Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Open Forum => Off-Topic => Topic started by: Chronic Apathy on March 23, 2012, 12:22:47 PM
-
This came up on Facebook (where all important things do) this morning and I figured there might be some discussion potential here. We have five huge blockbusters coming out this year, including what are probably two of the three most anticipated films of all time (the third having been Return of the King): The Hunger Games, re-release of Titanic, The Avengers, The Dark Knight Rises, and The Hobbit. What do you guys think is going to be the best selling of the group? The worst selling? I personally have the movies ranked in this order (in regards to what they'll sell):
The Dark Knight Rises (has a chance to beat Avatar, honestly)
The Hobbit
Titanic
Hunger Games
Avengers
Thoughts?
-
The Dark Knight Rises (has a chance to beat Avatar, honestly)
The Hobbit
Titanic
Hunger Games
Avengers
If it were just the Dark Knight Rises and The Hobbit it would be a big year. I think that both of those movies have a legitimate chance to not only beat but possibly dismantle Avatar's attendance. I'm not sure exactly how much each will get but it will be massive no doubt.
1: The Hobbit - After years of anticipation it's finally coming, I've never been more excited to see a movie than I am about seeing The Hobbit.
2: The Dark Knight Rises - I look forward to this one, but not anywhere even close to the level of anticipation that I have for The Hobbit, I'm sure that this will be good though.
3:Hunger Games - The Hunger Games has become a cultural phenomenon (much to my disgust) so I expect high attendance.
4: Titanic - Re-releases apparently do well so I'll put it 4th.
5: Avengers - A bad year to release this one, since it's over-shadowed by so many other block-busters.
Anyway those are my thoughts.
-
I disagree on Titantic. It is an "R" and therefore has a much more limited audience than the other movies. The economy is different as well, and I would be surprised that people would go out and see it again. Also, the actors are not headliners now...Leonardo is still mildly popular, but I don't even remember the Redhead's name. I wouldn't put it in top 5.
-
The Hobbit and The Dark Knight Rises will probably both hit the top 5 grossing films of all time. The second Hobbit has a really good shot at beating Avatar. I really hope Titanic flops.
-
I really hope Titanic flops.
:amen:
My personal hope is that the Hunger Games flops completely.
-
I really hope Titanic flops.
:amen:
My personal hope is that the Hunger Games flops completely.
I have not read the books or seen the movie yet, but supposedly they're great works of fiction (unlike Twilight...). What do you have against them?
-
I disagree on Titantic. It is an "R" and therefore has a much more limited audience than the other movies. The economy is different as well, and I would be surprised that people would go out and see it again. Also, the actors are not headliners now...Leonardo is still mildly popular, but I don't even remember the Redhead's name. I wouldn't put it in top 5.
Titanic is only a PG13 rating, andLeonardo DiCaprio just got off his biggest film since Titanic a couple years ago (Inception). Kate Winslet was never popular aside from Titanic. I think you're underestimating the performance the movie will have, especially when you consider the movie was never about who was in it, it was about the story and romance (and the ship sinking - I mean, come on, how great a sequence was that).
My personal hope is that the Hunger Games flops completely.
Too late. It's already broken Box Office release date records. Is there a reason you don't like it? I liked the books.
-
I disagree on Titantic. It is an "R" and therefore has a much more limited audience than the other movies. The economy is different as well, and I would be surprised that people would go out and see it again. Also, the actors are not headliners now...Leonardo is still mildly popular, but I don't even remember the Redhead's name. I wouldn't put it in top 5.
Titanic is only a PG13 rating, andLeonardo DiCaprio just got off his biggest film since Titanic a couple years ago (Inception). Kate Winslet was never popular aside from Titanic. I think you're underestimating the performance the movie will have, especially when you consider the movie was never about who was in it, it was about the story and romance (and the ship sinking - I mean, come on, how great a sequence was that).
There is no way (in my mind) that Titantic is PG13! There are elements* in that movie that clearly warrant a deserved rating of R (*I originally typed it until I realized that this is in off topic). If it does have that terribly low rating, then I would be aghast that tweens and young teens could see that movie.
