Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 ChargerIIC wrote:

 bbb wrote:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=main&id=starwars7.htm

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=main&id=starwars8.htm

As far as the box office goes, globally so far after about a month after being released TLJ as made about $800 million less than TFA. While, yes, that's still wildly profitable, the drop from one movie to the next is quite sharp. Did TFA benefit from years of pent up SW anticipation? Probably, but it seems like TLJ squandered an opportunity to keep that train rolling. While there are tons of people in both the love and hate camps, it seems like people have voted with their wallets in a noticeable way. TFA kept raking in money for months after release, but TLJ has slowed in comparison, so I don't expect the numbers to rise too much more.



That's a breakdown of the countries with a $10 million or more different so far in box office take. Sure there's more time for it to make money, but the rate of ticket sales is slowing rapidly.

Before we get too excited about the figures, bear in mind that TFA figures account for reruns, including those theaters that showed TFA right before the midnight release of TLJ. It's not an equal comparison.

No. If you just check the numbers for TFA you can see the totals in that page match exactly the foreign results as of 20/7/2016, so about 7 months worth of earnings and definitely not including any reruns prior to TLJ.

I don't think TLJ can make up the additional 67% it needs to get anywhere near TFA on foreign sales (especially if you look at the weekly distributions).

 insaniak wrote:

 Kap'n Krump wrote:


Hell, despite all their flaws, the prequel trilogy at least had an original story to tell, and this generation's trilogy doesn't.

Yeah, the PTs story of a young boy from Tatooine trying to find his place in the universe was a really nice change of pace from the OTs story of a young boy from Tatooine trying to find his place in the universe...

Look, I have a laundry list of problems with the prequels, but this is disingenuous. Not only the stories go in a completely different directions, they have a different scopes (downfall vs journey). Young Anakin is taken more than called (this BTW contributes into the Jedi looking like not clearly good guys).
Also, the guy was not "looking for his place". He knew (from his point of view) that he wanted to be a master, he just felt denied, thus unjustly treated.
Gods (the four of them), I am finding more nuances and motivations in the prequels than in Mouse Wars. This is the level we are at right now.

I didn't mind the overall idea behind the prequels and if nothing else they don't ape the OT like the mouse trilogy does. They just hinge on some really annoying characters with badly written and executed lines and a weak arc for Anakin.

Yeah, so far the prequel had a stronger story than the current trilogy does. Something might change with the next movie, but as of right now, most of the characters feel like throwaways.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

Look, I have a laundry list of problems with the prequels, but this is disingenuous...

No, it was a joke...

 insaniak wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

Look, I have a laundry list of problems with the prequels, but this is disingenuous...

No, it was a joke...

In this case, my apologies for not getting it!

It's interesting that the poll shows overall people like the movie, though its a slim majority, but the comments, like the other TLF thread, are overwhelmingly negative. I guess like a lot of things its the unhappy customer who feels the need to vent.

 bbb wrote:
As far as the box office goes, globally so far after about a month after being released TLJ as made about $800 million less than TFA. While, yes, that's still wildly profitable, the drop from one movie to the next is quite sharp. Did TFA benefit from years of pent up SW anticipation? Probably, but it seems like TLJ squandered an opportunity to keep that train rolling. While there are tons of people in both the love and hate camps, it seems like people have voted with their wallets in a noticeable way. TFA kept raking in money for months after release, but TLJ has slowed in comparison, so I don't expect the numbers to rise too much more.

I've seen a few version of this analysis, and I'm not sure it tells the whole story. Because while TLJ is the next part of the continuity after TFA, it wasn't the next Disney Star Wars movie. Rogue One followed on from TFA. That doesn't mean BO comparisons from TFA to TLJ are wrong, but it should be noted the story isn't that simple.

Especially because we aren't seeing either a steady drop through each film, or TFA and R1 holding similar, and then dropping to TLJ. Instead what we see is TFA making $2.07bn worldwide, then Rogue One grossing $1.06bn worldwide, then TLJ increasing back up to TLJ grossing $1.30bn worldwide.

That gives a much murkier result than a simple 'audiences voting with their feet' story. Exactly what explains the result would be a lot of guesswork, all of which will be made to look silly when the Han Solo and conclusion to the TFA trilogy come out and we see how those films perform. If the young Han Solo movie does great and the last TFA has a lower take, then it's probable that a lot of the box office is simply fondness for the old characters (with TLF making money just by having Luke return). If the young Han movie doesn't do great, then maybe the issue is audiences aren't that interested in yet more prequels.

