Marvel wen't from Amazing Spiderman 2 to Homecoming.Can Marvel make X-Men a success after what Fox has done/doing to it?
Nobody's gonna care what garbage came before.
Marvel wen't from Amazing Spiderman 2 to Homecoming.Can Marvel make X-Men a success after what Fox has done/doing to it?
I think we can all agree...Dark Pheonix is gonna bomb.
God it look so shit.
What is a Mortal Combat?Go see Detective Pikachu everyone! It's the best video game adaption since Mortal Combat!
Go see Detective Pikachu everyone! It's the best video game adaption since Mortal Combat!
Plenty of people. Your decades too late to question the greatness of MK
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.
So anyone who lives near an IMAX and was disappointed John Wick 3 wasn't gonna play on the screen may want to double check showtimes. The Regal IMAX near me will show it, but it will start Friday instead of Thursday night.
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.
Any kids out of school yet? That might be why.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$) despite HTTYD3 having a slightly better opening (55M$)
They did? Outside of Logan, Xavier, and Magneto, every other X-Men character in these movies is barely more than their name and powerThe 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.
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.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.
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 $30m-40m?
What would be a bomb in your opinion?I think it's going to outright bomb. The last movie was the worst X-Men movie, the fans know the franchise is over, Sophie Turner is a terrible Jean, and the trailers are terrible.
It's going to fall hard.
It looks to be holding well.
First two days of the week are significantly above How to Train Your Dragon 3's (9,1M$ vs 6M$) despite HTTYD3 having a slightly better opening (55M$)
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 comicsPeople 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
They did? Outside of Logan, Xavier, and Magneto, every other X-Men character in these movies is barely more than their name and power
It really is. Serkis is on a different level when it comes to mo-cap acting.
That's why I said "has also"....
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.
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.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
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.
Wut..?And part of my problem is characters like Hulk look bad *all the time.*
Sometimes less than that :'vThey 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.
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.Hulk is not good CGI. Especially in Ragnarok and Endgame.
Especially when compared to Caesar, or even Thanos. It's clear that they spend more time on Thanos.
3 billion has been off the table for a while. It will most likely pass Avatar but it will be down to the wire and pretty dang close.So is 3 billion officially off the books for Endgame but passing Avatar still guaranteed?
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.
3 billion has been off the table for a while. It will most likely pass Avatar but it will be down to the wire.
Lmao at RBG