If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Den Of Geek)   The winners and losers of 2013's summer blockbuster movie season   (denofgeek.com) divider line 56
    More: Interesting, R.I.P.D., blockbuster movie, Iron Man, Monsters University, Superman reboot, Blue Sky Studios, Shane Black, World War Z  
•       •       •

6173 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 15 Aug 2013 at 8:01 AM (48 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



56 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-15 08:08:35 AM
Why did they keep referring to Batman as valet?
 
2013-08-15 08:12:51 AM

JDIAH GDizzleCKY: Why did they keep referring to Batman as valet?


Alfred was the REAL star, obviously!
 
2013-08-15 08:13:29 AM

JDIAH GDizzleCKY: Why did they keep referring to Batman as valet?


Spellcheck run amok.
 
2013-08-15 08:24:49 AM
Valet Begins sounds promising.
 
2013-08-15 08:25:57 AM
Valet Returns... with my car
 
2013-08-15 08:31:33 AM
The Dark Valet?

....aren't all of them darker in skin anyway?
 
2013-08-15 08:35:26 AM
"I'm the goddamn Valet!"
 
2013-08-15 08:54:37 AM
Now You See Me was a dreadful movie with plot holes so big you could drive a truck through them.  I heavily regret paying to see that.
 
2013-08-15 09:03:22 AM
MAN OF STEELWarner Bros bet heavily on its expensive Superman reboot this summer, and it's got the rewards it was looking for. Helmed by Zack Snyder, Man Of Steel has taken nearly $650m worldwide (good business for an opening installment), dwarfing the take of valet reboot, valet Begins. Furthermore, it's unlocked the future of the DC universe on screen, as Man Of Steel 2 has given Warner Bros the platform for the long-mooted valet/Superman crossover movie. That, in turn, reboots valet, and Warner Bros will be hoping that it then has two franchise on the go, ahead of the planned Justice League movie, which is rumoured for 2017.
The only fly in the ointment is that Man Of Steel was a divisive reboot. Unlike valet Begins, which seemed to win most people over, Man Of Steel's reviews were mixed, with the last act in particular coming in for heavy criticism. That said, even the harshest of critics seemed to admit that Henry Cavill was a fine Superman, and Warner Bros will now be keen to use Man Of Steel as a catalyst for many more DC movies.


That's the greatest thing I've read today.

/Woke up an hour ago
 
2013-08-15 09:08:58 AM
thedukesplayground.files.wordpress.com
This is the most bankable star in America. Think about that for a second.
 
2013-08-15 09:09:30 AM
So what we can learn is that Ryan Reynolds just isn't a 'leading man' star.
 
2013-08-15 09:15:58 AM

scottydoesntknow: The only fly in the ointment is that Man Of Steel was a divisive reboot. Unlike valet Begins, which seemed to win most people over, Man Of Steel's reviews were mixed, with the last act in particular coming in for heavy criticism. That said, even the harshest of critics seemed to admit that Henry Cavill was a fine Superman, and Warner Bros will now be keen to use Man Of Steel as a catalyst for many more DC movies.


Until World's Finest gets crapped out of WB's anus and farks it all up.

/MoS was not great.
 
2013-08-15 09:51:49 AM

Orgasmatron138: So what we can learn is that Ryan Reynolds just isn't a 'leading man' star.


Can we just admit he can't carry a movie, and that we only like him in small doses? 2 hours of his snarkiness is too much outside of a Deadpool mask.

Ryan, make Deadpool and disappear for a while, k thx.
 
2013-08-15 10:08:26 AM

imontheinternet: [thedukesplayground.files.wordpress.com image 425x425]
This is the most bankable star in America. Think about that for a second.


It's actually been building for a while.  We've reached a point where movie stars can't sell a $150-200 million movie (see: Oblivion, After Earth, The Lone Ranger).  You need an established franchise to do that (comic books, Hunger Games, Twilight, Harry Potter, etc.).  What movie stars can sell is the $75 million movie that only needs to make $150 million to be a success.  And that's what Sandler gets you.  With a couple of exceptions, his movies are $150-200 million in the bank, every time.  Melissa McCarthy is the new version of that, except that she doesn't command Sandler's $20 million payday yet, so her movies run in the $30-40 million range instead of $75 million.  But she still manages to bring in $150-200 million every time.
 