EDIT: I looked it up on PluggedIn and to my dismay it is a PG-13. The rating is wrong in my opinion. Christians should avoid this movie in theaters or rental and stick to its edited version. How disappointing.
-
I think Avengers and The Hobbit will have the broadest appeal. As a conservative parent, I have no interest in taking my family to Titantic, Hunger Games, or The Dark Knight.
The Hobbit definitely has hype and a large following. There was already a huge Tolkien fanbase before the LotR movies came out. The movies only increased that total.
The Avengers has an equally large following, especially since it eclipses generations and is (generally) family-friendly.
I realize that the Dark Knight had good reviews, but parents like me find it too dark for children.
Hunger Games will do well due to its current popularity, but parents are already up-in-arms on the internet, so there will be lost revenue from a large population base.
The Titantic was a good movie to see once. I would never watch it a second time.
I realize that my opinion will be unpopular on these Boards, but I do represent a rather large paying audience type.
-
My personal hope is that the Hunger Games flops completely.
Too late. It's already broken Box Office release date records. Is there a reason you don't like it? I liked the books.
To be honest I haven't read the books :P. I am sort of familiar with the story line though, and it didn't seem all that extraordinary IMO. My main problem with them is that I just don't like how they've become a cultural phenomenon. I think society could waste their time doing better things, like playing Redemption * cough *
-
To be honest I haven't read the books :P. I am sort of familiar with the story line though, and it didn't seem all that extraordinary IMO. My main problem with them is that I just don't like how they've become a cultural phenomenon. I think society could waste their time doing better things, like playing Redemption * cough *
That's a pretty bad reason to hope something fails. "Don't knock it 'til you've tried it."
There is no way (in my mind) that Titantic is PG13! There are elements* in that movie that clearly warrant a deserved rating of R (*I originally typed it until I realized that this is in off topic). If it does have that terribly low rating, then I would be aghast that tweens and young teens could see that movie.
The way the ratings system works now (which is much, much more strict), Titanic would definitely garner an R rating, however, in 1997, a PG13 rating was much more lax. To be fair, the scene you're talking about is very brief, however, I do understand what you mean, and I agree with you.
YourMathTeacher, I'm curious, why is The Avengers okay but The Hunger Games is not? The Avengers doesn't have a rating yet, but it's safe to say it's going to pull a hard PG13 rating, same as The Hunger Games, and frankly, The Avengers is much more likely to have a fair amount of language (to be fair, I'm not seeing The Hunger Games until tonight, so maybe a strong amount of language will end up surprising me). Let me put it this way: Do you think Iron Man (or Iron Man 2) would be more appropriate than The Hunger Games? That's probably the kind of content The Avengers is likely to have, especially with Joss Whedon at the helm (cue fanboy squealing). If so (and I'm not judging you if you think it is), why?
I realize that my opinion will be unpopular on these Boards, but I do represent a rather large paying audience type.
You can't hit every demographic, and pretty much every movie on this list (except The Hobbit) isn't aiming for the small conservative Christian market. At the end of the day, the two best grossing movies of all time (not adjusted for inflation) both contain a lot of objectionable material, which proves that opinions such as yours (which I certainly don't dismiss, so please please please don't be insulted) don't have much weight on actual box office performance.
