Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
People were laughing at my screening.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Not looking good for "Lone Ranger"
- Thread starter fractal
- Start date
People were laughing at my screening.
GrumpyFan
Well-Known Member
All good points, and I agree, but then if you're Disney, how do you not gamble on a proven strategy with names like Verbinski, Bruckheimer and Depp, when they've been very successful in the past?
I think, much like John Carter, some of this failure can be blamed on marketing missing the mark. Maybe I'm old fashioned, or just old, but The Lone Ranger was huge at one time, and the themes and ideas for which he stood are just as viable now as they were then. This is a story that should have worked, but sadly seems to be failing, and based on the trailers I've seen, it's due to the over-hyping of explosions and mass chaos that doesn't really send a clear message of what the story is, just that it's from the same people who brought us Pirates of the Caribbean.
Wilt Dasney
Well-Known Member
If it weren't for the Subway avocado ads, I'm not sure I'd even know about this movie. They seem scared to come out and act like the Lone Ranger is "cool", so they emphasize explosions and jokes over anything of substance. I think the scriptwriters unfortunately got the same memo.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Same during mine. And I don't see it as any worse than Gru getting tossed about as he was kidnapped.
PirateFrank
Well-Known Member
Just came back from seeing the Lone Ranger. It was stellar - pure excitement and humor for 179 minutes. Don't believe the hype....I don't know who or why they're trying to John Carter this movie, but it's not even remotely a bad film.
My wife saw it and said it was great. I'm hoping that word of mouth and people getting DM2 out of the way will help it grow some legs.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
I just looked up Lone Ranger on Rotten Tomatoes and it's interesting to see that the critic rating for it is 24%, but 68% of the audience liked it. That's the biggest discrepancy between the critic number and audience number of any major movie out right now.
Bairstow
Well-Known Member
That happens all the time.
Audiences tend to only pay to see movies they want to.
Critics see every movie they're paid to.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/scary_movie_5/
Critics are political monkeys.
GrumpyFan
Well-Known Member
Great article here on The Lone Ranger, and what's wrong with Hollywood.
http://www.vulture.com/2013/07/lone-ranger-is-everything-wrong-with-hollywood.html
http://www.vulture.com/2013/07/lone-ranger-is-everything-wrong-with-hollywood.html
Bairstow
Well-Known Member
danlb_2000
Premium Member
Good point. If I had to see every summer blockbuster I would probably tire of them very quickly.
Philadelphia Inquirer gave it 4 out of 5 stars...
Wild, wacky 'Lone Ranger' is epic good time
Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/movies/20130703_Wild__wacky__Lone_Ranger__is_epic_good_time.html#AX8vItP1d4D15w6O.99
If Johnny Depp, movie star, and Gore Verbinski, moviemaker, can revive that peg-legged, whiskey-soaked buccaneer genre - and four Pirates of the Caribbean and $3.72 billion in worldwide box office later, it's been demonstrated that they can - then why not the dusty old six-shootin', saloon door-swingin' western, too? And with The Lone Ranger, that's exactly what they've done. A wild, wacky, wide-screen reimagining of the vintage radio serial and TV series, the film - with Armie Hammer in the hat and mask, galloping across Texas righting wrongs, and Depp as his trusty Indian sidekick, Tonto - is an epic good time. It's also as American as apple pie, and as American as greedy railroad barons, cagey brothel madams, and two-faced pols. Perfect timing for the Fourth of July!
Wild, wacky 'Lone Ranger' is epic good time
Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/movies/20130703_Wild__wacky__Lone_Ranger__is_epic_good_time.html#AX8vItP1d4D15w6O.99
If Johnny Depp, movie star, and Gore Verbinski, moviemaker, can revive that peg-legged, whiskey-soaked buccaneer genre - and four Pirates of the Caribbean and $3.72 billion in worldwide box office later, it's been demonstrated that they can - then why not the dusty old six-shootin', saloon door-swingin' western, too? And with The Lone Ranger, that's exactly what they've done. A wild, wacky, wide-screen reimagining of the vintage radio serial and TV series, the film - with Armie Hammer in the hat and mask, galloping across Texas righting wrongs, and Depp as his trusty Indian sidekick, Tonto - is an epic good time. It's also as American as apple pie, and as American as greedy railroad barons, cagey brothel madams, and two-faced pols. Perfect timing for the Fourth of July!
