MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

The End of Days: April 19, 2011


So far, Thor is the best reviewed studio movie of the year… 94% on Rotten Tomatoes… Oscar, here The God Of Thunder comes!!!

VOD launches tomorrow.  Adam Sandler is the first one to be shoved out of the nest.  Interestingly, I have DirecTV, their newest boxes, every premium movie channel they offer, and no sign of Premium HD anywhere to be found on the DirecTV Cinema or anywhere else on the service.  Nothing on their web home page either.  Plenty on HBO GO and UFC though.  Is Premium VOD’s 60 day window the end of the world?  No.  But Sarah Palin could easily see the end of the world from her house on Premium VOD.   Failure or success is equally dangerous, as the door is now open to experimentation… an opportunity to do to theatrical what they did to the DVD business.

Mark Cuban is ready to sell Magnolia and Landmark Cinemas.  So much for the might of VOD.  Cuban told Bloomberg that valuations are high and that is why he is considering selling.  There might be a small amount of truth to this.  Money is getting loose again around the movie business.  There are all kinds of players with no experience looking for a way onto the playing field.  Magnolia, which has been great, is also stuck as a nickel & dime business.  If he can get a premium price from some sucker, he can shift that focus elsewhere.

Game of Thrones’ renewal was announced in the now classic HBO way… as a day-after-premiere non-event.

Cannes has announced its full jury of really cool people you’d love to hang out with for a week… but who you don’t get to hang out with at all.  Maybe Uma Thurman will wear a see through dress or something… or more scandalously, not.

Jim Cameron offered up a classic “get off of my lawn” quote, “With everybody going through their lives bent over their Blackberries all day long, you could even argue the machines have already won.”  TMZ, being the serious journos they are, turned it into, “Terminator’ Creator: Cell Phones Are The New Skynet.”  Idiot writers republished it as though it was a more considered opinion than your dad might offer in your elevator, as someone chatters away on their Blackberry.  Proud moments.

John August gave Fox a $10m idea for free… have the ape at the end of the Rise of the Planet of the Apes trailer speak.  Smart.  Now maybe he could consult on name changes to Sundance-bought films.  Homework was not a great title, unless there was a teacher or tutor sexing up Freddy Highmore.  But The Art of Getting By is about as memorable as… what’s that new show on… is it ABC… with the 30 year olds… uh…

50 Responses to “The End of Days: April 19, 2011”

  1. IOv3 says:

    He is a GOD after all!

  2. LexG says:

    Thought that was Bill Macy on Shameless hoisting a beer at first glance.

    THOR is GOING DOWN up against that DELIGHTFUL looking romcom with Gennifer Goodwin, of which I am fully incapable of remembering the title. But it looks SO. CUTE. and a lot less dorky than THOR.

    Thor better get that might hammer, because K-Hud is taking him the fuck DOWN. On a not related note: Hudson and Goodwin trying on LITTLE OUTFITS? I’ll have a THOR HAMMER in my pants watching that.

  3. IOv3 says:

    Aww Lexy, you live in a world where female centric fare is important during the Summer. Awwwwwwwwwww :P!

  4. LexG says:

    I have come to a point recently where I’ve SERIOUSLY decided the romcom is my FAVORITE genre; Much as my usual “wheelhouse” is probably urban action type shit and teen-girl horror, I am NEVER more delighted than at a romantic comedy.

    It is the highest form of art; Last six months alone, I had a consistently better time at Love/Drugs, Dilemma, No Strings, Arthur, How Do You Know, etc, than any other type of movie.

    THEY’RE FUNNY AND FUN.

    GOODWIN POWER. Also CAN NOT WAIT for that thing with Selena Gomez, Leighton Meester and Katie Cassidy where LITERALLY THE ENTIRE TRAILER is them TRYING ON OUTFITS.

  5. LexG says:

    Also this EOD recap is missing THE most important story of the day:

    Evan Rachel WOOD comes out as bisexual.

    YEP TO THE HELL YEP. Paquin, Heard, now Evan???

    Who could be next? How GLORIOUS is this news. The good news about these HALL OF FAME pieces of tail liking clam is it leaves them less and less time to date Derek Jeter.

