Originally posted by Darth ThorDo not ever compare Lucasfilm to that dumpster fire in charge of the old dceu again. One misstep but I always said solo sucked ass. I am right as per the norm.
Well looks like theyre cancelling all of them after Solos failure.Lucasfilm are as retarded as the WB execs in charge of DC films.
Originally posted by Darth ThorProve it. Filmsflop all the time on their own merit. Every film made over a billion save one but you dared to compare it to the dceu. Your feelings do not matter. Facts do and Star Wars has made a lot of money at the box office save solo. Episode 9 will slap your Disney hating ass in the face.
They are the same.And no its no just 1 misstep 😂
1 misstep doesnt lead to a flop Lmao.
Because Star Wars was always a bigger franchise than DC you Doofus!
Did BvS flop? Nope. Did Suicide Squad flop? Nope.
It took a few stinkers for the DCEU to flop, so it would obviously take more than 1 film for a franchise that starts at $2Billion you moron.
You have already been called out on the Apoc vs Black Order thread for being a Disney cock sucker, so stop making an ass out of yourself.
Originally posted by Darth ThorNot with Solo you idiot. No brand is full proof. Disheycrsxked 2 billion for ****s sake and a billion in all save Solo so do not compare it to the shit bad dceu. I know you hate Star Wars and the newer films but man try to make it less obvious in the future.
Because Star Wars was always a bigger franchise than DC you Doofus!Did BvS flop? Nope. Did Suicide Squad flop? Nope.
It took a few stinkers for the DCEU to flop, so it would obviously take more than 1 film for a franchise that starts at $2Billion you moron.
You have already been called out on the Apoc vs Black Order thread for being a Disney cock sucker, so stop making an ass out of yourself.
No, they did not but Justice League did. They did not even smell a billion. The film you said dud terrible made 1.3 billion which is not a flop either. You just sunk your own battleship.
Ant Man did not make close to a billion after the 2 billion Infinity War because different films matter. Solo was a bad idea and by your points episode 9 will flop. I offered a billion dollar bet but you balked like when you enter a room with a female. Your confidence just exits your body and you are paralyzed with fear.
Leave other threads out of this. I am well known as the MCUs and Thanos biggest fan unlike you the guy who hates Disney across the board.
Stop harping on like a maniac.
TLJs drop from TFA was just terrible. You think if Avengers 4 makes 1.3bill that will be considered some great success? Hell no.
Heck Jurassic World 2 only dropped from 1.7bill to 1.3bill. JW2 for Gods sake had a massively smaller drop. Made almost as much as TLJ. Except no one was all hyped to see what happens in JW2. It was just a filler in story for a trilogy.
And then Solo did not even make 500million. Venoms blown Solo out of the park. Every DCEU film has as well.
So if you stop sucking up to Disney for a second you might see some sense.
And you know Avengers 4 will make over 1.6bill but you aint willing to bet those kinda numbers on Episode 9.
Originally posted by Darth ThorTFA was after a ten year Star Wars drought. No one expected it to replicate the kind of money. Did it fall below expectations, sure. I have said all of this before but when you are cornered you ignore context and misrepresent my position.
Stop harping on like a maniac.TLJs drop from TFA was just terrible. You think if Avengers 4 makes 1.3bill that will be considered some great success? Hell no.
Heck Jurassic World 2 only dropped from 1.7bill to 1.3bill. JW2 for Gods sake had a massively smaller drop. Made almost as much as TLJ. Except no one was all hyped to see what happens in JW2. It was just a filler in story for a trilogy.
And then Solo did not even make 500million. Venoms blown Solo out of the park. Every DCEU film has as well.
So if you stop sucking up to Disney for a second you might see some sense.
And you know Avengers 4 will make over 1.6bill but you aint willing to bet those kinda numbers on Episode 9.
Completely different discussion. MCU is the best. You said Lucasfilm is just like the nuts running the dceu. You are insane. Look at the numbers of the films and compare them to the totality against the totality of the dceu. It is not ****ing close. Mcu has the best leadership and Star Wars has made mistakes sure but their quality is leaps and bounds better than the dceu. I believe Kathy is a bad star wars leader but all the blame cannot be left at her feet.
So even jw dipped but somehow you give it a pass. See this is typical of you. You throw your perception as if it matters. I do not care about your garbage opinion.
Yes, solo bombed. I acknowledged that so quit acting like this is some point I failed against. Solo was a bad idea from the start. No one gave a ****. It showed.
Episode 9 will bounce back. You think otherwise and that the sky is falling. You will be wrong and I will rub this into your face when it drops.
🙂
Originally posted by Darth Thor
They are the same.And no its no just 1 misstep 😂
1 misstep doesnt lead to a flop Lmao.
A lot of things can lead to a flop.
1. The vocal crowd that loathed TLJ
2. A sudden saturation of Star Wars films, which prior to Disney had always been event films with long downtime between releases. This sudden saturation removed some of the "prestige" that came with the franchise up until this point, and the excitement.
3. Solo simply not being a story that needed to be told and evidently one that not many people really cared to hear. It was just not a very interesting premise and was probably the wrong character based prequel film to start with.
