred by trying to force them into a 2 hour run time. (Nevermind that audiences have repeatedly shown that they will pay for and sit through a 3 hour movie if it's even remotely interesting.) I wish someone with talent and appreciation for the book would make a good miniseries of Ender's Game, for instance. But the movie was so bad I doubt anyone will ever touch it again.
actually enders game wasnt that bad. my problem is that (if you read the books of course) it was just a skeleton of story. there is sooo much story and character building that was lost. it felt more like watching an outline with bullet points of the plot than the actual book
The movie was terrible for precisely the reasons you mentioned. They took a story involving the manipulation and torture of a boy over the course of many years to turn him into the ultimate (mental) weapon, and turned it into Ender Goes to Summer Camp, Feels Sad, Gets Tricked.
Melissa Gomez The Netflix program is going to be based off the book series, not the movie. And the series is going to go out of its way to stay more reliable to the source material, unlike this one did. Even when disregarding the source material, the movie itself is just simply not good, a lot of style and no substance. Also Jim Carrey's performance was overly cartoonish, so when the children were terrified of him it just didn't make sense. If the Netflix series was going to be based off the movie, then they would have done it probably back when people still remembered the movie. There's a reason why it's almost *never* talked about now.
There's a book called 'A Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives'. It analyzes a whole bunch of different things and shows that they're just random. One chapter is about how the public responds to media. It's random. Truly, completely random. For every huge-budget star-studded runaway box office smash hit... there is a low-budget nobody-filled runaway box office smash hit. For each of those big budget films full of stars, there is also a big budget film full of stars that was a catastrophic flop. For every Titanic, there is a Waterworld and a My Big, Fat, Greek Wedding. There really is nothing you can do to give a film a better chance of success. Bigger budgets don't help, famous stars don't help, particular genres don't help, etc. I believe they looked at over 50,000 different aspects of movie production and found no statistically significant factors that could predict a movies success. But, Hollywood is made of people. People with careers. In an industry where the careers of executives are determined by whether they "know what the public wants." As a result, superstitions proliferate like crazy. That's what humans do when there isn't actually any pattern to something - they invent fake patterns. So when an executive gets lucky, they grab onto that lucky roll of the dice and they ride it for all it's worth. They even believe it themselves, telling themselves that they have their finger on the pulse of the publics tastes. But, they don't. So their followups inevitably fail. It's only because they have an extremely high degree of control over what makes its way into theaters in the first place that they're able to be financially successful. The book even looked at the performance of various executives, and found that the ones held up as "geniuses" had no better than random performance either. In almost all cases, the big successes that they were credited with were actually projects started by the exec that came before them that just finished production and got released as the 'genius' took the reins. Then when their own projects started coming out, copycats of what they saw work before, flopped and everyone said "their hot streak was over." It's not just movies, this happens across all forms of media. The Harry Potter books got turned down by 9 publishers before someone took a chance on it. How can book publishing executives by so catastrophically incompetent? Because there's nothing to be competent in. They're rolling dice, and that is all they can EVER do. Analysis can't tell us what movie to make or what book to publish... but it can tell us to cut the salary of those executives by 90% and stop looking up to them as "tastemakers."
I agree with everything but R-rated superheros. I want MORE of that. I want this to be what stems the introduction of some of the best comic book and graphic novel characters. I'm sorry, but a high budget R-rated Spawn, Black Widow, Ghost Rider, or Nemesis. I feel like this is the direction I always wanted superhero movies to go, but was always stuck with shitty pg-13 versions of what I actually wanted.
I think you missed his point on the R-rated superhero movies. You want movies about super heroes that need to be R rated, because that's how the specific super hero is. A PG-13 Spawn would suck. What he was saying you don't want is slapping an R rating on a movie for a superhero that doesn't make sense to be R rated. Superman and Captain America are goody two-shoes characters. Making them R rated doesn't really add much.
KaosOrder Sure, but Batman isn't. Wolverine isn't. Black Widow isn't. The Hulk isn't. Thor isn't. Like, honestly, there are more superheros that should have R movies than PG13, yet that's what the genre is filed with.
Why would Batman/Hulk have R ratings? They are about detective work and strength respectively. They aren't exactly gorey or rapey by nature. Think about what actually requires an R rating. A movie can be great without the extra rating.
Django Unchained was also really good western movie, actually I feel like he is blatantly missing out parts to it to continue the rest of the rant half way through.
