That is laughable. I saw the poster with the release date in the movie theater the other day and I just shook my head. If this was about a regular looking guy with a regular job it would be released on Halloween.
Boston and Philly love to slander us, but they don t have as many fans as us
I think this movie will no doubt suck, but I do not blame them for necessarily releasing it on Valentine's Day. First, however stupid the premise, it is considered somewhat of a romance--albeit a twisted and perhaps misogynistic one.
The other reason why it's being released on Valentine's Day is because studios usually don't release GOOD movies until later in the year. Universal is probably just hoping to create a smashing success right now and avoid the critical reception (and mocking) later in the year, when critics start really doing their jobs. And keep in mind, the Razzies which this will obviously qualify for will not come out until a year from now...so maybe Universal is hoping for this to be forgotten at that point!
When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading!
It's an interesting release date, as it was last time (at least they are consistent!) ha
I'm not in the room with the Hollywood suits when they decide release dates.
But there's always the big Christmas extravaganza releases. Then the summer releases around various holidays.
But it must be nice for a studio to release a film in the dead zone of February that last outting pulled in what? A little more half a billion total box office?
It seems good marketing for a time when it's slower winter period. And why not then around V-Day? Even if it doesn't come close to the original opener, it has to spark up the box office in a slow month.
Yes, that's my point! They're probably counting on this being a blockbuster success at a time when critics are hardly paying attention (their top ten best/worst lists won't even come out until almost a year from now) and the Razzies won't come out until over a year from now. It's smart on their part, because I can assure you that this will be blasted by critics when this comes out, though forgotten after a few months.
The other thing that they're confident of is that most of the imbecile audience won't even care about critic reviews anyways. They'll go and see the piece of *beep* no matter what the reviews are. Thus if you're Universal, it makes a lot of sense to try to market this as a "romance" just in time for V-Day and hope they get their money on opening weekend on a holiday like that. This strategy is nothing new; it's called "frontloading" in the movie biz.
If you remember the terrible movie "Alexander" back in 2004, this is what the studio did (I know this because I had to review this terrible film for my college newspaper). Behind the scenes, when studio executives looked at this thing prior to its release, they realized that they had a piece of absolute *beep* on their hands, so they just tried to get it out as fast as possible and spend all of their advertising budget leading up to opening weekend, because they knew that once word got out as to how awful this was, they would never draw a crowd on subsequent weeks--which turned out to be true. There are numerous other examples of this.
Thus I expect a marketing blitz in the next couple of weeks, because Universal knows that after V-Day, word will get out at how ridiculous this thing is and that its only chance to make money will be on opening weekend and V-Day. Again, I think this movie will be a laughable mess, but this strategy makes sense from a business perspective. You also have a bunch of idiots (even on this board, though I'll be respectful and won't mention names) who love the books and will love this movie no matter how dumb it is. This is what Universal is counting on.
When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading!
I understand all the concepts regarding releases and things.
But not necessarily the notion that once it gets out and it is reveavled as a "laughable mess" the film will fail as the bad films did that you referred to?
Unlike an uknown film that is heavily promoted up front in that model to bring in folks to opening weekend, knowing the numbers will plummet once word of mouth gets around, these films all have a built in fan base of multiple millions who bought the trilogy. And you alluded to that.
Yes, Universal is counting on the existing fan base to bring in the bucks. But I doubt they see this as a weekend opener box office draw that will drop sharply in later weeks. Of course it might this time, as the initial curiousity to see how "Christian" is portrayed and how "Ana" is portrayed has been answered for those who only came to see that and are now disinterested.
Then after the US release, we know it goes international and last time got good box office there, as well, due to the anticipation by international fans.
This triology of films is a kind of odd duck in the film business. Not sure the traditional release and advertising (or box office draw) models of "not so great a film" apply here.
If you take the last film that did almost 600 million world wide, it seems word of mouth didn't hurt it much?
Well, let's just say that the original movie grossed $166 million domestically. And Box Office Mojo claims that opening weekend was over $85 million domestically. The movie was probably in theaters for 5-6 weeks in total. Those numbers indicate that it was a major hit on opening weekend, then once people agreed at how bad it was, they were not interested. Now I will grant you that there is always a factor of, "OMG, this is so bad; you have to see it to believe it." Given this past TV spot, that will probably happen here too.
Do not get me wrong: I'm sure that this movie will be box office success, on a pretty low budget, which is what any studio including Universal hopes for. But I highly anticipate a marketing blitz in the next couple of weeks and a huge opening weekend and V-Day, but a major drop-off after that and when everyone starts making fun of it. (Though again, it still might sell additional tickets from the whole "This is so bad you have to see it to believe it.")
When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading!
It's a smart move, CobblersAwls. They made a fortune last Valentine's Day on the film along with Fifty Shades Teddy Bears, wine, and chocolates. I don't think they'll make the same amount of money but this film was cheaper to make than the original. With a better script and director, I think it might actually get some repeat business, something the original didn't get.
shareI'll be looking forward to what you think once you see it. I'm having surgery the week it comes out and will be out of commission for a few weeks afterwards, so I'll just have to read the reviews.
All I know, from watching the latest clip, is that I can't take Dakota's expressions anymore. Another thing, it's sad when the farthest fetched thing in a movie consisting of a whip wielding billionaire falling for a virginal college grad, is Ana being so damn loud in a crowded elevator and no one notices. Seriously, that's all I could think about. Not even the woman in front of her, who noticed Christian tying his shoe, but didn't notice the warm front approaching her from behind from Ana's excessive panting.
It's just too out there. This is the stuff that will make people laugh in the theater. Stuff like this works better on the page, because when you actually see it, it's just so unbelievable.
~Keep some room in your heart for the unimaginable~
My darling Stacy, unless I can score a screener or a bootleg, I won't be seeing it I a theater. I waited to see Fifty Shades and I'll wait for this one. I have to admit, I love Jamie, but not as Christian. Regarding Dakota, while I think she's a decent supporting actress, she isn't sexy enough for that role, at least in my humble opinion. Her incessant giggling and panting drove me nuts in FSOG and I fear there will be more of the same in Darker. Still, I wish them great luck with it. To be honest, the elevator scene made me giggle as much as Dakota did in FSOG.
shareWell, best wishes Stacy to your surgery!
Your point about Dakota is good, and the ridiculous elevator scene. It's amusing as a short clip, but you're right: it can be funny on the page from a GOOD author (which James is certainly not), but it's just going to be mocked when you see it on the screen!
When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading!
It kind of makes sense since the first one was such a big hit on the same date.
Whatever you are, be a good one.