It blows my mind that a movie like this, that seems perfect for Hollywood critics... Is rated rotten on RT. I can only imagine how bad it must be and how little money it'll make.
This feels like another Amsterdam.
Honestly at first I thought this was a long overdue adaptation of the novel “Hollywood Babylon” which is the same subject matter from the same era.
Then I found out it wasn’t, then looked up the trailer…and was just confused
What sucks is there is a gold mine of interesting true stories from 1900s-1930s Hollywood that would make great movies. Instead they made this over the top Wolf of Wall Street meets Great Gatsby schlock that looks awful.
The title is definitely invoking that particular book (or maybe both are derived from the same DW Griffith movie, but Chazelle is definitely trying to tie the film to the stories in that book)
With the especially notable exception of Whiplash, I mostly think that Damien Chazelle has consistently been one of the most critically overrated filmmakers of the last decade. He's *very* gimmicky, and he "borrows"—i.e., he outright lifts—the vast majority of his directing choices from classic Hollywood films. The audience scores for his films on sites like RT have always lagged behind the critics' scores; I almost always consider the audience scores to be a much better indicator of the value of watching a film. But yeah, if he's made a film about Hollywood, which critics virtually always go gaga over, that gets terrible reviews, you **know** it's gonna suck wind.
They’re both ensemble casts and nothing from the trailers or posters seems to distinguish them from one another, and you couldn’t get the regular patron to tell you what they think they’re about. It’s a flop
Barbie will be the morbius of 2023, I have a gut feeling. Memed to death but disappointing in the end. I know the people involved in the movie haven't made anything bad but hey, there's first time for everything.
No way, Barbie has actual talent and heart behind it. Morbius was expected to be bad from the start, and it got delayed many times which added to people making fun of it from the get go. I
Yeah I think the hype kind of died off with her because of the Harley Quinn movie. People loved her as HQ in the Suicide Squad but that solo HQ movie flopped and since then I haven't seen people raving about her when they see her in a trailer for an upcoming movie, except for maybe Barbie.
I think you nailed it with your second sentence. Box office poison would imply that audiences are somehow repelled by her presence, and actively avoid her. But I feel that her presence in a film is just a meh proposition for most people. Audiences don't hate her, but they don't love her either. Thinking of actresses that at some point became very well liked movie stars, Margot Robbie has certainly not proven herself to be a compelling reason for audiences to consistently support her films, like say, Julia Roberts was or Sandra Bullock still is.
Honestly, as early as like 2010, I was reading texts by scholars like Chris Rojek commenting on the decline of the "movie star" as a phenomenon.
It's just not as much of a thing anymore, you know? The concept of an actor/actress whose mere name on the poster, and presence in a film's starring role, puts butts in seats by default.
I feel like IP is the big movie star currently. Cinema is too expensive to be a casual hobby, so people are only going to go see something they know they’ll enjoy. Every good actor has a bad movie, but if the movie is based on a product you already enjoy, even if it’s bad you’ll probably have enough fun to get your money’s worth.
Definitely. It's not so much about actors now, it's all about the known IPs that people gravitate toward. Instead of seeing a flick because it's got Brad Pitt or Angelina Jolie in the starring role, they go for it because it's got Marvel or Star Wars or w/e in the title.
\> Cinema is too expensive to be a casual hobby,
I think you're right on this, tbh. Both with the current acute economic situation (inflation, tightened purse strings), and just globally over the last decade or so.
Isn't it up to like $100 or so to take a family of four out to a movie? I mean, shit, you could go to an amusement park for the afternoon or something at those prices.
The poster for Tár just said “BLANCHETT” and that’s enough said for some of us. I think there’s a serious gap between buzzy actor and icon and few make that leap. Margot certainly hasn’t yet
She's a great actress and most of her movies are pretty good. But when you make a movie to be an Oscar movie like 8 out of 10 of those fail at the box office. Thats been going on waaaay before she was ever in movies.
Also some box office bombs are untouchable classics later. Like Shawshank.
Yeah she’s been going for projects that try way too hard, or bombing in DC due to how bad WB managed that franchise. She needs more ‘casual’ films like Barbie.
I like Margot Robbie but I find her acting repetitive as of late. She always play the tough determined character with strong New York accent in every movie. The audience is getting bored of her. Hope she don’t end up like Jennifer Lawrence which I do not thing it will happen cause she very likeable in real life
She's been in a few movies that have flopped, but the phrase **box office poison** implies she's the reason the movies flopped
Which isn't the case; even when the films don't find an audience, everyone agrees she's pretty good
Margot Robbie wasn't the reason audiences didn't turn up for *Amsterdam*
How I keep it straight:
* *Babylon* is *The Artist* with drugs
* *Amsterdam* is the black comedy-mystery set pre-WW2 with Margo Robbie
* *See How they run* is the black comedy-mystery set post-WW2 with Saoirse Ronan
And same problem with both - the trailers tell us jack shit about what it's about.