PirateFrank
Well-Known Member
Sorry that article's a hot mess. Gilbert Cruz cites four reasons for why the movie industry has problems...but seriously contradicts himself on two of reasons and fails to accurately explain the other two. Ultimately, he completely ignores the largest problem with the movie industry.
He claims the Origin-story is a huge problem in movies...but in the same paragraph states that 'the origin story MUST be told' Which is? Do you want the Origin story or not? IMHO, There's nothing wrong with Origin stories. Tell that to Chris Nolan -- He has two of them that are hugely successful. One is in the theaters as we speak...
Secondly, he complains about movie length....and in the same paragraph, quotes Roger Ebert's near-famous statement "No good movie is too long and no bad movie is short enough." Movie length is a non-issue. If the movie sucks, it's too long. If the movie is great, I'll watch it for 3 hours, rewatch it home multiple times and take 10 more equally good sequels, thank you!
That leaves the franchise problem and the ratings problem. I'm not so sure someone can sit there with a straight face and say there's a franchise problem. Take a look at the All Time worldwide gross list (http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/). 8, soon to be 9, of the top 10 grossing movies of all time are franchises. That's not a problem. That looks to me like a solution. The movie industry is *constantly* fighting atrophy of it's business. As entertainment gets more and more portable and home screens have gotten larger, theaters and studios have to come up with new ways to keep people into the theaters. Simply put, people are rejecting the old paradigms and delivery mechanisms, just like they did with recorded music. Heck, if I had my druthers, I'd *never* see a movie in the theaters. ever. I hate sitting in a theater where I have to hear some cough/talk through the movie, smell someone's bad breath, cant stretch my legs out, get interrupted by some crusty hag needing to go to the bathroom 12 times, risk taking bedbugs home.....Movie Studios and theaters see this writing on the wall and they've come up with several ways to counter this. Roomier theaters, 3D and the most recent gimmick seems to be this $50-60 super-ticket (where movie goes can take home a digital copy). After taking a look at how much franchises have contributed to studio grosses in the past decade or two, I'm convinced franchises are just as responsible for staving off movie industry disaster. Without the franchises of the past decade, I'm not so sure the movie industry would be at all recognizable to any of us.
the 'ratings' problem......excuse me? what ratings problem? This is a total non-issue. Every film for the past 50 years has had to deal with the ratings issue. It's a known entity. It hasn't changed in 2 generations. As a parent, I would hate a movie industry without some barometer to understand what the content of a movie is going to be.
Ultimately, the largest problem with movies is the 'budget' problem. This isn't really an issue/discussion of Eisner's singles and doubles mindset for studios to adopt to compete. It's a problem with the industry as a whole. The cost to throw a movie together seems to have gotten completely out of hand. The cost of pre-production, post production, marketing, etc. Let's not forget the actors. When you have production budgets for summer movies routinely passing $150M, marketing budgets doubling that...you have a whole fleet of movies that *need* to get well past half a million in gross receipts before they even break even. Considering the constant atrophy of the receipts end of this industry, this is just completely idiotic. This reminds me of the fiscal idiocy happening in governments right now. At some point, the bottom is going to fall out from underneath the movie industry. All it takes a a handful of tentpoles to fail and boom....
In the next 10 years, the computing power to complete 99% of the CGI done in current movies is going to be easily accessible in personal computers. Combine that with the fact that modern DSLRs have sensors that can 'get almost there' with respect to filming movies and were actually used in the 3rd highest grossing film of all time (http://www.eoshd.com/content/8032/c...sed-to-shoot-action-sequences-on-the-avengers ). At some point, someone is going to release a visually stunning movie filmed on a true shoestring budget....and slap this whole industry on its . It's not a matter of if. It's a matter of when. When it happens, every studio spending $225M to put out 'summer blockbusters' is going to look like dinosaurs. It happened to the music industry. Its going to happen to the film industry.