True. Quentin Tarantino could make a movie set in a futuristic space colony, and it wouldn't feel like a sci-fi movie. It'd just feel like...a Tarantino movie.
Did you just badmouth Blazing Saddles? You sir, are talking without making any sense... randomly picking bad movies then assuming they all suck is pathetic, you've clearly learned the Ted Talk method of nonsense.
...Dragons wide shut... ...Dragons day off... ...The little dragon... ...7 dragons... ...Dragonhead... ...Dragon fever... ...Harry Dragon and the goblet of fire... and you're thinking "Jesus Christ Nikki!" yeah I got that covered too... ...The passion of the Dragon... ...The last temptation of Dragon... ...The son of Dragon... ...Dragon Christ superstar... and who can forget: ...Dragon.
what the hell are you talking about?! Steel is masterpiece of modern film making. I distinctly remember a single tear slowly rolling down my cheek the first time i watched steel because of how much it changed my life for the better...
Victim of Bass a movie based on the Disneyland attraction Country Bears Jamboree, it’s located in Frontierland & is an animatronic show of bears 🐻 playing Banjos & singing country songs , it’s an old attraction , like the Tiki Room ( which I actually enjoy) but they were things that wowed people back in the 60s today people have so much technology it no longer possess the wow factor .
Although correct about many points, sort of missed the other obvious points: Creative Accounting : Hollywood accounting bears no resemblance to real accounting. Whether a movie is a hit or a loss has nothing to do with actual earnings vs expenses. The money is made in the distribution chain not the production houses. They misrepresent earnings on a regular basis inside the USA. Expanding Markets : Movies can be flops in the US but so long as they do well overseas they can be big money makers for the distributors and the producers. The World of Warcraft movie was a flop by normal standards in US sales, but China distribution meant it was a Hit financially.
Mad Max Fury Road made more in the overall gross (378 mil vs 287 mil), but also cost much more to make (150 mil compared to 29 mil). So, the profit was less than Pitch Perfect 2. And PP2 made more opening weekend that MMFR. But MMFR got much more attention after all the haters.
Fury Road was kind of a sleeper, I'm a Mad Max fan and I myself didn't know it was coming out until after it was released. I don't know if that's more to do with me than the film's marketing, but it ended up being my favorite movie of the year.
You are asking they wrong questions.My wife had no interest in a mad max movie, but she sure loved the pitch perfect movies.For the record I was dragged to the first one, and it is horrible. Nothing but a visual cliché fest. But if terrible movies like this can do so well, it usually means there is very little of that style out there.
Mad Max made more money because more people were allowed to see it. Pitch Perfect had a PG rating, while no one under 18 was allowed to buy a ticket. If we didnt have a rating system it probably would have made a lot more.
Man, is it ironic that this exists on Cracked, a website/show that gets thousands of comments telling them "We don't want this type of video, why do you still make it!?" and yet they still make those videos?
speak for yourself, I don't mind this video at all. here's an idea, if you don't like a type of video... don't watch it?! shockingly simple I know, one day you'll get there. cracked does a wide spectrum of video content, not every single one is going to be a hit or to everyone's liking. they've never said they would just do one type of videos, if you don't like it just don't watch, get over yourself, you aren't the only viewer, quit bitching, and have a nice day
Ghadente First of all, chill pill. Second of all, I loved this video. I just thought it was funny that this is a video that's about "Hollywood doesn't learn from failures" from a site that posts videos that are just text over clips from stuff that isn't labeled so they've already suckered a view out of you even if you hate that content and don't want to watch it. Finally, Bitching is not pointing out something ironic. Do they pay you to defend their videos with an inability to understand nuances of language?