We'll find out over the next couple of years.

Oh, and if you want to use the drop off from the original as some kind of guide of quality, not that ESB dropped 32% at the BO compared to Star Wars, that is only slightly more than TLJ's drop off. I don't think anyone would want to claim that proves audiences were reacting against ESB.

 sebster wrote:
It's interesting that the poll shows overall people like the movie, though its a slim majority, but the comments, like the other TLF thread, are overwhelmingly negative. I guess like a lot of things its the unhappy customer who feels the need to vent.

Currently 50% like it, 13% are conflicted and 37% didn't like it. For one of the most (if not most) beloved movie franchises of all time this indicates an extremely divisive movie.

 bbb wrote:
As far as the box office goes, globally so far after about a month after being released TLJ as made about $800 million less than TFA. While, yes, that's still wildly profitable, the drop from one movie to the next is quite sharp. Did TFA benefit from years of pent up SW anticipation? Probably, but it seems like TLJ squandered an opportunity to keep that train rolling. While there are tons of people in both the love and hate camps, it seems like people have voted with their wallets in a noticeable way. TFA kept raking in money for months after release, but TLJ has slowed in comparison, so I don't expect the numbers to rise too much more.

I've seen a few version of this analysis, and I'm not sure it tells the whole story. Because while TLJ is the next part of the continuity after TFA, it wasn't the next Disney Star Wars movie. Rogue One followed on from TFA. That doesn't mean BO comparisons from TFA to TLJ are wrong, but it should be noted the story isn't that simple.

Especially because we aren't seeing either a steady drop through each film, or TFA and R1 holding similar, and then dropping to TLJ. Instead what we see is TFA making $2.07bn worldwide, then Rogue One grossing $1.06bn worldwide, then TLJ increasing back up to TLJ grossing $1.30bn worldwide.

That gives a much murkier result than a simple 'audiences voting with their feet' story. Exactly what explains the result would be a lot of guesswork, all of which will be made to look silly when the Han Solo and conclusion to the TFA trilogy come out and we see how those films perform. If the young Han Solo movie does great and the last TFA has a lower take, then it's probable that a lot of the box office is simply fondness for the old characters (with TLF making money just by having Luke return). If the young Han movie doesn't do great, then maybe the issue is audiences aren't that interested in yet more prequels.

We'll find out over the next couple of years.

Oh, and if you want to use the drop off from the original as some kind of guide of quality, not that ESB dropped 32% at the BO compared to Star Wars, that is only slightly more than TLJ's drop off. I don't think anyone would want to claim that proves audiences were reacting against ESB.

The ANH to ESB drop off isn't the best comparison because the way movies were watched in the late 70s and early 80s is different to now and Star Wars went from being an unknown thing that captured the hearts and minds of a generation to a known quantity, so ANH was in theaters for a long time compared to ESB.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=weekly&id=starwars4.htm

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=weekly&id=starwars5.htm

Source: Box Office Mojo.
This is domestic USA plus international - the total gross.
Someone better skilled than me could adjust if for inflation I guess.

Guardians of the Galaxy (2014): $773,328,629
Guardians of the Galaxy 2 (2017): $863,746,089

Batman begins (2005): $374,218,673
Dark knight (2008): $1,004,558,444
Dark knight returns (2012): $1,084,939,099

Avengers (2012): $1,518,812,988
Avengers, Ultron (2015) $1,405,403,694 (considered a bit of a disappointment)

X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014): $747,862,775
X-Men: Apocalypse (2016): $543,934,787 (box office considered not that great)

Thor (2011): $449,326,618
Thor: Dark World (2013): $644,571,402
Thor: Ragnarok (2017): $851,641,959

Transformers (2007): $709,709,780
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009): $836,303,693
Transformers: Dark of the Moon (2011): $1,123,794,079
Transformers: Age of Extiction (2013): $1,104,054,072
Transformers: Last Knight (2017): $605,425,157 (considered underperforming)

Man of Steel (2013): $668,045,518
Batman vs Superman (2016): $873,634,919
Wonder Woman (2017): $821,847,012
Justice League (2017): $655,302,179 (considered a major disappointment)

SW Fanfiction: The Force Awakens (2015): $2,068,223,624
SW Fanfiction: The Last Jedi (2017): $1,296,450,164, plus record week-to-week drop.
Media: OMG YESSS MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! YAHOOOOO! You're all clear, kid. Now let's blow this thing and go home!