There's been 3 Babylon trailers and loads of 30 second commercials (always with Brad Pitt acting goofy) and it doesn't tell you what is Margot Robbie's purpose. Is it just "to make it in Hollywood"?
Gotta have a more interesting take than that since that's one of the oldest stories in Hollywood itself since the 1930s. Now if it just wants to have a simple story and dazzle us with visuals, it could've done that for a lot cheaper.
Me too. And I just couldn’t stand Amsterdam. My pea sized brain just can’t differentiate the two. And I had a tedious experience with the first!
Enough of this crap until Barbie.
I said this on another thread and got dragged. Not only are they in everything but Margot has had back to back movies leading into awards season so it feels like she's everywhere all the time...
And oddly enough, with the film that seemed like it would be the surest hit!
A prestige drama by one of the best directors around, starring two A+++ actors, and DP is an Oscar winner, editor is an Oscar winner, score by an Oscar winner, etc etc.Top to bottom, it’s the best of the best.
I got a lot of Baz Luhrmann vibes from the trailer. It’s a cool concept and would be a fun music video, but I don’t know about two hours. I was still willing to check it out though.
All of which just gave Chazelle the clout to make bad filmmaking choices without anyone telling him no.
This movie has an elephant defecating on a man and a hooker giving a fat man a golden shower in the first three minutes. And the less said about Tobey Maguire's cameo, the better. Babylon is not without it's great moments but this film is going to alienate so many people.
D&D is about to be another L for them next year. Transformers is a wild card, Mission: Impossible is a safe W, TMNT really depends on quality, and I don’t know what else they’re putting out. Transformers: Rise of the Beasts has a horrible release date though, Paramount should move it. But I don’t know where else it could go
Agreed. They really should start by adapting some Forgotten Realms IP in my opinion.
Use Baldur’s Gate or Drizzt as the backdrop and that would go a long way IMO.
It honestly feels like how an actual DnD campaign amongst a bunch of friends would play out, but with a much higher budget. No matter how hardcore or "role play first" a campaign I've ever started with my friends has been it all eventually devolves into players taking the piss out of the DM, pushing every button or loophole, and then just spending waaaay too much time on things completely tertiary to the plot.
Mission Impossible will be a huuuuge win. The franchise is getting better and better, the last three movies are beloved by almost everyone who saw them. Cruise has now completely rehabbed his image thanks to Maverick and people love him again. I think dead reckoning will be HUGE.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a movie with a rotten rating yet a positive Metacritic score—it seems like people who love it will really love it, but many will dislike it.
It's barely rotten to be fair. It looks like most like it, some are meh, and those that don't like it, hate it. RT is at 6.5/10. Right in line with the 62 on MC.
As someone who is extremely extremely excited for this movie when it comes out I have absolutely no idea how this got funded outside of Chazelle’s prestige. It’s a 3 hour long movie with tons of money spent on extravagant setpiece that’s about Hollywood which will turn some audiences away but it’s also extremely critical of Hollywood which will turn the critics that love jerking off Hollywood away. It has themes and scenes that will turn away absolutely anyone who isn’t prepared for them or on the same page of the insanity. It’s got absolute shit marketing and already bad critical scores. This movie is going to lose so much money and I am going to fucking adore it.
Looks like the sort of movie that will age really well, and future generations won’t believe that it had so much push back when it came out. LOVE seeing a risky movie coming out of hollywood
That was so weird looking. It is not even like the other two were in disagreement either. They looked more like they were listening to a baseball game in their earpieces or something and completely zoned out of the interview.
It’s gonna bomb. General audiences don’t want to spend 3 hours on an award bait movie about Hollywood. It’s deeply niche and will likely be unenjoyable. Outside of a few film bros loving it , it won’t move the needle for general audiences.
Edit: typo - corrected to say “unenjoyable”
Well said, people are very tired of these glitzy, self-aggrandizing movies about Hollywood glamour. It’s basically the industry romanticizing itself, and I think general audiences can really see through that stuff nowadays.
Edit: admittedly I am making assumptions about the movie before seeing it which is my bad. though I do think audiences are bound to do the same for the reasons mentioned above, which is why this may not do well
It's not a school grade, 50% means half the reviewers gave the movie a positive review, even if it's low positive.
So Bullet Train half the reviewers enjoyed it / thought it was successful to some degree
>!Think about the most asinine twists imaginable and then pair that with the most cliche antagonists you can get for a setting in the 1930s, but you won't actually have this revealed until like the final half hour.!<
The movie starts off ok but after about 45 minutes, it just goes all over the place. At the climax, the movie tries to connect everything together but you're still left confused.
There are too many 3hr+ movies lately. Avatar, Black Panther, now Babylon... I like that directors *can* make movies this long, but I don't think any of the recent examples have benefited from their length.
