I don't necessarily believe that "good movies" equal box office smash. Mission Impossible was well received critically, had fantastic audience scores, but lo and behold, flop. Same case with Dungeons and Dragons. On the flip side, Mario was poorly received critically, and is currently the highest grossing film of the year. While "bad movies" may be a factor in SOME cases, it isn't the end all be all. Box office success isn't a complete meritocracy.

@@henrywayne5724 Completely agree. The mario movie is mid as can be, yet is the second highest grossing movie of this year

“Barbie did so good let’s make more Hasbro movies!” They are missing the point of its success.

​@@henrywayne5724yeah definitely. People are simply more picky after the pandemic

@@henrywayne5724 Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning didn't do as well domestically, but it was rather successful internationally. Maybe it was sequel fatigue that led to it not being as successful? I know I lost interest in superhero movies because there was such a high volume of them and I wasn't really interested in bothering with sequels; I think the last one I watched was the Black Panther movie in 2018.

It was probably Harrison Ford's salary

@@e.ogigia I mean if I was 80 yrs old and asked to do a role I did 50 years ago, I would charge a bomb as well :p

And ofc we're getting a fucking Mattel Cinematic Universe. Ffs.

Kathleen Kennedy. What else?

@@TonksMoriarty they think people wanted to watch Barbie because of Barbie and not the fact that it was given to a very talented director who put a lot of love and care into the project

Also, the term 'blockbuster' originally referred to a literal huge bomb, capable of levelling an entire block.

@@sambeckett2428By that logic, should a movie that “bombed” be a good thing?

@@niclaswa5408 no, they mean the the original meaning of “blockbuster” was a literal large-scale bomb and now it also refers to a very successful/popular movie

@@sofia2222 But when a movie “bombs”, it’s considered a bad thing.

If I wasn't such a fan of many of their brands (DC, Looney Tunes, Harry Potter, etc) and didn't have stuff I cared about on Max, I would never buy another product from Warner Bros again.

Wouldn't that be nice

They're disgusting for that. Fortunately, I think the rest of us have, so now he's box office poison along with being a toxic human being.

Lool what? Ezra Miller is still going to court for their crimes. You know a bunch of Execs don’t actually change that right?

​@@YourBlackLocalDoesn't mean that the execs can't fire Miller

Right?! Especially with streaming prices becoming so expensive. It used to be $8 now it's almost $20. If they dropped the streaming prices where it's actually affordable. Disney's attempt to have people watch their streaming show to get prior knowledge on the movies might have actually worked. But then they will also have to stop spending hundreds of millions on those shows.

you're thinking about it logically though. They're thinking from the bottom of an ocean of desperate, money-grubbing sweat trying to keep from collapsing under their own weight and operating at a loss lol. Keep in mind that video storage and streaming for entire movie/series length content is a HUGE cost, on top of the budget to actually create and release all their series and movies, so they're doing the best they can think to do to keep their profit margins trending upwards... but every cash cow eventually runs dry -(then dies)- and the last one to notice is *always* the studio milking them.

Politics of endless growth and so on.

​@@RozWBrazelthe upper management need to take pay cuts, but that would only happen by government order. Hollywood is doomed to fail and repeat this cycle unless the project is an exception where the art gets prioritized ie Barbie or Oppenheimer vs Sound of Freedom

@Jermaine2099 I was wondering if he would hit this point or if anyone else thought about it. We are forced to pay for numerous streaming platforms from the big studios, and we know that the movies will be released ON those streaming platforms if we just wait a bit. WHY would we want to pay to go see all these movies, when they will he available on another platform we ALREADY pay for? Idk how they fix it, but that system is broken.

I think many, myself included, don’t even see anything new to spend $2 on, it’s not worth my time when I know 95% of what’s coming out is ‘meh’ at best. And as for the restaurant, I’ll skip that now as well and keep the money in savings. At least there it’s earning me 3%. I know many that have gone back to reading. In fact, I’m back in a book club for the first time in 2 decades.

And we already are spending some of that money on streaming! My wife and I used to go out to the movies a few times a year. After the pandemic? Once a year, maybe if we really want to? But even then it’s such a hassle and way too expensive. Not to mention the IP that really has excited me lately has been streaming series! Other than DND, I can’t remember enjoying my time in a theatre recently. We loved Ted Lasso, Wheel of Time, Rings of Power, Arcane, etc. but the movies are all meh and the price to go out is insane.

And it's even more expensive if you are trying to take a family. 4 tickets at $10-$12 a pop is $40-$48 just to get in. (And most families can't make the cheap matiness because of work and school.) That doesn't include concessions (and everyone saying "just don't buy them", that is how theaters themselves make their money so if nobody buys concessions, there are no theaters; plus, one of the only things that differentiates watching at home and watching in a theater ARE the theater snacks, which is why theaters have spent the last few years upgrading their snack choices and food quality). So add another $20-$30 AT LEAST for concessions - that is $60 for the outing. You know what else costs $60-$70? A video game that the kids can play for hours and hours. (Not to mention all the ones they can play for free). Theaters are in a very tough spot in terms of competition for people's money and time these days.

No more high budget movies sir Bob iger more like Bob Floper Hollywood sucks Fire all of these ended up career actors celebrities animators ceos bosses creators directors I wanted them to be fired immediately #firerachelzagler Get Rachel Zagler Fired for hating prince

It will only reinforce their "rent only" and owning nothing push, even video games are going in on it.

What allot of these people fail to include in these videos

Numbers will do the talking. Adapt - or go bankrupt. Their choice.