Of course when almost every critic (for whatever reason) says that the film is a cinematic gem before it opens also might have something to do with it.

Personally I regretted the time and money I wasted on going to see the film myself and I don't take any notice of what Film Critics spew out.

 bbb wrote:

 sebster wrote:
It's interesting that the poll shows overall people like the movie, though its a slim majority, but the comments, like the other TLF thread, are overwhelmingly negative. I guess like a lot of things its the unhappy customer who feels the need to vent.

Currently 50% like it, 13% are conflicted and 37% didn't like it. For one of the most (if not most) beloved movie franchises of all time this indicates an extremely divisive movie.

Agreed.

For additional anecdotal context, I have been absolutely savaging the movie in it's thread but responded to this poll with 'conflicted'. Had I responded to this poll in the first 48 hours after seeing the movie I'd have said i liked it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Heck,

I could name several posters who 'enjoyed' it but felt it had deep shortcomings and/or admitted to giving it the benefit of the doubt until the trilogy ends.

 sebster wrote:
It's interesting that the poll shows overall people like the movie, though its a slim majority, but the comments, like the other TLF thread, are overwhelmingly negative. I guess like a lot of things its the unhappy customer who feels the need to vent.

As someone who strongly dislikes the film, I agree that this is a completely fair statement. Particularly when you add in emotional investment.

There is an old saying along the lines of: "A person has a good meal at a restaurant, they might tell 2 people. A person has a bad meal, they'll tell 10."

Addendum: first 10 days of B.O. for the Mouse Wars movies.


We see that before the drop, TLJ was headed close to TFA. Then diverges losing "difference quotient", so to say.
In particular, notice what happens in Day 3.
Closer to the spin-off Rogue One. with way less leverage, unknown characters and actors, mostly.

Now you have to convince me that the people involved do not keep track of such data, and do not think about the potential revenue lost.
I'll wait.

May have God mercy of my sinful soul for using Buzzfeed as a reference, but this one is exactly like many other graphs I found on the subject.

The people who have decided to ignore film critics, do you think the critics are wrong about all films, or only the latest Star Wars, or a select number of films (e.g. Dumb and Dumberer, Darkest Hour, Blade Runner, and so on.) ??

Supplementary question: Why do you think the critics are getting it wrong?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The people who have decided to ignore film critics, do you think the critics are wrong about all films, or only the latest Star Wars, or a select number of films (e.g. Dumb and Dumberer, Darkest Hour, Blade Runner, and so on.) ??

Supplementary question: Why do you think the critics are getting it wrong?

The same reason game critics get it wrong. Critics are not consumers. Consumers have a limited amount of money and time. They want to see and play things that they ENJOY regardless of "quality". There is also the fact most critics are of a certain political persuasion, one that TLJ panders to unceasingly.

TLJ is an unenjoyable, preachy movie, when all we want is some fun, drama or grit.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The people who have decided to ignore film critics, do you think the critics are wrong about all films, or only the latest Star Wars, or a select number of films (e.g. Dumb and Dumberer, Darkest Hour, Blade Runner, and so on.) ??

Supplementary question: Why do you think the critics are getting it wrong?

I think that the criticism for the movie could be divided in 2 types (absolutely not exclusive one of the other):
- criticism of TLJ as a SW movie
- criticism of TLJ as a movie, fullstop

The first thing, I am sure, bothers a lower amount of critics, and for sure not the top-tier ones.
Nonetheless, TLJ is a movie with huge tonal dissonances, small continuity errors, dubious use of the timeline, nonsensical plot and characters, contrivances, subversion for the sake of subversion, shoehorned and clumsy (and self-contradictory) political messages,and is even schizophrenic about its own ethics. It looks to me like a very cynical movie, written by people with a lot of signalling but not much true moral compass that, like TFA but nonetheless way more than that, is more a movie about star wars than a SW movie. Is cynical, when is supposed to be a family movie.

In the context of the saga, and even of TFA alone, is an awful movie (excluded some scene, generally containing a lot of red, for aesthetic reasons). But even as the first SW movie one watches, is terrible.