  6. berg says:

    Paquin, Heard, now Evan …. let me just lie underneath while they bukkake me … seriously though; a well done romcom is the bomb …. Lady Eve anyone? I think Love/Drugs had its moments, No String Attached (that’s the tampon version) was above average, but the best romcoms in the last few years are French imports like Priceless and Heartbreakers

  7. JKill says:

    I really dug LOVE & OTHER DRUGS, HOW DO YOU KNOW, MORNING GLORY and NO STRING ATTATCHED so maybe I’m getting into similar territory. Haven’t seen ARTHUR yet.

    Ginnifer Goodwin is super cute.
    HE’S JUST NOT THAT INTO YOU 4 LIFE

    Berg, LADY EVE is awesome. I love 30s/40s rom coms.

  8. IOv3 says:

    David, I want to meet you one day and see how you don’t even come close to stating that to my face. Oh you will be looking up at me but it would be worth it just for a laugh.

    Seriously, I am supposed to take that response… seriously? Please, stop sticking your head up your own ass, and realize that this blog has a SEARCH FUNCTION.

    Wow you changed your mind, that’s good, but look at the fucking picture of this thread. Did you just have a whole thread questioning the press conference? Seriously man, you’ve got to be joking with this shit.

    `

  9. anghus says:

    it’s funny how this Thor review thing has worked out in their favor.

    my wife, who really only hits up sites like E Online and perez hilton said to me last night “i heard Thor is getting really good reviews”

    So now my wife, who really doesn’t care for these kind of movies, said “i wouldn’t mind seeing that”

    mission accomplished paramount marketing team.

  10. Proman says:

    I haven’t seen Morning Glory (I really should) bit LOVE & OTHER DRUGS and HOW DO YOU KNOW were both great.

  11. LYT says:

    First good marketing move Par has made with THOR.

  12. Foamy Squirrel says:

    One of the XBox Live portfolio managers noted that the biggest indicator of whether a game got predominantly good or bad reviews (and therefore had good or bad sales) was the first few that were recorded.

    They tested this by releasing the EXACT SAME GAME several times with different titles and pre-seeding the reviews (either good or bad). Sure enough, the majority of subsequent reviews followed the 4-5 star or 1-2 star pattern of the initial ratings.

    This recently got Microsoft into trouble when Indie developers started deliberately downrating competitors’ games so that their own products would rise in the rankings.

    http://www.next-gen.biz/news/failure-to-fix-fake-xbox-indie-ratings-is-%E2%80%9Chighly-disappointing%E2%80%9D

    With regards to Thor, I find it interesting that the majority of reviews seem to give it a “good, but not great” rating – which Rotten Tomatoes considers the same thing as “BEST. MOVIE. EVER.” The same thing happened with the Star Trek reboot – the pure up/down vote gave it one of the best reviewed records of the year, despite the majority of the reviews being in the 3-4 star range rather than 4-5 star range.

  13. Paul MD (Stella's Boy) says:

    Wow sad news about Restrepo co-director Tim Hetherington.

    http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2011/04/tim_hetherington_restrepo.html

  14. LexG says:

    Not to repeat my material, but really, NOBODY is slightly more excited about SOMETHING BORROWED, which looks entirely delightful and not anywhere near as dorky as THOR?

    It’s just weird how INTERNET MOVIE COVERAGE *so* favors the ‘geek’ movie, even on NON-geek sites; Poland certainly isn’t a geek, but how many mentions of THOR has he made, vs how many mentions of SOMETHING BORROWED? A guy like Wells HAAAAAAAAAAATES geek properties, yet is obsessed with pumping himself up to hate THOR as much as humanly possible. And Faraci and CHUD and AICN, obviously you know it’s gonna get a lot of coverage; But romcoms and procedurals and cop movies and romances and downer dramas get NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTHING.

    As much as we talk about how TOTALLY IRRELEVANT AICN is now– and I don’t know ANYBODY who’s regularly read there at least since Drew left– it really DID, for better or worse shape the internet movie coverage slant whereby even SERIOUS MOVIE JOURNALISTS champ at the bit to catch the first whiff of buzz about “geek” movies, and kind of shrug off 90% of everything else.

    How many LINCOLN LAWYER or LIMITLESS photoshops did DP create? How many headlines about, even, FAST FIVE, which is going to be ENORMOUS? Nope, just GEEK MOVIES, even on non-geek sites. How about JUST NOT COVER THOR? It is what it is, it’s plain what it’s going to be, no more predictably so than a Kate Hudson romcom.