Exactlly, a lot of these movies literally insult the audience, and quite a few seem to do their best to avoid being genuine. People want to connect to something but studios won't let them. Its why sequels do relatively well- people are already connected to the characters, setting or etc, and the studios are just cashing on on it. With the culture of failing upwards, lots of executives do not understand what makes their industry work, and make decisions based on tag based metrics. It feels like there is algorithm at the head of studios that just greenlights thinga based on tags that were successful... they do not understand that "genuine", and "passion project" are also tags...

Just let your wallet speaks

😂😂😂 This comment needs to blow up!

I dont get it, pls explain

That's really a big part of why movies bomb... They just suck. Funnel 300 mil into a movie but when writers are bad not even 1 billion is going to save you.

What was the quarter of an original idea they had?

I suspect it's not that writers are bad per se, but just as with Videogames the upper echelons interfere and water down any good ideas to the point where they just disappear.

I really liked the HM movie, found it to be quite a fun and extremely beloved way of adapting the ride, there's a lot to like if you're a ride fan. But for the life of me I didn't understand why it wasn't an October release. Like I fully expect the fnaf movie to probably be the standout in October, but thats meant to be a full on horror movie. Hm, despite its scary bits, is way more suited for families to see, so why did Disney release it so early i don't get it????

The answer is streaming

@@teamchaos5101 Yeah, Haunted Mansion was theatrically released just in time for it to be released on Disney + in October. It baffles me that they think that's the best strategy but that was for sure what they were thinking.

Even in October, it would've bombed. 'Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children' (which seemed like a spooky film) could've opened in October 2016 when it was released in September 2016 and STILL bomb. I don't even have hopes for what Guillermo del Toro would've done for 'The Haunted Mansion', but it probably would've been better than what we got last month.

What I saw is that the majority of royalties actors get are tied to it's performance in the first 3 months. So they let it bomb in July, then if it picks back up in October on streaming they barely have to pay anything

Marketing for blockbusters used to be absolutely insane. Let's take Transformers for example, holy shit you had commercials for cars, fast food, of course toys, you name it. You saw it all the time to "go watch this awesome movie". But now, the only marketing you really see is the trailers, and the occasional movie theater tie-in promotional item, like a popcorn bucket or something.

A24 has been doing well lately. It's in the same role Pixar filled not too long ago, the "prodigal son" of the film industry.

@@johnhoney5089 A24 also has diverse projects

@@johnhoney5089really hoping it doesn't end up the way Pixar has, being bought by Disney had made its work steadily more indistinguishable from theirs

@@natatatmThat was intentional. When Disney bought Pixar they also moved John Lassiter (longtime head of Pixar and co-founder) over to be the head boss at Disney Animation.

They also made EEAAO, which is one of those films that feels like a classic despite it only being out for a year

No yeah, DND was actually such a cute and fun movie!

Agree

Wait it flopped? I thought it had done well, shit.

Same! I enjoyed it a lot.

@@RoseKoneko it just barely made its budget back, but it sadly didn’t break even.

YEAH!! He would’ve gotten fucking prison time for that shit! And they would’ve rewritten EVERYTHING in that film because of it. But I guess someone at the top said they HAD to have him. Utterly stupid on their part. A lesson on what not to do. I swear when Hollywood finally collapses from capitalism dying, we’re gonna be celebrating.

​@@shcdemolisherHollywood's unlikely to collapse, as it didn't when similar viewer fatigue happened in the past. More likely, the cycle will repeat: they'll learn their lesson for a decade or two before they go back to being greedy again.

yeah, it's gross

I mean they have to release the movie, it was already shot before he got exposed. It was ready. What are they going to do not release it? No they delayed it for as long as they could and then went for it. He did suffer consequences because hes no longer casted or working on anything. Like what more do you want. His career is over.

@@nevaminddd He belongs to jail. He's guilty of assault, gr**ming minors and robbery.

fr i just want hollywood to support original ideas for once instead of just remakes and reboots and sequels its so frustrating to see

Yess. And bring back practical effects. CGI seems so... idk, cheesy sometimes at this point? Its hard to explain. But i wanna see an anamotronic shark bite something in half again. Im not sure where studios got the idea that CGI was the only way, but its sorta boring and all the same now.

You would think that the studios would take more “risks” on small movie like Saw.

​@MrSqurk that's why A24 exists. Back on the day it was Lionsgate who did that kind of small indie movies like Saw, Cabin Fever or Artisan Entertainment with Blair Witch project.

@@juicyfruits8071 You should watch the Saw series if you haven't yet bc a lot of it are practical effects and most of the "traps" are real and would legitimately work if in the wrong hands 😂 I so applaud the creators of Saw & excellent cast!

Especially when theaters literally blast your ears because they think louder = better

Sometimes it is. But yeah, they can overdo things.

Thankfully people don’t care about the directors unless they make something amazing or outrageous, so there’s really no need to be shy in public if it’s a mediocre movie

Yeah! My dad and I sat through Oppenheimer and we were NOT bored at all. Of course we made the smart move and not get any drinks or food, because that meant eventual bathroom break and missing stuff in the movie. It was a fantastic film!

Seconded, I can’t with the lukewarm reboots/sequels/prequels anymore 😭

I think it has more to do with the lesser quality that these projects are coming out with.