In another thread I pointed out how The Mouse takes revenge of those that displease Him removing the critic from the previews.
Add to this that if the movie becomes popular, none of them wants to be the unpopular guy/gal that bashed it.
In all honesty I cannot see most critics being honest about the movie unless they appreciated it as a meta-commentary. That is interesting, but butchers its purpose of a family movie.
Finally, as others pointed out, to me it looks that for many current critics is more important checking shallowly boxes than analyzing context and narrative. It reminds me, on the opposite end of the spectrum, all the screeching following Blade Runner 2049. A movie about disposable workforce, literal objectification on many level, control of female reproductive power, hated by those unable to read through the lines or slammed as "sexist" because some bosom is shown.

For what concerns me, my trust in critics has been very low for a long time, and this movie just set it even lower. They just reported moments and meaning that are not there. Even critics that I consider highly - just looks like they watched a whole different movie.

Re: critics, I don't care about them one way or another. Good for them and their profession when they have opinions. I begrudge them nothing.


I do have a problem with people using critics as a cudgel to tell me my opinions are wrong and consider opening up that line of questioning an admittance that the people on the opposite side of the fence are out of opinions of their own and are "tapping out" so to speak.

I agree with some of Kaiyanwang thoughts but I also think there's a bit of a problem with critics nowadays when it comes to media.

Maybe it isn't a 'nowadays' actually - "Everyone is a critic" is a phrase that's as old as dirt, after all.

In any case, I think there's a problem of not really knowing what critics are there for and while I don't think there's a giant conspiracy to screw over Warner and artifically inflate Disney properties, like, no doubt, someone will claim during the course of this thread (or, someone putting words in my mouth claiming I think that), I think there is a lot of industry around the whole thing.


In any case, there problem is a question there about, "what is a critic?" and "what is a review?"

Is their job to judge the worthiness of a film and it's impact on some sort of greater cultural zeitgeist or what have you. - Or in terms I understand, "do the thing an art critic does."

Or are they essentially another form of film advertisement, that tells you about the film. - In other words, an extension of a Graeme Norton / Jonathan Ross style interview.

Or are they a neutral party that talks about the film and tries to give the reader a bit of an insight into the things the viewer might like about the film, or might not like. - In other words, "is this the type of film I should pay the ticket price, parking, a meal, overpriced popcorn AND hire a babysitter to go see."


I think there's all sorts of overlap between these and others, as well as differing expectations right now that's causing problems.

 bbb wrote:
Currently 50% like it, 13% are conflicted and 37% didn't like it. For one of the most (if not most) beloved movie franchises of all time this indicates an extremely divisive movie.

I'm not saying its a good result for the movie. 50% liking it is a bad result for any movie, especially one that's supposed to be a safe blockbuster.

I was just saying the difference between the poll and the thread is due to the old cliche, that you can serve 1,000 hamburgers and the only feedback you'll get is from the one guy who didn't like it. It's something worth keeping in mind as people read the thread, which can give the impression that a majority of people didn't like the movie.

The ANH to ESB drop off isn't the best comparison because the way movies were watched in the late 70s and early 80s is different to now and Star Wars went from being an unknown thing that captured the hearts and minds of a generation to a known quantity, so ANH was in theaters for a long time compared to ESB.

You're talking in circles. You can't claim ESB only didn't make as much money because it wasn't in theatres as long. But the reason fro the shorter theatre run was because it wasn't selling as many tickets.

Plain reality is that ESB dropped well back from ANH. It still made stupid amounts of money, of course, and making less money doesn't mean it wasn't a great movie. But it does shed some light on any argument that tries to use BO reductions to claim a trilogy is weak, or losing interest or anything like that.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The people who have decided to ignore film critics, do you think the critics are wrong about all films, or only the latest Star Wars, or a select number of films (e.g. Dumb and Dumberer, Darkest Hour, Blade Runner, and so on.) ??

Supplementary question: Why do you think the critics are getting it wrong?

I have no interest in their opinions, they do not know me or the films I would like or not, and they are no more neutral than anyone else is about an art form plus Critics are paid to watch films they don't like and that often shows.

Therefore they are completely worthless to me. I occasionally I will ask what friends thought but again they often don't like what I like and vice versa. I would contend that a film is personal experience and having someone tell me how or if I should enjoy something is laughable.

