Edmilson

Paramount was mind-numbingly stupid when releasing M: I Dead Reckoning. They released their mega expensive movie (almost $300 million budget) that absolutely depended on the "you must see this on an IMAX screen" kind of buzz one week before Oppenheimer, which would also use IMAX. Instead, why didn't they release the movie in a less crowded date? Like October or November or whatever, those months were pretty devoid of blockbusters. In retrospect, I guess they were so confident with the mega success of Maverick that they thought "Heh, we have another Tom Cruise action epic, everyone is craving that after Maverick! Nolan with his stupid WWII drama biopic won't be a match for us! Of course IMAX will prioritize our movie instead of Oppenheimer!" They didn't count on two factors: IMAX's loyalty to Nolan (despite Cruise's desperate appeals to them); and The whole Barbenheimer thing. This story only illustrates how unpredictable movie audience has become post-pandemic. In 2022, six months after the success of No Way Home Hollywood thought people wanted more Marvel multiverse epics featuring the return of older characters played by their original actors. Then, to the surprise of anyone, Maverick outgrossed Multiverse of Madness. So, in 2023 Hollywood thought people wanted Tom Cruise action movies (Dead Reckoning), the return of beloved 80s heroes (Indy 5)... and of course more superhero multiverses (The Flash) No one thought the two biggest movies of that summer were going to be a fantasy feminist comedy and a World War II drama. For 2024, the main bets based on conventional wisdom build throghout the 2010s are on Despicable Me 4 and Deadpool & Wolverine. Will these bets pay off and so this will be a rather "boring" summer (in terms of not having a surprise hit)? Or will some movie that no one thought would be "big" is going to make a billion dollars? And if so, which one?

I remember when I had The Empire Strikes Back's plot twist first "ruined" by Toy Story 2. By the time I saw TESB I already knew that both Luke and Leia were Vader's kids. And some classic Simpsons episodes "ruined" Planet of the Apes' plot twist. At least the 68 one. The 2001 remake caught me by surprise and pretty much "traumatized" me. How come such a grim movie involving slavery wouldn't have a happy ending, 8-year-old me thought. I remember even asking my mom after just seeing the movie: "mom, is the movie going to have a sequel?". These days I'm thankful we didn't got another awful Apes movie by Burton...

I don't think no algorithm nor human could have predicted that Oppenheimer would be the monster hit it was. Heck, before 2023 begun how could anyone predict that Oppenheimer would outgross every Marvel and DC movie of the year? Indy 5, The Flash, those were the movies people were expecting to be highest grossing movie of the summer, not a 3 hour biopic set in WWII where most of the scenes is people in suits in tense discussions. Not even the fact that it was a Christopher Nolan movie would be enough. His latest movie before Oppenheimer wasn't exactly beloved (Tenet). Also, his biggest hits either had Batman and/or action and sci-fi elements that theoretically made them closer to what we understand as a big blockbuster movie on these days. Also, there are a lot of other factors that could have impacted in Oppenheimer's performance. Barbie could've moved to another date and the whole Barbenheimer thing would've never happened, the movie itself could have been "less good" and not have connected to the audiences as much as it did, Flash, Indy or M: I could've been the big summer movies (and the latter two in particular were thought by some to be the "Top Gun: Maverick of 2023" - another movie whose monstrous box office couldn't have been predicted by anyone)... In other words: since 2022 (the first year post-pandemic to have actually a relatively normal release schedule) it became harder and harder to predict which movies are going to break out in a given year. Before Covid it was easy: just bet on the big Marvel movie of the year or the Disney live-action remake, Pixar sequel, etc. Now it's harder than ever. For this year, people are expecting Despicable Me 4 and Deadpool & Wolverine to be the summer's biggest hits. But what if neither of them even reaches Dune 2? What if this summer's big hit is actually, I dunno, the new Planet of the Apes? Furiosa? Twisters?

Emily Blunt has some "kind" words to say about algorithms: Emily Blunt Says Algorithms ‘Frustrate Me’ and ‘I Hate That F—ing Word’: ‘How Can We Let It Determine What Will Be Successful?’