Even with superhero movies. Guardians of the Galaxy and Spider-Man showed that there's a huge public who still enjoys good stories, and are willing to pay for it

Right, it's interesting that the original-ish movies of Barbie and Oppenheimer succeeded, but the nth movie in a boring series can't. It's just too much crap

They're definitely not giving that money to the workers, so yeah, I'm curious where the money goes too.

Yeah like secret invasion that thing cost $212 million

It goes into reshoots because the studios have no clear plan on what they're gonna do before shooting

Does the money go into an offshore account for the executive and producers? I mean, the money is going somewhere. It's definitely not going to the workers or to charities.

A lot of budget is wasted on Actors. All Disney's past live action films have tried to market through a terrible casting of A-list Celebs. Like Will smith as genie and Beyoncé in lion king or The Rock on Moana. 50% of cash goes to popular celebs to get a fanbase to watch. The money isn't spent on making art itself.

World war z. Only thing that made it successful was Brad Pitt.

Barbieheimer is a happy surprise. What started out as a meme made 2 very unconventional blockbusters, Barbie and Oppenheimer, become huge critical and box office successes. Though having very popular award-winning directors also played a huge part in it.

Big celebrities? There are no big celebrities anymore.

​@@KaleighCeeThe movie industry is way older. Give it some time

​@@mesicek7There will always be big celebrities

Now that's something!

thats sad

how is it sad ?? @@dpducks2723

Yes, that is crazy to think.

So what? How much return on investment did isro give comparable to openhiemer😊

Yeah, people and studios forget the social aspect of going to the movies. I used to go alone to the movies to watch indie or less popular stuff, but when a big movie came out, it was an event. Maybe not to the extent of Barbie, but it had to be "worth it". The last great movie experiences i had were, The Conjuring and Jojo Rabbit, those movies were such a collective experience it was amazing. The Harry Potter premieres were always fun too. (i can't talk about superhero movies, because i gave up on them a long time ago) And other movies like T2. Trainspotting or Mother! have this effect of wanting to keep talking about them for hours after watching them. The current movies are very underwhelming, unless you are a super fan and you catch easter eggs or obscure references, there's not much to talk about. And with remakes, it just feels awkward, like you are watching something knowing how is it supposed to be and is just disappointing.

I totally agree! I feel like "Barbenheimer" and Endgame were the closests we've had in recent years to the blockbusters of the days of yor FSPN talked about with Jaws and Star was. real event movies and I loved it! (I just think studios think that people can do a barbenheimer every weekend - which has proven to not be true.)

I never got Barbies when I was a kid, I never wanted one, why? I HATE the color PINK, especially Pepto-Bismol Pink, Childhood trauma is real.

The only movie I saw this year in the cinema was Barbie. Because my group of friends wanted to go together dressed in pink and all so I was like sure, why not? Would've loved to see Oppenheimer too but I live in Japan and it's not coming out here for obvious reasons lol. I wasn't too hyped for Barbie to be fair but because we had a nice night out and overall I found the movie to be quite entertaining I did enjoy my time and it did feel a bit like an event, it was nice. I feel like Hollywood just forget about the social aspect of going to the cinemas which I think that nowadays is the most important aspect, because at least for me I will spend in going to the cinema only if it's kind of a big eventful thing like Barbie or maybe End Game too or for Horror movies. Cause I wanna get the full horror experience and I want to hear everyone else screaming in the theatre too lol.

Barbie was and is a movement! A moment! I can’t explain the excitement I had in the months leading up to it, the products and marketing, getting me & my baby’s Barbie looks together for the theater, finally seeing it and then afterwards letting it all sink in. I was a little Barbie girl, my daughter is a barbie lover, and this whole experience has made my heart so happy. I’ve been wanting to go back and see it alone before it leaves theaters since I had my daughter with me the first time. Truly a magical experience

it's simply unsustainable

I've always known cinema-going experience is expensive. Decided to calculate how much it is here in Australia. So you've got say two adults going to the cinemas, that's $52.30AUD (including the $3.30 booking fee) so if you want just tickets alone converting to USD it'd be $33.87. But then you think "actually feeling kind of peckish. Let's get a large popcorn and two drinks, that's $31.10AUD which converts to $20.14. So combining the two tickets, a popcorn and a drink it'd be $83.40AUD, or $54.02USD. I could buy some clothes, or hell even a streaming service with that much.

​@@mikubrot It seems to be a tendency in a lot of the entertainment industry right now to burn money like gasoline on enormous spectacle productions. Maybe because raw capital is the only thing big production and publishing companies have going for them. Yeah, they hold tons of IPs. But an Intellectual Property's star can fade, and the idea, plot elements, genre, themes, aren't encompassed in the copyright. Warner Brother's can stop me from getting together with my friends and filming a movie about an ensemble cast of thieves breaking the casinos. All they can do is make sure that there version is bigger, with more famous names, higher production value, and more distribution.

And they make their workers and customers eat the cost of their expensive decisions

They spend millions on production yet the effects look terrible 🤣

AMEN. The 1989 movie was classic why touch it

Anyone But You did really well (I thought it was meh, but...), so there's definitely a demand for them!

what would have skyrocketed it further was releasing dolls from the movie alongside. the film isn't for kids, but trust me, adults like me would spend our wages on it. edit: i should've stated i meant repros of the silk stone dolls, i.e. the first dolls made (Barbie, ken, Midge, and christie were the original friend group)

@@janaekelisi think they did, at least the margot robbie doll

Was it? That first trailer was garbage.

Naaahh, you're just easily influenced

@@janaekelisThey did.

Why is that a thing? How did that happen? Why are so many people willing to believe in something that isn't a thing?