-
I couldn't care less about the "almighty dollar". I go to movies to be entertained, nothing more. That being said, here are the movies I plan on seeing on the big silver screen:
Avengers (just because without my fishing vest, I'm just a genius, billionnaire, playboy, philanthropist)
Dark Shadows (I used to play the board game as a kid)
Battleship (gotta see at least one comedy)
MiB III (Back in Black, baby...{cue guitar riff})
Snow White and the Huntsman (that's right...kiddie movie remade as an action flick. Kinda makes me yearn for a zombie version of Sleepless in Seattle)
Prometheus (fingers crossed that Predator makes a cameo)
Rock of Ages (so I can do some pre-booing of Cruise who's been cast as Jack Reacher)
GI Joe (pure adrenalin ride, kiddos...and Bruce Willis makes a cameo)
The Dark Knight Rises (seriously, I don't think it gets near the attendance they're predicting...but gotta see nonetheless)
The Bourne Legacy (Jason Bourne-less notwithstanding, I'll need an additional jolt of adrenaline to avoid withdrawal)
Expendables 2 (will check into the Betty Ford clinic in the room next to Lindsey to treat my adrenaline addiction ;D )
**These movie selections in no way represent a recommendation for anyone else to see. :)
-
To be honest I haven't read the books :P. I am sort of familiar with the story line though, and it didn't seem all that extraordinary IMO. My main problem with them is that I just don't like how they've become a cultural phenomenon. I think society could waste their time doing better things, like playing Redemption * cough *
That's a pretty bad reason to hope something fails. "Don't knock it 'til you've tried it."
I never said I had a good one. :P
-
A few points
1.) In terms of quality (not money) DKR won't even hit top five. It'll still be a good movie, but it'll be overshadowed by TDK. It'll still make a boatload of money.
2.) Of the five, Avengers is my favorite. I'll admit, I've been shying away from Hunger Games (avoiding spoilers until I can read the books), but I know the other four.
3.) Remember, when movie gross is adjusted for inflation, Avatar is 14th. First is Gone With the Wind, then Star Wars IV.
4.) The largest-grossing moviegoing audience is teenagers. They have the highest disposable income (as a percentage of total income). That said, family-friendly movies will make more.
Also:
That's probably the kind of content The Avengers is likely to have, especially with Joss Whedon at the helm (cue fanboy squealing).
SQUEEEEEE! (Also, I'm a Robert Downey Jr. fan)
-
I have a feeling DKR will be disappointing (mostly because it's the last), but still huge.
The Bourne Legacy (Jason Bourne-less notwithstanding, I'll need an additional jolt of adrenaline to avoid withdrawal)
I totally forgot about that movie. I'm going to lose so much money to the theaters this year...
-
That said, family-friendly movies will make more.
Avatar is far from family friendly, and Titanic even is even farther from family friendly, and these two are the highest selling movies of all time (again, not adjusted for inflation). Unless your definition of "family friendly" is a very liberal one (Avatar for instance, has a fair amount of language and violence, which would not put off most parents), you're kind of forced to conclude that this definition is wrong. Plenty of kids who are under 13 are going to be taken to see The Dark Knight Rises at some point, likewise for The Hunger Games, likewise for The Hobbit (which may actually manage to score a PG rating, though Part II would have to sacrifice quality for a PG rating). Family friendly movies will not make more money, movies that are not rated R will make more money. A hard PG13 rating doesn't even exist anymore. 15 years ago, as Titanic proved, it was possible to pick up a PG13 rating with some minor nudity and a couple F words. These days, two F words is an automatic R rating regardless of other content, except in a few extreme circumstances.
SQUEEEEEE! (Also, I'm a Robert Downey Jr. fan)
I know! Me too! SQUEEEE!
-
That said, family-friendly movies will make more.
Avatar is far from family friendly, and Titanic even is even farther from family friendly, and these two are the highest selling movies of all time (again, not adjusted for inflation). Unless your definition of "family friendly" is a very liberal one (Avatar for instance, has a fair amount of language and violence, which would not put off most parents), you're kind of forced to conclude that this definition is wrong. Plenty of kids who are under 13 are going to be taken to see The Dark Knight Rises at some point, likewise for The Hunger Games, likewise for The Hobbit (which may actually manage to score a PG rating, though Part II would have to sacrifice quality for a PG rating). Family friendly movies will not make more money, movies that are not rated R will make more money. A hard PG13 rating doesn't even exist anymore. 15 years ago, as Titanic proved, it was possible to pick up a PG13 rating with some minor nudity and a couple F words. These days, two F words is an automatic R rating regardless of other content, except in a few extreme circumstances.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlier (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlier)
Studios make more money from family flicks on average.
SQUEEEEEE! (Also, I'm a Robert Downey Jr. fan)
I know! Me too! SQUEEEE!