Given the overwhelming positive response which is completely at odds to the extremely mixed views of those not paid to watch it, I would suggest that at least some of them want to get/keep on the right side of Disney and/or have been pressured

 sebster wrote:

I was just saying the difference between the poll and the thread is due to the old cliche, that you can serve 1,000 hamburgers and the only feedback you'll get is from the one guy who didn't like it. It's something worth keeping in mind as people read the thread, which can give the impression that a majority of people didn't like the movie.

This is absolutely true, but I have one theory: the more time will pass, more people will dislike TLJ unless J.J. pulls a miracle for IX.
Stuff that is tolerated will become unacceptable in retrospect, a bit like with TFA. Also, as someone noted, is a movie that has different layers of problems so one does not realize them all at once. It happened with the prequels for many, too.

You're talking in circles. You can't claim ESB only didn't make as much money because it wasn't in theatres as long. But the reason fro the shorter theatre run was because it wasn't selling as many tickets.

Plain reality is that ESB dropped well back from ANH. It still made stupid amounts of money, of course, and making less money doesn't mean it wasn't a great movie. But it does shed some light on any argument that tries to use BO reductions to claim a trilogy is weak, or losing interest or anything like that.

No, it was just another situation, for ANH additional reruns that happened later are calculated and taken into account.
Anyway, I posted performances and sequel drops of many recent blockbusters. Is undeniable TFA is a winner, but is as much as undeniable that TLJ is an enormous drop from the first movie. In the modern blockbuster context, so far is victorious but the future could not be as much as victorious.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
This is absolutely true, but I have one theory: the more time will pass, more people will dislike TLJ unless J.J. pulls a miracle for IX.
Stuff that is tolerated will become unacceptable in retrospect, a bit like with TFA. Also, as someone noted, is a movie that has different layers of problems so one does not realize them all at once. It happened with the prequels for many, too.

Not quite. I think you're missed what happened with the prequels, and its caused you to make an inaccurate prediction about the new films. The prequels at the time were hated, the vitriol those films copped was incredible. Over time the prequels haven't been thought of as worse. I'm kind of amused at your argument that the issues of the prequels only became clear over time - their crappiness was entirely obvious at the time and widely acknowledged. But how the prequels are treated has changed massively - at the time there was great energy, lots of attackers and a handful of defenders arguing endlessly over those movies. Nowaways they've just been largely forgotten. Not literally, of course, they're still part of SW canon, and the experience of such complete disappointment will never stop being part of geek folklore, but as films... these days no-one gives a gak.

If Episode IX fails to deliver then the same will happen to this trilogy. After all the heat dies down it'll just get forgotten. On the other hand if Episode IX delivers, then we'll still get the arguments, but in time the trilogy will retain its cache of fans who'll still watch it regularly.

No, it was just another situation, for ANH additional reruns that happened later are calculated and taken into account.

Yes, it had reruns... because the film was so popular that later reruns were also profitable. Had such reruns been then ESB would have had them as well.

This is bonkers. "Oh sure, it made loads more money, but that's only because lots of people went to see it over a long period of time".

So, you're saying it all depends on if the guy directing IX is capable of delivering a satisfying conclusion?

 sebster wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
This is absolutely true, but I have one theory: the more time will pass, more people will dislike TLJ unless J.J. pulls a miracle for IX.
Stuff that is tolerated will become unacceptable in retrospect, a bit like with TFA. Also, as someone noted, is a movie that has different layers of problems so one does not realize them all at once. It happened with the prequels for many, too.

Not quite. I think you're missed what happened with the prequels, and its caused you to make an inaccurate prediction about the new films. The prequels at the time were hated, the vitriol those films copped was incredible. Over time the prequels haven't been thought of as worse. I'm kind of amused at your argument that the issues of the prequels only became clear over time - their crappiness was entirely obvious at the time and widely acknowledged. But how the prequels are treated has changed massively - at the time there was great energy, lots of attackers and a handful of defenders arguing endlessly over those movies. Nowaways they've just been largely forgotten. Not literally, of course, they're still part of SW canon, and the experience of such complete disappointment will never stop being part of geek folklore, but as films... these days no-one gives a gak..

