X-MEN: DARK PHOENIX directed by Simon Kinberg (11/2/18)
3 3

1,177 posts in this topic

81,141 posts
27 minutes ago, Jaydogrules said:

And colour me shocked if WB ever actually does move forward in earnest on anything theatrically on anything having to do with Shazam.  Believing that WB is seriously moving forward on its biggest box office bust (in terms of worldwide box office) with not one but multiple sequels, lol, is just more clapping at the sky IMO.

-J.

:nyah:

Now you are just doing this for attention. Come on. Admit it. The Hollywood Reporter, Deadline, Variety and others all announced the Black Adam director. Even the Producer of the Shazam and Black Adam films made an announcement about it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,429 posts
8 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

It already was.

Since Aquaman was a 2018 release, Deadline counted it in last year's list -- and it was listed as more profitable to Warner Bros. then Venom was to Sony.

Venom cost less than half what Aquaman did, and made $300MM less, but still only netted about about $15MM less than Aquaman.  

So I'm not sure what your point is supposed to be here.  

-J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,429 posts
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

:nyah:

Now you are just doing this for attention. Come on. Admit it. The Hollywood Reporter, Deadline, Variety and others all announced the Black Adam director. Even the Producer of the Shazam and Black Adam films made an announcement about it.

 

"Eyed to direct". "In talks". 

Nothing final about any of that.  

And Black Adam has been "in development" for ten years lol.  You think they're going to suddenly fast track it now after the first movie flamed out so spectacularly? 

Mm-kay. :foryou:

-J.

Edited by Jaydogrules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16,201 posts
19 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

It already was.

Since Aquaman was a 2018 release, Deadline counted it in last year's list -- and it was listed as more profitable to Warner Bros. then Venom was to Sony.

i meant to say that Captain Marvel would be more profitable than Aquaman for the reason you mentioned

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
81,141 posts

THE-NUMBERS: Dark Phoenix is Brighter Internationally

Quote

Dark Phoenix may have struggled domestically, but it is doing a lot better internationally. The film opened with $107.0 million in 53 markets with Japan being the lone major market it didn’t debut in. China was the film’s biggest single market, representing $44.44 million of its total haul, including $31.85 million over the weekend.

 

The film cracked $5 million in South Korea with a total opening of $5.58 million on 868 screens, including $2.82 million over the weekend. It had nearly identical results in the U.K. ($4.78 million in 615 theaters) and Mexico ($4.65 million). Unfortunately, for all of the film’s success on the international stage, the film is only looking to save face, as it cost $200 million to make and there’s nearly no chance it will recoup that in a timely fashion.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
81,141 posts

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,913 posts
53 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

 

If they were going to introduce a new villain group in the movie that nobody knows anything about, why was it the Skrulls in the first place?  For the most part they are a FF and Avengers villain not an X-Men.  Remember the Hellfire Club should be the villain here along with Jean. And if you are going to introduce a new group, why not the Shi'ar?

 

This choice makes little sense from the start. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
81,141 posts
26 minutes ago, drotto said:

If they were going to introduce a new villain group in the movie that nobody knows anything about, why was it the Skrulls in the first place?  For the most part they are a FF and Avengers villain not an X-Men.  Remember the Hellfire Club should be the villain here along with Jean. And if you are going to introduce a new group, why not the Shi'ar?

 

This choice makes little sense from the start. 

There was a Skrull in Uncanny X-Men #137, wasn't there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
81,141 posts

And in X-Men: TAS.

Quote

The Skrulls appeared in the 1990s X-Men TV series. In the episode "Mojovision" a Skrull is seen in the audience. In the episode "Dark Phoenix Saga" Lilandra consults the Skrull Empress on how to deal with Dark Phoenix's rampage.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,446 posts

They’re a big part of Apocalypse: The 12 too.  Still a lousy fit for this Dark Phoenix fiasco though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13,488 posts

Someone may have posted this already but I'm too lazy to hunt for it...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,594 posts

They were obviously skrulls. When I read that Jessica Chastain played Vuk of the D'bari, I knew that was obviously a BS last minute change. They didn't want to do a major overhaul to the entire story, so they just changed her name & race instead. Everyone knew the MCU planned to use the skrulls in Captain Marvel & Fox wanted to beat them to the punch, which they would have had it come out last November.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,913 posts
2 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

There was a Skrull in Uncanny X-Men #137, wasn't there?

Possibly, been years since I have read it.  And yes Skrulls have been used in X-Men, but they are much more associated with other teams. Plus, it is only more recently that the X-Men have dealt with them. Captian Marvel was a more logical fit for the Skrulls.

 

It was a stupid and failed substitution instead of using villains that are much more important in X-Men lore. Plus the original villains work much better with the story.

 

I understand changes are needed to adapt stories to film.  I will never understand why some things are changed for no clear or logical reason.  That is just change for change sake. That philosophy never works out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
81,141 posts
5 hours ago, drotto said:

Possibly, been years since I have read it.  And yes Skrulls have been used in X-Men, but they are much more associated with other teams. Plus, it is only more recently that the X-Men have dealt with them. Captian Marvel was a more logical fit for the Skrulls.

 

It was a stupid and failed substitution instead of using villains that are much more important in X-Men lore. Plus the original villains work much better with the story.

 

I understand changes are needed to adapt stories to film.  I will never understand why some things are changed for no clear or logical reason.  That is just change for change sake. That philosophy never works out.

You mean like not using Adam Warlock in the Infinity War and Endgame movies when he was integral to the original source material?

