LexExpress
Team Rocket
Posts: 927
Member is Online
|
Post by LexExpress on Jul 21, 2016 2:56:47 GMT -5
Ohhh damn. That's an indictment on the dreary quality of these adaptations if I ever saw one.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,211
Member is Online
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Jul 21, 2016 3:17:28 GMT -5
the last movie made 179 million on a 110 million dollar budget. So it made it's budget back but was nowhere near the conventional advertising budget. What is with this trend? It was done with "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows," "Twilight: Breaking Dawn" and "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay." Now I have not read the Divergent books, but the movies were not great. The first one was just okay at best. The second one had some eye-rolling moments. The third one was just plain bad and the story was not over. Basically what ever was the first to do it was way too long to faithfully adapt and get all the important shit in. both of those movies made money. Hollywood is stupid. Hollywood decided that splitting all final movies will equal profit because there is an extra movie for people to see! Despite most novels you know... not having an ending point in the middle that could work. I think the first was Harry Potter. But they didn't take anything else into consideration, things like the novels being freaking enormous, things like this already being a massively successful series so people were begging for more.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Jul 21, 2016 6:17:52 GMT -5
At least it's been said that Avengers: Infinity War I + II will function as two different self-contained films, despite the Part I + Part II titling (though it seems they'll get distinct subtitles ultimately). They are getting completely new titles Per the Russo Brothers so people don't get confused that they are one big movie split in two. Infinity War is more or less an example of it. But the Marvel gang has way better marketability and more of an established connection with the public at this point, so I'm not gonna shake my fist at Disney over it because it's more of an understandable gamble on their part.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,211
Member is Online
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Jul 21, 2016 6:24:12 GMT -5
They are getting completely new titles Per the Russo Brothers so people don't get confused that they are one big movie split in two. Infinity War is more or less an example of it. But the Marvel gang has way better marketability and more of an established connection with the public at this point, so I'm not gonna shake my fist at Disney over it because it's more of an understandable gamble on their part. Yeah, how many movies had Marvel done before even announcing a 2 parter? They knew there was the interest and good will to sustain this, not forcing it just because that's what you do these days.
|
|
|
Post by Alice Syndrome on Jul 21, 2016 7:06:51 GMT -5
Nope, this was another case of the dreaded "split the last book into two parts" What is with this trend? It was done with "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows," "Twilight: Breaking Dawn" and "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay." Now I have not read the Divergent books, but the movies were not great. The first one was just okay at best. The second one had some eye-rolling moments. The third one was just plain bad and the story was not over. HP needed it because the book was long and they NEEDED to tie everything up (and they still cut plenty of things out) Twilight I'm not sure, Mockingjay and Divergent are just cash cow extensions. Interestingly I did actually find Divergent to be a better (book at least, the films of both are all meh) series than Mockingjay, so I'm kinda disappointed that it's bombing where MJ succeeded
|
|
|
Post by cageking666 on Jul 21, 2016 8:11:26 GMT -5
Don't people realize that Shailene Woodley is hot yet? Yes but looks don't equal success
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jul 21, 2016 8:36:17 GMT -5
the last movie made 179 million on a 110 million dollar budget. So it made it's budget back but was nowhere near the conventional advertising budget. Only $66 million domestic (where studios take most of the profits), so if the budget was $110, then it was a huge flop. The story just seemed like it was written in a board room where they broke down the Hunger Games into bullet points to try to replicate it. - Dystopian future? Check. - Angsty teenage heroine who is tough but tender? Check. - Ridiculously stupid idea for how to keep a population in check for the elite? Check and Double Check. It's like when a company sets out to make the next World of Warcraft, and ultimately fails because there's already a world of Warcraft and people don't want another one.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jul 21, 2016 8:48:00 GMT -5
the last movie made 179 million on a 110 million dollar budget. So it made it's budget back but was nowhere near the conventional advertising budget. Only $66 million domestic (where studios take most of the profits), so if the budget was $110, then it was a huge flop. The story just seemed like it was written in a board room where they broke down the Hunger Games into bullet points to try to replicate it. Well yeah I was doing the quick and dirty by just looking at the total box office. because going in to how global studio takes, and domestic studio takes (since studios make most of their money from the opening weekend box office and significantly less every following week) makes the issue pretty dang confusing
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Jul 21, 2016 10:55:04 GMT -5
I've had my fill of teenage dystopian sci-fi novels/movies.