  15. Paul MD (Stella's Boy) says:

    Lex my time hanging out at movie sites has taught me that guys on the net are only interested in discussing movies like Something Borrowed in derisive terms. They mention them only to make fun of them. Movies aimed primarily at males, no matter how generic looking, are always AWESOME and KICK ASS, while movies aimed primarily at females are LAME and STUPID. On one site’s board, after 20 different people just ruthlessly lambasted a Tyler Perry flick, I calmly mentioned that there are different audiences for different movies and some people happen to like Perry’s movies as much as you like, say, Fast & Furious. Needless to say they tore me a new one and called me every name in the book. They would also always claim that someone who preferred say a PTA movie over a Michael Bay movie was an elitist snob who thinks they are superior to everyone else; then they would turn around and make fun of someone for liking He’s Just Not That Into You.

    I don’t like Hudson much, but I like Goodwin a lot, and Something Borrowed looks enjoyable.

  16. LYT is right, of course. The consensus amongst the geeks was that Thor looked like a stinker, so Paramount’s best weapon was to screen it early and let the word out early that it was at least pretty good. Since, Foamy Squirrel is right about the ‘he who goes first defines the criticism’ thing, the consensus on Thor will remain that it’s ‘pretty decent’, even IF the reviews get more negative as more traditional critics see it. Sometimes the best marketing tool is the quality of the movie (cough-The Karate Kid-cough), especially when the early buzz is poor.

  17. David Poland says:

    Lex… the reason why I am interested in Thor is that it is in the first summer blockbuster slot, it is part of the Marvel strategy (now Disney strategy), and it seems on track – along with Captain America – to do The Incredible Hulk kinda business (which is not enough to make it profitable, but is somewhat of a set-up for Avengers).

    I grew up with Thor, but was a bigger Captain America fan. Not terribly excited about that film either. The main reason is that Marvel hires second-tier directors for these films who bring no real vision to the party.

    I am a little excited about the idea of Thor being primarily an Asgaard movie. Much more interesting. Much more Branagh-friendly.

    I don’t want to beat it to death, but the reviews are still all geek sites and unknown crix at the trades. I respect Drew, but I don’t trust anyone who has ever been at AICN with any review of a Paramount movie, much less a Marvel movie.

    I haven’t asked Par to see the film. They haven’t asked me to see the film. I will be out of town until the 1st, so there is a good chance I won’t see the film pre-release. Not sweating it. $35m- $50m opening… $150m – $180m total domestic. They get a pretty clean run in second weekend. Third weekend, it’s over. Pirates is a wall they will hit.

  18. JKill says:

    Yeah I wish there was more balance on converage. Obviously it’s market driven and this is what people want to read, but it gets to be a bit much when every development for every geek property is covered with breathless enthusiasm like it’s THE PENTAGON PAPERS whereas equally cool, if not cooler art or horror or crime or drama or comedy films get totally skipped over or ignored. Something like THE LINCOLN LAWYER feels like it comes out of nowhere and is fresh, whereas the geek stuff is discussed in such a volume and in such depth.

    It’s strange but I get the feeling that a lot of the audiences for these websites ONLY CARE about these big genre movies and barely watch anything else. I feel like if these sites were actually traffic driven by film geeks, instead of genre geeks, there would be a broader focus than what actor is going to have a walk on role and two lines in THE DARK KNIGHT RISES. Don’t get me wrong; I like those movies too. I just also like crime, horror, comedy, drama, period movies, musicals, documentaries, foreign films, art films and the list goes on…

    EDITED: PaulMd, I’m curious how many of those ppl ripping into you had actually even seen a single Tyler Perry movie. I watched one out of curiosity because my knee jerk reaction was to dismiss them. I’m not a fan, but I think the type of commenters you’re talking about are pretty unadventerous and insular in what they like and watch, as noted in their apparent dislike of PTA (!?!?!?!!?!). I think that gives support to the idea that these people, who generate the hits on these sites, care about the properties, and not really cinema in general.

  19. JKill says:

    Didn’t TRANSFORMERS 2 not get a single positive review from any AICN related writer? That’s Paramount right? I guess McWeeny sort of gave it a very mild pass but I don’t remember anything like an endorsement. Just sayin’.

  20. IOv3 says:

    Lex, I hate horror films, but all of those damn sites also go on endlessly about them. This is just who they are and it’s what drives traffic. Seriously, these film drives traffic to these sites, but there are other sites that cater to those films. Those sites just happen to be all about women.