Even Spielberg himself probably forgets that he made Always lol The Abyss did bomb at the box office back in 89. It's funny that in the late 80s a James Cameron science fiction about water was a box office failure while a DC superhero movie starring Michael Keaton as Batman and an Indiana Jones movie where he fights nazis were breaking records. A little more than three decades later and the exact opposite of that happened

Correct.

1991 was even better: That is... aside from Hook *runs*

The funny thing is, in comparison 1987 and 1988 didn't have as many blockbusters, aside from a few obvious ones, like Roger Rabbit: Then, in 1989: And the 90s began with a bang on the following year: Of course, the definition of what constitutes a blockbuster these days is much different than what it was back then. Movies like Rain Man, Coming to America and Twins were certainly big events back in 88, while in 1990 Ghost and Home Alone (a romance and a family comedy) outgrossed every 1989 movie. Heck, Pretty Woman and Dances with Wolves made more money at the box office than Batman! In other words: the definition of a blockbuster being an action/sci-fi/fantasy movie based on "nerdy" stuff, like superheroes, Indiana Jones, Star Wars, etc., only took full force on the 2000s and 2010s.

And I was 8, which means I only watched it when it came out on DVD Children aged 8 today weren't even born when The Hobbit trilogy had just released its last movie.

Just like Batman, The Last Crusade, Ghostbusters 2, Lethal Weapon 2 and, by the end of the year, The Little Mermaid and Back to the Future Part 2. It must've been a crazy year for movie nerds! Probably the most packed full of blockbusters since Jaws and Star Wars invented the concept.

When I saw Lincoln I found it extremely boring and just the typical "Oscar bait biopic about important people", so I'd put it in my bottom 5... But I saw it when I was too young at age 19, so maybe now that I'm a bit more grown up I can appreaciate it better. RPO is better than I was expecting, but that doesn't mean it's a great movie. Hook is kinda like BFG: it's either one of those movies where you see it as a kid and then is enraptured by its magic, or you see it as an adult (or even as a teen) and don't care about it. And I think I'll replace either Munich or Minority Report by Empire of the Sun in my top 5. It's a friggin' masterpiece.

Seems like a great movie (aside from Keitel's weiner). It's on my watchlist. Hopefully not because of "lil' Harvey" making a special guest appearance, right?

Even that one where we have the "privilege" of seeing Harvey Keitel's dick?

Yes! I remember I saw this movie on VHS at my cousins's house during a sleepover back when I was 8. At the time I didn't notice the score, but it's cool that they're finally releasing a complete version.

My top 5, as of right now, would look something like this: E.T.; Raiders; Munich; Minority Report; Last Crusade; There are several of them that I need to rewatch though, like A.I. for instance, or that I need to watch at all, like 1941 or Amistad. On the bottom: The BFG (maybe if I were, like, 6 or something I would've liked it); Crystal Skull

Mad Max prequel Furiosa was originally developed as an anime spin-off, and has been ready for 15 years

This may be of interest of both the Zack Snyder fans and the Richard Wagner diehards from the forum:

Battlestar Galactica was pretty much that and it was awesome But yeah, this Thrones spin-off was probably going to be lame anyway.

Couldn't help reading this in Steve Carrell's and Rainn Wilson's voices:

The LOTR movies are as great today as they were back when they were released.

Of course he loved OUATIH so much. That movie allowed him to pretty much fulfill his dream of traveling back in time to 60s Hollywood and work in a western TV show from that era, like those he saw as a kid. That movie was made more for himself, and especially for him to play make believe that he's actually living in the 60s and not the 2010s, than for anyone else.

Which is why we need Mike. Disney would listen to him, since he has connections in the industry, including John Williams himself. And he could explain them even better the value (financial or otherwise) of having a definitive presentation of 14 of the most beloved film scores of all time. Again: Disney won't listen to a two dozens of film music diehards. For them, we're even more insignificant than those guys petitioning Disney to remake The Last Jedi a few years ago. But they may listen someone with connections and contacts in the industry.

It's weird that Hollywood kept casting him in spy roles but never as Bond, even after Craig retired the role. It would be a better use of his talents than crap like Argylle. I'm not a fan of NTTD either. Honestly, I may like it even less than Spectre (which at least starts strong).

No Emile Mosseri then.

We should forward his Facebook profile to Matessino. "Hey Mike, we found on the internet a very interesting person for you to talk! Why don't you text him or something?"