Good points man. Now here's some the list that Hollywood had made billions of dollars while they continue to made movies sucked. 1. Sony needs to stop making bad films with terrible decisions, worst editing cuts, and false advertisements. (Sony! Get your ass straight up and make your studio to be on track! Since "Annie," "The Amazing Spider-Man 2," "Ghostbusters" reboot, "The Angry Birds Movie," "Sex Tape," "The Interview," and every "Adam Sandler" films were the worst decisions that your greedy boss don't give more appreciation! You're losing your intention! I'll be watching you for releasing "Spider-Man Homecoming" next year. So don't! 👁👁☝👉 Sony's 2010's entertainment probably the worst studio ever! Whenever that happened? 2. Stop making found footage films that people are getting tired of seeing this genre. 3. Get Michael Bay outta here before he will harass and rape another "Transformers" film. 4. Abandoned Adam Sandler away from comedy films. (Seriously, it's been done so long so watch something else.) 5. Make R rated action films instead of putting into a kid friendly PG-13 ratings. (Back off teenies! We're making hardcore R rating films since 80's and 90's were the best so back off!) 6. Stop rebooting classic Action films from the 80's and 90's and leave it alone! (No one is not watching Total Recall, Point Break, RoboCop, Terminator Genisys, or any film that Hollywood would make more! Just stop it!) That's all there is.
I'll be watching you for releasing "Spider-Man Homecoming" and that´s why these movies will keep getting made , i agree with your points here but in the end they don´t care if their movies are garbage , as long as the ticket sells ...
The amount of money thrown at a movie has become a warning flag to me lately. Almost all my favorite films of all time had really low budgets: The Usual Suspects, Memento, 28 Days Later, Drive, The Thing (1982), Alien, etc. Great movies, miniscule budges for their time.
I think the lower budget forces people to be creative, or try harder to succeed so they can get their next movie to have a bigger budget. A lot of the time I feel a big budget can make people complacent or its just not something they're interested in. The director, actors, etc are getting paid a lot or are on contract to be in the movie. Inversely if they're in a lower budget movie they probably want to be there. Lastly, most of the time a bigger budget means more studio interference and an attempt to appeal to the largest audience possible. Sorry about the organization, thoughts were kind of all over the place.
These days the higher budget is not for the script, talent, sets or director. They generally go into the hype and distribution for the film. Three different trailer versions, booking time at the Comic Cons, overseas versions translated into Chinese (the big market everyone wants in to) etc.
Lee Meriwether's Catwoman was most certainly a thing of beauty. Michelle Pfeiffer is very pretty, Julie Newmar was very sexy, and Halle Berry worked the slut look, but Lee was probably the most beautiful Catwoman ever.
I don't think that is where he was going with it. I think he was just saying, female driven movies can be great. Stop letting Paul Feig (sp?) give us garbage.
Right, because I have time to watch EVERY SINGLE MOVIE and decide on my own whether I liked them/they were worth my time. That's (part of) what reviews are for.
Critics are only people, they're not all the same and we look at an average between them... The only difference between them and your average person is that they have seen a lot, lot of movies. Anyone who has a brain and watches hundreds of movies with a similar plot will get bored.
90% of the comments making the same mistake spoken about in the video, Logan was a successful R-rated film. But it wasn't successful BECAUSE it was rated-R, but because UNLIKE the other 2 previous wolverine films it actually had a good story. Logan could have been rated PG-13 and still been a success. Story and substance trump just being an 18 rated film, see Hellboy.
I think i would like more R rated super hero movies...........and honestly i didn't care that much for Deadpool. It wasn't a BAD movie, and I saw why people liked it, but I guess i've never been in love with the character as other people are.............Would love a hard R spiderman Noir movie of some kind. That comic got DARK. Be like Sin City
Why are people saying this is so good? The facts are wrong on many many of them. Maze Runner made over 345 Million dollars on a (relatively) tiny budget of 34 million dollars. Hook made $300 Million on a budget of $70 Million. The list goes on. This badly tattooed presenter is pulling shit out of his ass.
60 million in 1985 would be about 150 million today when factoring inflation. Yeah I know that’s 1 film versus 2 but the biggest differences in budget these days is Star salary.
If you want to make a fantasy movie, try and go the Harry Potter route. There's a lot of series out there with a pretty dedicated fanbase already that would love a movie of their favorite books, but they usually make an original script or some book no one has ever heard of.
Lol in hindsight at 8:00 this guy was so fuckin wrong on the Logan movie (then not yet called Logan as the final Wolverine movie, the R rated helped). In general this guy is pretty much totally wrong speaking about the R rating of movies. Earned himself a downvote.
Yes, pg 13 was holding us back from wolverine. That berzerk mode rampage at the end was such authentic wolverine i bought the movie for that one scene .......
Hollywood movies suck so bad lately. I can’t remember the last time I seen a reall good blockbuster. Avatar i think and of course the hobbit sequels. That’s it. Star Trek star was was ok That’s it.