I remember glowing reviews for the Phantom Menace in film magazines when it came out - one of the many reasons I learned to distrust Film Critics.

 sebster wrote:


Not quite. I think you're missed what happened with the prequels, and its caused you to make an inaccurate prediction about the new films. The prequels at the time were hated, the vitriol those films copped was incredible. Over time the prequels haven't been thought of as worse. I'm kind of amused at your argument that the issues of the prequels only became clear over time - their crappiness was entirely obvious at the time and widely acknowledged. But how the prequels are treated has changed massively - at the time there was great energy, lots of attackers and a handful of defenders arguing endlessly over those movies. Nowaways they've just been largely forgotten. Not literally, of course, they're still part of SW canon, and the experience of such complete disappointment will never stop being part of geek folklore, but as films... these days no-one gives a gak.

Ok Sebster, first and foremost, watch out your dismissing tone or we start all over again. We don't want that, right?

Their crappiness was clear to some for the first time, but not to everybody. People still went for Ep II after TPM, bought DVD and re-watch, or watch for the first time the prequels, especially if they have kids. Still, yes. One wants to kill himself when Jar Jar is on screen, screams internally at the "love" scenes, and enjoys Ian McDiarmid if forgets that the plot works only if everyone involved is drugged up and stupid. I dare to say that I cared more for Order 66 than for anything the new sequels. Meh.
The "respected" or at least influential Roger Ebert gave to TPM 3.5/4 stars. RotS got way better reception. Is really not that black and white.
For sure, there was less media circus involving the director defending every single choice on twitter or in interview, and the dislikers were not called mysoginist or nazi or russian hackers. I perhaps have to conclude that people paid more attention to which kind of idiot would express his thoughts in public?
The true "elaborated" and popularised disliking arrived partially with the fantastic and NSFW Plinkett reviews from Red Letter Media. They said nothing other did not say but for sure arrived in the right time. And partially because we generally need time to elaborate phenomena, especially if there is emotional investment.

If Episode IX fails to deliver then the same will happen to this trilogy. After all the heat dies down it'll just get forgotten. On the other hand if Episode IX delivers, then we'll still get the arguments, but in time the trilogy will retain its cache of fans who'll still watch it regularly.

TFA and TLJ have better acting and direction of the prequels, but they are not less stupid. And are way more cynical, "ironic", more about SW than SW movies. When the dust will settle, the dishonesty of these movies will surface.... maybe.
Ep IX is no longer relevant because the authors did not plan anything about that. They don't care. These movies are there to deconstruct SW. Are meta-movies that have the purpose of destroying what is there, and transform it in components easier to market. With an enormous contempt for the audience, the audience that wants the "twists" in the tv series, that watches movies "ironically" because lol I am a geek but these are kid movies amrite? (TLJ teaches that nothing matters, you are entitled to things without training or demonstrating you have the right skills, and you should follow orders without discussion. also, hint of romance/connection with a dark triad guy that murdered his father - great for a kid movie indeed).
A justified contempt, I'd say.
Red Letter Media commented recently about the fandom. The title is misleading.

Yes, it had reruns... because the film was so popular that later reruns were also profitable. Had such reruns been then ESB would have had them as well.
This is bonkers. "Oh sure, it made loads more money, but that's only because lots of people went to see it over a long period of time".

The point is that you are comparing 2 different situations, like people already pointed out and you conveniently ignored. Reruns were more diluted in time, it was a different phenomenon. Cinemas worked differently. I gave examples of what blockbusters do now, and you did not address anything of that.
TFA grossed all that much in a timespan comparable to the other movies I linked.
TLJ started great because of the (unexplainable for me) success of TFA, then dropped. In the current context, if you look at the blockbusters I have shown and what was considered a disappointment, the sequel movie is supposed to gross more. THIS is the context TLJ must be compared to because is the way movies nowadays work, at least these popcorn ones.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

TLJ started great because of the (unexplainable for me) success of TFA, then dropped. In the current context, if you look at the blockbusters I have shown and what was considered a disappointment, the sequel movie is supposed to gross more. THIS is the context TLJ must be compared to because is the way movies nowadays work, at least these popcorn ones.

TFA did well, because it (unlike TLJ) covered up its inadequacy's with a massive amount of Nostagia, and scattered hints of there being some potential. It gave off the impression that the writers were signalling that, "Okay, we know how to make a Star Wars Movie. Here are some new characters, welcome to the setting, next movie will tell it's own story". TLJ decides to do away with the nostalgia, and so all of the flaws inherent to the sequel trilogy were made apparent.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
This is absolutely true, but I have one theory: the more time will pass, more people will dislike TLJ unless J.J. pulls a miracle for IX.
Stuff that is tolerated will become unacceptable in retrospect, a bit like with TFA. Also, as someone noted, is a movie that has different layers of problems so one does not realize them all at once. It happened with the prequels for many, too.