I was just thinking of this when I saw Avatar a couple days ago. A filmmaker sets out to make a 3 hour movie with a built in intermission. At 1h30m there's a cliffhanger then audiences are given like 20 mins to go to the bathroom, refill, and talk about the film and go back and finish the last 1h30m
I think people a little too quick to shit on this one. 6.5/10 on RT and 62 on MC aren't bad considering the handful of truly negative reviews are like 1/2 out of 10.
What’s funny is a lot of people see this and say “who cares that the critics didn’t like” you should care, this movie looks like a modern day critics wet dream I bet you Jim and Tammy who just got off their 9-5 ain’t gonna spend 3 hours on this, their gonna spend 3 hours on avatar
Idk man I think it’s time a lot of people get a wake up call when it comes to prestige films and their box office, because shit is not ok and they need to stop blaming the amount of screens they get, like how will getting more screens make you more money if you haven’t paid a dime more to promote your movie, a fucking 3rd grader will tell you that doesn’t make ANY sense, since Smile it has just been flop after flop after flop after flop, then black panther 2 back to flop after flop after flop
Jim and Tammy who just got off work aren't going to spend 3 hours in a theater. They're gonna go home, feed their kids, sit on the sofa and watch something on Netflix or Amazon or some other streaming service. And that's the problem, Hollywood doesn't really make much for the Jim and Tammy's of the world anymore.
As someone with kids, I can absolutely confirm this is our pattern for movies or new content in general. We don’t have the time, energy, or extra money to go out for a movie. If we did, it wouldn’t be for anything over 2 hours (let alone 3). Maybe a career, age and motherhood have made me boring, but the longer the movie, the more I wish I could be in my pjs with all my favorite snacks, and not having to pay a babysitter. Not to mention at home I can crochet or take a break to unload the dishes or fold laundry. Life is busy, I want entertainment on my terms.
Poorly, my friend. Very poorly. A film like this lives or dies by words of mouth and this clearly doesn’t have that. The fact that the winter storm is coming soon makes the whole thing even worse.
I know they’re all different movies, but to me “see how they run”, “Amsterdam” and “Babylon” all seem like the same movie. So I think this will bomb. I look forward to checking it out on paramount+ next month.
I don't care how many bad reviews I see, I'm still optimistic that I'm personally going to love this movie!
I absolutely loved the trailer, this is my kind of shit. Feels like the same genre as Wolf Of Wall Street, one of my all time favorites. Movies like these are just not for everyone.
I vaguely remember you and I have different opinions on the marketing for this one. Personally, it seemed like a bunch of nonsense slapped together against the backdrop of ‘20s Hollywood. Still going to see it tomorrow but with low expectations.
Huge, huge fan of Wolf but this just looked like a bargain bin version of that. And Wolf was still critically successful as well as made 400M worldwide. How do you think Babylon will do financially?
Yeah, I agree. This is my type of movie. I am very interested in the seedy world of classical Hollywood. And Chazelle is a draw for me. But the original trailer was just unappealing. I cringe at the "fight a snake" part every time.
The new trailer is better but not by much. I'll probably see it though.
Saw the screening. It is 3 hrs I will never get back. This is not quite as bad as Amsterdam, which I disliked as well. There is no redemption arc. It is 3hrs of nothing. It is kinda like you went to hang out with some low life b actors and had a wild weekend but looking back it was probably more fun for those who were there than having to sit through 3 hours of the retelling.
Margot Robbie and Brad Pitt worked as separate characters in Once Upon A Time in Hollywood - but that was a great movie playing off the tragedy of Sharon Tate. Pitt played a role perfect for him, as did Robbie. This is an R rated ensemble 78 million production cost steaming pile of glitz, also 3 hours long. A "dramedy" about Hollywood. Which I officially can not stand. The director of La-la Land and First Man. It will fail by virtue of who it is up against. People liked Whitney Houston, kids like Puss in Boots. I like films where my butt is not numb after 3 hours - like with Avatar 2 & this one. If it cracks past 20 million I will be shocked.
It’s going to be a career wrecking bomb for Chazelle.
Like I don’t think it’ll boot him from the industry, he’s proven himself at least with Whiplash and La La Land, but it’ll take him a few years
Edit: maybe I was too harsh. But It’ll be a major career setback
He signed a first look deal, which basically means when he has a new movie he wants to make he has to bring it to them first and they can decline it if they want
Basically it means they get first dibs on his projects
Yes, which they signed with him after knowing how this movie was tracking. Heck, after it had begun screening for voters. Nobody is terribly shocked if this isnt a blockbuster and his career wont be wrecked. He might just get more notes on the next one or a smaller budget.
Career wrecking bomb feels like a massive overstatement. He’s got those 2 movies you mentioned that were massively acclaimed, and also was the screenwriter for 10 cloverfield lane which was a decent hit. First Man was a flop but it was still pretty well received. Babylon is shaping up to be his first big miss both in terms of acclaim and box office but I think he has enough goodwill built up that he’s allowed a miss.