Any one of these things could lead to Solo underperforming, all three combined led to it being the flop that it was, with 2 and 3 being the largest contributors, imo.
Originally posted by BackFire👆
A lot of things can lead to a flop.1. The vocal crowd that loathed TLJ
2. A sudden saturation of Star Wars films, which prior to Disney had always been event films with long downtime between releases. This sudden saturation removed some of the "prestige" that came with the franchise up until this point, and the excitement.
3. Solo simply not being a story that needed to be told and evidently one that not many people really cared to hear. It was just not a very interesting premise and was probably the wrong character based prequel film to start with.
Any one of these things could lead to Solo underperforming, all three combined led to it being the flop that it was, with 2 and 3 being the largest contributors, imo.
Originally posted by BackFire
A lot of things can lead to a flop.1. The vocal crowd that loathed TLJ
2. A sudden saturation of Star Wars films, which prior to Disney had always been event films with long downtime between releases. This sudden saturation removed some of the "prestige" that came with the franchise up until this point, and the excitement.
3. Solo simply not being a story that needed to be told and evidently one that not many people really cared to hear. It was just not a very interesting premise and was probably the wrong character based prequel film to start with.
Any one of these things could lead to Solo underperforming, all three combined led to it being the flop that it was, with 2 and 3 being the largest contributors, imo.
OR Maybe the New Trilogy just hasnt been that loved.
Given TLJ massively underperformed compared to TFA, right before Solo flopped, that seems to be the case.
If the brand is strong audiences will give new films a shot, no matter what they are. Solo is an iconic character and his film flopped. Whereas Marvel can put out Ant-Man and it will easily gross 500million.
Theres simply no good excuse for Solo flopping. Disney/Lucasfilm is 100% to blame for denting the brand.
I think you're underselling TLJ's box office results, it did not underperform, and if it did it wasn't by very much. If anything, TFA overperformed because it was the first new Star Wars film in a decade and had pretty unprecedented levels of hype attached to it. TLJ was never going to match those numbers. Its drop off is on similar levels as Empire Strikes Back was to the original Star Wars.
If you want to compare it to Marvel, then let's look at how TLJ compared domestically to Infinity war. It only made about $50 million less than Infinity War in America, that's in no way a bad showing. Comparing worldwide numbers between Marvel and Star Wars is apples to oranges because Star Wars generally does not do well in China, which is a huge market, whereas Avengers movies make gangbuster money over there.
Solo's failures should obviously be placed on Disney, as they are responsible for greenlighting the film and advertising it and all that, but to place them on the prior movies in the franchise is poor reasoning. That may be a part of it, but I've seen no evidence to support it outside of the confusion of correlation with causation.
It's all conjecture, though. If the brand is truly damaged then we'll know it with how Episode IX does. Solo's failure may just be an anomaly because of poor planning or any other of the various possible reasons. If IX fails, then I would agree that the brand is in trouble. One relatively thoughtless spin off doing badly isn't going to convince me of that, though.
Originally posted by BackFire
A lot of things can lead to a flop.1. The vocal crowd that loathed TLJ
2. A sudden saturation of Star Wars films, which prior to Disney had always been event films with long downtime between releases. This sudden saturation removed some of the "prestige" that came with the franchise up until this point, and the excitement.
3. Solo simply not being a story that needed to be told and evidently one that not many people really cared to hear. It was just not a very interesting premise and was probably the wrong character based prequel film to start with.
Any one of these things could lead to Solo underperforming, all three combined led to it being the flop that it was, with 2 and 3 being the largest contributors, imo.
Originally posted by BackFire
I think you're underselling TLJ's box office results, it did not underperform, and if it did it wasn't by very much. If anything, TFA overperformed because it was the first new Star Wars film in a decade and had pretty unprecedented levels of hype attached to it. TLJ was never going to match those numbers. Its drop off is on similar levels as Empire Strikes Back was to the original Star Wars.If you want to compare it to Marvel, then let's look at how TLJ compared domestically to Infinity war. It only made about $50 million less than Infinity War in America, that's in no way a bad showing. Comparing worldwide numbers between Marvel and Star Wars is apples to oranges because Star Wars generally does not do well in China, which is a huge market, whereas Avengers movies make gangbuster money over there.
Solo's failures should obviously be placed on Disney, as they are responsible for greenlighting the film and advertising it and all that, but to place them on the prior movies in the franchise is poor reasoning. That may be a part of it, but I've seen no evidence to support it outside of the confusion of correlation with causation.
It's all conjecture, though. If the brand is truly damaged then we'll know it with how Episode IX does. Solo's failure may just be an anomaly because of poor planning or any other of the various possible reasons. If IX fails, then I would agree that the brand is in trouble. One relatively thoughtless spin off doing badly isn't going to convince me of that, though.
spot on Backfire
Originally posted by BackFire
I think you're underselling TLJ's box office results, it did not underperform, and if it did it wasn't by very much. If anything, TFA overperformed because it was the first new Star Wars film in a decade and had pretty unprecedented levels of hype attached to it. TLJ was never going to match those numbers. Its drop off is on similar levels as Empire Strikes Back was to the original Star Wars.