    So, yeah, the demos breaking up to have their own sides of the net is pretty silly, but romcoms get derided for a reason… because 80 percent of the time they are just shit. Something Borrowed does not look that bad but it will probably break down the same way they all fucking do, and that’s why people fucking slam the shit out of them. The girl either gets the guy, the guy either gets the girl, or they have a happy moving in together montage.

    Now, there are romcoms that can have those sort of trite endings and overcome them, but most of the times they never do. Kate Hudson is pretty much a joke because she used her Almost Famous capital to do shit like Le Divorce and those other shitty Paramount romcoms. Until Romcoms are all quality, they deserve to be kicked to the corner of the net that they are on.

    The fact that you think Thor is dorky and Something Borrowed looks quality to you Lex, is a matter of taste and all, but Thor will probably be the film that features a better representation of human emotion and that’s why ROMCOMS SUCK… 80 percent of the time!

    ETA: Let us all remember: Paramount hates David Poland as much as David Poland hates Paramount.

    Also, Tyler Perry gets shit on for a reason, but his plays are a lot funnier than the movie adaptations.

    You also are out to fucking lunch to think that liking these films does not make these people film fans. They are film fans. This is what they like and most of the time it’s not all they like. They basically like horror films as well but you know, winners can’t be choosers.

  21. Krillian says:

    Something Borrowed – Where John Krasinski does not play a real person but rather that inner voice in a mirror to keep telling Ginnifer Goodwin she deserves to be happy. And of course there’s a scene where Goodwin and Hudson dance together. All chick flicks have women dance together to a song at some point.

    I find myself more interested in Jumping the Broom, maybe because Modern Family’s Julie Bowen’s in it.

  22. JKill says:

    IO, I agree that his work is not good, at least from the one movie I saw (WHY DID I GET MARRIED?) I thought his writing was clumsy and his direction was shoddy to the point of incompetence, but I think he is hated on frequently without people taking the time to even see what he does. His work ethic, however, is insane because he seemingly makes three movies a year.

    I’m not denigrating these people or what they like. I just think if you’re going to consider yourself a film fan you should like more than one type of movie. I think that makes you a fan of genre but not cinema as an art form. I’m not trying to be insulting. And as I said, I like the geek stuff too.

  23. LexG says:

    I have never seen a Tyler Perry movie, but they showed the trailer for the new one before ARTHUR, and anytime there’s a fat black dude in drag doing pratfalls, I am GUARANTEED to be on my ass rolling with gales of laughter. Was cracking up like Max Cady over that shit. Are the movies like a lot of scenes where Madea falls down and gets hit in the junk and gets hit with dodgeballs like Big Momma’s House?

    ‘Cause if so, I kind of want to see them.

  24. Paul MD (Stella's Boy) says:

    Yes JKill Perry haters I come across have never even seen his movies. Regardless, I don’t know why it seems to bother so many people that there are folks out there who like Tyler Perry movies or genre movies. They get so worked up about it. So what if Scream 4 appeals to someone more than Captain America? Or if someone wants to see Something Borrowed more than Thor.

  25. JKill says:

    Lex, the one I saw was a series of very long, expository talky scenes of characters discussing their backstories, emotions and desires. It was much more stagey and talky than any Kevin Smith movie ever made. (I’m 100 percent a Smith fan, but I feel like the most serious marks against his work are abundant in Perry, at least from this one movie.) The whole thing was really over written and false and awkward.

    There are also really weird character choices that feel nothing like something a human being would ever do. For instance, the movie starts out with a character bringing his mistress with him on a couple’s retreat along with his wife (!) and she’s somehow oblivious to this, and then he goes and gets her kicked off the plane while repeatedly insulting her weight…

    In agreement PaulMd. People like what they like. As long as the stuff we like individually still exists, no reason to take down others for not liking it or prefering something else.

  26. IOv3 says:

    How on earth could Scream 4 appeal to people more than Cap? That makes no sense what so ever. “Hey, do you want to see the symbol of truth and justice movie or kids needlessly killed by some assholes?” “The asshole movie.” “Wow, I don’t even know you anymore Jeff.” “Does the Cap movie have a demented Nazi in it?” “Yes.” “Nazis are bigger assholes. Captain American then!” “Nice way to end a sentence asshole.” “OH fuck you Gary.”