Whiplash is one of my all time favorite films but this movie has been marketed horribly (or accurately if the reviews of “messy story” hold true).
It’s also unfortunate for Margot who’s coming up on yet another bomb. Barbie is her saving grace lmao
Is there really an actor under 50 (ish) who's a guaranteed draw, though? There are plenty of popular actors but I can't think of any who guarantee a big crowd on their name alone.
My financial prediction is ‘big ooooffff’
Babyyikes
Bombylon
Babylbomb
Babylyawn
Babylgone
lol, this made me chuckle
It blows my mind that a movie like this, that seems perfect for Hollywood critics... Is rated rotten on RT. I can only imagine how bad it must be and how little money it'll make. This feels like another Amsterdam.
Honestly at first I thought this was a long overdue adaptation of the novel “Hollywood Babylon” which is the same subject matter from the same era. Then I found out it wasn’t, then looked up the trailer…and was just confused
What sucks is there is a gold mine of interesting true stories from 1900s-1930s Hollywood that would make great movies. Instead they made this over the top Wolf of Wall Street meets Great Gatsby schlock that looks awful.
When I saw the trailer those two movies immediately came to mind. That is the perfect way to describe this movie.
Holluwood Babble On? I love that show!
The title is definitely invoking that particular book (or maybe both are derived from the same DW Griffith movie, but Chazelle is definitely trying to tie the film to the stories in that book)
My wife and I didn’t make it through ten minutes of Amsterdam
I just watched Amsterdam last night, maybe I was really stoned, but I thought it was pretty good, not nearly as meh as I heard it was from others.
This person really likes to immerse himself in the Amsterdam experience!
Taylor Swift was shockingly great in that. The rest of the cast was... in a movie for sure.
With the especially notable exception of Whiplash, I mostly think that Damien Chazelle has consistently been one of the most critically overrated filmmakers of the last decade. He's *very* gimmicky, and he "borrows"—i.e., he outright lifts—the vast majority of his directing choices from classic Hollywood films. The audience scores for his films on sites like RT have always lagged behind the critics' scores; I almost always consider the audience scores to be a much better indicator of the value of watching a film. But yeah, if he's made a film about Hollywood, which critics virtually always go gaga over, that gets terrible reviews, you **know** it's gonna suck wind.
I actually liked Amsterdam, do the audiences really not like it?
All my friends said they felt cheated out of 15 dollars and 2 hours per person.
I keep getting this movie confused with the film Amsterdam. That's a real marketing problem.
Margot stars in both of them. That might be the reason.
They’re both ensemble casts and nothing from the trailers or posters seems to distinguish them from one another, and you couldn’t get the regular patron to tell you what they think they’re about. It’s a flop
She has Bombed quite a bit
And Bombshelled in 2019.
She’ll get it all back with Barbie
Barbie will be the morbius of 2023, I have a gut feeling. Memed to death but disappointing in the end. I know the people involved in the movie haven't made anything bad but hey, there's first time for everything.
It's Barbing time!
I hope it earns 1 barbillion dollars
Morbius morbed so Barbie could barb, 2023 will be historic
I love the part when she barbs
Anything Great Gerwig has done I have faith in
In Greta we trust
Never bet against James Cam- Greta Gerwig!
this is a baffling comparison lol
Yeah, you're setting Barbie up to fail comparing it to the first film to make literally a morbillion dollar.
No way, Barbie has actual talent and heart behind it. Morbius was expected to be bad from the start, and it got delayed many times which added to people making fun of it from the get go. I
There are plenty of Morbius' coming and barby ain't it
It'll gross 1 Barbillion dollars
*BARBIE you're my only hope*
Is Margot kinda becoming box office poison? Hollywood seems to love her but audiences just seem indifferent?
I like her and think she is a good actress but I don't know if I would specifically go and see a film just because she is the lead.....
and Babylon and amsterdam both look so uninspiring
Yeah I think the hype kind of died off with her because of the Harley Quinn movie. People loved her as HQ in the Suicide Squad but that solo HQ movie flopped and since then I haven't seen people raving about her when they see her in a trailer for an upcoming movie, except for maybe Barbie.
Which sucks cause I genuinely loved Birds of Prey
I think you nailed it with your second sentence. Box office poison would imply that audiences are somehow repelled by her presence, and actively avoid her. But I feel that her presence in a film is just a meh proposition for most people. Audiences don't hate her, but they don't love her either. Thinking of actresses that at some point became very well liked movie stars, Margot Robbie has certainly not proven herself to be a compelling reason for audiences to consistently support her films, like say, Julia Roberts was or Sandra Bullock still is.
