Yeah, it's getting really middling reviews. I'll still watch it though.

Speaking of Disney geeks, Inside Out is getting ridiculous reviews. Can't wait.

 

Mad Max was pretty awesome. Liked it better than Age of Ultron. They did a lot with a little story-wise, and the visuals were amazing. I've only seen bits of the older movies, but tomorrow I'll try to burn through at least the first one to make up for it.

 

90% sure the little girl was his daughter but yes I totally agree. I just got back from watching it and Mad Max is fucking incredible. Easily one of my new all time favorites.

 

At the end I'm pretty positive she calls him papa, so I am in agreement^

 

At first I thought it was his daughter too, but there's no evidence saying she is, and the baby from the first movie was a boy. I didn't hear the 'papa' bit though.

 

It's not a sequel, there's no continuity between this and the originals.

 

There is 'loose' continuity. G. Miller can't say where they correspond to each other specifically, but they do exist together.

 

Yeah this is what I heard - and interpreted. I'm quite willing to accept it as a continuation, Mad Max 4, because of how awesome it is, but I believe it's meant to be viewed as a 'spiritual' sequel.

Fun fact: Immortan Joe is portrayed by Hugh Keays-Byrne, the actor who played the Toecutter in original Mad Max.

 

Obviously there weren't any captions but you're right, right when Furiosa and the wives are riding away in Maxs vision what I'm pretty sure I heard her say was "Come on Pa" to Max or something very similar.

 

Not enough love for Barry and Larry, and their equally stellar performance imo.

 

So, it's official, Batman is in Suicide Squad.

 

Batfleck you mean?

 

Just came back from Tomorrowland.

What an amazing movie! I highly recommend it.

 

Since I saw Mad Max with subs and paid attention to all of her scenes, I'm 90% sure she called him Pa or the like. Also, BADASS and FUCKIN' AWESOME best describe this movie. Very fun. And that's how use speciall effects.

 

Err...

I wouldn't say amazing... Each to their own though.

I thought it started really slowly and got far too preachy at points (I cringed at the wolf analogy).

The Cloon is great though. I'm hoping they don't scrap it...

Spoiler

and actually set a whole sequel/s in Tomorrowland. That five/ ten minute tour was easily the best/ most magical part of the movie.

 

99% it's not going to have a sequel. With $190 million budged, it needs at least get close to $400m worldwide to be considered profitable and has only $141m. While it will probably pass $200m (depending on how well it does in Japan), the only reason why it's not called the biggest box office bomb of this year is because Jupiter Ascending did even worse. Which is a shame because I wanted this movie to start an optimistic s-f movement in Hollywood.

 

The movie premiered on May 22nd, Celestin. Sure, it's not raking in the kind of money Age of Ultron is, but it's only been a little over two weeks and it has the uneviable position of trying to break out into a sf market that is populated by huge franchises.

To be fair, I don't think it's going to do particularly well, but I'm reasonably sure it'll at least make a profit.

 

Nope. Not with this budged. Like I said, it would need to make around $400m to be considered profitable. Twice a budged is a rule of thumb based on many factors like not all the money goes to the producer (between 30%-60% depending on a country) and that the official budged doesn't include promotion costs (rumors say it's another $90m).

And three weeks is enough to predict how much the movie will make. Tomorrowland will earn around $100m in US and even if it's very popular in Japan and Brazil (the last two countries where it just had a premiere) it may do $150m worldwide, but $250m is not even close to what it should make to not be considered a box office bomb.

Not even DVD/Blu-Ray/digital sales and selling to TV will make it profitable for Disney. At best in a very long run they may get even.

 

It is definitely not going to get a sequel, but there may be a string of similar spiritual sucessors loosely based on the parks in the future. Disney has so much green they could make big budget original flops for the next 10 years and their stock wouldn't drop an inch due to all the money-shitting franchises they've acquired.

I'd love to see an Adventureland or a Fantasyland type of deal.

 

Celestin, of course it won't make enough money to be what a studio would consider profitable. That's not what I meant. I used a different definition of profitability. Profitable as in, it'll make back what it cost to produce and then a bit extra. Mathematically at lest, that is profit.

Joke's on me for not being clear enough.

Lastly, there wasn't anything in that film I'd particularly like to see in a sequel. That's good for me personally, but probably bad for the industry as a whole if the "lesson" Disney learns from this is that we just want to see them do remakes of other shit or more variations on the Lion King.

But really, I just want to say, "what the fuck, Brad Bird?"