    Jkill, a fan of any genre is still a fan of film. I have known women who love those horrible Kate Hudson movies, it’s their movies, and that’s what they love. This makes them a lover of film. Does it make them well rounded fans? Not really, but people can be the fans they want to be, and I have seen their DVD collections. Mind blowing stuff but they like what they like what they like.

    ETA: Jkill, life doesn’t work that way and you and Paul know it. People get judged on what they like. That’s how it works.

  27. Paul MD (Stella's Boy) says:

    Here’s Scott Mendelson on Perry’s The Family That Preys:

    “I contend that The Family That Preys, a dark and morally complicated family drama with great work from Alfre Woodard and Kathy Bates, would have been a serious contender had Perry been a more respected name at that point and/or it hadn’t been written off as a ‘black film’. I’m not saying it’s a masterpiece, but it’s a damn good melodrama with several ‘Oscar bait elements’. It’s also better than several of the actual Oscar contenders from 2008 (The Reader, Revolutionary Road, etc).”

    It’s not the only Perry movie he says is good.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-mendelson/tyler-perry-as-an-oscar-c_b_705784.html

    Exactly JKill there is no reason to trash others for having preferences.

  28. David Poland says:

    IO… you prove the old “even a broken clock is right twice a day” line.

    Paramount does hate me as much as I hate them… which is to say, not at all. There are surely a few people at Paramount who do hate me… and a few I hate. But overall, I consider the team at Paramount a group that I like enormously, even if I don’t always love their product.

    I am on record, from months ago, saying that this would be the best year Paramount has ever had and that it is, after years of this not being the case, truly their year. This is the first true full Paramount line-up since Brad Grey took over.

    So… IO… do me a favor and shut the fuck up as regards this. You are wrong. And repeating a falsehood that you have no reason to believe other than in your fantasy life, is distasteful for me and for my friends at the studio.

  29. IOv3 says:

    I love your revisionist history but do your friends come to this blog? What did they have to say about the Thor press conference thread? Again, there’s a search function on this site and it NEVERRRRRRRRRRRR EVERRRRRRRRRRRRR… shuts the fuck up.

  30. Krillian says:

    I’ve seen two Perry movies. Meet the Browns and For Colored Girls. They’re not bad; they’re just not that good either. FCG had great, great acting from some actresses who don’t usually get to show off, but it was so miserable and melodramatic. Meet the Browns was fine; I feel like I’ve seen ten Perry movies after watching it.

  31. David Poland says:

    Again, IO… bullshit. Revisionist about what?

    Here is how journalism works… the journalist, even when he or she has friends at the places he or she writes about, does their job. In my case, it opinion-heavy.

    The Thor Press Conference entry actually did what I intended it to do… it created a conversation. I didn’t call any of the people who said that it was no big deal “idiots.” I didn’t claim they were on Par’s payroll. I asked the question and all kinds of answers came out.

    Likewise, the joke about Thor being an Oscar candidate brought out differing perspectives.

    Is your notion that I am supposed to be in the pocket of those who I know and like at the studios? Is it a black-and-white issue for you, no gray?

  32. IOv3 says:

    David, I have no idea why you think a guy like myself, whose a short sleeper, would only see the world all black and white. Yeah no buddy. You have several posts in the history of this blog that have led to people believing you have an agenda, you refute that agenda to us, and then continue on with your agenda as if no one called you out on it.

    This is how you roll. There will be some movie this Summer that performs amazingly well but it may have cost just a bit too much, and this will lead to you trying to turn a positive into a negative. This may just be a personality trait with you but there is no denying what you did with Inception last year, and what you continually do to certain films that just stick in your craw.

    You really went to the SHUT THE FUCK UP route. There is no pipe.

  33. storymark says:

    ….and so it goes.

  34. David Poland says:

    IO, I told you to shut the fuck up about one thing… one thing you presented as fact when, in fact, you are wrong. One thing that really bothered me because, though you forget, you are talking about real people.

    And yes, there will be some movie that performs well this summer that is not a financial success. That’s not an agenda – unless you consider the truth to be an agenda – that’s math.

    I am absolutely not a fan of overhype and hysteria. I write a lot about keeping perspective… from every direction… whether it’s my favorite movie or my least favorite movie… or my favorite studio or my least favorite studio.