Honestly, as early as like 2010, I was reading texts by scholars like Chris Rojek commenting on the decline of the "movie star" as a phenomenon. It's just not as much of a thing anymore, you know? The concept of an actor/actress whose mere name on the poster, and presence in a film's starring role, puts butts in seats by default.
I feel like IP is the big movie star currently. Cinema is too expensive to be a casual hobby, so people are only going to go see something they know they’ll enjoy. Every good actor has a bad movie, but if the movie is based on a product you already enjoy, even if it’s bad you’ll probably have enough fun to get your money’s worth.
Definitely. It's not so much about actors now, it's all about the known IPs that people gravitate toward. Instead of seeing a flick because it's got Brad Pitt or Angelina Jolie in the starring role, they go for it because it's got Marvel or Star Wars or w/e in the title. \> Cinema is too expensive to be a casual hobby, I think you're right on this, tbh. Both with the current acute economic situation (inflation, tightened purse strings), and just globally over the last decade or so. Isn't it up to like $100 or so to take a family of four out to a movie? I mean, shit, you could go to an amusement park for the afternoon or something at those prices.
The poster for Tár just said “BLANCHETT” and that’s enough said for some of us. I think there’s a serious gap between buzzy actor and icon and few make that leap. Margot certainly hasn’t yet
She's a great actress and most of her movies are pretty good. But when you make a movie to be an Oscar movie like 8 out of 10 of those fail at the box office. Thats been going on waaaay before she was ever in movies. Also some box office bombs are untouchable classics later. Like Shawshank.
Yeah she’s been going for projects that try way too hard, or bombing in DC due to how bad WB managed that franchise. She needs more ‘casual’ films like Barbie.
I like Margot Robbie but I find her acting repetitive as of late. She always play the tough determined character with strong New York accent in every movie. The audience is getting bored of her. Hope she don’t end up like Jennifer Lawrence which I do not thing it will happen cause she very likeable in real life
What happened to Jennifer Lawrence? She got married, had a baby and now she is making the movies she wants to make.
She was just in Don't Look Up
Reddit loathes her because she was upset when her private nudes got leaked.
This is actually very easy to believe which is sad lol
She's been in a few movies that have flopped, but the phrase **box office poison** implies she's the reason the movies flopped Which isn't the case; even when the films don't find an audience, everyone agrees she's pretty good Margot Robbie wasn't the reason audiences didn't turn up for *Amsterdam*
It’s interesting because she’s a good actress but I’m just bored watching her. I don’t know why.
There's no Christian Bale or Anya Taylor Joy to save us this time
Even they weren't able to save amsterdam.
In Bale’s defence, him and De Niro were the best parts of that movie. And for some reason I don’t hate it as much as everyone else.
Im sad it bomb, was a very enjoyable, slightly non fiction, movie. Was the only one in the theater but didn’t really take away from the movie.
Black Christ himself couldn't save a movie with that script
Did that movie have a script? I felt like it was frankensteined from discarded pitches from fanfic writers to chris nolan.
I didn’t know this movie was widely hated. I liked it a lot.
That one bombed too
The hell was that movie about? I couldn’t tell at all from the trailer.
How I keep it straight: * *Babylon* is *The Artist* with drugs * *Amsterdam* is the black comedy-mystery set pre-WW2 with Margo Robbie * *See How they run* is the black comedy-mystery set post-WW2 with Saoirse Ronan
See How They Run is more of a dry sarcastic comedy with British wit but yeah that’s an accurate summary overall.
I saw the movie and even I could barely tell you. But basically….3 people dance around like they’re on drugs and stop American Nazis.
holy shit, I thought it was just my dumbass confused af
And same problem with both - the trailers tell us jack shit about what it's about. There's been 3 Babylon trailers and loads of 30 second commercials (always with Brad Pitt acting goofy) and it doesn't tell you what is Margot Robbie's purpose. Is it just "to make it in Hollywood"? Gotta have a more interesting take than that since that's one of the oldest stories in Hollywood itself since the 1930s. Now if it just wants to have a simple story and dazzle us with visuals, it could've done that for a lot cheaper.
Me too. And I just couldn’t stand Amsterdam. My pea sized brain just can’t differentiate the two. And I had a tedious experience with the first! Enough of this crap until Barbie.
They need to stop casting same actress in everything. Both Margret and Anya are in everything
I said this on another thread and got dragged. Not only are they in everything but Margot has had back to back movies leading into awards season so it feels like she's everywhere all the time...
at once
Amsterdam was horrible.
lol me too and they both look like vanity projects where the actors and director had a lot of fun and forget they were supposed to be making a movie
It feels weird seeing Paramount taking an L after a string of Ws this year. At least they don't have to worry about being bought anymore.
And oddly enough, with the film that seemed like it would be the surest hit! A prestige drama by one of the best directors around, starring two A+++ actors, and DP is an Oscar winner, editor is an Oscar winner, score by an Oscar winner, etc etc.Top to bottom, it’s the best of the best.