@@katherinealvarez9216because people are desperate hurting for money, and recognize it’s an issue. However, it’s easier to give in to propaganda that blames minorities for all the issues we face rather than take a second to look the wealthy producing all the propaganda and hoarding all the money. That would require self reflection and critical thinking.

@@katherinealvarez9216possibly echo chambers on the internet shouting false narratives for clicks. It’s getting worse by the year.

​@@katherinealvarez9216 This and many other questions only in (insert generic documentary I don't know).

Thank god I've gotten out of that hivemind from those awful youtubers.

Where is your evidence for this?

@lalehiandeity1649 Based on real life experience, Twitter posts, and the fact that most of the critical/ harsh reviews are of the "older generation" that state they were fans of the original series.

@@tarabletv Fair enough, but that’s still anecdotal evidence. As a millennial myself, I have to concur with FSN. I’ve never seen any of the Indy films, and there’s too much stuff competing for my attention to feel the urge to change that.

This might be bc of a weird phenomenon I've noticed...something really unprecedented...which is...young people are reaaally lame now. Young adults and teens especially usually seemed to be on the frontlines pushing society change and deciding what's cool. Everything from hippies to skateboarding xtreme 90s stuff. Now, what exactly are they at the forefront of? Really dumb consumerism? 100 million e celebs? Thinking a blatantly awful looking Indiana Jones as an 80 year old looks exciting? There are just so many entertainment options that I guess it's diluted interests. Given how lame interests are now, this means the power of young adults and teens to shape what's cool is dead. That and if you grew up in the 80s and 90s, we grew up being shown how blatantly awful mindless consumerism is. We also grew up in the single wildest time entertainment wise. Jackass, WWE attitude era, South park, simpsons, Howard stern, O&A, shock jock radio, grunge music, alt rock, etc all were MASSIVE and they all carried the same air of f*** authority, f&&* trends and f*** you I won't do what you tell me. Unsurprisingly, that older group now thinks for itself and frequently tells the young, old, studios with their lame consumerism and shitty writing, politicians, etc to go f*** themselves on the regular. The 80s and 90s produced two-three decades worth of people who demand quality, have a distrust of everything and a willingness to laugh at everyone and everything.

Spot on!!!! My husband and I were fans of the first three movies and we avoided this movie like the plague. Especially when we heard that Lucas and Spielberg were not involved. We were already disenfranchised by the 4th film, although we were excited to see Karen Allen back. The clear attempt at gender swapping to force feed a female who's smarter than the male and the fact that we felt that Harrison Ford was just too old at this point. All good things must come to an end. Create a new character and start something new.

Oppenheimer budget is 100Mil And Barbie budget is 145Mil not 200Mil

@@amritanjalsingh756they said both under 200 so they’re not wrong

@@k.c5052 yeah , i am just putting the real numbers out there incase if someone didn't knew can get the idea 😊, "under 200" felt like 180 or 170 to me that's why , my mistake i wrote my comment like that 🙂

And those movies still look better then what I have watched

There was a ton of cgi on both, don't parrot fluff pieces, watch the credit roll for once.

And it stood the test of time! People still watch it, love it and new writers and directors still take inspiration from it and learn from it. Sure money will help you make your film look better ect but, there's plenty of movies out there made with low budgets that are sooo good, better than any big blockbusters

I think its the big budgets are prob a contributing factor to why these blockbusters are so crap. David Lynch has even said how a a small budget constraint helped him to be more creative with film making and be more thoughtful. I employ this thinking everytime I am working on an art project. Sure if you have an endless budget, you could theoretically do whatever, but limitations help you to think outside the box. Halloween is a great example of quality without the necessity of a large budget.

Not to discredit John Carpenter, he's one of the greats, but $100k back then would be way, way more today. Similar situation to Sam Raimi and the first Evil Dead film. Nonetheless, extremely impressive stuff and I tend to agree that, for most talented directors, only exceptions are probably Nolan, Fincher, etc., a smaller budget can lead to better results.

Done by people who knew how to make movies, and studios who knew how to run business... instead of 10 white collar guys ( who got the job by nepotism ) e-mailing each other scripts and asking for changes , playing with the editing...

Buuuut it was low budget then…..and even more amazing films get made on this kinda budget, not sure what you’re blathering about.

Well that depends on what you mean by "properly". Their job isn't just to make the movie possible, it's also to make it profitable. If they can't do that in spite of massive budgets, is it proper to reward them anyway? And I'm including studio execs in that bunch, of course. I mean it's not like they can't find another job in another city with somewhat affordable housing, surely a bright young college-educated kid can mow a lawn or fold laundry, maybe recycle electric car batteries and replace cracked solar panels that can't withstand harsh weather. Sell wind turbines to old couples whose sense of hearing is long-gone anyway. Help tear down craft breweries that went bankrupt due to the oversaturation of the IPA market. Collect used heroin needles and clean human excrements off the streets of San Fran, you know, harm reduction and all that. Knit wholesome little beanies for the homeless schizophrenics who may or may not relish the taste of human flesh. Failing that, there's always the armed forces. I hear Navy boys are very broad-minded.

Someone doesn't understand how budgets work. They got the jobs BECAUSE they're willing to make less than others. Grow up.

​@@zogwort1522Ok, boomer.

Part of the reason they're so expensive is because soooo many people work on them. Paying an army gets expensive fast regardless of how much you pay them. Ask... well, the army. It's not just the budget bloating.