    There is no denying that I was and am 100% on track with Inception. It was a movie that was very, very expensive. The effects in the film played great in the trailer. And people went… more people than anyone imagined. Great. They didn’t go because it was the best movie of the year or the most challenging or a life changer. They went to see cool shit they had never seen before and God bless Nolan, they probably thought more than they expected to while they watched shit bend and explode. Nothing wrong with that, but certainly overhyped. And indeed, old people didn’t much care for it. Don’t blame the messenger, son. I like Inception. It was overrated. But it certainly was terrific summer entertainment… that went on too long.

    And its finances were, and are, its finances. Completely different issue.

    You, IO, have the obnoxious trait of having no perspective on the things you feel. It isn’t enough for me to like Inception, I have to LOVE Inception… or I am a traitor to your cause.

    This is what makes you a bore and a wannabe bully, IO.

    I certainly have tastes that are my own. And I have perspective on decades on the film industry. And I consider all kinds of things as I write about movies. Don’t like it? No one is keeping you here. If you leave, blog comments may be more fun or less fun, but they will go on and probably, they will include more voices that actually want to discuss the issue, not filibuster.

    I’m not going to ask you to get the shine box… but when you assert that someone hates me because I am not going to the early screening of Thor… and keep repeating it… “shut the fuck up” is the appropriate notion.

    If you really thought about things before you spewed, you would realize that even I shut the fuck up about a lot of things every single day… because just because i feel like mouthing off does not make doing so appropriate. And as a result, I have a pretty good handle on what I have said and what I have not. It’s part of being an adult. Try it. You might enjoy it.

  35. IOv3 says:

    Seriously a bore and a wannabe bully? Oy to the vey. Keep one foot in the gutter and keep one arm reaching for the GOLD, David!

  36. Martin S says:

    The only “issue” Poland’s had with Par was over the closing of Vantage.

    IO – “This is how you roll. There will be some movie this Summer that performs amazingly well but it may have cost just a bit too much…”

    How, after all of these years, can you not see the perpetual contradictions in your arguments?

    If something performs “amazingly well”, then it didn’t cost “a bit too much”. It’s cost were exactly right. But that’s not the case with Inc Hulk or IM2. They went over budget and underperformed. IM2 especially.

    It’s Business 101. Marvel cannot keep pumping out movies that go 25M+ over budget and then have the same plateau returns. They are in this for that dreaded, evil thing known as a profit, which they put back into the next film. If the returns keep shrinking, kiss it all goodbye.

  37. IOv3 says:

    Martin, you do realize that smart people do not get roped in by talking points? Good lord, you are red all the way through. Now with Marvel, ANCILLARIES! End of Line.

  38. David Scholes says:

    I’m just going to see it later today as it has arrived in my home town of Canberra, Australia.

    Here’s hoping it’s as good as the reviews suggest.

    As an Aussie science fiction writer:
    http://www.goldenvisionsmagazine.biz/AlienHunter.html
    I’ve written some Thor fan fiction. Scroll down below my author profile to see over 40 stories:
    http://www.fanfiction.net/u/1276881/David_Scholes

  39. Martin S says:

    Smart people. Talking points. Ancillaries.

    Instead more of your vague nonsense HypIO, why don’t you lay out how Marvel operates.

  40. Harrison says:

    Rom-coms = the crappiest, most predictable and dire film genre out there. They’re so imminently hateable because the plots are all basically the same and unlike other genres, they pretty much never have a twist near the end that makes them different or at least a tad unpredictable. I don’t get how the people that like them can continue to see one after the other, essentially paying to see the same thing again and again. Seems like a monumental waste of time and money.

  41. Martin S says:

    I’m waiting HypIO

  42. IOv3 says:

    Martin, keep waiting because I could give a fuck what you think.

  43. Martin S says:

    Not about what I think, Alex.It’s about you, for the millionth time, not being able to back shit up. That’s why you apply half-baked wrestling logic when reality doesn’t match up to your perceptions.

    So, instead of implying ancillaries cover losses in other divisions, how about you STFU and first learn to balance a checking account.

    I do this IO, because it’s a tally. You run your mouth days, weeks and months on end and 75% is utter garbage, which is your game. Throw out so much shit it becomes unbearable to keep track of how many times you were wrong, so no one calls you out on it.

    How about that Kick-Ass sequel you were sooo adamant about because of those nifty DVD sales? Do you want to pull the numerous quotes about how it ain’t happenin?

