• Introducing Image Options for ResetEra 2.0! Check the left side navigation bar to show or hide images, avatars, covers, and embedded media. More details at the link.
  • Community Spotlight sign-ups are open once again for both Gaming and EtcetEra Hangout threads! If you want to shine a spotlight on your community, please register now.

Wkd Box Office - 5•10-12•19 - Pikachu does like Ash and fails to be #1, Endgame's Arceus-like run slows, Tolkien can't Hustle audience interest

Oct 28, 2017
7,059
New Jersey
Nobody is saying Infinity War/Endgame doesn't look convincing.

I was throroughly convinced that Thanos was using the reality stone with a lot of the weird compositing throughout. It kept me guessing and even serviced the narrative. Based Marvel.
Thanos looked worse at the end of EG than he did in IW in my opinion. Some of the shots of his head/neck in the armor looked like they needed more time. Effects work in general in EG were a step down from IW
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,337
I FINALLY saw Endgame last night. Absolutely loved it. It certainly wasn't my favorite MCU film but it was a love letter to the folks that invested a lot in watching the first 21 films.

Great to see it doing well!
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,419
People are actually pushing the MCU as a paragon of CGI? Thanos looks good, but just about everything else ranges from "ok" to "cut-and-pasted Ruffalo Head." I say this as a fan! The CGI has never been the strong suit, and the big endings where more and more of what you see on the screen is CGI had always been a weakness.

That's because to an X-Men fan, those characters (minus perhaps Wolverine) have never been in a movie or a TV show. Poor half-assed shades with their names have been, but the MCU will deliver the actual goods we've waited all this time to see. So you better fucking believe I want to see Cyclops, Jean, Storm, and the rest of the team done up right for once. I'd like to see the MCU hold off on Wolverine for a while and let the X-Men team as a unit gel and shine, though.
The Fox X-Men movies are all over the place in quality, but they gave us true-to-the-character versions of most of the X-Men. And I don't know why you bank on the MCU versions being more faithful when we have characters like Hawkeye, or Star-Lord (and many other GotG characters) who aren't much at all like their comics versions. the MCU has felt free to take big liberties with character interpretations on film.
 
Oct 25, 2017
9,473
It looks to be holding well.

First two days of the week are significantly above How to Train Your Dragon 3's (9,1M$ vs 6M$) despite HTTYD3 having a slightly better opening (55M$)
Any kids out of school yet? That might be why.

In MInnesota kids aren't usually let out until June but I've heard it's different elsewhere.

Maybe it won't have a huge drop next weekend. Like $30m-40m?
 
Oct 25, 2017
15,372
The Fox X-Men movies are all over the place in quality, but they gave us true-to-the-character versions of most of the X-Men. And I don't know why you bank on the MCU versions being more faithful when we have characters like Hawkeye, or Star-Lord (and many other GotG characters) who aren't much at all like their comics versions. the MCU has felt free to take big liberties with character interpretations on film.
They did? Outside of Logan, Xavier, and Magneto, every other X-Men character in these movies is barely more than their name and power
 
I think it's going to outright bomb. The last movie was the worst X-Men movie, the fans know the franchise is over, Sophie Turner is a terrible Jean, and the trailers are terrible.

It's going to fall hard.
One of the trailers had an insane amount of views in China iirc. Doesn't necessarily mean much of course but I assume it will still manage to clear First Class worldwide.
Which would not be a great result but hey, who cares anyway, it's all gonna be rebooted.
 

PhoncipleBone

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,828
Kentucky, USA
Any kids out of school yet? That might be why.

In MInnesota kids aren't usually let out until June but I've heard it's different elsewhere.

Maybe it won't have a huge drop next weekend. Like $30m-40m?
A drop like How to Train Your Dragon 3, which was 45%, would be hovering around $30m. $40m second weekend is not happening.
Even if it had a Zootopia drop of 31% it wouldn't hit $38m.
 
Nov 15, 2017
4,251
I think it's going to outright bomb. The last movie was the worst X-Men movie, the fans know the franchise is over, Sophie Turner is a terrible Jean, and the trailers are terrible.