I can't post the link here as originally intended (language), but you've got a PM.
-
I looked it up on PluggedIn and to my dismay it is a PG-13. The rating is wrong in my opinion. Christians should avoid this movie in theaters or rental and stick to its edited version. How disappointing.
I completely agree with Soul Seeker. Titanic should have been rated R. I've avoided it all these years due to an 5-min scene of female nudity, and I'll skip it again in re-release. I also doubt that it will be in the top 5 movies this year (at least I hope so).
The main problem with the Dark Knight Rises, is that it will inevitably suffer comparisons to TDK, and it is almost impossible to be able to live up to those expectations. When Health Ledger died, it elevated that movie to immortal status in too many critics and people's minds. Unless it is just completely awesome, it will probably be a movie people see once, but not repeatedly, and therefore also won't be able to break into the top 5.
The Hobbit has a similar problem because of comparisons to LOTR. However, since it has the same director, and apparently the same feel, I think it will suffer less from those comparisons. I think this has a GREAT chance to make it into the top 5.
I think the best shots at top 5 belong to Hunger Games and the Avengers. Both of those appeal to both male and female teenagers (who are the most likely to be responsible for repeat viewings), and combine action, romance, cool special effects that are more fun in a theater, and have been built up for the past couple years by either the books or the single comic-book hero movies respectively.
So besides those 3 (Hobbit, Hunger, Avengers) the other 2 movies that I suspect will be in the top 5 will be:
1 - Whatever movie Pixar comes out with
2 - Something totally unexpected that we haven't even mentioned yet.
-
That's a pretty bad reason to hope something fails. "Don't knock it 'til you've tried it."
Please don't use this philosophy with any illegal activities... ;)
YourMathTeacher, I'm curious, why is The Avengers okay but The Hunger Games is not?
Your interpretation of "objectionable material" may simply not be the same as mine. Hunger Games represents a philosophy that I do not want my children exposed to. Having children kill other children for entertainment is not my idea of a family movie.
Avengers, on the other hand, represents the philosophy that super heroes will defeat super villians. This is generally a family friendly ideal.
Realize that Iron Man is the least favorite of my super heroes because of the demeanor of Tony Stark. I used to like Batman, but I really don't like The Dark Knight, since these are not the same person in my opinion, much like Robin and Night Wing are not the same.
You can't hit every demographic,...
My demographic is as a conservative parent, not necessarily a Christian parent. Also, certain genres and ratings eliminate population groups entirely, whereas "family-friendly" movies do not.
... don't have much weight on actual box office performance.
Your numbers are skewed, as pointed out by SK. Also, if the top 50 movies are perused, I would hazard a guess that a majority of them are "family friendly."
FTR, I think Hunger Games will do very well. My students are looking forward to it, mostly because they were forced to read it over the summer as part of the required Summer Reading List. The county has already set up dates to take groups of students together. I find this disturbing, of course, but it will nonetheless help the money pour in. I'm sure that this book was on many school systems' required reading list, much like Twilight and Happy Potter before it (and we know they did well at the box office).
-
Spider-Man will outgross Titanic.
I agree with Underwood on Dark Knight, but since Inception succeeded solely on Nolan's name, I don't think it's going to be a let down unless the villains are very weak (which concerns me since Bane is hard to understand, Hathaway has only done weird R roles lately, and the good Inception guy is in an unannounced role).
PG-13 always means the film was rated R, but the studio has enough money to convince the MPAA to re-rate it PG-13. Spielberg invented this in case Indiana Jones got an R and the practice stuck.
And re: Hunger Games, remember that DiVinci Code, a weak film and iffy book, succeeded solely because conservatives hated it. HG is said to be a decent read as well, so I think it has a good chance at top gross this year and a couple Oscars
-
The Perks of Being A Wallflower. All your argument are invalid.
On a more serious note, I can't wait to see The Dark Knight Rises. I will probably go see Titanic. The rest, probably not, but I'm not much of a movie goer.
-
The Perks of Being A Wallflower. All your argument are invalid.
