Originally Posted By DDMAN26 <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://deadline.com/2015/06/jurassic-world-weekend-box-office-spy-entourage-insidious-chapter-3-1201441812/">http://deadline.com/2015/06/ju...1441812/</a> I can't speak for the quality as I haven't seen it. But Jurassic World pulled in 83 million and could be the second film after Avengers to make 200 million. Everyone thought this would be Disney's year but Universal is saying not so fast
Originally Posted By dagobert >>>Everyone thought this would be Disney's year but Universal is saying not so fast <<< I still can't believe that Fast and the Furious made so much money. These movies are as dumb as the Transformers movies. I can't wait to see Jurassic World and maybe the Minions movie, but that's it for me when it comes to Universal this year. Maybe we are going to watch the Everest movie. The book on which that movies as based is so interesting.
Originally Posted By dagobert Since I mentioned the the Fast movies as being dumb, I guess that counts for the Marvel movies too. Different tastes, different movies. Like the Marvel movies, which I really like, the Fast or Transformers movies are perfect blockbuster movies and each franchise has its fans. So brain out, fun on.
Originally Posted By dagobert >>>I like the Fast movies because they know they're kind of ridiculous. <<< As I said, each franchise has its fans, which is totally fine. I just didn't expect that the Fast 7 movie would be so successful, since the old ones weren't.
Originally Posted By CuriousConstance "I still can't believe that Fast and the Furious made so much money. These movies are as dumb as the Transformers movies. " Agreed!
Originally Posted By CuriousConstance I can't stand cheezy one liners, and I bet Fast and Furious has a multitude of them.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>Since I mentioned the the Fast movies as being dumb, I guess that counts for the Marvel movies too.<< Yah, they're all kind of dumb big-budget popcorn flicks. I guess that's to be expected in the summer, but it's just annoying that it's all we get year-round these days. It seems that the studios are all focusing in on the audience that likes those sorts of films, while essentially forgetting about the rest of us. I guess that's part of the reason I only average about one movie a year in theaters... I wonder when we'll see the end of this trend. I noticed the other day that in the late 90's/early 00's, there were TONS of romantic comedy/meet cute type movies, but those have dried up. I wonder if there will be a day in the not-so-distant future where these big budget spectacles have a similar fate. It seems hard to imagine, since the studios release their schedules so far in advance, but I suppose anything is possible
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 Well there really hasn't been a great romantic comedy since when Sleepless in Seattle? To me as long as a big budget tent pole movie is well made and entertaining they can make as many as needed. Now they don't always hit the mark its thrilling to watch. But films like Argo, American Sniper, Gone Girl show that films for adults can still be very successful . And I'll say my two favorite films last year were small pictures that save from some awards went unnoticed Whiplash and Locke
Originally Posted By dagobert >>>To me as long as a big budget tent pole movie is well made and entertaining they can make as many as needed. Now they don't always hit the mark its thrilling to watch.<<< I agree. I enjoy popcorn movies as much as movies like Argo, The Theory of Everything or Woody Allen movies.
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 Sorry bad sentence: They don't always hit their mark but when they do it's exhilarating
Originally Posted By utahjosh I loved Jurassic World. Our audience clapped at the end, and cheered during parts of the movie.
Originally Posted By magic0214 Universal's "tent poles" don't excite me whatsoever. That being said, I adored Pitch Perfect 2 and I have been excited for "Trainwreck" for MONTHS. Those two get me in seats. Not explosions in different locales.
Originally Posted By leemac <<I loved Jurassic World. Our audience clapped at the end, and cheered during parts of the movie.>> Boy the latter would annoy the hell out of me. Never understand why a lot of American movie-goers think this is appropriate behaviour. One of the interesting things about JW is that Uni and Legendary brought it in at $150m (allegedly). Disney should take note how to make a huge summer blockbuster that doesn't begin with a 2 (I'm looking at you Tomorrowland).
Originally Posted By dagobert >>>Disney should take note how to make a huge summer blockbuster that doesn't begin with a 2 (I'm looking at you Tomorrowland).<<< Maybe Disney has the wrong people to handle the Studio. I haven't seen JW yet, but judging from the trailers, it looks far more elaborate than Tomorrowland. Why are Disney's movies always so expensive?
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>Disney should take note how to make a huge summer blockbuster that doesn't begin with a 2 (I'm looking at you Tomorrowland).<< Don't look at Tomorrowland. It sure wasn't a blockbuster by any means! ; ) >>Why are Disney's movies always so expensive?<< I would guess it's in part because they only make a few films a year, yet maintain a full studio staff. The old films could be made cheaply because they could pump them out quickly. Now that people have to work on them longer, the expense adds up Not to mention that Disney has a crazy overhead to get things like marketing and merchandise. For both of those, they seem to allocate a lot more effort than the competition
Originally Posted By dagobert Makes sense. Given the already high expenses, I wonder why Disney isn't doing more smaller movies. I know Iger likes franchises, but maybe that happens again when he is out.
Originally Posted By ecdc Jurassic World was just not a good movie but danged if the kid in me didn't drag me to the theatre because dinosaurs.
Originally Posted By ecdc Also, Spielberg is a master. That Jurassic Park's CGI is more natural than Jurassic World's tells you all you need to know.
Originally Posted By dagobert >>>Also, Spielberg is a master. That Jurassic Park's CGI is more natural than Jurassic World's tells you all you need to know.<< Then I would blame ILM.