It's going to fall hard.
What would be a bomb in your opinion?
I think it manages a 50 million DOM OW and 150 WW OW. I'm not expecting it to have great legs or anything but I think the WW BO will carry it to at least 400 mil with a chance of hitting 500 mil depending mostly on China. Anecdotally, most people I talk to IRL want to see the movie since they realize it'll be the last film and they've grown attached to these versions of the characters. I know i'm still going to see it for the same reason.
 
Nov 13, 2017
3,999
I do think X-Men will underperform because people know that the franchise is over after this, so there isn't much point in tuning in anymore. I see that they're trying to pivot the marketing to make the movie out ot be a grand finale to 20 years of films (Endgame's impact) but I think people just aren't as invested and don't really care.
 
It looks to be holding well.

First two days of the week are significantly above How to Train Your Dragon 3's (9,1M$ vs 6M$) despite HTTYD3 having a slightly better opening (55M$)
Not to derail the thread, but now that there’s going to be a Toy Story 4, does How to Train Your Dragon have any competition as the best animated trilogy? Those movies are just so fucking good.
 
Nov 1, 2017
2,762
People are actually pushing the MCU as a paragon of CGI? Thanos looks good, but just about everything else ranges from "ok" to "cut-and-pasted Ruffalo Head." I say this as a fan! The CGI has never been the strong suit, and the big endings where more and more of what you see on the screen is CGI had always been a weakness.



The Fox X-Men movies are all over the place in quality, but they gave us true-to-the-character versions of most of the X-Men. And I don't know why you bank on the MCU versions being more faithful when we have characters like Hawkeye, or Star-Lord (and many other GotG characters) who aren't much at all like their comics versions. the MCU has felt free to take big liberties with character interpretations on film.
Logan, Charles, and Erik are not the majority of the X-Men. Fox has also taken huge liberties with characters. They made Mystique into a hero and way more important than she ever was in the comics
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,419
They did? Outside of Logan, Xavier, and Magneto, every other X-Men character in these movies is barely more than their name and power
Cyclops in the original trilogy is exactly as wooden as the comics character (who I like, btw) and bounced off Logan just like in the books. Nightcrawler was dead-on. Adult Beast was perfect, and young Beast is pretty good. Deadpool is perfect. Original Jean was just like Jean (let's forget X3 happened). They're ensemble movies, so it's not like you get to see a ton of depth. There's a zillion characters in these movies, and the ones they focused on they got right, some of them exceptionally so.

There's a lot to complain about regarding the X-Men franchise, but characterization seems to be an odd one to me.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,419
What would be a bomb in your opinion?
I think it manages a 50 million DOM OW and 150 WW OW. I'm not expecting it to have great legs or anything but I think the WW BO will carry it to at least 400 mil with a chance of hitting 500 mil depending mostly on China. Anecdotally, most people I talk to IRL want to see the movie since they realize it'll be the last film and they've grown attached to these versions of the characters. I know i'm still going to see it for the same reason.
I'd say under 400M WW would count. I think that's what will happen, too.
 
Oct 25, 2017
11,103
People are actually pushing the MCU as a paragon of CGI? Thanos looks good, but just about everything else ranges from "ok" to "cut-and-pasted Ruffalo Head." I say this as a fan! The CGI has never been the strong suit, and the big endings where more and more of what you see on the screen is CGI had always been a weakness.



The Fox X-Men movies are all over the place in quality, but they gave us true-to-the-character versions of most of the X-Men. And I don't know why you bank on the MCU versions being more faithful when we have characters like Hawkeye, or Star-Lord (and many other GotG characters) who aren't much at all like their comics versions. the MCU has felt free to take big liberties with character interpretations on film.
You have no idea how much of what you're seeing is CG in the MCU films. You might notice some CG stunt double or three seconds of Banner looking bad but you won't notice a dozen other shots laced with CG that's completely seamless.
And holding the Fox X-Men films up as highly faithful to all the characters is...questionable, to say the least.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,419
Logan, Charles, and Erik are not the majority of the X-Men. Fox has also taken huge liberties with characters. They made Mystique into a hero and way more important than she ever was in the comics
Didn't have Mystique on my list. They absolutely did change her a ton. Never said otherwise. I left Bobby off too, though interestingly the comics version has been made to be like the movie version since. Warren is also quite different. The initial post implied only a handful were done faithfully though, and that's just wrong.

