+- +-

+- You

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+- Site Data

Members
Total Members: 87
Latest: brewski
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 112827
Total Topics: 4374
Most Online Today: 3
Most Online Ever: 55
(April 18, 2016, 06:09:38 pm)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 2
Total: 2

Poll

Passengers ranks...

Great (9-10)
0 (0%)
Good (7-8)
1 (33.3%)
Average (4-6)
2 (66.7%)
Poor (2-3)
0 (0%)
Anus of Cinema (0-1)
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 3

Author Topic: Passengers  (Read 1033 times)

cupcake

  • Alfred Hitchcock
  • **********
  • Posts: 9419
  • Hello
  • Location: Bryan Singer's lap
Re: Passengers
« Reply #40 on: December 15, 2016, 12:11:04 pm »
22% on the Tomatometer so far. Ouch.

I think pretty much anyone with a brain saw this coming.
goodbye!

Tut

  • God-King
  • Paul Thomas Anderson
  • **********
  • Posts: 6693
  • It's all over now, baby blue...
  • Location: Nice try, NSA
Re: Passengers
« Reply #41 on: December 15, 2016, 01:17:24 pm »
22% on the Tomatometer so far. Ouch.

And according to the review snippets, the reasons for Jennifer Lawrence's character waking up and Chris Pratt being in love with her are actually very creepy.


Tut

  • God-King
  • Paul Thomas Anderson
  • **********
  • Posts: 6693
  • It's all over now, baby blue...
  • Location: Nice try, NSA
Re: Passengers
« Reply #42 on: December 15, 2016, 05:51:14 pm »
Really though, this should not come as a surprise.

This movie should've had a built-in audience from day one, but for some reason they felt the need to advertise constantly and release a lot of scenes online. I've seen like seven movies in theaters over the past month or so, and at least five of them had a Passengers trailer before them. Makes no sense. The only explanation was that the studio knew it would get bad reviews and were saturating everyone's brains with marketing material to try and offset the damage. Ghostbusters remake did the same thing. And I'm starting to think that 20th Century Women is doing it too. I've seen a trailer for that at every movie I've been to for the past two months. Not conclusive evidence, of course... but I'm still suspicious.

Anyway, I looked up the spoilers for this movie, so if you're like me and you don't care enough to see the film (but are still curious about the negative reaction), click below.

Spoiler (hover to show)

Crohn's Boy

  • David Fincher
  • ******
  • Posts: 4286
  • Hello
  • Location: My couch
Re: Passengers
« Reply #43 on: December 15, 2016, 06:58:15 pm »
Really though, this should not come as a surprise.

This movie should've had a built-in audience from day one, but for some reason they felt the need to advertise constantly and release a lot of scenes online. I've seen like seven movies in theaters over the past month or so, and at least five of them had a Passengers trailer before them. Makes no sense. The only explanation was that the studio knew it would get bad reviews and were saturating everyone's brains with marketing material to try and offset the damage. Ghostbusters remake did the same thing. And I'm starting to think that 20th Century Women is doing it too. I've seen a trailer for that at every movie I've been to for the past two months. Not conclusive evidence, of course... but I'm still suspicious.

Anyway, I looked up the spoilers for this movie, so if you're like me and you don't care enough to see the film (but are still curious about the negative reaction), click below.

Spoiler (hover to show)

I think the trailer issue has to do with the trailer being released so late, and the fact that the film can be attached to multiple different genres of movies (action, adult dramas, sci-fi, family movies, etc.).  Plus, I'm pretty sure every studio attaches the trailer for at least one movie to every wide release.  Ever since this trailer was released, Sony's other films they had to advertise were Inferno and Billy Lynn.  Inferno had little appeal outside of overseas and could really only be attached to action and adult drama films, and Billy Lynn could really only be attached to adult dramas.  So outside of Passengers having a wide variety of the type of films it could be attached to, it also wasn't going up against much competition from Sony itself.
Goodbye!

Tut

  • God-King
  • Paul Thomas Anderson
  • **********
  • Posts: 6693
  • It's all over now, baby blue...
  • Location: Nice try, NSA
Re: Passengers
« Reply #44 on: December 15, 2016, 07:07:16 pm »
Really though, this should not come as a surprise.

This movie should've had a built-in audience from day one, but for some reason they felt the need to advertise constantly and release a lot of scenes online. I've seen like seven movies in theaters over the past month or so, and at least five of them had a Passengers trailer before them. Makes no sense. The only explanation was that the studio knew it would get bad reviews and were saturating everyone's brains with marketing material to try and offset the damage. Ghostbusters remake did the same thing. And I'm starting to think that 20th Century Women is doing it too. I've seen a trailer for that at every movie I've been to for the past two months. Not conclusive evidence, of course... but I'm still suspicious.