On a more serious note, I can't wait to see The Dark Knight Rises. I will probably go see Titanic. The rest, probably not, but I'm not much of a movie goer.
YOU'RE GOING TO TITANIC BUT NOT THE HOBBIT? WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU?!
-
I don't mean to sound rude or disrespectful Mark*, but The Dark Knight Rises not even being in top 5 grossing movies for this year has got to be the most foolish thing I've ever heard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole). Look at the difference in quality between Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. They are at roughly the same quality, except everyone involved seemed to be a bit better at their jobs with one movie down, and of course, Heath Ledger absolutely nailed his role. The writing, acting, and overall direction is at roughly the same level. Heath Ledger's death did indeed add to the hype of the movie, but I think that six months later, it wasn't as driving a force for the movie as it would have been if Ledger had died, say, a month before the release of the movie. This seems to be an unpopular opinion, but I still like to voice it when these debates come up all the same. Even so, The Dark Knight lived up to a lot of the hype, more than the vast majority of sequels (or any movies) do. When we look at Christopher Nolan's track record, there's literally not a bad movie in the bunch, at least looking at critical reviews. His most popular movies of course are the two Batman movies and Inception, and that's literally half (if we round down) of the movies he's released, not to mention that The Prestige is also a very popular (and acclaimed) movie. What I'm getting at here is that, regardless of whether The Dark Rises can live up to the hype, there's absolutely no reason to assume it's going to be in any way, shape, or form a bad movie. Put simply, I have every reason to assume The Dark Knight Rises will be (and I like the way you put this), "just completely awesome," and people will most definitely see it multiple times. I will be fundamentally shocked if it doesn't place number one in the box office this year (I could maybe - maybe - see it placing number two next to The Hobbit, but since The Hobbit is a 2-parter, I don't think so).
-
Your interpretation of "objectionable material" may simply not be the same as mine. Hunger Games represents a philosophy that I do not want my children exposed to. Having children kill other children for entertainment is not my idea of a family movie.
I'm curious, have you read The Hunger Games or do you otherwise have an understanding of the plot? The entire point of the movie isn't to celebrate the free-for-all, it's to represent the disgusting power of the rich over the poor. The Hunger Games themselves are supposed to be a metaphor, and they're never, at any point in the series, celebrated by any of the protagonists. I understand if you simply don't like the subject matter being used as a form of entertainment, but the actual philosophy in the books doesn't glorify the violence or the nature of having kids killing kids, it condemns it. I think that part of what Collins was trying to do was write something with the same kind of power that 1984 or A Brave New World (especially the latter) have, albeit aiming for entertainment more than any actual lesson-learning. If you do know what the plot is about, then I apologize, but I wouldn't want you to condemn the franchise because you got the wrong message from the commercials or an overeager student or something like that.
My demographic is as a conservative parent, not necessarily a Christian parent. Also, certain genres and ratings eliminate population groups entirely, whereas "family-friendly" movies do not.
You know, I'm not sure I agree with that last statement, though that largely depends on our definition of family-friendly, which can vary wildly, especially since I have no idea what you would find offensive or not. For instance, would we call the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie "family-friendly" or not? What about a movie like Juno? The bounds of "family-friendly" aren't well defined, so it's hard to argue against either of our positions because we could be referring to entirely different things. However, I think "family-friendly" movies, if we use a relatively tight definition do tend to alienate different demographics (not eliminate, but enough to make a difference). For instance, Pixar is one of the only studios who can release a G or PG rated movie and get a lot of people in the 18-25 demographic to see it. A G rating tends to limit a movie to children and their parents, unless it's of especially high quality (i.e. Pixar) in the same way that a PG13 rating tends to limit a movie to pre-teens, teens, and adults, unless it's especially good.
Your numbers are skewed, as pointed out by SK. Also, if the top 50 movies are perused, I would hazard a guess that a majority of them are "family friendly."
