By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies & TV - Solo Headed To Become A Flop? Yep, It Flopped.

 

How Much Will Solo Make WW?

Under $700M 56 60.87%
 
$700M-$800M 18 19.57%
 
$801M-$900M 12 13.04%
 
$901M-$1B 3 3.26%
 
Over $1B 3 3.26%
 
Total:92
Azuren said:
Soundwave said:

I've worked in the film business, it doesn't work how you think it does. If it did, James Cameron would never work again after The Abyss, Steven Spielberg wouldn't have worked again after Always, M.Night Shyamalan wouldn't have worked after like 5 bombs in a row. 

One hit movie in Hollywood alone buys you a lot of leeway, two hits and you will working for a long ass time, a track record of multiple billion+ pictures means you get to do what you want, it doesn't matter what some kid on the internet thinks. 

I don't like Michael Bay, the last Transformers movie underperformed, but Michael Bay is going to be able to make whatever he wants for the next 20 years. And if you think you're better/smarter, then great go write your own movie and get it made, otherwise lets pipe down on pretending to be experts when I doubt most of the people complaining have even ever worked 1 day on a movie set. 

I'm gonna just come out and say you're a liar, because if it did you would have already said something to the effect of "but if she turns it around, everything will be fine". Since you haven't, I'm sorry; I just don't believe you, and you're about as credible at this point as InfoWars. And the issue I take with your comparisons is Kennedy isn't Cameron. She's not Spielberg. Shyamalan was about to be laughed out of everything until Split released. Kennedy is the person who took the single most prominent franchise in film history and made it a joke. Quit pretending that people can rest on their laurels forever and understand that Disney don't care about your pedigree if you aren't delivering.

I think The Visit is where he really turned it around, but Split definitely made him viable, again.  And he is ABSOLUTELY wrong in his next post about studios willing to give him a $50M movie.  After The Airbender and After Earth, no one was going to give him any money.  That's why all 3 (Devil is included, since he wrote it) of his next films were made on a budget of ~$10M.



Around the Network
Azuren said:
morenoingrato said:

The movie is therefore not pushing an SJW agenda if Finn's race or Rey's gender have no bearing in the main plot. Is Rey a Mary Sue? Sure, and that is poor writing, but we can probably find dozens of protagonists in dozens of moves where that is the case as well.

I'll admit that I was not aware that "officially" those two characters are supposed to be gay/pansexual/genderfluid/whatever. But had you gone without any negative preconceptions to those movies, it is literally impossible to tell. There is not a millisecond of indication and it has no impact plot in any way whatsoever. Half the cast could be gay and it changes nothing, literally nothing. It's like when Dumbledore was gay. So what?

I do not know the circumstances behind that Tweet and it sounds like a knee-jerk reaction, but I can see it being a response to people imagining SJWs and political agendas everywhere.

Not everything has to be clearly stated, but Jonathan Kasdar has clearly stated it. And I firmly don't support anything that has a blatant Mary Sue character in it.

 

I have no problem with inclusion, but I also don't care to muddy things up with useless information just for the sake of virtue signaling. "Lando is pando". Cool, does it come up? No? Then who fucking cares? I also don't care for unrealistic collections of tokens. Like in TLJ: strong independent Mary Sue, gay ace pilot, black guy, and an asian bitch all team up to take down a white guy and his white guy friends who all work for an evil old prick. HMM.

Poor you. Having to emphathize with people who look different from you when colored people/women have been asked to do that for 50+ fucking years of Hollywood films. How awful for you. 

It's like hearing a person who's only ever flown first class complain about flying in second class once or twice a year with other people. 



Soundwave said:
shikamaru317 said:

Like he said, Jerry Bruckheimer produced two $1b+ movies for Disney (3 that did $900m+) and they dropped him faster than a live grenade after Lone Ranger flopped. It's not too much of a stretch to believe that they would drop Kathleen Kennedy when her Star Wars movies are tending downward (TLJ made less than TFA and Solo made less than Rogue One), Solo is looking like a straight up flop, and Star Wars toy sales are down by 56%. 

 

shikamaru317 said:

Like he said, Jerry Bruckheimer produced two $1b+ movies for Disney (3 that did $900m+) and they dropped him faster than a live grenade after Lone Ranger flopped. It's not too much of a stretch to believe that they would drop Kathleen Kennedy when her Star Wars movies are tending downward (TLJ made less than TFA and Solo made less than Rogue One), Solo is looking like a straight up flop, and Star Wars toy sales are down by 56%. 

Jerry Bruckheimer still works for Disney, what are you talking about? He's producing a sixth Pirates of the Caribbean movie for them along with a third National Treasure movie. 

They ended their partnership with Bruckheimer in 2014 and chose to keep doing some individual movies only.

 

You really don't read anything we tell you, right? I gave you a link about this. 

 

Just like when I told you "this is why prequels didn't hit billions", you answered me with "LOL the prequels didn't hit billions". 