Anyway, I looked up the spoilers for this movie, so if you're like me and you don't care enough to see the film (but are still curious about the negative reaction), click below.

Spoiler (hover to show)

I think the trailer issue has to do with the trailer being released so late, and the fact that the film can be attached to multiple different genres of movies (action, adult dramas, sci-fi, family movies, etc.).  Plus, I'm pretty sure every studio attaches the trailer for at least one movie to every wide release.  Ever since this trailer was released, Sony's other films they had to advertise were Inferno and Billy Lynn.  Inferno had little appeal outside of overseas and could really only be attached to action and adult drama films, and Billy Lynn could really only be attached to adult dramas.  So outside of Passengers having a wide variety of the type of films it could be attached to, it also wasn't going up against much competition from Sony itself.

If this is true, I didn't know that. But it's not just in-theater advertising I'm talking about. Press circuits, scenes released online, advertisements on sites... I've seen more promotional material for this than Rogue One. The difference, I guess, is that Rogue One belongs to a franchise so powerful it doesn't really need to advertise... but that's still saying a lot.

Crohn's Boy

  • David Fincher
  • ******
  • Posts: 4286
  • Hello
  • Location: My couch
Re: Passengers
« Reply #45 on: December 15, 2016, 07:13:01 pm »
Really though, this should not come as a surprise.

This movie should've had a built-in audience from day one, but for some reason they felt the need to advertise constantly and release a lot of scenes online. I've seen like seven movies in theaters over the past month or so, and at least five of them had a Passengers trailer before them. Makes no sense. The only explanation was that the studio knew it would get bad reviews and were saturating everyone's brains with marketing material to try and offset the damage. Ghostbusters remake did the same thing. And I'm starting to think that 20th Century Women is doing it too. I've seen a trailer for that at every movie I've been to for the past two months. Not conclusive evidence, of course... but I'm still suspicious.

Anyway, I looked up the spoilers for this movie, so if you're like me and you don't care enough to see the film (but are still curious about the negative reaction), click below.

Spoiler (hover to show)

I think the trailer issue has to do with the trailer being released so late, and the fact that the film can be attached to multiple different genres of movies (action, adult dramas, sci-fi, family movies, etc.).  Plus, I'm pretty sure every studio attaches the trailer for at least one movie to every wide release.  Ever since this trailer was released, Sony's other films they had to advertise were Inferno and Billy Lynn.  Inferno had little appeal outside of overseas and could really only be attached to action and adult drama films, and Billy Lynn could really only be attached to adult dramas.  So outside of Passengers having a wide variety of the type of films it could be attached to, it also wasn't going up against much competition from Sony itself.

If this is true, I didn't know that. But it's not just in-theater advertising I'm talking about. Press circuits, scenes released online, advertisements on sites... I've seen more promotional material for this than Rogue One. The difference, I guess, is that Rogue One belongs to a franchise so powerful it doesn't really need to advertise... but that's still saying a lot.

Well, there's this site.  Basically, it shows what trailer can be played with a certain movie.  For example, the trailers eligible to be played with Rogue One are Pirates of the Caribbean 5, Guardians of the Galaxy 2, Cars 3, Free Fire, Valerian, A Monster Calls, Logan, War for the Planet of the Apes, Power Rangers, Transformers 5, Case for Christ, Spider-Man: Homecoming, The Red Turtle, Space Between Us, The Fate of the Furious, The Mummy, Dunkirk, Kong: Skull Island, and Wonder Woman.  Of course, this doesn't mean you'll be getting all these trailers when you see it.  The theater decides what trailers actually play.  For Passengers, I've seen its name pop up on the trailer drives very often, so oversaturation is definitely a major factor.
Goodbye!

Rupert Pupkin

  • Tim Burton
  • ***
  • Posts: 1014
Re: Passengers
« Reply #46 on: December 15, 2016, 10:36:52 pm »
I did not see this trailer at Rogue One. I saw Spider Man Homecoming, Kong Skull Island, Transformers 5, Pirates 5, Cars 3, And the Fate of the Furious.

Tut

  • God-King
  • Paul Thomas Anderson
  • **********
  • Posts: 6693
  • It's all over now, baby blue...
  • Location: Nice try, NSA
Re: Passengers
« Reply #47 on: December 19, 2016, 08:21:56 pm »
Consensus is up. Sadly, I doubt that this will be a significant commercial disappointment. It might not make the kind of money it was expected to due to Tumblr folk protesting it as sexist (which is certainly possible from what I've heard of the plot). But apparently its budget is $110 million, and even after factoring in marketing and theater shares, there's virtually no way it won't break even. Such a shame.

You still seeing this in theaters, Caleb? I'll give you a Christmas present if you swear not to.

