Youth N Asia Posted October 9, 2005 Report Posted October 9, 2005 1 Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit $16,100,000/$16,121,000 2 Flightplan $10,788,000/$60,940,000 3 In Her Shoes $10,025,000/$10,025,000 4 Two for the Money $8,380,000/$8,380,000 5 The Gospel $8,000,000/$8,000,000 6 Tim Burton's Corpse Bride $6,540,000/$42,145,000 7 Waiting $5,700,000/$5,700,000 8 A History of Violence $5,125,000/$16,697,000 9 Serenity $4,925,000/$17,594,000 10 Into the Blue $4,800,000/$13,873,000 11 The Greatest Game Ever Played $4,012,000/$8,788,000 12 Just Like Heaven $3,400,000/$43,568,000 ----------- The American movie going public should burn in hell for what's happening to Serenity! Personally I've seen more trailers for Waiting than Wallace, The Gospel, and In Her Shoes combined. I thought Waiting would do better with not much else comedy to choose from right now The Greatest Game Ever played is BOMBING for Disney. That's pretty obvious though. ----------- OPENING OCTOBER 14: -DOMINO -ELIZABETH TOWN -THE FOG
razazteca Posted October 9, 2005 Report Posted October 9, 2005 I noticed that the recent commercials for Serenity has it being compared to the orginal Star Wars.
SuperJerk Posted October 9, 2005 Report Posted October 9, 2005 Serenity has as much in common with Star Wars as Saving Private Ryan has in common with Casablanca.
Guest Vitamin X Posted October 9, 2005 Report Posted October 9, 2005 To be honest, and this is coming from someone who knows absolutely nothing about Firefly or Serenity, watching the trailers for Serenity or even finding out its plot made me no more interested in it than say, Battlefield Earth. That's how terribly it was marketed. Just looked like another shitty sci-fi flick.
2GOLD Posted October 9, 2005 Report Posted October 9, 2005 Waiting didn't open as wide as the other movies, I think it was in 500 to 1000 less theaters than the competition. So a normal Lions Gate opening.
gWIL Posted October 9, 2005 Report Posted October 9, 2005 Going to see Waiting tommorow. I work as a cook and the previews had me rolling, so I hope it's good. The line "I can't wait to quit" is sooooooo very true.
Youth N Asia Posted October 9, 2005 Author Report Posted October 9, 2005 I haven't seen Serenity yet... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And you never will... *KILLS YOU!*
razazteca Posted October 9, 2005 Report Posted October 9, 2005 To be honest, and this is coming from someone who knows absolutely nothing about Firefly or Serenity, watching the trailers for Serenity or even finding out its plot made me no more interested in it than say, Battlefield Earth. That's how terribly it was marketed. Just looked like another shitty sci-fi flick. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It looks like a remake of The 5th Element to me.
the max Posted October 9, 2005 Report Posted October 9, 2005 After everyone creaming over Serenity, I watched the trailer online and waited to get knocked on my ass. It looks like a sci-fi show that you'd watch on UPN or WB when there's nothing else on on a saturday afternoon. Just didn't look interesting at all. Maybe if I had heard of someone in the film, I might have checked it out. The girlfriend and I checked out Waiting and other than the idiotic fucks yelling out advice to the characters on screen, it was an enjoyable experience. Not anything that I'd buy on dvd, but a good amount of LOL moments.
bobobrazil1984 Posted October 9, 2005 Report Posted October 9, 2005 lets just fast forward to the DVD release already so I can watch serenity a half dozen times.
Gary Floyd Posted October 9, 2005 Report Posted October 9, 2005 At least "Wallace and Gromit" are #1 in the Box Office.
2GOLD Posted October 9, 2005 Report Posted October 9, 2005 I was going to see Serenity this weekend but 40 year old Virgin was two dollars. I went with Steve and the hotties. Serenity will be two bucks in a few weeks cause I'm going to waste my money on DOOM next.
Slayer Posted October 9, 2005 Report Posted October 9, 2005 Wait, Whedon's #1 nutswinger hasn't seen Serenity yet? How does that happen?
RavishingRickRudo Posted October 9, 2005 Report Posted October 9, 2005 Mole has been notoriously anti-firefly for sometime now. Mainly because he's a bitch.
devo Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 1 Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit $16,100,000/$16,121,000 That's kinda odd.
SuperJerk Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 After everyone creaming over Serenity, I watched the trailer online and waited to get knocked on my ass. It looks like a sci-fi show that you'd watch on UPN or WB when there's nothing else on on a saturday afternoon. Just didn't look interesting at all. Maybe if I had heard of someone in the film, I might have checked it out. The girlfriend and I checked out Waiting and other than the idiotic fucks yelling out advice to the characters on screen, it was an enjoyable experience. Not anything that I'd buy on dvd, but a good amount of LOL moments. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ironically, the star of Serenity and the star of Waiting were in a TV show together. A movie doesn't have to have big stars in it to be any good. Serenity was far better than many of the star-studded shitfests Hollywood cranks out every year. I don't get your attitude at all.
razazteca Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Ironically, the star of Serenity and the star of Waiting were in a TV show together. 2 Guys, a Chick, and a Pizza show?
the max Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Since I didn't watch Buffy the Vampire Slayer or Angel, I'm not going to see it based on Whedon. So, as a not even fan, I'd expect them to try to knock me on my ass to make me think "Hey, that looks interesting" and go see it instead of a movie like Waiting with little (if any)star power. Why should I see a film that I have no reason to see? At least if there were someone in it that I recognized, I would say "Well, that doesn't look good at all, but __________ is in it!" which I've done with a few films this year (the last film being The Longest Yard that I saw for my love of the original and Sandler looked pretty good in it.)