2013-08-15 10:16:18 AM
I'd watch Valet Begins, only if it stars Stephen Fry.

Also, there were winners this year? I thought almost every big-budget movie flopped big-time.
 
2013-08-15 10:22:52 AM

cameroncrazy1984: I'd watch Valet Begins, only if it stars Stephen Fry.

Also, there were winners this year? I thought almost every big-budget movie flopped big-time.


Iron Man 3, Fast and Furious 6, Man of Steel, and Despicable Me 2 all brought in insane amounts of money.
 
2013-08-15 10:42:18 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Also, there were winners this year? I thought almost every big-budget movie flopped big-time.


Ironman 3 was the 5th highest grossing movie of all time. FF6 grossed half a billion international alone. Man of Steel made 160 million before a ticket was sold and still made over 600 million at the box office.
 
2013-08-15 10:50:18 AM
*checks for Pacific Rim*

Ok, it was deemed "good"
 
2013-08-15 11:34:53 AM
It prevailed over the idea that you can't get a movie out of Max Brooks' source material (although it did take a lot of liberties to do so).

Shiat the book was a goldmine of material and a decent hollywood writer could have had a field day with it. Oh wait I used decent and hollywood writer in the same sentence.
 
2013-08-15 11:47:43 AM

DanZero: *checks for Pacific Rim*

Ok, it was deemed "good"


The movie deserved more then it got.  Glad it did well overseas, and its sure to make a killing on dvd/blu-ray sales.  I loved it because, well, it proved that you can, in fact, make a giant robot live action film.  That's something Japan had tried many times, and was never able to really pull off.

Needed better marketing though, as many thought it was some sort of transformers knockoff rather then a monster movie fundamentally about the people rather then the robots.
 
2013-08-15 11:49:49 AM

groppet: It prevailed over the idea that you can't get a movie out of Max Brooks' source material (although it did take a lot of liberties to do so).

Shiat the book was a goldmine of material and a decent hollywood writer could have had a field day with it. Oh wait I used decent and hollywood writer in the same sentence.


as much as WWZ the film was in almost no way the book....  it was a pretty damned good movie.  I loved the book, and the film entertained me enough that I have seen it twice and will get it in HD when released.

rugman11: Melissa McCarthy is the new version of that, except that she doesn't command Sandler's $20 million payday yet, so her movies run in the $30-40 million range instead of $75 million. But she still manages to bring in $150-200 million every time.


And for the life of me I just don't get this right here.  Bridesmaids sucked out loud, Identity Thief was terrible and The Heat is just abysmal.  She isn't as funny as they want you to believe.  Not.  At.  All.
 
2013-08-15 11:51:03 AM

Antimatter: DanZero: *checks for Pacific Rim*

Ok, it was deemed "good"

The movie deserved more then it got.  Glad it did well overseas, and its sure to make a killing on dvd/blu-ray sales.  I loved it because, well, it proved that you can, in fact, make a giant robot live action film.  That's something Japan had tried many times, and was never able to really pull off.

Needed better marketing though, as many thought it was some sort of transformers knockoff rather then a monster movie fundamentally about the people rather then the robots.


pacific rim was damned amazing and I can't wait to own it in HD.
 
2013-08-15 11:52:44 AM

Antimatter: Needed better marketing though, as many thought it was some sort of transformers knockoff rather then a monster movie fundamentally about the people rather then the robots.


That was 100% Warner Bros fault. They didn't want this to succeed, as they could use it as leverage against Legendary Pictures to negotiate a better deal on the remaining pictures between the two companies. The fact that it still succeeded in spite of WB trying to screw it allowed Legendary to have a lot more negotiating power.
 
2013-08-15 11:57:43 AM

HST's Dead Carcass: Can we just admit he can't carry a movie, and that we only like him in small doses?


Yet,  Buried was actually pretty good, and he's the only actor on camera for the entire film, and the film plays out pretty much in real-time. Mind you, a lot of credit goes to the writing and direction.
 