Tho Master Fie

  • God-King
  • Sam Raimi
  • **********
  • Posts: 5410
  • Fear comes in waves
Re: Passengers
« Reply #48 on: December 19, 2016, 08:26:03 pm »
Consensus is up. Sadly, I doubt that this will be a significant commercial disappointment. It might not make the kind of money it was expected to due to Tumblr folk protesting it as sexist (which is certainly possible from what I've heard of the plot). But apparently its budget is $110 million, and even after factoring in marketing and theater shares, there's virtually no way it won't break even. Such a shame.

You still seeing this in theaters, Caleb? I'll give you a Christmas present if you swear not to.
This movie stars the most marketable actor in the world and the most marketable actress in the world.  It could be about two people taking massive shіts as they watch paint dry, and it would still make money.

cupcake

  • Alfred Hitchcock
  • **********
  • Posts: 9419
  • Hello
  • Location: Bryan Singer's lap
Re: Passengers
« Reply #49 on: December 19, 2016, 08:36:41 pm »
the most marketable actress in the world

What's so marketable about a cheese danish?
goodbye!

Tut

  • God-King
  • Paul Thomas Anderson
  • **********
  • Posts: 6693
  • It's all over now, baby blue...
  • Location: Nice try, NSA
Re: Passengers
« Reply #50 on: December 19, 2016, 08:41:35 pm »
Consensus is up. Sadly, I doubt that this will be a significant commercial disappointment. It might not make the kind of money it was expected to due to Tumblr folk protesting it as sexist (which is certainly possible from what I've heard of the plot). But apparently its budget is $110 million, and even after factoring in marketing and theater shares, there's virtually no way it won't break even. Such a shame.

You still seeing this in theaters, Caleb? I'll give you a Christmas present if you swear not to.
This movie stars the most marketable actor in the world and the most marketable actress in the world.  It could be about two people taking massive shіts as they watch paint dry, and it would still make money.

Yeah, but I was hoping for a budget closer to $200 mil that would at least put a dent in the profits and discourage them from making more films like this. Although the marketing budget for this movie is probably unusually bloated, I'm sure that despite major competition from Rogue One, negative word-of-mouth, and angry social justice bloggers whining about it, it'll succeed solely on Lawrence and Pratt's combined star power.

$+/\|_|\|

  • David Fincher
  • ******
  • Posts: 4117
Re: Passengers
« Reply #51 on: December 19, 2016, 09:13:22 pm »
Consensus is up. Sadly, I doubt that this will be a significant commercial disappointment. It might not make the kind of money it was expected to due to Tumblr folk protesting it as sexist (which is certainly possible from what I've heard of the plot). But apparently its budget is $110 million, and even after factoring in marketing and theater shares, there's virtually no way it won't break even. Such a shame.

You still seeing this in theaters, Caleb? I'll give you a Christmas present if you swear not to.
This movie stars the most marketable actor in the world and the most marketable actress in the world.  It could be about two people taking massive shіts as they watch paint dry, and it would still make money.

Yeah, but I was hoping for a budget closer to $200 mil that would at least put a dent in the profits and discourage them from making more films like this. Although the marketing budget for this movie is probably unusually bloated, I'm sure that despite major competition from Rogue One, negative word-of-mouth, and angry social justice bloggers whining about it, it'll succeed solely on Lawrence and Pratt's combined star power.
Oh please, even if it did bomb, they'd still continue to make movies like this. It's why this exists in the first place.

Crohn's Boy

  • David Fincher
  • ******
  • Posts: 4286
  • Hello
  • Location: My couch
Re: Passengers
« Reply #52 on: December 19, 2016, 09:28:57 pm »
Wouldn't discount it bombing quite yet.  Depp and Jolie were both huge in 2010, yet The Tourist was a disappointment.  It still broke even, but only by barely, and most of that came from international gross, where studios often don't receive as high of a percentage for the grosses made there.  Also cost 10M less dollars to make than Passengers.
Goodbye!

Tut

  • God-King
  • Paul Thomas Anderson
  • **********
  • Posts: 6693
  • It's all over now, baby blue...
  • Location: Nice try, NSA
Re: Passengers
« Reply #53 on: December 19, 2016, 10:33:48 pm »
Wouldn't discount it bombing quite yet.  Depp and Jolie were both huge in 2010, yet The Tourist was a disappointment.  It still broke even, but only by barely, and most of that came from international gross, where studios often don't receive as high of a percentage for the grosses made there.  Also cost 10M less dollars to make than Passengers.

I feel like the demographic appeal is pretty different with those two movies...