@SoulDevoured individuals also like to shoot off ammo into the sky. The military budget is hardcore bloated bro, just look at how high it is by comparison to every other national service...

And also the fact that dvd budgets are given so little time to make like interesting UI’s. All the ones we get now are generic bars and not stuff that you saw back in the day.

That is interesting. I was wondering whatever happened to comedies and romcoms.

Yup it definitely affects my calculus. If they want to preserve the prestige they need to extend the theatrical window not shorten it.

@@paulfosten2094or make the recent movie be put into ppv jail for 6 months on streaming services or even longer.

Even with the price hikes, I'm way more of a theater-goer, so the worst part is when interesting movies go to the streaming services instead

Yeah... it is way too fast!

yup, they should at least wait for 3 months or more, even if the movie flops

Yeah the OGL kneecapped D&D's likeability right before the movie launched

We don't talk about Bruno lol

came here to say this....

I like the cast of D&D movie but the trailers I saw were not all that great. I will make sure to see it on a streaming service then, it sounds like it was a well received movie by the comments I've read.

This was the reason I didn’t go coz I was still annoyed by them but I’ll probably watch it when it goes to streaming

Especially when you consider that Honor Among Thieves would have been able to ride the wave of Baldur’s Gate 3’s runaway success & widespread acclaim to increase interest in the film.

@@NN010 agreed, the DnD movie was such a fun adventure film! If they did that it couldve made big money!

You're right, DnD released now with BG3 would have been great. Also would have distanced it from the OGL fiasco in January (not sure how deep you are in DnD fandom, but that got A LOT of hardcore DnD nerds angry enough to boycott the movie.)

@@mathsalot8099 yeah I remember being really super hesitatant to see the movie myself, my parents talked me into seeing it with them and I'm glad that I did!

The d&d movie was super fun. I had a great time.

Omg thanks I wil always be a Marvel fan but at some point I just gave up... like I couldn't go into every movie and didn't have streaming for some time and now that I have Disney+ I'm overwhelmed and have to make a gameplan bc I have no idea what's going on. I watched a few new series like Ms Marvel and She hulk and didn't hate them but I don't know where to go from there. I also like GOTG but I seriously consider not watching the rest of the Avengers bc it's a huge investment to watch every movie and sequel and what not. There are recaps of course on KZfaq but it's just a lot and I'm not THAT into it🙈

That's exactly my issue. I only got into the MCU right after Endgame and even then it was a lot to watch but I was able to get back up to speed but now it's basically impossible. It feels daunting even if you've been kinda keeping up, they just keep churning stuff out

Every time that I hear about the current state of the MCU, I a) chuckle because I hate current Disney for various reasons and b) unfortunately feel vindicated that I more or less stopped after _Endgame_ since pretty much only like...two MCU movies since then have seemed worth a damn. Probably more TV shows have been at least worth watching, but even ignoring reason a), I barely watch TV and that still can feel like homework depending on certain things. I can understand why they did it, especially given COVID, but introducing Kang in a TV show first feels like a massive misstep (even before the allegations that turned up with his actor--whoops). Honestly? The saddest thing about theu current MCU to me is that despite it becoming a bit of trainwreck, it's still not nearly as much of a flaming disaster as the DCEU has unfortunately been for the past 10+ years, so it doesn't have as much pressure on it to improve as it otherwise might. As much as the MCU is floundering and screwing up its own plans as of late, the DCEU somehow *still* doesn't seem to have a plan over decade later which is just baffling. (To end this without seemingly I'm just using it to bash DCEU, at this point I think I'd only watch an MCU movie again if it was _Guardians of the Galaxy 3_ or, largely for a friend, _Shang-Chi_ since just can't care, especially when we've been given no real reason to care about any newer characters for the most part anyway--misusing multiverses only makes that more the case.)

End game should've been just that anything past that is pure greed expecting us to swallow B grade characters with mostly B grade actors is laughable

I still go and watch them because its a thing me and 17yr old have done since he was little. But i actually liked quantimania more than most of the others. Wish the ending was different, tho.

You forgot Captain Marvel, a movie that was only made so Disney could keep the trademark on the name of the main character.

​@@joshuarichardson6529they could've just made a keychain if that was the goal... it was a response to wonder woman and a failed attempt to get women to watch marvel movies en masse

Avengers 2

​@@derrick73I wouldn't say it failed

@@ShadowSonic2 fair enough, it did make a billion dollars, but I haven't personally met anyone who watched captain marvel.

Reshoots has ALWAYS been a part of movie making, at least since the blockbuster era started.. As soon as you went above an independent movie level budget Reshoots will usualy happen after the studio sees the first cut.. The reason it's gotten a bad rap the ladt decade is because news articles only tend to mention Reshoots when a movie test badly even though they happen regardless of how the movie is testing... Thst said.. Studios trying to save a movie with Reshoots is definetly a more recent problem.