Again, this depends entirely on one's definition of family friendly, since there's a lot of franchises on the list that will push the results heavily one way or the other. Top 50 Movies (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/). Is Twilight family friendly? Is Transformers? Is Harry Potter? Is Lord of the Rings? Is Star Wars? Is Pirates of the Caribbean? Just those franchises make up almost half that list (and this is just the top 50, mind), so it really could go either way. I'm actually curious that, of those franchises, which you think would be considered family friendly.
-
Why did I type Titanic? It must have been me thinking about Soul Seeker's post cause I actually have zero interest in seeing the movie, and meant to say the hobbit. My mind needs to stop wandering mid post.
Edit: The twilight saga is in the top 50 twice. Nope. I'm done. Suicide just became the answer.
-
Going back to differences between Batman Begins and TDK...Katie Holmes>>>>>Maggie Gyllenhaal. Obviously Heath Ledger made up for this, but I was really annoyed the entire first time I saw TDK.
Speaking of acting changes, switching Rhodey in Iron Man was really frustrating too, but I didn't care for Iron Man much anyway.
-
Going back to differences between Batman Begins and TDK...Katie Holmes>>>>>Maggie Gyllenhaal. Obviously Heath Ledger made up for this, but I was really annoyed the entire first time I saw TDK.
Speaking of acting changes, switching Rhodey in Iron Man was really frustrating too, but I didn't care for Iron Man much anyway.
I do agree with this, though Gyllenhaal was competent in the role.
-
I think that Avengers does better than what you have it ranked. definitely before titanic!
-
I think "Starvation-related Recreational Activities" (my name for Hunger Games) is probably going to be the highest grossing film of this year. I would rather see Avengers or Hobbit to beat it, but it doesn't look like it. (Hobbit has the better chance to though.)
-
The Dark Knight Rises will most definitely beat out Hunger Games. No competition.
-
Doesn't Spider-Man come out this year? No love for Spidey?
-
I think since it won't have good ol' Tobey, I dunno. (I still want to see it though.)
And, just another thought, do you know who would win every time.at a starvation-related recreational activity? Katie Kaboom.
-
I think since it won't have good ol' Tobey, I dunno. (I still want to see it though.)
That's an argument against seeing it?
-
1. The Dark Knight Rises
2. The Hunger Games
3. The Avengers
4. Titanic
5. The Hobbit
I think TDKR is easily the top grossing film of the year. Nolan is the best director of his time. He's never produced a flop and has produced 4 of the best movies I've personally (along with many others in my age bracket) ever seen (and of recent years). There's just no way to stop that momentum to create turnout, especially coupled with big stars Anne Hathaway and Christian Bale.
I think the Hunger Games slots in 2nd. I don't think it's the second best movie on this list, but I think it has the hype and the fanbase. People I've never known to read before have read these books in a matter of two days. There's no doubt it's a compelling storyline, and when teens actually get compelled to do something, they tend to bring friends. I see this one riding the backs of angsty teens rewatching it with different friends groups.
I like the Avengers at three mostly because I freaking love Joss Whedon. Oh, and there's some stars in it. But really, Joss Whedon. Let's all talk about our man crushes on Joss Whedon for about 3 pages at least.
Titanic is at four because after all this action, boyfriends are going to have to their girlfriends to something...
Hobbit is at five by default. I just don't see how it overcomes the other films, especially since the casual movie goer that liked the Return of the King is NOT going to like the Hobbit. I don't think people realize how different the Hobbit is going to look because they haven't read the book in awhile.
-
I suppose adults here do not realize the enormous, and I mean ENORMOUS impact Hunger Games will have on money sales.
My proof - did not even know the other 4 you listed were coming out this year, or at all, but I have yet to spend 5 minutes in any class without hearing about the Hunger Games. Everyone and their sister is re-reading the book and saw last night's midnight premier. While I despise literary present tense as it takes the least skill to write and has pretty much no (how would I put this, shading?) behind it, that book was amazing. In comparison to twilight, twilight was only for 14-18 year old girls (around) pretty much, VERY few adults and hopefully no males. I also know it to be one of the most despised franchises out there but honestly I find that so sad, I would hate to spend that much time writing what I believe is a not-terrible work of fiction (even though I would never watch or read any of the series) but have so many people hate my work for no reason...