Not quite. I think you're missed what happened with the prequels, and its caused you to make an inaccurate prediction about the new films. The prequels at the time were hated, the vitriol those films copped was incredible. Over time the prequels haven't been thought of as worse. I'm kind of amused at your argument that the issues of the prequels only became clear over time - their crappiness was entirely obvious at the time and widely acknowledged. But how the prequels are treated has changed massively - at the time there was great energy, lots of attackers and a handful of defenders arguing endlessly over those movies. Nowaways they've just been largely forgotten. Not literally, of course, they're still part of SW canon, and the experience of such complete disappointment will never stop being part of geek folklore, but as films... these days no-one gives a gak..

I remember glowing reviews for the Phantom Menace in film magazines when it came out - one of the many reasons I learned to distrust Film Critics.

I remember some crap reviews.

I think we can all agree, that we can dislike or like things due to personal reasons, and we don't have to project those reasons and use them to claim that the things we dislike are objectively bad.

For example, I dislike Greek food. At the same time, I can recognise that millions of people love it (not even just the Greeks!) I can read a professional restaurant critic's piece on a Greek restaurant and understand intellectually that it contains objective truths (such as that the salad was fresh, the dressing was well made, etc) even though I still don't like the taste of Greek salad, and I won't go and eat there.

I can flip that and read the review of Santa Claus Conquers the Martians, and understand that objectively it is a bad movie with a stupid plot, cliched dialogue and rotten special effects, but I can still like it myself.

1. I dispute that many "professional" critics are objective and usually their own specific taste and ingrained prejudices shine through.

2. Its art - therefore subjective.

3. Paid critics certainly hold different films to different standards and are seldom consistent.

The assertion by the previous poster was that both the critical and consumer reception to the Prequel films was negative "The prequels at the time were hated, the vitriol those films copped was incredible." I recall vividly glowing reviews from paid critics in film magazine at the time - later some of them backtracked in the DVD reviews.

Conflicted. I went into all of the new SW movies really wanting to like them, and I did enjoy watching all three, but they all left a sour taste in their own way, especially TLJ.

I prefer the prequels by far, for all their flaws. The sequels have been visually stunning but stink of fan fiction

 sebster wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
This is absolutely true, but I have one theory: the more time will pass, more people will dislike TLJ unless J.J. pulls a miracle for IX.
Stuff that is tolerated will become unacceptable in retrospect, a bit like with TFA. Also, as someone noted, is a movie that has different layers of problems so one does not realize them all at once. It happened with the prequels for many, too.

Not quite. I think you're missed what happened with the prequels, and its caused you to make an inaccurate prediction about the new films. The prequels at the time were hated, the vitriol those films copped was incredible. Over time the prequels haven't been thought of as worse. I'm kind of amused at your argument that the issues of the prequels only became clear over time - their crappiness was entirely obvious at the time and widely acknowledged. But how the prequels are treated has changed massively - at the time there was great energy, lots of attackers and a handful of defenders arguing endlessly over those movies. Nowaways they've just been largely forgotten. Not literally, of course, they're still part of SW canon, and the experience of such complete disappointment will never stop being part of geek folklore, but as films... these days no-one gives a gak.

If Episode IX fails to deliver then the same will happen to this trilogy. After all the heat dies down it'll just get forgotten. On the other hand if Episode IX delivers, then we'll still get the arguments, but in time the trilogy will retain its cache of fans who'll still watch it regularly.

Another interesting bit between the pre's and ep 8, when people said TPM was horrible they never got attacked for it, their motives and reasoning were never called into question. Yet now the people who defend the movie are trying to demonize people for not liking it. a weird phenomenon that seems to have started around the time the new ghostbusters came out. You can dislike all the movies you want no questions asked, just not those on the approved SJW viewing list, then you're a bad person for not liking them.

With PR like that I wonder if it will have an effect on ep 9's box office take.

yes these movies are canon, but just look at the people who claim a "best" viewing order, TPM is always left off the lists, or pushed to the end of it, or if there's still time spot. ep 2 suggests skipping to the attack on genosis. if 9 bombs, then the whole triology is easily left off the list, just stop on ep 6 and end the saga with a happy ending.