Reshoots aren't a new thing, but this thing where reshoots DOUBLE or TRIPLE the budget of the film are very new, and a sign of two issues that are common in the industry today. Reactionary Filmmaking and Lack of Clear Vision. Lack of Clear Vision is studios having a license, having a date on a calendar, knowing who they want on the film, but not knowing what the film should actually be, sometimes the movie STARTS SHOOTING when questions that should have been answered in pre-production are still up in the air. Or, the film gets completed and someone high enough up in the studio to approve the budget changes their mind about what the film should be and starts demanding changes. Maybe after test audiences, maybe after something else going on in the industry, and that brings me to... Reactionary Filmmaking is the trend chasing that has gotten so bad at Warner Brothers as of late, but other studios aren't immune. The Star Wars sequel franchise, regardless of which films you thought were good or bad, suffered from films not necessarily building on what came before, but reacting to the reaction to those films. Part of that is that there was no trilogy outline or bible to run off of, but I cannot help but look at Rise of the Skywalker as anything BUT a film responding to the Last Jedi backlash. It spends more time settling grievances and retconning things from the prior movie than it does setting up its own inciting incident. Flash's budget went OUT OF CONTROL because it was Greenlit before Justice League was even in theaters, then, when Justice League wasn't the guaranteed money maker the studio hoped for, the DCEU shifted to this damage control mindset. By the time Flash was even REALLY filming, it was being set up as this way to 'fix' the DCEU, and then al lthe stuff with Ezra, and just so much behind the scene shit was happening and what the movie was even meant to BE was this constantly moving target. I wouldn't be shocked to find out that enough footage exists for The Flash that you could stitch together 3 or more VERY different movies, all because it was this crazy moving target where every tiny fluctuation in the environment lead to huge changes to the movie. Wonder Woman 84 REEKS of having been at LEAST two very different films stitched together. Part of this is CoVID shutdown, and too many movies having these ridiculously long production timelines as a result, giving executives way too much time to think and change their mind about stuff. Ultimately, it all boils down to a lack of confidence in any of these creatives to CREATE. It's not about creating a work of narrative art, but in creating a product to fill a studio schedule, with brand synergies and the like.

Reshoots aren't blowing the budgets. The number one reason for so many movie flops is social justice messaging. Audiences don't want to be preached at or told they are wrong for embracing their own personal beliefs. Disney has become so anti-family, they deserve to fail. Reshoots? C'mon. Most movies have them.

@@aradraugfea6755they’re basically filming a new movie at this point. They don’t have a script they actually like before they start filming, so they film a bad script, decide it is bad and then film a new movie.

Film The Producers. Make a rotten failure and clean up from investors. I'd like to see receipts for these production costs. Chief Financial Officer of Disney quit. Hopeful deniability?

They could have made a decent Indiana Jones movie with a lower budget by making him the grouchy mentor, or the grandfather who inspired the younger actors to go do some tomb raider type dungeoncrawling. Hell, they got that asoan kid that just sort of appeared for one movie. Why not make him track down the old man for some advice. I mean, there are so many ways to make the idea of an old Indiana Jones work, from a writing standpoint, but the movie is significantly undercut because everyone knows its just a cash grab.

Nah, that's just a DC pattern tbh, we don't expect much from them tbh- considering ezra's crimes too. The flash could've did good if it was treated better, it had YEARS to be better but we knew what to expect. This movie was announced on the second episode of the flash tv...when how I met your mother was still on, and to add the frosting on the cake....we had (some and at the time) promising directors that kept exiting left on the movie. Hope had been lost tbh lol

@@KirasfoxYou’re right

“We were shocked a movie with a publicly canceled actor did poorly. Super hero movies are definitely on the decline heres 2 examples of the opposite of that.”

Well, there was the whole protest since the lead is acting like an ass, and he's honestly just not a good Flash. That awful movie (by itself) failing isn't enough to draw a conclusion about the entire genre.

Of course the flash bombed ezra Miller was starring in the film he's horrible as the flash

Can someone send this comment to Hollywood executives? I think it could help with their obvious money problems.

I wholeheartedly agree. I want good stories again. Blockbusters are great from time to time, but they’re not always stellar when it comes to story and content.

Irony..........don't think you realize that. All blockbusters are cash grab. It has nothing to do with budget but intent. Don't let the video OP misguide you. This apply to all things. Is it expensive to expanse the military complex - Yes. Is it worth it? No. Is it expensive to apply universal healthcare - Yes. It is it worth it? Yes. Budgets need to match quality. What wasn't talk about in the video is money spent without quality met. A blockbuster is called a blockbuster because it is a expensive movie with matching quality that is worthy of something you can spent on. Today's expensive movie are things that you would consider a waste of money.

Low budget would be more accurate. When high budget is over three hundred million dollars, mid is still inflated. VFX artists deserve a good paycheck, but they also shouldn't be over used. Honestly it's not even that they need to tighten the purse strings, they need to reel in their directors, stop letting them waste the resources.

​​​@@dutchmilk the real problem is letting the directors waste that big budget. If you give the military a hyper inflated budget, they'll spend it on toys and hoarding toilet paper. If you give it to healthcare, you will prevent disabilities and manage those with disabilities - so thens of thousands of people, who would otherwise be on welfare, can participate in the workforce, making back the money spent on it AND dramatically boosting the economy. True story, the military buys up and hoards, often just throw away, mundane items to justify larger checks. Needing money for hygiene products is a more excusable request than designing planes that will never get off the ground. In the Air Force, one of my dad's superiors managed to get himself caught with a huge room full of random crap, mostly toilet paper- when he casually admitted he was doing it to get the base more funding. You gotta be a genius to get dishonorably discharged for what the whole military is doing.

Exactly...I saw the full video till 2 am

The thing with DIsney in particular is that they always bet big, even when it wouldn't benefit them. When you look at the production and marketing budget for THE LONE RANGER back in 2013, it would've had to have made $800 million worldwide just to break even. For a Western! THAT'S INSANE.

correction: square enix is _relying solely on yoshi p and his projects to keep them afloat._ seriously, if not for ffxiv, and yoshi's desire to keep the rest of the company off of his baby, square would be in WAY worse trouble. they haven't released a good and/or well recieved game aside from final fantasy(which are all handled by yoshi now) in years.