2013-08-15 12:01:09 PM

frepnog: as much as WWZ the film was in almost no way the book.... it was a pretty damned good movie. I loved the book, and the film entertained me enough that I have seen it twice and will get it in HD when released.


WWZ wasn't a bad movie but it was clearly designed by committee for the international market. You could replace zombies completely with a random disaster and tell almost the same movie. My biggest complaint was they took a really good zombie book and turned it into an ok action movie.
 
2013-08-15 12:03:01 PM

frepnog: Antimatter: DanZero: *checks for Pacific Rim*

Ok, it was deemed "good"

The movie deserved more then it got.  Glad it did well overseas, and its sure to make a killing on dvd/blu-ray sales.  I loved it because, well, it proved that you can, in fact, make a giant robot live action film.  That's something Japan had tried many times, and was never able to really pull off.

Needed better marketing though, as many thought it was some sort of transformers knockoff rather then a monster movie fundamentally about the people rather then the robots.

pacific rim was damned amazing and I can't wait to own it in HD.


This. Saw it in 2D opening day, then went back for IMAX 3D the next week. Too much of a poor college student to drop $30 on it again, but I'll probably see it in a theatre at least once more when it hits the dollar theatre down the road.
 
2013-08-15 12:05:05 PM

Carth: You could replace zombies completely with a random disaster and tell almost the same movie.


but they didn't do that, it was a zombie film.

/why do people say this shiat?
 
2013-08-15 12:12:01 PM

frepnog: Carth: You could replace zombies completely with a random disaster and tell almost the same movie.

but they didn't do that, it was a zombie film.

/why do people say this shiat?


Because in WWZ zombies were used as a plot device to examine human interaction during a never before seen event that threaten human existence. It looked at the problem from multiple points of view and showed what ties bind humanity together in the face of adversity and how some people crack.

The movie didn't do any of that and just blew stuff up and showed zombies running around. It wasn't a bad movie but it wasn't the film it could have been.
 
2013-08-15 12:13:37 PM
I saw The Host without every noticing it was written by the Twilight writer. This was good because if I'd known that I'd probably have avoided it, and it was actually quite good. A quiet sci-fit film, not a huge action fest, I really enjoyed it.

/Lots of people seem to hate it.
 
2013-08-15 12:29:33 PM

Flint Ironstag: I saw The Host without every noticing it was written by the Twilight writer. This was good because if I'd known that I'd probably have avoided it, and it was actually quite good. A quiet sci-fit film, not a huge action fest, I really enjoyed it.

/Lots of people seem to hate it.


When I first saw the preview I thought to myself "Oh kinda looks cool might have to check it out". Then when they were they said "Written by the writer of twilight" I goraned inside and said "Forget it"
 
2013-08-15 12:39:12 PM

Carth: The movie didn't do any of that and just blew stuff up and showed zombies running around. It wasn't a bad movie but it wasn't the film it could have been


It wasn't the film we wanted......it was the film we deserved.....

Anyway, I'm glad Despicable Me did well. I love those farking minions. It was a little slow in the middle, but still fun.
I miss "fun" movies. I prefer Iron Man movies over dark and broody Man of Steel.
EPIC was boring as all get out.
Hangover 3 was also. Hangover 3 was the Smokey and the Bandit 3 of the series.
 
2013-08-15 12:40:49 PM

Flint Ironstag: I saw The Host without every noticing it was written by the Twilight writer. This was good because if I'd known that I'd probably have avoided it, and it was actually quite good. A quiet sci-fit film, not a huge action fest, I really enjoyed it.

/Lots of people seem to hate it.


dude, I watched that film and let me tell you - people hate it because it sucks, and sucks hard.  It sucks like Gianna Michaels on the set of a bukakke film.  It sucks more than Mega-Maid.  It is just a bad, bad film.
 
2013-08-15 12:41:22 PM

Zombie DJ: Anyway, I'm glad Despicable Me did well. I love those farking minions. It was a little slow in the middle, but still fun.


I haven't see DM2 yet but I"m looking forward to it on video. I agree MoS tried to make superman too dark and serious and it didn't work. Pacific Rim was my favorite summer movie because it knew exactly what it wanted to be and succeeded.
 