Hunger Games is for pretty much anyone. Males, females, the romance side is not significant but apparently heavy enough for the females to enjoy. Enough action for the males. Adults also love this book, and the sequel Catching Fire is even better in my opinion. Even though I can't stand the writing tense or style, Hunger Games and Catching Fire are easily in my top 8 books of all time, which says something.
YMT - the children aren't really fighting for entertainment... Well kind of. The capital is filled with rich bored people that have nothing better to do than force a child from each of the 12 districts (kind of like states) to fight to the death. Nobody from any of the 12 districts enjoys this (it's been a while so correct me if I'm wrong, anybody). They only submit because the capital is extremely powerful and influential over every action in the country. Coming from someone who read this in the 8th grade, I found this book series extremely non-disturbing, the violence is extremely insignificant when compared to a lot of other books I have read. My suggestion is you read this book, I'm pretty sure you will love it, and then see if it's suitable for your kids. I'm not trying to tell you how to parent your kids, it's just that if I was them I certainly would want to get a hold of this series. Just looking out for the little ones :D
-
We realize The Hunger Games is going to perform well, it already has, but there is no way it touches The Dark Knight Rises. The Dark Knight is already one of the highest grossing films of all time, it's not like the sequel is going to just tank or anything even if it's horrible. Christopher Nolan may be the greatest director of our generation, coupled with Christian Bale who is one of it's biggest stars. There has been more hype around the FILMING of The Dark Knight Rises than there has been around the RELEASE of the Hunger Game. Kids in school talking about something doesn't automatically make it a box office hit (and how I wish this had been true with the twilight movies). When TDKR is around it's release date they will probably be talking about it just as much. I've only met one person that didn't love The Dark Knight, and is not looking forward to the sequel, and they didn't like it because Heath Ledger died....don't know why that's a reason to not like a movie but that's why she didn't like it.
-
Dark Knight was awesome. From the trailers of Dark Knight Rises, it doesn't look as great as Dark Knight. Still seeing it regardless.
-
I don't think TDKR will be as good as The Dark Knight, because there is no Heath Ledger as the Joker, now I'm not saying that because he's dead, as far as I'm concerned (and I know this sounds bad) I really couldn't care less that he is when it comes to the movie. He just nailed that role. He brought exactly the right amount of sociopath to it while not over doing it.
-
I don't think TDKR will be as good as The Dark Knight, because there is no Heath Ledger as the Joker, now I'm not saying that because he's dead, as far as I'm concerned (and I know this sounds bad) I really couldn't care less that he is when it comes to the movie. He just nailed that role. He brought exactly the right amount of sociopath to it while not over doing it.
Well, I mean, he's dead. Some might call that "overdoing it". (I know that there's not much evidence to suggest he purposefully killed himself, however, there is some speculation that was taking what he was because of that role.)
My proof - did not even know the other 4 you listed were coming out this year, or at all
I can see not knowing about The Titanic, and maybe even The Avengers, but missing that The Dark Knight Rises and The Hobbit hit theaters this year is kind of big. Did you happen to spend most of the last six or seven months in Best North Korea?
-
Well, I mean, he's dead. Some might call that "overdoing it". (I know that there's not much evidence to suggest he purposefully killed himself, however, there is some speculation that was taking what he was because of that role.)
He didn't kill him self it was an accidental overdose brought on by a lethal combination of medications that he wasn't supposed to take together, but they were all prescribed by different doctors who didn't know he was on the other ones. You can speculate all you want but that doesn't change the facts. National Enquirer might listen though if you claim, but do provide evidence of, a "reliable source".
-
I also did not know The Hobbit was coming out. I think its an easy bias to believe it will be a big movie because of what kind of people this forum caters to. I don't see it as action packed as the LotR trilogy, so I think most casual viewers will be 'meh' towards it. Even though I don't find the series all that great (long and boring in my opinion), I'll watch The Hobbit for nostalgiac purposes. This drummed up memories of being forced to read it during summer break in middle schoool, and only actually reading it the last 2 days before school started and turning in the most asinine book report ever.