2GOLD Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Ironically, the star of Serenity and the star of Waiting were in a TV show together. 2 Guys, a Chick, and a Pizza show? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It was Two guys and a Girl by the time Nathan showed up I think.
Edwin MacPhisto Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Why should I see a film that I have no reason to see? At least if there were someone in it that I recognized, I would say "Well, that doesn't look good at all, but __________ is in it!" which I've done with a few films this year (the last film being The Longest Yard that I saw for my love of the original and Sandler looked pretty good in it.) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Do people not read movie reviews anymore? I dunno. Outstanding critical acclaim usually pushes me in the right direction and creates a "reason."
Art Sandusky Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Why should I see a film that I have no reason to see? At least if there were someone in it that I recognized, I would say "Well, that doesn't look good at all, but __________ is in it!" which I've done with a few films this year (the last film being The Longest Yard that I saw for my love of the original and Sandler looked pretty good in it.) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Do people not read movie reviews anymore? I dunno. Outstanding critical acclaim usually pushes me in the right direction and creates a "reason." <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I do, but ignore them. I'll make up my own mind. Something could have a quote from God himself saying "BEST FUCKING MOVIE IN ALL OF EXISTENCE," but if it doesn't look like something I'd like, screw it. I care little for who's in something as well, except for when I saw The Rundown because I was curious to see how The Rock would do. That said, Waiting is a definite must-see on my next day off.
cabbageboy Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Serenity seems like it was highly mismarketed. I think I saw maybe a couple of trailers for it and it didn't look like much, so I never worried about going to see it. Having never seen the TV show it's based on, I really didn't know anything about it. Why is everyone so shocked that it is tanking? It's a movie based on a cancelled TV series, that doesn't have anyone of note in it, and the marketing wasn't anything to write home about.
the max Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Why should I see a film that I have no reason to see? At least if there were someone in it that I recognized, I would say "Well, that doesn't look good at all, but __________ is in it!" which I've done with a few films this year (the last film being The Longest Yard that I saw for my love of the original and Sandler looked pretty good in it.) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Do people not read movie reviews anymore? I dunno. Outstanding critical acclaim usually pushes me in the right direction and creates a "reason." <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't share likes with most critics. I like what I like. If I see the preview and it looks like the movie is going to blow, I'm not going to see it. Serenity. It's based on a tv show that I watched exactly once and didn't like. It's by a writer that I'm not particularly fond of. It doesn't have an actor that I like in it. The preview looked dull to me. So, where's my reason to see it? Critical acclaim? I learned my lesson on critical acclaim with The Aviator amongst numerous others.
Edwin MacPhisto Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 I was just talking about in general. "Oo, Adam Sandler" is never going to get you anywhere good.
Bruiser Chong Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Too many people have this mindset about reviewers, as if they hate anything mainstream and only latch on to a handful of indy flicks that are impossible to understand. All too often, it seems like people avoid even reading reviews because they have the "I'll decide if it's good or not for myself" state of mind. Nothing wrong with forming your own opinion, but avoiding reviews is a bit silly. I check reviews (primarily Ebert) on the regular. Not because I can't form my own opinions, but rather, they help find the diamonds in the rough. With the sheer quantity of films being released every year, it's easy to miss the less promoted ones. Checking out the reviews can alert you to these films and at least pique your interest on other ones you may have not considered checking out before. Citing Ebert has become something of a pattern for me. Not because I can't form my own opinion. The guy just knows what he's talking about. Whether he likes it or not, he's always there with the reasons he came to that conclusion. Reading reviews and/or sharing similar opinions with reviewers doesn't make you some mindless drone. Just more informed. At least in regards to the former, anyway.
SuperJerk Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Since I didn't watch Buffy the Vampire Slayer or Angel, I'm not going to see it based on Whedon. So, as a not even fan, I'd expect them to try to knock me on my ass to make me think "Hey, that looks interesting" and go see it instead of a movie like Waiting with little (if any)star power. Why should I see a film that I have no reason to see? At least if there were someone in it that I recognized, I would say "Well, that doesn't look good at all, but __________ is in it!" which I've done with a few films this year (the last film being The Longest Yard that I saw for my love of the original and Sandler looked pretty good in it.) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You make a pretty good case for expecting the filmmakers to sell you on the film before you'd see it, then you mention going to see Waiting and The Longest Yard, which put out horribly unfunny commercials, thus destroying your own argument. The only commercial I've seen for Waiting features a guy spitting in people's food. Somehow that's more appealing that a movie about space outlaws protecting a little girl from an evil assasin? Serenity isn't even a comedy and its commericals were funnier than Waiting. You'd rather watch a guy spit in people's food than space outlaws protecting a little girl from an evil assasin? As far as this "someone famous has to be in it" argument...If that's really a prerequisite for you to see a movie, then you're missing out on a lot of really great stuff. Serenity. It's based on a tv show that I watched exactly once and didn't like. I can't blame you for not seeing it if that's the case. If you didn't like "Firefly", then you're not going to like Serenity. That's having a little more informed opinion than saying "I didn't see it because I didn't know any of the actors."
Guest JMA Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 I can't speak for anyone else, but I usually trust the critics over the casual movie audience. Frankly, too many people go to see shitty movies based on crazy reasons (hot celebrity gets naked, lots of explosions, remake, ect). Critics don't fall for that kind of stuff and since they've obviously watched a lot of films they know when something is special.
SuperJerk Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Cinderella Man got an 84% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes. It. Sucked. Ass.
Guest JMA Posted October 10, 2005 Report Posted October 10, 2005 Does anyone know how much Firefly made in DVD sales?
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now