 

Please read what others tell you if you want to debate, it's the point of a forum. Ignoring other's messages and just hit copy/paste of your original opinion is useless. Even if it would explain perfectly your posts here, it's tiring to try to talk to a wall. 

Last edited by Faelco - on 27 May 2018

Soon all the prequel movies will be billion dollar movies once adjusted. Pretty sure only AotC should not be there yet.

All I'm saying is that we need to look at the context certain movies are making money or not, such as ticket prices and worldwide theater availability. Much like we can't really compare the Snes and the Xone if both end up selling about the same as equal successes.



 

 

 

 

 

Faelco said:
Soundwave said:

She's made three $1 billion+ Star Wars films, that buys her a decade at least in Hollywood, that's how things work, ok.

Disney got Star Wars for a laugh by the way, $4 billion ... Lucas could have easily gotten $10 billion for this, that was a huge bargain for Disney, The Force Awakens alone likely made Disney somewhere in the range of $2+ billion in profit alone from all movie sales + merchandise + commercial tie-ins.  

A lot of people are better off sticking to video games on the business side because like I said the analogy here is like saying "the Nintendo president better be worried about his 1st half Switch performance and Labo underperforming, because he could get fired!". 

We all know that's a pretty stupid statement and is unlikely to happen. Kathleen Kennedy was producing blockbuster movies when half this board was in diapers. 

Oh, sorry, they "only" spent 4 billions and already got 10 billions back so they can stop making movies now, the ROI is good, let's stop all this Star Wars stuff, right?

 

No. If they think they can get more money, they will do what they can to get it. And I'm not saying that she should be fired right now. I'm saying it's a possibility, unlike you who are saying "No, people can't get fired in industry as long as they make a bit of money and have relations". Who doesn't understand how things work? 

 

If her numbers keep getting smaller (possible, and ongoing), if Disney wants more money (obvious), and if they think someone else can bring them more money (not the case so far), they will fire her. Or put her in charge of something else. She will still have work, nobody is saying she will end up in the streets because nobody will want her anymore. But not on SW in that case. 

 

You're acting like "No guys, Don Mattrick can't get fired, he was having a huge success with the Xbox 360 when you were still in high school" at XOne launch. And what happened? Oh, yeah... 

Exactly.  And in terms of TLJ, Disney isn't just looking at that $1.33B they made only.  They are also looking at that $1.8B they should have made, as well.  And the fall in merch sales.

Faelco said:
Soundwave said:

Apparently it isn't that easy to make a billion+ picture.

Marvel is 5/19 (25%)

Pixar is 2/19 (10.5%)

Lucas went 1/3 on the prequels (33%) 

Disney Star Wars is 3/4 (75%) soon to be 80%. 


Are you really trying to compare Ant-Man, Doctor Strange or The good dinosaur to Star Wars? Really? How can you even think like that? Star Wars is one of the biggest franchise ever, the only thing remotely comparable is the full Avengers, not individual superheroes 90% of the audience never heard about before. And Pixar movies have never been billion dollars franchises, they're kids movies before anything else.

 

On the prequels, you forget to take inflation in consideration, 850 millions 15 years ago is no different than 1 billion today. And again, it was without the power of Disney and the "What will Disney do with SW?" expectations.

 

Any fan made story would have been a billion dollars hit for the Disney Star Wars rebirth, you won't be able to change my mind on that. 

That's what they do now.  The largest film franchise in history..."Let's compare it to other normal blackbuster films (except Avengers, that's not fair), to try to prove its all ok."



Around the Network

Actually I don't agree "any Star Wars spin-off would make a billion dollars".

Solo sure as hell wouldn't and I would've said that 5 years ago too. Obi-Wan movie won't either. Boba Fett won't either. They should cancel both of those films for now and focus on the trilogy films. 

These spin-offs rely too much on Star Wars nerds, that's not big enough of an audience alone, the general audience isn't interested enough to watch these kinds of movies and quite frankly the characters aren't *that* interesting. Deadpool is fucking interesting, you don't need to be a Marvel/comic book fan to be entertained. But Obi-Wan? Dude is not that interesting, you can't make an entire movie around him and expect $1 billion plus.

Darth Vader IMO is the only Star Wars character that could reliably bank $1 billion with a side story based soley on them and even then that script better be good, and I mean Darth Vader not whiny ass Anakin. 

Last edited by Soundwave - on 27 May 2018

Soundwave said:

Actually I don't agree "any Star Wars spin-off would make a billion dollars".

Solo sure as hell wouldn't and I would've said that 5 years ago too. Obi-Wan movie won't either. Boba Fett won't either.

These spin-offs rely too much on Star Wars nerds, the general audience isn't interested enough to watch these kinds of movies and quite frankly the characters aren't *that* interesting. Deadpool is fucking interesting, you don't need to be a Marvel/comic book fan to be entertained. But Obi-Wan? Dude is not that interesting, you can't make an entire movie around him and expect $1 billion plus.