    I think when we get closer to GL’s opening, we can start talking about how you, Mr. “I Get It” Fanboy was 100% wrong about Nolan’s direction for TDKR, and I, the evil rightie, was dead-on days after TDK was released. It’s a great showcase of your soap opera instincts, Mr. Black Mask.

  44. IOv3 says:

    Much like with Poland, I could give a fuck what you think about me, but you citing Kick-Ass as an example is why you are such a fucking dipshit. Seriously, go hang out with Poland, and maybe you two fuckers can condescend to someone who that sort of shit works on. Seriously, you are such a jackass that you are giving me shit for HAVING A DIFFERING OPINION and that’s why this blog is such shit. It’s an opinion, you are a comic book hating repcon fuck, and what you think about me means absolutely nothing to me.

  45. David Poland says:

    Can we please try to keep the rage intact tonight?

    The Incredible Hulk lost money, whether IO likes it or not, ancillaries or not. And if Thor and Captain America do similar business, they will lose money too. And then everyone who wants to defend Marvel can say that it’s all about setting up The Avengers… but unless they make the Avengers for under $225m (unlikely) and make over $750m worldwide, it won’t be worth making 3 money losers.

  46. IOv3 says:

    Dude, you talk down to me… figuratively and follow that with SHUT THE FUCK UP. You are lucky that I don’t flame this place like a Dreadlock on a bender but you can’t have money losers with properties that have generated hundred of millions of dollars. The Hulk, Thor, and the Avengers have generated millions a year and seeing as they all go to Marvel and Marvel is owned by Disney now, where’s the drama David?

    Again, I could give a fuck about this shit. Why? I WIN! I get a Thor film, a Cap film, and an Avengers film. If they don’t set the world on fire, who cares? Yeah it cost money that these character made back in 1970s on Iron-on T-shirt decals. Seriously, the film world changed on you, and you keep trying to catch up Poland.

  47. Foamy Squirrel says:

    You do know Marvel almost went bankrupt, right?

  48. IOv3 says:

    FS: You do know that they still make millions off of their ancillaries from these characters, right? Seriously, every single one of their movie properties have had characters making money for them for at least the last 20 years and now they are owned by Disney. Your point?

    Again, you want to act as if this matters because the sequels are lined up, Portman is in the Avengers, and I am getting an AVENGERS MOVIE IN A YEAR! Seriously, embrace the message of DX, because some of you have earned it! Not you FS.

  49. Foamy Squirrel says:

    They came within a hair’s breadth of shutting down forever despite making millions from their ancillaries. There’s this thing called “cost” – the 1990 Captain America film was almost the last Marvel film ever made.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

“Ten years ago at Telluride, I said on a panel that theatrical distribution was dying. It seemed obvious to me. I was surprised how many in the audience violently objected: ‘People will always want to go to the movies!’ That’s true, but it’s also true that theatrical cinema as we once knew it has died. Theatrical cinema is now Event Cinema, just as theatrical plays and musical performances are Events. No one just goes to a movie. It’s a planned occasion. Four types of Event Cinema remain.
1. Spectacle (IMAX-style blockbusters)
2. Family (cartoon like features)
3. Horror (teen-driven), and
4. Film Club (formerly arthouse but now anything serious).

There are isolated pockets like black cinema, romcom, girl’s-night-out, seniors, teen gross-outs, but it’s primarily those four. Everything else is TV. Now I have to go back to episode five of ‘Looming Tower.'”
~ Paul Schrader

“Because of my relative candor on Twitter regarding why I quit my day job, my DMs have overflowed with similar stories from colleagues around the globe. These peeks behind the curtains of film festivals, venues, distributors and funding bodies weren’t pretty. Certain dismal patterns recurred (and resonated): Boards who don’t engage with or even understand their organization’s artistic mission and are insensitive to the diverse neighborhood in which their organization’s venue is located; incompetent founders and/or presidents who create only obstacles, never solutions; unduly empowered, Trumpian bean counters who chip away at the taste and experiences that make organizations’ cultural offerings special; expensive PR teams that don’t bring to the table a bare-minimum familiarity with the rich subcultural art form they’re half-heartedly peddling as “product”; nonprofit arts organizations for whom art now ranks as a distant-second goal behind profit.”
~ Eric Allen Hatch