Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
Movies MOBILE
Byrne Robotics | Movies << Prev Page of 20 Next >>
Topic: Shazam - Spoilers begin pg. 8 Post Reply | Post New Topic
Author
Message
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security

Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 33180
Posted: 11 April 2019 at 12:28am | IP Logged | 1 post reply

Haven't seen the film...yet.  But listening to a review from the panel of the podcast POP CULTURE HAPPY HOUR you would think that this was a kiddie film.  Not quite sure I get that designation.  Just because it features kids, it's a "kid film"?  Is STRANGER THINGS a "kiddie" TV series because it features children?

I really feel reviewers are glomming onto the fact that kids are in the cast to force some kind of "kid" narrative onto it instead of reviewing it as a film in its own right.  They even try to make the connection to BIG, which is obvious, but wasn't a kid's movie when it was released and, in fact, was marketed to adults who wanted to connect with their inner child. How did that film get twisted into being a "kid's movie" simply because there are children involved?
Back to Top profile | search
 
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12914
Posted: 11 April 2019 at 2:34am | IP Logged | 2 post reply

I feel that "kid's film" is appropriate, and it's not a pejorative. I wouldn't call it a "kiddie film". It really did feel like a fusion between the modern superhero movie and the sort of kids' adventure films you had in the 80s, like E.T., GOONIES, and EXPLORERS. There's a bit of whimsy and childhood wish fulfilment, without the need to frame it as the nostalgia of a jaded adult (hi READY PLAYER ONE!).
Back to Top profile | search
 
Andy Mokler
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 20 January 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2651
Posted: 11 April 2019 at 4:03am | IP Logged | 3 post reply

From everything I've heard, this is along the lines of Superman's trunkless look.  DC seems to want to distance itself from it's own character and at some point, it's just a different character.

I'm still uncertain whether I'll go to see this(mainly, I haven't been to the movies in so long that I want to see "something") and I hope I like it but those are the same thoughts I had when the Brandon Routh Superman came out.  

Talk about Lingchi.  Billy's different, Captain Marvel's different, his costume is different, his cape is different, his family's different...can't really say I'd be going to see a Captain Marvel movie.  I didn't need Johns to "fix" the character and his universe.  

I know, if one squints hard enough and concedes enough, the film itself has a good production value but as each year goes by, I think back to being a kid and wishing they made super hero movies and realizing I should have been more careful about what I wished for.  
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Eric Lund
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 15 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2065
Posted: 11 April 2019 at 5:18pm | IP Logged | 4 post reply

Lowest opening weekend of any DC movie and
DC thinks it is a win because it didn't
open as bad as they thought it would.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Marc Baptiste
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3089
Posted: 11 April 2019 at 6:22pm | IP Logged | 5 post reply

Eric,

I was thinking the same thing - I was thoroughly unimpressed with SHAZAM's opening weekend figure and not all surprised by its 78% post-weekend drop in ticket sales.

Marc


Edited by Marc Baptiste on 11 April 2019 at 6:23pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12914
Posted: 11 April 2019 at 6:39pm | IP Logged | 6 post reply

Lowest opening weekend of any DC movie and  DC thinks it is a win because it didn't open as bad as they thought it would.

óó-

Sorry, but this is silly. What else would it open at? Itís a DC movie that doesnít feature Superman, Batman, or Wonder Woman. Even SUICIDE SQUAD traded on its Batman connections with Joker and Harley Quinn. And general audiences are at least aware of Aquaman, and it was heavily marketed as a big summer blockbuster. SHAZAM is lesser-tier DC hero with no major box office movie stars. Itís performing how itís supposed to be performing.

This is akin to the people declaring ANT-MAN a failure (which also debuted in the mid-50s) because it didnít do as well as AVENGERS and GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security

Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 33180
Posted: 11 April 2019 at 11:15pm | IP Logged | 7 post reply

SHAZAM! also cost just $100 mil to make.  To put that into perspective re: DC films, BATMAN V SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE cost $250 mil.  JUSTICE LEAGUE cost an astounding $300 mil. SUICIDE SQUAD cost $175 mil. AQUAMAN cost $160 mil while WONDER WOMAN cost $150 mil.  

Success is always weighed by how much a film cost to make and market against its box office returns.  $100 mil for a superhero film might as well be considered an indie movie.  That it's already grossed $193.7 mil worldwide as of April 10 (six days) means, yes, it's a hit.  Warner Brothers has every right to tout it as a win. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security

Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 33180
Posted: 11 April 2019 at 11:49pm | IP Logged | 8 post reply

 Eric Lund wrote:
DC thinks it is a win because it didn't 
open as bad as they thought it would.

What were the expectations of DC (really Warner Brothers) for the opening?  Pre-release, Variety tagged it as opening north of $40 mil.  That would still be a great opening for a film that cost just $100 mil. 

And then it exceeded expectations by $13 million. 

By Friday, April 5 (opening day) Business Insider predicted it would end its weekend with a $50 mil gross. Note: That is $10 mil more than Variety predicted a month earlier.  

And then it exceed that expectation by $3 million.

So are you really saying that Warner Brothers thought SHAZAM! would open to less than $40 mil domestic despite all evidence to the contrary and now they should be mocked for touting it as a win because it made more? Seriously? 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian Miller
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 28 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 26493
Posted: 12 April 2019 at 5:18am | IP Logged | 9 post reply

At least itís not as bad a failure as fucking Captain Marvel. What a let-down. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Eric Lund
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 15 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2065
Posted: 12 April 2019 at 5:43am | IP Logged | 10 post reply

45 million was the expected opening.... Lot of faith
there....
Back to Top profile | search
 
Petter Myhr Ness
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 02 July 2009
Location: Norway
Posts: 3052
Posted: 12 April 2019 at 9:30am | IP Logged | 11 post reply

Like with the (other) Captain Marvel thread, a lot of the discussion seems to about whether the movie is a failure or not, instead of whether it's good or not. Maybe I've put on my grumpy old man-pants today, but why does it matter to any of US how much money WB or Disney makes on the movie? Did you invest in it? If not, why not stick to whether you enjoyed it or not? 

Not pointing out anyone here in the forum, incidentally, just the entitled "fan boys" out there. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Eric Lund
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 15 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2065
Posted: 12 April 2019 at 11:45am | IP Logged | 12 post reply

The whole point of any movie is to make money....that is
why they are made.
Back to Top profile | search
 

<< Prev Page of 20 Next >>
  Post Reply | Post New Topic |

Forum Jump

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login

You are currently viewing the MOBILE version of the site.
CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE FULL SITE