|
|
LexExpress
Team Rocket
Posts: 927
Member is Online
|
Post by LexExpress on Jul 21, 2016 11:51:20 GMT -5
HP needed it because the book was long and they NEEDED to tie everything up (and they still cut plenty of things out) Twilight I'm not sure, Mockingjay and Divergent are just cash cow extensions. Interestingly I did actually find Divergent to be a better (book at least, the films of both are all meh) series than Mockingjay, so I'm kinda disappointed that it's bombing where MJ succeeded Twilight was the original cash cow, could've easily been done in one film even though the book is long (most of it is filler). Completely agree with you about Divergent vs. HG book series.
|
|
Ultimo Gallos
Grimlock
Dreams SUCK!Nightmares live FOREVER!
Posts: 14,867
|
Post by Ultimo Gallos on Jul 21, 2016 12:15:18 GMT -5
Don't people realize that Shailene Woodley is hot yet? She is nice to look at but has the acting talent of my dead dog.
|
|
|
Post by Cela on Jul 21, 2016 12:19:42 GMT -5
Don't people realize that Shailene Woodley is hot yet? She is nice to look at but has the acting talent of my dead dog. She was great in The Descendants, but her follow up was pretty weak. Also, she sounds a little crazy, what with her Only Eat Clay diet.
|
|
|
Post by Alyce: Old Media Enthusiast on Jul 21, 2016 12:20:35 GMT -5
What is with this trend? It was done with "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows," "Twilight: Breaking Dawn" and "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay." Now I have not read the Divergent books, but the movies were not great. The first one was just okay at best. The second one had some eye-rolling moments. The third one was just plain bad and the story was not over. HP needed it because the book was long and they NEEDED to tie everything up (and they still cut plenty of things out) Twilight I'm not sure, Mockingjay and Divergent are just cash cow extensions. And let's not get started about the Hobbit "trilogy"
|
|
JoDaNa1281
Crow T. Robot
Jackie Daytona, Regular Human Bartender. #BLM
Posts: 41,028
|
Post by JoDaNa1281 on Jul 21, 2016 14:23:55 GMT -5
HP needed it because the book was long and they NEEDED to tie everything up (and they still cut plenty of things out) Twilight I'm not sure, Mockingjay and Divergent are just cash cow extensions. And let's not get started about the Hobbit "trilogy" That should've only been 2 movies, at most.
|
|
Fade
Patti Mayonnaise
Posts: 38,330
|
Post by Fade on Jul 21, 2016 14:30:39 GMT -5
So...Shailene Woodley, Ansel, Miles "PunchMeFaceSyndrome" Teller aren't the biggest stars but I doubt they'll commit to this. So, what? Brand new cast? Thats LOL-worthy. Just call an L an L.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jul 21, 2016 14:35:42 GMT -5
So...Shailene Woodley, Ansel, Miles "PunchMeFaceSyndrome" Teller aren't the biggest stars but I doubt they'll commit to this. So, what? Brand new cast? Thats LOL-worthy. Just call an L an L. they may be contractually obligated for at least the tv movie.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Jul 21, 2016 15:06:29 GMT -5
One of the dumbest concepts for a series I've ever heard
|
|
|
Post by Alice Syndrome on Jul 21, 2016 16:04:38 GMT -5
HP needed it because the book was long and they NEEDED to tie everything up (and they still cut plenty of things out) Twilight I'm not sure, Mockingjay and Divergent are just cash cow extensions. And let's not get started about the Hobbit "trilogy" ![](http://i.imgur.com/fZGUg9z.gif)
|
|
|
Post by SHAKEMASTER TV9 is Don Knotts on Jul 21, 2016 16:32:43 GMT -5
So...Shailene Woodley, Ansel, Miles "PunchMeFaceSyndrome" Teller aren't the biggest stars but I doubt they'll commit to this. So, what? Brand new cast? Thats LOL-worthy. Just call an L an L. they may be contractually obligated for at least the tv movie. One of the articles I read that they were only committed on condition of a theatrical release. They would have to renegotiate if that's the case for just the movie which there is no set television network committed to it yet. Might depend on the network.
|
|
agent817
Fry's dog Seymour
Doesn't Know Whose Ring It Is
Posts: 21,437
|
Post by agent817 on Jul 21, 2016 16:48:45 GMT -5
One of the dumbest concepts for a series I've ever heard I thought it was dumb for them to do the split the final book into two parts. Not that the other movies were that good anyway.
|
|