2013-08-15 12:48:10 PM

scottydoesntknow: That was 100% Warner Bros fault. They didn't want this to succeed, as they could use it as leverage against Legendary Pictures to negotiate a better deal on the remaining pictures between the two companies. The fact that it still succeeded in spite of WB trying to screw it allowed Legendary to have a lot more negotiating power.


www.militaryphotos.net

/I don't buy it. MoS was Legendary and they marketed the shiat out of it
 
2013-08-15 12:55:13 PM

scottydoesntknow: The only fly in the ointment is that Man Of Steel was a divisive reboot. Unlike valet Begins, which seemed to win most people over, Man Of Steel's reviews were mixed, with the last act in particular coming in for heavy criticism. That said, even the harshest of critics seemed to admit that Henry Cavill was a fine Superman, and Warner Bros will now be keen to use Man Of Steel as a catalyst for many more DC movies.

That's the greatest thing I've read today.

/Woke up an hour ago


Spellcheck fark up notwithstanding, essentially they're right:  Batman Begins was applauded and people were waiting for the sequel.  Man of Steel?  Meh at this point.
 
2013-08-15 12:59:54 PM

scottydoesntknow: That was 100% Warner Bros fault. They didn't want this to succeed, as they could use it as leverage against Legendary Pictures to negotiate a better deal on the remaining pictures between the two companies. The fact that it still succeeded in spite of WB trying to screw it allowed Legendary to have a lot more negotiating power.


Oh, that's farking nice.

Pacific Rim was about the best fantasy film I've seen in years. I'll gladly watch it over any of the Dark Knight or Avengers film. Pre-ordered the Blu-Ray when I got home and told people I worked with bluntly "please, just trust me and go and see it". At my age, it's rare to go to a film and feel goosebumps at what's on screen, to go "holy shiat" because you're so bowled over, and I thank every film maker that can still bring out the inner child in me that saw Star Wars and Raiders of the Lost Ark.

The way the fights were shot, the imagination that went into the kaiju and jaegers, the way that they balanced heroic macho warriors with crazy, comic scientists to bring some relief and Ron Farking Perlman, and fit it all together.

If I see anything better this year, I'll be really surprised.
 
2013-08-15 01:00:35 PM

peterthx: scottydoesntknow: That was 100% Warner Bros fault. They didn't want this to succeed, as they could use it as leverage against Legendary Pictures to negotiate a better deal on the remaining pictures between the two companies. The fact that it still succeeded in spite of WB trying to screw it allowed Legendary to have a lot more negotiating power.

[www.militaryphotos.net image 400x300]

/I don't buy it. MoS was Legendary and they marketed the shiat out of it


I agree.  The trailers didn't show much outside of the fight sequences but, really, how are the going to fit the idea of The Drift into a trailer?  And the middle 45 minutes of the movie is about the training of the sidekick, not really trailer material either.  It's just not a movie that cuts down to 90 seconds very well.
 
2013-08-15 01:09:45 PM

groppet: Flint Ironstag: I saw The Host without every noticing it was written by the Twilight writer. This was good because if I'd known that I'd probably have avoided it, and it was actually quite good. A quiet sci-fit film, not a huge action fest, I really enjoyed it.

/Lots of people seem to hate it.

When I first saw the preview I thought to myself "Oh kinda looks cool might have to check it out". Then when they were they said "Written by the writer of twilight" I goraned inside and said "Forget it"



I liked it. And then I found out it was written by the Twilight writer. Otherwise I would have done exactly what you did.


frepnog: Flint Ironstag: I saw The Host without every noticing it was written by the Twilight writer. This was good because if I'd known that I'd probably have avoided it, and it was actually quite good. A quiet sci-fit film, not a huge action fest, I really enjoyed it.

/Lots of people seem to hate it.

dude, I watched that film and let me tell you - people hate it because it sucks, and sucks hard.  It sucks like Gianna Michaels on the set of a bukakke film.  It sucks more than Mega-Maid.  It is just a bad, bad film.



What can I say? I liked it. It wasn't the best movie ever. But I'll watch it again. If it had some uber-geek sci-fi authors name on it people would have loved it.
 