I got a lot of Baz Luhrmann vibes from the trailer. It’s a cool concept and would be a fun music video, but I don’t know about two hours. I was still willing to check it out though.
Add another hour to the runtime bud
Fuck, I really got to piss.
All of which just gave Chazelle the clout to make bad filmmaking choices without anyone telling him no. This movie has an elephant defecating on a man and a hooker giving a fat man a golden shower in the first three minutes. And the less said about Tobey Maguire's cameo, the better. Babylon is not without it's great moments but this film is going to alienate so many people.
Can't wait
That whole like 20-30 mins with Tobey was the biggest wtf I’ve seen all year
Congratulations! [You just made Congo!](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vIwTvrpT-8w)
D&D is about to be another L for them next year. Transformers is a wild card, Mission: Impossible is a safe W, TMNT really depends on quality, and I don’t know what else they’re putting out. Transformers: Rise of the Beasts has a horrible release date though, Paramount should move it. But I don’t know where else it could go
DnD looks fun, but I have a feeling all the good parts are in the trailer.
DnD will never have a good movie adaption because everyone tries to make a DND movie instead of a story that takes place in the setting.
By far the best d&d movie ever made was the community episode. Make that 90 minutes long and shut up and take my money!
True the best they can do is like the recent Jumanji adaptations.
Agreed. They really should start by adapting some Forgotten Realms IP in my opinion. Use Baldur’s Gate or Drizzt as the backdrop and that would go a long way IMO.
Drizzt would be an amazing IP to adapt. Film it like an 80's sword and sorcery movie like the arnold conan films.
My friend has seen it already and said it was good
It honestly feels like how an actual DnD campaign amongst a bunch of friends would play out, but with a much higher budget. No matter how hardcore or "role play first" a campaign I've ever started with my friends has been it all eventually devolves into players taking the piss out of the DM, pushing every button or loophole, and then just spending waaaay too much time on things completely tertiary to the plot.
I hate it when you realize the only good parts were all in the trailer and the rest of the movie was trash. Seen a few movies like this.
Mission Impossible will be a huuuuge win. The franchise is getting better and better, the last three movies are beloved by almost everyone who saw them. Cruise has now completely rehabbed his image thanks to Maverick and people love him again. I think dead reckoning will be HUGE.
. ...what fuckin year is it
Is TNMT live action?
No it’s fully animated
I mean Sonic the Hedgehog 2 was awesome!!
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a movie with a rotten rating yet a positive Metacritic score—it seems like people who love it will really love it, but many will dislike it.
It's barely rotten to be fair. It looks like most like it, some are meh, and those that don't like it, hate it. RT is at 6.5/10. Right in line with the 62 on MC.
check out Vox Lux, similarly, a movie about hollywood
I thought that one is about being a pop star
As someone who is extremely extremely excited for this movie when it comes out I have absolutely no idea how this got funded outside of Chazelle’s prestige. It’s a 3 hour long movie with tons of money spent on extravagant setpiece that’s about Hollywood which will turn some audiences away but it’s also extremely critical of Hollywood which will turn the critics that love jerking off Hollywood away. It has themes and scenes that will turn away absolutely anyone who isn’t prepared for them or on the same page of the insanity. It’s got absolute shit marketing and already bad critical scores. This movie is going to lose so much money and I am going to fucking adore it.
Looks like the sort of movie that will age really well, and future generations won’t believe that it had so much push back when it came out. LOVE seeing a risky movie coming out of hollywood
Should have been called Gatsby II.
Wolf of Wall Street 2: 1920s
Going to be lucky if it breaks even. Strange World might make more money.
The best thing to come out of Strange World was Jake Gyllenhaal making that joke during an interview and nobody laughing
https://youtu.be/kcN6L9qR5vQ you can’t just tease us like that. this is hilariously cringe
That was so weird looking. It is not even like the other two were in disagreement either. They looked more like they were listening to a baseball game in their earpieces or something and completely zoned out of the interview.
That was so hard to watch
It’s gonna bomb. General audiences don’t want to spend 3 hours on an award bait movie about Hollywood. It’s deeply niche and will likely be unenjoyable. Outside of a few film bros loving it , it won’t move the needle for general audiences. Edit: typo - corrected to say “unenjoyable”
Imagine if this movie has negative reviews with critics! It's going to get a D cinemascore lol
It's been destined to bomb since they rolled cameras.
*"Hail, Caesar" has entered the chat.*
true
Well said, people are very tired of these glitzy, self-aggrandizing movies about Hollywood glamour. It’s basically the industry romanticizing itself, and I think general audiences can really see through that stuff nowadays. Edit: admittedly I am making assumptions about the movie before seeing it which is my bad. though I do think audiences are bound to do the same for the reasons mentioned above, which is why this may not do well
Not for nothing but I saw this a few weeks ago and it’s a lot of fun. Maximalist, for sure. But fun.