Darth Vader IMO is the only Star Wars character that could reliably bank $1 billion with a side story based soley on them and even then that script better be good. 

They could make a billion if they were well done.

 

Who cared about a bunch of completely unknown fighters without a single jedi in sight like in Rogue One? Useless story shoehorned between 2 existing movies. But it was good, so it managed to make 1 billion. 

 

Do good movies, get good numbers. So difficult to understand that nowadays...



Faelco said:
Soundwave said:

Actually I don't agree "any Star Wars spin-off would make a billion dollars".

Solo sure as hell wouldn't and I would've said that 5 years ago too. Obi-Wan movie won't either. Boba Fett won't either.

These spin-offs rely too much on Star Wars nerds, the general audience isn't interested enough to watch these kinds of movies and quite frankly the characters aren't *that* interesting. Deadpool is fucking interesting, you don't need to be a Marvel/comic book fan to be entertained. But Obi-Wan? Dude is not that interesting, you can't make an entire movie around him and expect $1 billion plus.

Darth Vader IMO is the only Star Wars character that could reliably bank $1 billion with a side story based soley on them and even then that script better be good. 

They could make a billion if they were well done.

 

Who cared about a bunch of completely unknown fighters without a single jeudi in sight like in Rogue One? Useless story shoehorned between 2 existing movies. But it was good, so it managed to make 1 billion. 

 

Do good movies, get good numbers. So difficult to understand that nowadays...

No they couldn't. 

Even Marvel struggles to hit $1 billion reliably and those characters have 60+ years worth of back story, hundreds of seperate writers to mine material from and Marvel is at its absolute peak right (probably will start to decline).  

Star Wars is a very nerd centric audience, the problem with spin-off films is the "regular Joe public" people who don't give that much of a fuck about everything Star Wars aren't going to be interested about every second character. 

And Star Wars is also limited is what they can do with their characters. You can't just make an Obi-Wan film that's R-rated or wildly breaks from canon, so you're limited in what you can write. 

I don't mind Harry Potter films, I saw most of the main line films, but would I go see a Ron Weasely film? Probably fucking not. The reviews on that would have to be through the roof. Nor would I want to watch a Gimli The Dwarf film from LOTR or something. No thanks, I do like LOTR but at some point enough is enough, that last Hobbit film was reeeeeallly pushing it already. 

Marvel can cheat that because they can dip into other genre types and incorporate modern humor which is something Star Wars wouldn't be able to do either. 



haxxiy said:
Soon all the prequel movies will be billion dollar movies once adjusted. Pretty sure only AotC should not be there yet.

All I'm saying is that we need to look at the context certain movies are making money or not, such as ticket prices and worldwide theater availability. Much like we can't really compare the Snes and the Xone if both end up selling about the same as equal successes.

Very good point.  And it really shows just how big the OG trilogy was when they all did $1.2B (adjusted) WW, or more, without the greatly expanded market we have today.  And yes, you are right that AOTC would be the only one not over $1B.  It's not that far off, though.  $989.5M.  TPM did $1.74B, and ROTS did $1.19B.  Of course, those films still didn't have the advantage of the much larger foreign market we have today.  They weren't the greatest films, either.  That's why a SW film underperforming (TLJ) in this huge market is such a big deal.  And one that actually flops is a huge deal.

Interestingly, when I went to go look up when I calculated those numbers, I came across a post that is pretty funny, now. 

"Sounds like the early buzz from advance screenings of Solo: A Star Wars Story are very positive, ruh roh, Star Wars not dead yet? lol."  - Some Guy

Ruh Roh, indeed.



thismeintiel said:
haxxiy said:
Soon all the prequel movies will be billion dollar movies once adjusted. Pretty sure only AotC should not be there yet.

All I'm saying is that we need to look at the context certain movies are making money or not, such as ticket prices and worldwide theater availability. Much like we can't really compare the Snes and the Xone if both end up selling about the same as equal successes.

Very good point.  And it really shows just how big the OG trilogy was when they all did $1.2B (adjusted) WW, or more, without the greatly expanded market we have today.  And yes, you are right that AOTC would be the only one not over $1B.  It's not that far off, though.  $989.5M.  TPM did $1.74B, and ROTS did $1.19B.  Of course, those films still didn't have the advantage of the much larger foreign market we have today.  They weren't the greatest films, either.  That's why a SW film underperforming (TLJ) in this huge market is such a big deal.  And one that actually flops is a huge deal.

Interestingly, when I went to go look up when I calculated those numbers, I came across a post that is pretty funny, now. 

"Sounds like the early buzz from advance screenings of Solo: A Star Wars Story are very positive, ruh roh, Star Wars not dead yet? lol."  - Some Guy

Ruh Roh, indeed.

lol, glad to see little remarks get locked into your memory so long. I should be flattered.