2013-08-15 01:10:52 PM

peterthx: scottydoesntknow: That was 100% Warner Bros fault. They didn't want this to succeed, as they could use it as leverage against Legendary Pictures to negotiate a better deal on the remaining pictures between the two companies. The fact that it still succeeded in spite of WB trying to screw it allowed Legendary to have a lot more negotiating power.

[www.militaryphotos.net image 400x300]

/I don't buy it. MoS was Legendary and they marketed the shiat out of it


Because Warner Bros owns the rights to DC distribution and did NOT want to see a possible franchise fail (especially with the success of the Batman trilogy). Legendary helped finance MoS, but it was not the main studio behind it. They (WB) negotiated with Legendary to keep 100% stakes in the Batman & Superman crossover in exchange for Legendary getting a stake in Chris Nolan's new movie Interstellar.
 
2013-08-15 01:30:32 PM

Flint Ironstag: If it had some uber-geek sci-fi authors name on it people would have loved it.

it wouldn't have sucked so hard.

there, FTFY.

I went in to the Host liking the premise and disregarded the Twilight author connection because I really wanted to give the film a chance.  Unfortunately, much like giving that Motel 6 hooker a chance, it was just a bad idea.  Yeah, the film gave me herpes it was so bad.

/don't really have herpes
//but man just thinking about that film is like a 5-alarm outbreak of the herp.
 
2013-08-15 01:37:27 PM

scottydoesntknow: Because Warner Bros owns the rights to DC distribution and did NOT want to see a possible franchise fail (especially with the success of the Batman trilogy). Legendary helped finance MoS, but it was not the main studio behind it. They (WB) negotiated with Legendary to keep 100% stakes in the Batman & Superman crossover in exchange for Legendary getting a stake in Chris Nolan's new movie Interstellar.


If what you said was true they it still would have been in their best interest to see MoS fail.

Just because they didn't market Pacific Rim the same way they marketed MoS, or Hangover III, or Jack The Giant Slayer (or even 42) doesn't mean there's a conspiracy. It's a hard sell since it is not a mindless Godzilla/Transformers mashup like it seemed to be, just as rugman11 pointed out.

So a big fat [citation needed] to back up your story is required.
 
2013-08-15 01:42:11 PM

peterthx: scottydoesntknow: Because Warner Bros owns the rights to DC distribution and did NOT want to see a possible franchise fail (especially with the success of the Batman trilogy). Legendary helped finance MoS, but it was not the main studio behind it. They (WB) negotiated with Legendary to keep 100% stakes in the Batman & Superman crossover in exchange for Legendary getting a stake in Chris Nolan's new movie Interstellar.

If what you said was true they it still would have been in their best interest to see MoS fail.

Just because they didn't market Pacific Rim the same way they marketed MoS, or Hangover III, or Jack The Giant Slayer (or even 42) doesn't mean there's a conspiracy. It's a hard sell since it is not a mindless Godzilla/Transformers mashup like it seemed to be, just as rugman11 pointed out.

So a big fat [citation needed] to back up your story is required.


pacific rim didn't do well in america because the story is simply not one that american audiences are likely to find appealing.  most americans don't like anime, and pacific rim was nothing if not live action anime.  Personally, I knew it was going to founder in the states.

/also knew that Lone Ranger was going to fail.  Seriously, who thought that was a good idea?

// LOVE LOVE LOOOOVED Pacific Rim.
 
2013-08-15 01:53:45 PM
Pacific Rim was a great film and really deserved a better showing at the box office.  Personally, I cannot understand why it didn't grab people's imagination.  It was vastly better than any other blockbuster this summer.
 
2013-08-15 02:21:35 PM

Kaeishiwaza: Personally, I cannot understand why it didn't grab people's imagination.


The trailers made it look like a Transformers knockoff.
 
2013-08-15 02:45:57 PM

peterthx: scottydoesntknow: Because Warner Bros owns the rights to DC distribution and did NOT want to see a possible franchise fail (especially with the success of the Batman trilogy). Legendary helped finance MoS, but it was not the main studio behind it. They (WB) negotiated with Legendary to keep 100% stakes in the Batman & Superman crossover in exchange for Legendary getting a stake in Chris Nolan's new movie Interstellar.