-
I also did not know The Hobbit was coming out. I think its an easy bias to believe it will be a big movie because of what kind of people this forum caters to. I don't see it as action packed as the LotR trilogy, so I think most casual viewers will be 'meh' towards it. Even though I don't find the series all that great (long and boring in my opinion), I'll watch The Hobbit for nostalgiac purposes. This drummed up memories of being forced to read it during summer break in middle schoool, and only actually reading it the last 2 days before school started and turning in the most asinine book report ever.
I think you may be underestimating the LotR fanbase. I'm not a movie goer myself, the only movie I might have gone to see is TDKR or The Avengers, but I will definitely go to the Hobbit.
I (along with millions of other fans) have been waiting indefinately for The Hobbit to be made into a movie. Alot of other people I know feel the same way, now maybe it's because I hang out in circles that are more nerdy than others. But I expect that a large number on 'not-the-average-movie-goers' will be drawn out to watch The Hobbit simply becasue it's a Tolkein story. Additionally, as I remember from the book, the Hobbit is a slight bit more 'family-friendly' meaning that some more conservative parents will let their kids see it. Additionally there is a large slew of people who remember how awesome the LotR movies were and will attend because of that. I think the TDKR and the Hunger Games may do better than the Hobbit, but it will definitely be in the top 5.
-
I'm not talking about the LotR/Hobbit/Tolkien fanbase. Everyone knows they will go see it because they're ravenous and will eat up anything Tolkien. I'm talking about the casual movie-goer that doesn't necessarily know/care about Tolkien books.
-
required reading list, much like Twilight and Happy Potter before it (and we know they did well at the box office).
Wait wait wait...you're telling me schools actually MADE students read twilight? I thought cruel and unusual punishment was banned in this country? Water boarding I can put up with if I have to, but forcing innocent children to read twilight? This is an outrage! I am going all the way to the top on this, I will not stop until Obama himself hears my cause!
-
I honestly wouldn't know about that, I don't know that many people who don't know/care about Tolkien. (shows how nerdy I really am)
I'm not 'the casual movie goer' so I suppose it's possible that a lot of people of that type will forgo the attendance of the Hobbit for other films.
EDIT: INSTAPOSTED, I was addressing MKC
-
Yeah, everyone hear loves Tolkien to much that the Hobbit is easily the most boring book to a casual fan who just liked the movies. Once some of them see the Hobbit and start talking about it, none of the casuals will want to go because it was 'boring'.
-
I like lord of the rings. I read the three books that have already been made in to movies.
I stopped reading The hobbit half way through. Might go see this movie just because I never finished the book.
-
I like lord of the rings. I read the three books that have already been made in to movies.
I stopped reading The hobbit half way through. Might go see this movie just because I never finished the book.
The end is the only part remotely like any of the other movies. The Hobbit has more of a Fellowship of the Ring feel, but without any sort of ominous the world is ending motivation.
-
The Hobbit was my favorite book for a very long time. It was adventurous and wonderfully written, but didn't have all the boring detail of LotR. Granted, I read these books when I was 12(?), but still, Hobbit was great.
There and Back Again will be better than An Unexpected Journey. The Battle of Four Armies should be more epic than Helm's Deep...
-
The Hobbit was my favorite book for a very long time. It was adventurous and wonderfully written, but didn't have all the boring detail of LotR.
This is how my wife compares the stories as well.
-
I think people writing off the first half of The Hobbit as "boring" are forgetting how great the first half of Fellowship is. There's only a few "exciting" parts (a couple run-ins with the Nazgul mostly), but the movie remains entertaining throughout, albeit a little slow. An Unexpected Journey will have more excitement than that I think, since there's going to be a few parts that are stunningly iconic (the scene with the trolls, the scene with Gollum, etc). While I'd have to read the book again to confirm, I remain quite confident that An Unexpected Journey will have the entertainment value to bring in large audiences. Return of the King is one of the best selling movies of all time, and this is the closest thing to a sequel. Do you really think that's just going to be ignored, especially when the hype kicks in at the end of the summer?