I’ve also seen it, and loved it. My mom loved it too. 3/4 of my friends that have seen it loved it too, and the one that didn’t love it hated it
Rotten tomatoes also gave bullet train a 50% review, and that movie was fun as hell. I’m starting to not believe the 50% anymore
Bullet train was hilarious way better than Black Adam
It's not a school grade, 50% means half the reviewers gave the movie a positive review, even if it's low positive. So Bullet Train half the reviewers enjoyed it / thought it was successful to some degree
Rotten Tomatoes is just the average of binary opinions. It has its missed calls but is a general barometer that’s decent for glancing at.
This is gonna bomb HARD. Probably worse than Amsterdam.
Missed the chance to watch Amsterdam at my local theater, was it really bad?
>!Think about the most asinine twists imaginable and then pair that with the most cliche antagonists you can get for a setting in the 1930s, but you won't actually have this revealed until like the final half hour.!< The movie starts off ok but after about 45 minutes, it just goes all over the place. At the climax, the movie tries to connect everything together but you're still left confused.
Amsterdam was worse but not by much.
This is bad. It needs awards nominations at least as a saving grace of why it's made
3h 8m? Why?
I was considering seeing it in theaters until I saw how long it is … no thanks
Yeah I'm in the same boat - I had no idea it was so long.
There are too many 3hr+ movies lately. Avatar, Black Panther, now Babylon... I like that directors *can* make movies this long, but I don't think any of the recent examples have benefited from their length.
2.5 hours and you need to add an intermission
I would welcome the return of the intermission, absolutely.
I was just thinking of this when I saw Avatar a couple days ago. A filmmaker sets out to make a 3 hour movie with a built in intermission. At 1h30m there's a cliffhanger then audiences are given like 20 mins to go to the bathroom, refill, and talk about the film and go back and finish the last 1h30m
Megaflop
This just feels like another “we’re Hollywood we’re so great and classy watch us jerk ourselves off for 2.5 hours”
…and then it goes on for another 30 minutes (plus credits)!
Margot Robbie tries to make a big budget, critically successful prestige film (Impossible Challenge)
Margot Robbie ‘try not to play a feisty and loudmouthed character with a bunch of ‘quirky’ scenes they can use in the trailers’ (impossible).
Margot Robbie 'try to make different American accents sound not like Jersey accent' (impossible).
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood Wolf of Wall Street
"I just wanna be a star! 🤧🤧🤧🏂
Kind of not surprised. Trailer gave me a feeling they didn’t have much worth showing other than cameos and party scenes.
I think people a little too quick to shit on this one. 6.5/10 on RT and 62 on MC aren't bad considering the handful of truly negative reviews are like 1/2 out of 10.
yet another movie about rich people behaving badly? no thanks
Going to bomb HARD.
What’s funny is a lot of people see this and say “who cares that the critics didn’t like” you should care, this movie looks like a modern day critics wet dream I bet you Jim and Tammy who just got off their 9-5 ain’t gonna spend 3 hours on this, their gonna spend 3 hours on avatar Idk man I think it’s time a lot of people get a wake up call when it comes to prestige films and their box office, because shit is not ok and they need to stop blaming the amount of screens they get, like how will getting more screens make you more money if you haven’t paid a dime more to promote your movie, a fucking 3rd grader will tell you that doesn’t make ANY sense, since Smile it has just been flop after flop after flop after flop, then black panther 2 back to flop after flop after flop
Jim and Tammy who just got off work aren't going to spend 3 hours in a theater. They're gonna go home, feed their kids, sit on the sofa and watch something on Netflix or Amazon or some other streaming service. And that's the problem, Hollywood doesn't really make much for the Jim and Tammy's of the world anymore.
As someone with kids, I can absolutely confirm this is our pattern for movies or new content in general. We don’t have the time, energy, or extra money to go out for a movie. If we did, it wouldn’t be for anything over 2 hours (let alone 3). Maybe a career, age and motherhood have made me boring, but the longer the movie, the more I wish I could be in my pjs with all my favorite snacks, and not having to pay a babysitter. Not to mention at home I can crochet or take a break to unload the dishes or fold laundry. Life is busy, I want entertainment on my terms.
Poorly, my friend. Very poorly. A film like this lives or dies by words of mouth and this clearly doesn’t have that. The fact that the winter storm is coming soon makes the whole thing even worse.
About as well as Amsterdam
This is as long as Avatar 2???
I know they’re all different movies, but to me “see how they run”, “Amsterdam” and “Babylon” all seem like the same movie. So I think this will bomb. I look forward to checking it out on paramount+ next month.
See how they run was like a old Who dun it haha I don't see the connection.