Crohn's Boy

  • David Fincher
  • ******
  • Posts: 4286
  • Hello
  • Location: My couch
Re: Passengers
« Reply #54 on: December 19, 2016, 10:42:10 pm »
Wouldn't discount it bombing quite yet.  Depp and Jolie were both huge in 2010, yet The Tourist was a disappointment.  It still broke even, but only by barely, and most of that came from international gross, where studios often don't receive as high of a percentage for the grosses made there.  Also cost 10M less dollars to make than Passengers.

I feel like the demographic appeal is pretty different with those two movies...

Maybe so, but it shows that big stars doesn't always automatically translate into box office success.
Goodbye!

Kale Pasta

  • God-King
  • David Lynch
  • **********
  • Posts: 4717
  • And the path was a circle, round and round
Re: Passengers
« Reply #55 on: December 19, 2016, 11:13:10 pm »
Consensus is up. Sadly, I doubt that this will be a significant commercial disappointment. It might not make the kind of money it was expected to due to Tumblr folk protesting it as sexist (which is certainly possible from what I've heard of the plot). But apparently its budget is $110 million, and even after factoring in marketing and theater shares, there's virtually no way it won't break even. Such a shame.

You still seeing this in theaters, Caleb? I'll give you a Christmas present if you swear not to.
I dunno, I still can't shake the feeling that it'll be good based on the trailers even though I know it'll most likely be terrible. Plus, my dad wants to see Sing (it's retarded, but he's a huge music fan and enjoys most films with music in them, even if he knows the movie's bad) so I might just go with him to the theater and see Passengers. If it's not my money it may be worth it just to satiate my curiosity, even if it is bad as it probably will be.

Charles Longboat Jr.

  • Moderator
  • Wes Anderson
  • ******
  • Posts: 7202
  • Upon us all a little rain must fall

Kale Pasta

  • God-King
  • David Lynch
  • **********
  • Posts: 4717
  • And the path was a circle, round and round

Tho Master Fie

  • God-King
  • Sam Raimi
  • **********
  • Posts: 5410
  • Fear comes in waves
Re: Passengers
« Reply #58 on: December 19, 2016, 11:21:22 pm »
Yo, Cutler.  Paaschengers.

Tut

  • God-King
  • Paul Thomas Anderson
  • **********
  • Posts: 6693
  • It's all over now, baby blue...
  • Location: Nice try, NSA
Re: Passengers
« Reply #59 on: December 19, 2016, 11:25:20 pm »
Consensus is up. Sadly, I doubt that this will be a significant commercial disappointment. It might not make the kind of money it was expected to due to Tumblr folk protesting it as sexist (which is certainly possible from what I've heard of the plot). But apparently its budget is $110 million, and even after factoring in marketing and theater shares, there's virtually no way it won't break even. Such a shame.

You still seeing this in theaters, Caleb? I'll give you a Christmas present if you swear not to.
I dunno, I still can't shake the feeling that it'll be good based on the trailers even though I know it'll most likely be terrible. Plus, my dad wants to see Sing (it's retarded, but he's a huge music fan and enjoys most films with music in them, even if he knows the movie's bad) so I might just go with him to the theater and see Passengers. If it's not my money it may be worth it just to satiate my curiosity, even if it is bad as it probably will be.

Buy a ticket for Sing and sneak into Passengers. Dawson Joyce style.

 

+- Hot Threads

The Trump Presidency Thread by Kale Pasta
Today at 12:55:39 am

Awards Season by Charles Longboat Jr.
December 18, 2018, 08:12:03 pm

2 Fudge 2 Knuckle by Charles Longboat Jr.
December 18, 2018, 08:07:48 pm

THE OFFICIAL MOVIE WATCHING THREAD by Crohn's Boy
December 16, 2018, 12:38:34 pm

The Video Games MegaThread by Charles Longboat Jr.
December 07, 2018, 01:06:29 am

The 2018 US Midterms and Goober-natorial Elections Thread by Robert Neville
November 27, 2018, 04:19:15 pm

The Official Movie Trailer/TV Spot Watching Thread by Robert Neville
November 27, 2018, 03:59:28 pm

What song are you listening to - Part II by Charles Longboat Jr.
November 26, 2018, 11:58:34 pm

2018 Standings by Crohn's Boy
October 07, 2018, 11:13:25 am

Khabib vs. Conor fight by Robert Neville
October 07, 2018, 07:15:48 am

Another reason why SEC is so embarrassing... by The One Who Lurks
October 06, 2018, 07:21:54 pm

Book Thread. What are you reading? by Tut
September 26, 2018, 11:40:42 pm

MWO Movie News, a subsidiary of the Walt Disney Company by Charles Longboat Jr.
September 20, 2018, 07:51:25 pm

Whats your take on movie crowdfunding? by Robert Neville
September 16, 2018, 07:23:03 am

Consensus XXXIII: Netflicks Moovys by Crohn's Boy
September 14, 2018, 04:06:15 pm