@@malum9478 I thought Yoshi P did 14 and only one of the last three (15, 7R, 16)? I do agree that their solid games are mainly FF.

This is a problem brought by the Avengers, Jurassic World or Avatar not being treated as an anomaly, but a new status quo. People were expecting all sorts of movies to reach a billion bucks, and thus they were surprised when it didn't because a movie breaking 1b it's actually something very rare.

and they-and correct me if I'm wrong -pay their workers like shit

I was also thinking money laundering because what the hell

or just COVID issues. Mission Impossible 7 had that massive budget to begin with cause Paramount wanted to fire the entire crew during the COVID delays until Cruise intervened and paid for their salaries instead. all in all, COVID has changed the industry, for better or worse.

Dude, look at Disney's Secret Invasion budget, no way its not laundering

Covid issues, huge star line-up, excessive Visual effects (digital and practical), studio interference, short turnaround or development hell etc. cost a lot of money ...

Its not money laundering, but it probaly isused as tax write off. Its not money laundering beause its entirely legal.

Streaming isn’t making a lot of money. Why would they do this?

Considering the fact that Disney+ has yet to generate even a cent of profit, I have my doubts. People are willing to subscribe to one maybe two streaming service, when every studio has it's own streaming, then they are just cannibalizing each other.

​@@artur6912Is Disney making profits anywhere? They are *billions* in debt for all those acquisitions they made buying up Fox etc and they are nowhere near close to paying it off. They're losing money by pissing people off in pretty much every way imaginable; nobody wants to give Disney money for anything anymore. Their stocks have been continually dropping for some time now. Even their actors are pissing people off like it's part of their PR training "Alright, now go out there and be as insufferable as possible! Don't forget to highlight how much we've changed the things people love because modernization! You got this! Now go out there and kick the hornets nest!"

Nah, studios are now realizing that streaming also isn't the moneymaker they thought it was. Look at them removing hella content from their services to cut costs so they can FEIGN a semblance of profitability or growth to their shareholders. Apple is giving its original movies theatrical runs because they realize that's how you ACTUALLY make money. Cinema isn't going anywhere. The studios just need to get their budgets under control.

If you can’t make a 300m budget movie work at the box office, you won’t make that work on streaming

Ehh, it was ok...but generational trauma movies are getting a little old, and the world building is so shit it makes it a hard movie to love for me.

To each their own! I personally cant get enough of it but thats my opinion and journey to be on lol

It does because I don’t think it left theaters until like February. Maybe even March?

It didn't premier in UK until February so yeah, it can easily be counted as 2023 movie.

My daughter & I went to see it on NYE and it was great

It made less than $500 million worldwide. Most Illumination movies made more than that. Across the Spiderverse made more than that, and it was the second lowest-grossing Spiderman movie ever, only behind Into the Spiderverse. Not to mention most 2010s Pixar films.

@@z0neofdanger498in roblox of course

Yep, Paramount and Tom Cruise vastly underestimated Barbenheimer. Doesn't help matters with how Covid inflated their budget.

@@henrywayne5724 Cruise thought nobody was going to watch Oppenheimer cuz it's a 3hr R rated dialogue based movie so he wanted IMAX to give more screen time to M:I

honestly the whole time around barbenheimer was so full??? when i was trying to book tickets for barbie i saw so many big movies being played at my local cinema (with like 20 normal screens and 2-3 imax ones) at the same time

My friends skipped MI 7 because they only had time for one movie in their schedule, and we all wanted to see Oppenheimer together. Loved MI 7 but that was a quiet movie hall

Didn’t The Sound of Freedom beat Mission Impossible 7 at the box office?

this!!! because so many films are connected to properties it feels like you HAVE to see the previous ones, where even as an avid barbie fan who understood more of its references i still enjoyed it as its own narrative

Puss in Boots 2 succeeded as did it cause you didnt need to remember or even watch the original, let alone all the other shrek movies to hop in on the storyline

​@@cacarlin70, Agreed, I hadn't seen Shrek 4 when I watched it, and I still haven't seen Puss in Boots 1. It stood alone excellently well.

@@iwakeupandboomimarat It's sooooo tiring, and it's also more risky than studios realise, I think. Like I was interested in Marvel phase 4, until I watched 1 TV show (Loki) and 1 movie (so forgettable I literally can't tell you WHICH ONE) and thought 'nah, I'm good'. For movies like Barbie, or even Puss 2, which worked well as a stand alone, references to source material or wider franchises should be easter eggs, not integral to understanding the story's plot. If you're asking for the level of mental commitment demanded by, say, Marvel, you NEED a good enough product to back it up.

i was born in 2001 and i grew up watching indy movies bc my mom was a huge fan but even i knew the new one was gonna be trash - but pls watch the originals theyre amazing

'Really good' is subjective though.

​@@Rishi123456789Well, In my mind it was the greatest ever movie to be released.

That's what blockbuster is supposed to mean. the term has just been bastardized to mean "big, overbudget movie they hope will do well" now.

No, that's the meaning. It's a block buster, it busted out, made far more money than projected. Come to think of it, when was the last blockbuster? Like he said in the video, they're lucky to break even lately.

@@giin97 That is a good point. Which Movies nowadays are blockbusters, if they are all flops.

