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.

 sebster wrote:

 Corpsesarefun wrote:
It's obvious from your avatar that you're not a real man.

You are in fact a dog.

But if I see Pacific Rim I can be a real man, yeah?

The internet is for fun if you saw my last post, you're hanging way to long on a joke.

ThePrimordial wrote:
I was making a joke, calm down. Plus there's only him and like three other people who didn't like the movie on this thread.

Yeah, but that's the audience that saw the movie. Which is, of course, a self-selecting group of people to whom the material appeals. 'People who like movies about big robots fighting big aliens like a movie about big robots fighting big aliens' is not a very remarkable thing at all. It indicates that this is a well made version of that type, but that should be no surprise considering its a del Toro film.

Meanwhile, judging by the box office, there's a hell of a lot of people out there who aren't very interested in the subject material at all who simply didn't go see this movie. Which is the real story, for anyone who wants to talk about sequels or other similar movies ever getting made.

 sebster wrote:

ThePrimordial wrote:
I was making a joke, calm down. Plus there's only him and like three other people who didn't like the movie on this thread.

Yeah, but that's the audience that saw the movie. Which is, of course, a self-selecting group of people to whom the material appeals. 'People who like movies about big robots fighting big aliens like a movie about big robots fighting big aliens' is not a very remarkable thing at all. It indicates that this is a well made version of that type, but that should be no surprise considering its a del Toro film.

Meanwhile, judging by the box office, there's a hell of a lot of people out there who aren't very interested in the subject material at all who simply didn't go see this movie. Which is the real story, for anyone who wants to talk about sequels or other similar movies ever getting made.

So are we ignoring all the other stuff like the NECA toy line, DVD sales, comic sales, Hero-Clix & the fact that people don't go see every movie they would like to.

ThePrimordial wrote:
So are we ignoring all the other stuff like the NECA toy line, DVD sales, comic sales, Hero-Clix & the fact that people don't go see every movie they would like to.

No, we're spending a lot of time with you talking around the basic fact that the box office is way below what would be needed to break even, and me trying to remind you of that fact.

Dude, it's okay if a movie you like didn't do very well at the box office. A lot of my favourite movies didn't do well at the box office. But there's no point deciding that you like a movie, and then making up reasons that it must be profitable. You don't get to re-shape the world according to how you'd like it to be.

 Corpsesarefun wrote:
I think we've made contact with a strange alternate universe where niche geeky films are the pinnacle of masculinity and always make large amounts of money.

Indeed. NERD!!!!

I want to point out again that Hellboy 1 only made 1/3 of its budget on opening weekend.

There is an awful lot of "will not" and "can not" being tossed around here for something that isn't remotely set in stone yet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 sebster wrote:
But there's no point deciding that you like a movie, and then making up reasons that it must be profitable. You don't get to re-shape the world according to how you'd like it to be.

Have you read anything about Hollywood accounting for things like this?

It's a bit... weird.

Regardless, how much money a film makes isn't indicative of quality... A film can be awesome and not make much money but by the same token a film can be terrible and make a fortune.

If you enjoy a film there is no reason to try and justify it financially, leave that to the film makers.

Hey guys stop liking this movie I heard on the internet that some guy who knows some other guy said that WB told another guy that it screened poorly
so cut it out.

 Grundz wrote:
Hey guys stop liking this movie I heard on the internet that some guy who knows some other guy said that WB told another guy that it screened poorly
so cut it out.

Which is precisely my point, albeit from the opposite angle.

If a film doesn't do too well at the box office, who gives a feth? If you like it then you like it.

I just went and saw it. GODDAMN.

Del Toro is getting a christmas card from me this year, THIS is how you do a summer action movie. I loved it from the second it started till the second it stopped. The plot isn't deep and there's some hollywood cheese here, but that isn't what you're there for, you're in the theater to watch giant robots (with stunning visual design) beat the ever loving hell out of giant monsters (who are also awesome looking). Absolutely fantastic from start to finish. It's not going to change the world, but it is awesome, and sometimes awesome is exactly what you need.

Not just robots, classy robots shot without shakeycam.

Wait there's no shakycam?

Well. I am not seeing Pacific Rim then!

It's worth it, Kan. I saw it last night. Sad to say, I had to see it in 2D. I heard 3D was the better option.

I cannot watch things in 3D. It hurts my eyes too much.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I just went and saw it. GODDAMN.

Del Toro is getting a christmas card from me this year, THIS is how you do a summer action movie. I loved it from the second it started till the second it stopped. The plot isn't deep and there's some hollywood cheese here, but that isn't what you're there for, you're in the theater to watch giant robots (with stunning visual design) beat the ever loving hell out of giant monsters (who are also awesome looking). Absolutely fantastic from start to finish. It's not going to change the world, but it is awesome, and sometimes awesome is exactly what you need.