AndyMagic
Well-Known Member
The 5-day Holiday box office numbers are in:
1. Despicable Me 2 (Universal) NEW [Runs 3,957]
5-Day Weekend $140.5M, Domestic Cume $140.5M
2. The Lone Ranger (Disney) NEW [Runs 3,904]
5-Day Weekend $48.5M, Domestic Cume $48.5M
4. Monsters University (Pixar/Disney) Week 2 [Runs 4,004]
5-Day Weekend $29.6M, Domestic Cume $215.6M
It looks like Despicable Me 2 will end up passing Monsters University to become the highest grossing animated film of the year. It's unfortunate for Disney that they only had a week and a half without direct competition. It's also unfortunate that they spent upwards of $210 million on MU while DM2 had a production budget of $79 million. Disney's love for astronomical spending isn't just limited to their theme park division. The care that goes into making a Pixar film is something to behold but there is a point of diminishing returns when you throw that kind of money at the screen.
1. Despicable Me 2 (Universal) NEW [Runs 3,957]
5-Day Weekend $140.5M, Domestic Cume $140.5M
2. The Lone Ranger (Disney) NEW [Runs 3,904]
5-Day Weekend $48.5M, Domestic Cume $48.5M
4. Monsters University (Pixar/Disney) Week 2 [Runs 4,004]
5-Day Weekend $29.6M, Domestic Cume $215.6M
It looks like Despicable Me 2 will end up passing Monsters University to become the highest grossing animated film of the year. It's unfortunate for Disney that they only had a week and a half without direct competition. It's also unfortunate that they spent upwards of $210 million on MU while DM2 had a production budget of $79 million. Disney's love for astronomical spending isn't just limited to their theme park division. The care that goes into making a Pixar film is something to behold but there is a point of diminishing returns when you throw that kind of money at the screen.
Prince-1
Well-Known Member
Lone Ranger will probably not have much international appeal. Westerns do notoriously poor overseas as it is purely an American genre. Having Depp in it MIGHT help but this one is ain't going to do well for Disney.
Now I did see the movie and I actually liked it a lot. But I think Depp playing the familiar odd and weird characters that he keeps on doing (see Lone Ranger, Alice in Wonderland, Willy Wonka, Pirates) is getting old.
Prince-1
Well-Known Member
I also liked it quite a bit but the numbers are trending downwards and it doesn't look like it will do anything. Summer movies like The LR have to open BIG and recoup as much as they can in the first week because they generally drop anywhere from 50-60% in revenue in week two. Look at Superman, huge opening, horrible second week.
PirateFrank
Well-Known Member
It's not just summer movies. It's every movie....despite efforts to maintain the length of movie cycles from 40 years ago, today, you get a very large share of your receipts opening weekend.
If you don't kill em right out of the gate, you're dead where you stand...
If you don't kill em right out of the gate, you're dead where you stand...
I haven't seen it yet, but I sincerely hope Disney doesn't do what they did with John Carter and put their tail between their legs and run away from this.
If they stick it out, they could still have success. There are just too many other more desirable movies out there that would take a higher priority for families right now (MU, DM2, MoS). After a week or two, those movies will have been seen and people will start going to see LR. Disney needs to be in it for the long run, and not for the first two weeks.
If they make it public that they still believe in the flick and know families will enjoy it (rather than acknowledging the bomb, like they did with JC), then the film will still look desirable and could still have a good run.
If they stick it out, they could still have success. There are just too many other more desirable movies out there that would take a higher priority for families right now (MU, DM2, MoS). After a week or two, those movies will have been seen and people will start going to see LR. Disney needs to be in it for the long run, and not for the first two weeks.
If they make it public that they still believe in the flick and know families will enjoy it (rather than acknowledging the bomb, like they did with JC), then the film will still look desirable and could still have a good run.
Well, the studios get a huge percentage of the gate in the first weekend (like 70% from what I understand). That percentage reverses and swings to the theaters after the first weekend.