Exactly. Tony Stark had a completely different personality in the comics-- one reason I like movie Iron Man so much more. Thor is more akin to Marvel's Hercules than comic-book Thor. Starlord is a doofus now. Drax and Mantis are virtually unrecognizable. Hawkeye is a completely different character who happens to have a bow.

Saying that you're eager for the MCU to adapt the X-Men more faithfully than the Fox movies did seems like setting yourself up for disappointment.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,419
You have no idea how much of what you're seeing is CG in the MCU films. You might notice some CG stunt double or three seconds of Banner looking bad but you won't notice a dozen other shots laced with CG that's completely seamless.
And holding the Fox X-Men films up as highly faithful to all the characters is...questionable, to say the least.
The problem is how much of the incidentals I *do* see. Dumb stuff, like the eye-holes in the suits in Endgame in act two. just stands out as ugly. There's a ton of it across MCU movies, they lean of CGI fixes far too much. And part of my problem is characters like Hulk look bad *all the time.*

And I didn't say they X-Men films were "highly faithful to all the characters" at all. I said they did far more characters justice than the 3 that the person I replied to claimed. Like the MCU, there's a mix of very faithful and quite different.
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,864
They did? Outside of Logan, Xavier, and Magneto, every other X-Men character in these movies is barely more than their name and power
Sometimes less than that :'v
Darwin was simply done dirty, and conversely, Quicksilver was turned into a character more like the Flash.

The adaptation part of the films really suffered from being the Wolverine Show. And to give priority to star power instead of bringing characters to the big screen, like the actress with a big social media game and Jennifer Lawrence.

While you could argue MCU presents sanitized versions of the characters. I think they do it right for the runtime and for appealing most people; keeping the quintessential characters traits and power sets, with great casting. Great examples: Carol Danvers, Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, who are really hard to empathize sometimes in comics due to how they are presented.

With Fox I always felt some changes were just for the sake of it because the studio thought they knew better (And following along the aforementioned Wolverine & Friends narratives).

Some of them are great films, yeah, but as adaptations...

Like, they could have done Doom Patrol, Misfits, Hamatora, or any other property about outcasts with superpowers, and still, we could have gotten a film like Logan, regardless of the source.

Never felt they liked the characters themselves, but loved them as vehicles to tell their stories, not the mainstream characters' stories in the comics.

But dunno, my opinion might be really biased right now since the last MCU film was Endgame and I really liked that.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,419
Sometimes less than that :'v
Darwin was simply done dirty, and conversely, Quicksilver was turned into a character more like the Flash.
I don't disagree, but the MCU does the same. Mantis isn't the same character at all. Hawkeye is completely different. Drax is completely different from either of his two major comics interpretations. Star-Lord is made into a (much more entertaining) doofus. They got Spider-Man's personality right but are turning him inot Iron Man Jr.

Saying that only "pale shades" exists in the Fox films but that MCU will do it right seems to be some very selective screening of the evidence. I don't doubt the movies will be better. But the MCU takes liberties about the same amount as do the Fox movies. Some characters are rich and deep and dead-on right, some are different for the better, and some seem to be different for no good reason and turn out worse.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,419
I mean, sure, if you compare any character to Caesar.. then nothing is good CGI. But, saying he looks "bad" in Endgame, I guess I just don't have an eye for that. I thought he looked good. Oh well, carry on.
For the most part, CGI doesn't bother me whether it's good or bad. But the biggest drawback is that when there are lingering medium or close takes of a CGI character it takes me out of the movie a bit.

Somebody said it up above, the best recent CGI character was Alita. Given how much they lingered on her and how much of the move centered around her, they did a fantastic job.