Sounds like fun.

Anyone else feel this was a giant allegory for immigration?
With the wall representing the wall they want to put up at the mexico border, The kaiju destructive immigrants and the robots outlaw patriots?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Anyone else feel this was a giant allegory for immigration?
With the wall representing the wall they want to put up at the mexico border, The kaiju destructive immigrants and the robots outlaw patriots?

Nah...

Just enjoy the flix man.

I know, but me and my friend starting making jokes about that when their final plan was a giant wall. Seriously why did they think a concrete wall would stop it?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I know, but me and my friend starting making jokes about that when their final plan was a giant wall. Seriously why did they think a concrete wall would stop it?

The wall was phase 1
phase 2 was tax cuts for the rich

Really enjoyed it being honest.
At a basic level, sure its Giant Robots VS Lizards but it had a few nice little sub plots going on, characters were solid and had some of the best CGI I've seen to date in the cinema.
Would have liked to see a bit more funky weaponry, there was a bit two much face punching of said Lizards (I literally burst out laughing when they full nelsoned one) but overall very enjoyable.

My lady wants to see it.



Tickets ordered, going after work tomorrow.

 sebster wrote:

ThePrimordial wrote:
I was making a joke, calm down. Plus there's only him and like three other people who didn't like the movie on this thread.

Yeah, but that's the audience that saw the movie. Which is, of course, a self-selecting group of people to whom the material appeals. 'People who like movies about big robots fighting big aliens like a movie about big robots fighting big aliens' is not a very remarkable thing at all. It indicates that this is a well made version of that type, but that should be no surprise considering its a del Toro film.

Meanwhile, judging by the box office, there's a hell of a lot of people out there who aren't very interested in the subject material at all who simply didn't go see this movie. Which is the real story, for anyone who wants to talk about sequels or other similar movies ever getting made.

Keep in mind there are several markets it hasn't opened in yet, I mean, Japan doesn't get it until August 9th.

The lack of shakey-cam was one of the many things that made this movie awesome.

Again excellent.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
The lack of shakey-cam was one of the many things that made this movie awesome.

THat and the fight scenes were actually followable. None of that flash cut to a screen shot flash crap that pervades the third Transformers movie or some of the scenes in World War Z.

They weren't just follow-able. The camera path was really well thought out and creative. I'd actually say the cinematography for the fights was full-on excellent.

Just got back from it.

I will be going again ASAP.

LOVED IT.

I saw it over the weekend, and splurged to see it in IMAX 3D. To anyone who might have a chance to see the movie this way, DO IT!

Really enjoyed it, but after all I was the kind of kid who would sit down with Kaiju toys in hand (Godzilla and Mechagodzilla were my favorites) to watch guys in rubber suits duke it out in giant cardboard/Styrofoam model cities.

Oh, and to anyone who may have thought the story was a little weak (which, I admit, it was) you may want to pick up the novelization of the movie. I've only read a bit into my Kindle version, but I'd put it up there with the novelization of John Carpenter's The Thing, where it does a great job of getting you inside the characters' heads and expanding on the story in ways that movies simply can't.

 Kanluwen wrote:
I cannot watch things in 3D. It hurts my eyes too much.

This is usually - but not always - my situation. Natively shot movies I don't have a problem with, but the converted ones almost always suck pretty bad.

I think I might try it in 3D anyway because my wife didn't see it, and since I already saw it in 2d if the 3d conversion process ruined it I won't feel like I'm missing stuff.

 Rented Tritium wrote:
I want to point out again that Hellboy 1 only made 1/3 of its budget on opening weekend.

There is an awful lot of "will not" and "can not" being tossed around here for something that isn't remotely set in stone yet.

Hellboy cost a third of what Pacific Rim cost. At $60 million you can save your bottom line with a really strong DVD audience. That's not as much of an option for a $180 million movie.

Have you read anything about Hollywood accounting for things like this?

It's a bit... weird.

I've read a lot about Hollywood accounting, and talked about it a bit on this very site. And while there's plenty of Hollywood shenanigans out there, it isn't enough to just assume its the case for any given movie. There actually has to be evidence of it. So, with Harry Potter, when the first film was reported to have lost money there's reason to be suspicious, and when we found out the stars had net points, not gross points, well then we know Hollywood accounting is trying to screw the stars out of money. But here we've got a mega-budget effects film with a budget entirely in line with what those kinds of movies cost (actually a bit lower than Battleship or Transformers III). It's just that the box office isn't what a film on that kind of budget could expect to make back.