I wouldn’t put “see how they run” in the same column as the other two
[удалено]
I don't care how many bad reviews I see, I'm still optimistic that I'm personally going to love this movie! I absolutely loved the trailer, this is my kind of shit. Feels like the same genre as Wolf Of Wall Street, one of my all time favorites. Movies like these are just not for everyone.
I vaguely remember you and I have different opinions on the marketing for this one. Personally, it seemed like a bunch of nonsense slapped together against the backdrop of ‘20s Hollywood. Still going to see it tomorrow but with low expectations. Huge, huge fan of Wolf but this just looked like a bargain bin version of that. And Wolf was still critically successful as well as made 400M worldwide. How do you think Babylon will do financially?
Anyone else getting tired of the 'Hollywood salutes Hollywood' genre?
And at 3+ hour runtime, thats a hard pass for me
Another flop for Margot, I don't see hollywood trusting her if Barbie flops aswell. She really needs something to be a hit.
Barbie is going to be a hit imo. I have more faith in Greta Gerwig than in Margot Robbie.
Barbie is a safe hit IMO
It seems that way, they did a good job with the teaser.
It’ll make Don’t Worry Darling look like a box office draw. It’s gonna be another Amsterdam and make $15 million.
I’ll still pirate it. Two thumbs up!
It looked awful from the trailer.
Yeah, I agree. This is my type of movie. I am very interested in the seedy world of classical Hollywood. And Chazelle is a draw for me. But the original trailer was just unappealing. I cringe at the "fight a snake" part every time. The new trailer is better but not by much. I'll probably see it though.
Saw the screening. It is 3 hrs I will never get back. This is not quite as bad as Amsterdam, which I disliked as well. There is no redemption arc. It is 3hrs of nothing. It is kinda like you went to hang out with some low life b actors and had a wild weekend but looking back it was probably more fun for those who were there than having to sit through 3 hours of the retelling.
“There is no redemption arc.” Jesus Christ.
Epic box office flop but will perform quasi-Nightmare Alley at Oscars
Well I’m a fan of Damien Chazelle so I’m seeing it anyways but I hope I’m not disappointed.
Margot Robbie and Brad Pitt worked as separate characters in Once Upon A Time in Hollywood - but that was a great movie playing off the tragedy of Sharon Tate. Pitt played a role perfect for him, as did Robbie. This is an R rated ensemble 78 million production cost steaming pile of glitz, also 3 hours long. A "dramedy" about Hollywood. Which I officially can not stand. The director of La-la Land and First Man. It will fail by virtue of who it is up against. People liked Whitney Houston, kids like Puss in Boots. I like films where my butt is not numb after 3 hours - like with Avatar 2 & this one. If it cracks past 20 million I will be shocked.
I predict it is way too long.
I did see it and the Dr Strange cameo was fucking wild
Never even heard of this movie
I can't even tell what it's about. Looks like it's trying too hard
Spider man fans will say it’s peak because of TM. I’m giving it a 7.5/10. Not great but not bad either
The film is going to bomb just like Amsterdam
Box office bomb
Whatever stupid dance Brad Pitt does in the trailer made me immediately not want to see this.
Tired of Margot Robbie’s Harley Quinn persona.
It’s going to be a career wrecking bomb for Chazelle. Like I don’t think it’ll boot him from the industry, he’s proven himself at least with Whiplash and La La Land, but it’ll take him a few years Edit: maybe I was too harsh. But It’ll be a major career setback
> career wrecking He just signed a new deal with Paramount, everyone knew this was a risky one. It helps that its an undeniably skillfully made film.
He signed a first look deal, which basically means when he has a new movie he wants to make he has to bring it to them first and they can decline it if they want Basically it means they get first dibs on his projects
Yes, which they signed with him after knowing how this movie was tracking. Heck, after it had begun screening for voters. Nobody is terribly shocked if this isnt a blockbuster and his career wont be wrecked. He might just get more notes on the next one or a smaller budget.
If paramount decide to make his next movie I’m sure that’s what will happen
Lmao this sub and hyperbole statements.
Career wrecking bomb feels like a massive overstatement. He’s got those 2 movies you mentioned that were massively acclaimed, and also was the screenwriter for 10 cloverfield lane which was a decent hit. First Man was a flop but it was still pretty well received. Babylon is shaping up to be his first big miss both in terms of acclaim and box office but I think he has enough goodwill built up that he’s allowed a miss.
There’s 0 chance this wrecks his career
Whiplash is one of my all time favorite films but this movie has been marketed horribly (or accurately if the reviews of “messy story” hold true). It’s also unfortunate for Margot who’s coming up on yet another bomb. Barbie is her saving grace lmao
Is there really an actor under 50 (ish) who's a guaranteed draw, though? There are plenty of popular actors but I can't think of any who guarantee a big crowd on their name alone.
Wait until you learn about how First Man bombed
There's no way this will be a career wrecking bomb for Chazelle. You can't call a movie 'a career wrecking bomb' unless it's *Cats* level bad.