If what you said was true they it still would have been in their best interest to see MoS fail.

Just because they didn't market Pacific Rim the same way they marketed MoS, or Hangover III, or Jack The Giant Slayer (or even 42) doesn't mean there's a conspiracy. It's a hard sell since it is not a mindless Godzilla/Transformers mashup like it seemed to be, just as rugman11 pointed out.

So a big fat [citation needed] to back up your story is required.


With only two weeks left before release, Warner Bros still had 70% of the marketing budget left unspent on Pacific Rim. They were also only responsible for 25% of the actual budget for Pacific Rim, and Legendary was responsible for the other 75%. Compare that to MoS where they shared the production budget 50/50 and WB would be keeping the rights to DC distribution afterward.

Man of Steel was WB's baby while Pacific Rim was the red-headed stepchild to them. Add in the less-than-amicable relationship between the two companies, and it's not hard to see that WB did not want Pacific Rim to succeed.

Citation
 
2013-08-15 02:53:31 PM
GDT's my favourite working director and I was incredible stoked for Pacific Rim, but honestly I thought it was pretty mediocre. The only real high points for me were Idris Elba, the design of the mechs/kaiju, and the Hong Kong fight scene.

The lead was boring.
I didn't find the scientists funny (and I usually really like Charlie Day), and they weren't incorporated into the plot very well.
The big dramatic moments in the last few minutes didn't really feel earned.
I didn't even think the other major fight scenes were very well done. I could barely tell what was happening in the first one, and staging the final confronation underwater took out the sense of scale. The category 5 kaiju looked just like all the others they'd been fighting.


I dunno. I didn't hate it. It was enjoyable enough. I just really expected more from GDT.
 
2013-08-15 03:10:47 PM

scottydoesntknow: With only two weeks left before release, Warner Bros still had 70% of the marketing budget left unspent on Pacific Rim. They were also only responsible for 25% of the actual budget for Pacific Rim, and Legendary was responsible for the other 75%. Compare that to MoS where they shared the production budget 50/50 and WB would be keeping the rights to DC distribution afterward.

Man of Steel was WB's baby while Pacific Rim was the red-headed stepchild to them. Add in the less-than-amicable relationship between the two companies, and it's not hard to see that WB did not want Pacific Rim to succeed.

Citation


Not a citation, since a lot of that article is rumor and speculation. And the majority of marketing happens in the two weeks before a film opens, so naturally you save your money for that time. Imagine that!

You also didn't explain the heavy push behind Hangover III and the other WB/Legendary movies I listed. ONE hard to market movie does not a conspiracy make!
 
2013-08-15 04:49:34 PM

IdBeCrazyIf: The Dark Valet?

....aren't all of them darker in skin anyway?


I think Forrest Whitaker did that.
 
2013-08-15 05:21:19 PM

rugman11: imontheinternet: [thedukesplayground.files.wordpress.com image 425x425]
This is the most bankable star in America. Think about that for a second.

It's actually been building for a while.  We've reached a point where movie stars can't sell a $150-200 million movie (see: Oblivion, After Earth, The Lone Ranger).  You need an established franchise to do that (comic books, Hunger Games, Twilight, Harry Potter, etc.).  What movie stars can sell is the $75 million movie that only needs to make $150 million to be a success.  And that's what Sandler gets you.  With a couple of exceptions, his movies are $150-200 million in the bank, every time.  Melissa McCarthy is the new version of that, except that she doesn't command Sandler's $20 million payday yet, so her movies run in the $30-40 million range instead of $75 million.  But she still manages to bring in $150-200 million every time.


Kevin Smith operated like that.  Every movie cost 20 million or less, but always made around 35 million.  It was a safe bet.
 
2013-08-15 09:08:01 PM
You basement dwelling hacks can gripe all you want.  Man of Steel was worth every penny I paid to go see it.

Replace Man of Steel with some shiatfest like Doctor Who and you guys would probably cream your pants.  Pathetic.
 
Displayed 50 of 56 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report