Or changing a character from a Tibetan man to a Celtic woman so as not to offend the Chinese movie market?

Studios make such changes either to work around character rights concerns, box office threats or to allow one director to allow another to develop a character from time to time. I would have been okay with the change if it helps tell a story people can appreciate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
81,141 posts
Quote

In a rare shattering of silence in a situation such as this, Dark Phoenix director Simon Kinberg has stepped forward publicly, taking the blame for the film's poor performance with reviews and audiences alike.

 

"It clearly is a movie that didn't connect with audiences that didn't see it, it didn't connect enough with audiences that did see it. So that's on me," Kinberg told KCRW's Kim Masters. "I loved making the movie, and I loved the people I made the movie with."

 

Later on in the interview, Kinberg admits that a previous chat with Ridley Scott has eased his mind about the entire process. While the two were on the set of The Martian, Scott told Kinberg his favorite film to work on was GI Jane, because that's where he had the most fun.

 

"He said it was his favorite because it was just a great process and he learned a lot on the process of making it. I've thought about that a lot over the years, and I thought about it a whole lot over the last weekend," Kinberg reflected.

 

In the lead-up to the film, Kinberg told ComicBook.com that Dark Phoenix was his version of Avengers: Endgame or Game of Thrones Season Eight — it was meant to be an epic conclusion to years worth of storytelling.

 

"I approach this movie as the culmination of 20 years of storytelling, of living with the X-Men for all this time and watching this family come together, and this movie is the movie that challenged that family and tears them apart in a new way," Kinberg said. "And so I imagined it as the culmination, and I even pitched it to the studio, as this is the culmination of this cycle of X-Men stories. Which there will be more X-Men movies in the future no doubt, but this particular cycle with this cast, it felt like it was time to do kind of what Game of Thrones has done, what Endgame has done, really see them challenged in a new way and sort of survive and go off into the sunset."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,446 posts
2 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

 

Is Kinberg on dope?  Dark Phoenix was supposed to be his “Endgame”?  With a cast had been together in full for, what, one film prior to Dark Phoenix?  And about a half dozen timelines across the X-Men movies?

Compared to the MCU that had been building for about 10 years, with everything building toward a common finale. 

Yeah, good plan. (thumbsu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
81,141 posts

Ouchy!

Quote

Dark Phoenix followed up lousy reviews and a lousy opening weekend with a near-record free fall. It earned just $2.348 million on its second Friday, down 83.2% from a $14 million opening day. That's a bigger drop than Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (-81%) and the biggest such drop for a "big" comic book superhero movie in history.

 

Heck, it's essentially the third-biggest drop for a "big" movie after Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II (-84% from a then-record $90 million opening day) and High School Musical 3 (-90% on its second Friday, which was Halloween night). At this rate, it'll earn just $8.63 million for a 74% second-weekend-drop. That'll be the second-biggest drop for any remotely "big" comic book superhero movie save for Steel and its 78% second-weekend-plunge ($870,068 from a $191,667 debut) back in 1997.

 

If we're talking somewhat bigger-scale superhero movies, it's by far the biggest such second-weekend drop, well ahead of Hellboy II which dropped 70% (from $34 million to $10 million) in 2008 against the $158 million opening weekend of The Dark Knight. Dark Phoenix has no such excuses. X-Men movies have always been a big frontloaded (this'll make five out of the top 20 biggest second-weekend drops for a comic book flick), but this is essentially a record for the genre.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,946 posts

Omg I just bit the bullet and watched Dark Phoenix. Wow what a colossal pile of . Talk about incompetent writing, acting, and directing. God Sophie Turner is a horrible actress at times. Even good actors like Nicholas Hoult and Jennifer Lawrence were incompetent and lost in this. Dear lord it was as if someone cynically wrote this movie mad-lib style from cliched comic themes and characters. The villains sucked, The “Special Girl” sucked, the back up hero’s sucked, it just blew from top to bottom.

Who was this movie written for? It didn’t know what it wanted to be. It tried to be a mindless action hero movie, but it did that late and ran it poorly. It tried to play up the social justice aspect but it gave up on it early and meaninglessly. This movie had no idea where it was going, other then down into a hole from which it never emerged.

This was damn near TLJ level of bad, the only redeeming factor is that you never really cared much for the characters the way you do Star Wars OT so when all hope of quality is lost and you are just waiting for the credits, it’s more of just boring and not soul crushing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
81,141 posts
1 hour ago, zhamlau said:

Omg I just bit the bullet and watched Dark Phoenix. Wow what a colossal pile of . Talk about incompetent writing, acting, and directing. God Sophie Turner is a horrible actress at times. Even good actors like Nicholas Hoult and Jennifer Lawrence were incompetent and lost in this. Dear lord it was as if someone cynically wrote this movie mad-lib style from cliched comic themes and characters. The villains sucked, The “Special Girl” sucked, the back up hero’s sucked, it just blew from top to bottom.

Who was this movie written for? It didn’t know what it wanted to be. It tried to be a mindless action hero movie, but it did that late and ran it poorly. It tried to play up the social justice aspect but it gave up on it early and meaninglessly. This movie had no idea where it was going, other then down into a hole from which it never emerged.

This was damn near TLJ level of bad, the only redeeming factor is that you never really cared much for the characters the way you do Star Wars OT so when all hope of quality is lost and you are just waiting for the credits, it’s more of just boring and not soul crushing.

 

I knew who was going to appreciate this post as soon as I read the first sentence.

"You hate this movie? Me too! Let's hate it together." (:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
3 3