Red Mosquito

durdencommatyler wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

B wrote:They really fucked this movie by not waiting until Christmas.

aw huh

For sure. When I went it was me, my girlfriend and 2 other couples in the entire theater. This was timed and marketed terribly.

I totally understand that Disney has Marry Poppins to worry about and they didn't to "Solo" that project by putting it up against Solo in December. But they should have moved Solo to December.

Nobody wants to see a fucking Mary Poppins sequel.

B wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

B wrote:They really fucked this movie by not waiting until Christmas.

aw huh

For sure. When I went it was me, my girlfriend and 2 other couples in the entire theater. This was timed and marketed terribly.

I totally understand that Disney has Marry Poppins to worry about and they didn't to "Solo" that project by putting it up against Solo in December. But they should have moved Solo to December.

Nobody wants to see a fucking Mary Poppins sequel.

Well hopefully they’ve learned a lesson and this spoon full of sugar will help the medicine go down

durdencommatyler wrote:

B wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

B wrote:They really fucked this movie by not waiting until Christmas.

aw huh

For sure. When I went it was me, my girlfriend and 2 other couples in the entire theater. This was timed and marketed terribly.

I totally understand that Disney has Marry Poppins to worry about and they didn't to "Solo" that project by putting it up against Solo in December. But they should have moved Solo to December.

Nobody wants to see a fucking Mary Poppins sequel.

You shut your stupid face!

In the most delightful way...

For the Willow fans

I liked Solo. I feel asleep a few minutes in the middle of the movie, which was strange, but it was probably an early sign that I had gotten infected by a bug, which really takes away your strength.

I enjoyed the action scenes, the interaction with Lando was great, the story made sense (perhaps apart from those rogue villains). I think the actors all did a fairly good job. Han himself had a few strange scenes, especially at the start of the movie, but then came into his own. Can this be because of the change of directors? Overall I do think it lacked something to make it really great. Hard to put my finger on exactly what, but the story was more or less predictable. All in all I am looking forward to seeing it again, and had a lot of fun with it. Two thumbs up.

Of the new movies I still think Rogue One is the best. Solo lacked some of the epicness and depth of TFA/TLJ, but it didn't have any of their bad parts either, and that is certainly a bonus.

Glad you enjoyed it Anders

Two quick points. Solo is currently enjoying its second week at number 1 in the US box office, by a healthy distance, and where’s all the ranting about RT now? (Its at 71/68% approval)
Findings are nobody is going to the cinema. That can simply be explained via avengers/end of school term etc

It’s picking up business in other markets (2 weeks top of the charts here, too)

Wookiee’s got legs. And he’s bringing han with him maybe.

That's only because nothing significant came out this weekend. It's still over 100,000,000 behind that piece of crap Deadpool in the U.S. for total sales. And what, the same amount under budget?

Or did it make budget? That one I'm not sure about

E.H. Ruddock wrote:Or did it make budget? That one I'm not sure about

This movie is unlikely to turn a profit during its theatrical run. It is a massive bomb, and the second week numbers are really bad

The end result of all this is that, according to the most recent reports, Solo: A Star Wars Story cost over $250 million.

To date, “Solo” has made $115.3 million internationally and $264.2 million worldwide.

The whole bomb thing is so overreacted.

VinylGuy wrote:The whole bomb thing is so overreacted.

Exactly. No spoilers equals not essential first weekend viewings. This will be a slow burner with decent dvd sales.

LetMeSleep wrote:

The end result of all this is that, according to the most recent reports, Solo: A Star Wars Story cost over $250 million.

To date, “Solo” has made $115.3 million internationally and $264.2 million worldwide.

Marketing usually doubles the price. And after the theaters take their cuts (and a higher cut in foreign markets), studios can easily lose money.

Though maybe in this case, they might have skimped on the marketing a bit to save money. I doubt they spent $250 mil on it.

BurtReynolds wrote:

LetMeSleep wrote:

The end result of all this is that, according to the most recent reports, Solo: A Star Wars Story cost over $250 million.

To date, “Solo” has made $115.3 million internationally and $264.2 million worldwide.

Marketing usually doubles the price. And after the theaters take their cuts (and a higher cut in foreign markets), studios can easily lose money.

Isn’t the general rule to cut the box office figures in half to estimate the studio’s take?

Anyway it’s all bullshit. They call any movie that leaves theaters with a $20m deficit a flop, as if they all stop making money the day they leave theaters.

BurtReynolds wrote:Though maybe in this case, they might have skimped on the marketing a bit to save money. I doubt they spent $250 mil on it.

I sure they didn't pay anyone to come up with the Solo branded Solo cups idea.

Monkey_Driven wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:Though maybe in this case, they might have skimped on the marketing a bit to save money. I doubt they spent $250 mil on it.

I sure they didn't pay anyone to come up with the Solo branded Solo cups idea.

Or pay Mike McCready to reference the movie in the middle of every pearl jam song

I tell dad jokes I don’t care