It didn't underperform? Are you serious? Do you think if an Avengers movie grossed $1.3bill then that wouldn't be an underperformance? It would have been considered so even before Infinity War. Heck it barely made more than Jurassic World 2. Jurassic World 2 which wasn't an essential part of the new Jurassic Trilogy, wasn't a direct sequel to a cliffhanger ending and the Jurassic new movies were never even sold as a trilogy. Yet JW2 dropped from 1.6/1.7bill to the same sort of numbers as TLJ.
TLJ did not need to match TFA numbers, but to go down from a $2billion franchise to well under a $1.5billion franchise is just a massive drop off.
I think it's being kind of disingenuous to compare to Star Wars films from 30 years back instead of comparing with current $1.5billion-$2billion mega franchises. The movie sequel industry was very different back then with sequels rarely outperforming the original.
Originally posted by BackFire
If you want to compare it to Marvel, then let's look at how TLJ compared domestically to Infinity war. It only made about $50 million less than Infinity War in America, that's in no way a bad showing. Comparing worldwide numbers between Marvel and Star Wars is apples to oranges because Star Wars generally does not do well in China, which is a huge market, whereas Avengers movies make gangbuster money over there.
Some films do better domestic, others do better internationally. Star Wars has always had a much larger domestic to international ratio than normal. Which is why we compare worldwide and not just domestic or just international numbers.
As for China the New Trilogy is doing much better there now than the Prequels ever did, and still the Prequels were making close to the Billion mark almost 2 decades ago now. So Star Wars films still making a Billion worldwide now is nothing to be amazed over tbh.
That said even domestically, TLJ is known for having the lowest domestic box office multiplier for any Star Wars film to date. So again, nothing to be overly proud of, and another sign the franchise has been dented.
Originally posted by BackFire
Solo's failures should obviously be placed on Disney, as they are responsible for greenlighting the film and advertising it and all that, but to place them on the prior movies in the franchise is poor reasoning. That may be a part of it, but I've seen no evidence to support it outside of the confusion of correlation with causation.
Again Solo is an iconic Star Wars character. And a strong brand will not just flop like that, even with a characters who are not known.
We have to ask why Solo flopped, yet a direct spin off to ANH featuring Tarkin and Vader (the latter being the highlight) grossed a Billion.
I'm a numbers guy by profession, so all I'm doing is putting the numbers and facts together, first TLJ's massive drop, then just a few months later Solo's terrible flop. Putting it together clearly doesn't look good even ignoring the online hate.
Originally posted by BackFire
It's all conjecture, though. If the brand is truly damaged then we'll know it with how Episode IX does. Solo's failure may just be an anomaly because of poor planning or any other of the various possible reasons. If IX fails, then I would agree that the brand is in trouble. One relatively thoughtless spin off doing badly isn't going to convince me of that, though.
Well of course there's conjecture. But the numbers are facts.
I'm not expecting Episode 9 to flop, but I don't think it passing the Billion mark is some huge success either.
I do not think the franchise has been destroyed. It's too big for that. But I definitely believe it's been dented, and the numbers back me up on that.
No I don't think it did underperform by any substantial degree. Maybe a bit, maybe it should have made 1.4 or 1.5 billion, but that's not all that much of a difference compared to 1.35 or whatever TLJ ended up making.
You keep comparing it to Avengers but like I said that's an apples and oranges comparison, Avengers simply has a broader global audience that acts as a cushion for any potential wavering of any individual nation. For instance, Age of Ultron made almost $200 million less than the first Avengers movie in the states, but ended up making nearly as much globally because of support in China and what not. Same is true for Jurassic World. The second one made about $250 million less than the first in the states, but still did very well globally because of its popularity in China.
Comparing how this trilogy is doing with how previous Star Wars trilogies have done is not disingenuous, no more so than comparing it to a completely different franchise with a much wider global audience and pretending that is some valid benchmark. There is simply an undeniable pattern with Star Wars trilogies. And that pattern is a significant drop in numbers between the first in the second film in each trilogy. This is also true for the prequel trilogy. So as far as I can tell, this sequel trilogy is just following the same trend as the other trilogies in the franchise.
What is a domestic box office multiplier? Is that like adjusted for inflation? Because if so TLJ beats out Eps 2 and 3.
Solo is an iconic Star Wars character that is largely identified as a specific actor - Harrison Ford, not the kid who played him in the sequel. No brand is immune from making a mistake, or making a movie that people just don't want to see. That doesn't inherently mean the brand is damaged or dented or whatever you want to say, maybe the movie just wasn't interesting. I enjoyed TLJ a great deal, I enjoyed all the previous Disney Star Wars movies to date. But I didn't see Solo in theaters, it didn't have anything to do with the brand, I just didn't find the premise interesting so I figured I'd wait until it came out for home release and rent it for a dollar.
Indeed, the numbers are fact, and the numbers of TLJ are in line with the numbers of the other second films in the other two Star Wars trilogies.
For the record, I think Episode IX making a billion dollars would be a flop. I think it will probably end up at the 1.3-1.5 billion mark, probably closer to 1.5 billion.