I agree. I'm a younger millenial from Europe and Indiana Jones was one of my favourites when I was a kid. But I was the only one amoung my peers who've seen it and the only reason I've watched it in the first place, was my mom making me 😂 She's Gen X, was a fan of Indy and is a firm believer that one should be educated about all influential forms of media throughout the time. Now I'm 29 and have long lost all interest in Indiana Jones and so has my mom. That's definitely one of those movies you eventually grow out off.

They should be looking at Spiderverse in reality. That movie didn’t blow the doors off the box office with like $1B, but it made a massive profit due to excellent critic and audience reviews, plus a smaller budget. The ~$700M or so it made at the box office on just a $100M budget delivered some of the biggest profits for any movie this year save for Barbie and Mario, coincidentally, BOTH movies made for under $150M

​@@MrRapmaster19Don't forget Oppenheimer, which cost $100M to make and has so far banked $500M at the box office.

​​​@@MrRapmaster19 That's the problem. Studios don't care about making a "big profit". They want ALL of them to be Barbie levels of profits. They're greedy. We used to have something called a mid-budget film. They weren't B movies, and they _were_ profitable, but not like, hugely so. Studios now won't bother investing in any script unless it's a huge name, 150m+ budget title they think will make them ALL the money. It's ridiculous.

I think Ezra is more obvious of his feelings

​@@evertonporter7887 Oppenheimer is at $770M worldwide

I know right. I work in a grocery store, and I feel bad how much people have to pay just to eat

​@zachrogers7243 why my husband and I will not have kids. Too bad, I wanted a child. But way too expensive.

When i Was a younger, we used to go to the movies on a whim if we were bored since it was a cheap way to pass the time. I feel sorry for people who actually want to watch movies on a big screen but have to budget for it like it's some major expense.

​@@Sakash52 its especially sad since even a half full room is rare so it seems like if the theatrs were to lower prices they could have more guests to compensate for it.

I bought a frozen coke recently, which is mostly all water with a tiny bit of syrup for $9.00. I promised myself I'd never buy another fucking thing from Regal Cinemas. I'm all for charging profitable prices, but that's a "fuck you" to your customers and I'm not going to play ball anymore.

Everything everywhere all at once was superb

Don't care so much about new. Just give me something good. If they are spending all this money why can't they get a good story that holds my interest for 90 minutes rather than something where you are left scratching your head as characters make decisions that run contrary to what they did just a few minutes earlier.

Yes! I just can’t watch another remake or reboot of a previously successful movie or franchise. In the best case it’s forgetful in comparison to the original. In the worst case it ruins the nostalgia. I just want some ORIGINAL, NEW IDEAS! Just tell some stories, please

Completely agree dude.

To an extent, I agree. As much as I hate most sequels, Top Gun: Maverick gave us something new. I want more movies like that or 'Knives Out' or 'Everything Everywhere All At Once'.

i mean, mission impossible failed partially bevause of Oppenheimer: it was in Imax cinemas for like four days before Nolan got every single one of them. Before the first week it already lost a very profitable chunk of the theatres

I certainly agree, but I feel like they'll probably take the wrong message from this: "Hey guys we need more toy biopics!!!"

I literally couldn't see Mission Impossible the week Barbie and Oppenheimer opened at my local cinema cause they both took all the screens so the movie couldn't be shown 💀

​@@DamnableReverendthere is a big trend for advert films right now. The Nike one, the tetris one, cheetos etc

​@DamnableReverend Mattel and Hasbro have already taken that message and are greenlighting a slew of toy-based films, from GI Joe being shoehorned into the recent Transformers, to things like Nerf and Micro Machines.

Also the writing has been the same bland preachy nonsense since endgame with the exception of spider man

It's both bad TV series and bad movies.

Yeah. It just came to the point where I had to watch Honest Trailers and Pitch Meetings to keep up

@@artingevondyan1613 I don't think Spiderman was an exception though... It just happened to work cause Spiderman is one of the favorites I think, and you had 3 of them in one movie. Nostalgia works.

​@@artingevondyan1613Spiderman was also mostly made by sony and not Disney

Barbenheimer is the exception that proves the rule. Two long-standing brands (Barbie and Nolan) without much audience overlap.

The biggest problem with movies is studios think you don’t need a good story, only a popular property. Or they think you only need a property that was popular 20, 30, 40 years ago. Without doing anything interesting or new with them. Or, hell, properties that were never popular, but it’s fine because it’s a superhero, right?

I think a majority of these “failures” is that they are churning out massive amounts of the same IP (too much for one person to follow even as a diehard fan) while having these MASSIVELY inflated budgets. These budgets are regularly in the hundreds of millions with marketing that is even bigger. This means that unless you are a left field hit out of nowhere… you can’t break even. You have to be the top movie of the year to be a commercial success. These budgets are absolutely out of control and they aren’t even spending the money on quality. They are shotgunning movies/TV out all with hyper inflated budgets. Like DND should be on here because it wasn’t a corporate success… but fuck I loved that movie, it was so fun. The reason it’s a failure? The budget was way too high for what it was. This means unless you have a proven IP/backing in some way you aren’t getting funding because each entry is so goddamn expensive. So we aren’t going to see movies take a leap and make something new and exciting. Which means people go out to see less movies… less break even… less “unproven” get made and rinse/repeat.

I don't know anyone that's seen both

2 completely different target demographics.

Er, no. Minus One stars a film Icon who always made money. It's not an example of anything.

I’m so glad I’m not the only one that noticed that!! I described it like the quality of a video game character face

the fucking babies in the beginning almost had me stop watching the movie. that scene broke me.

I really enjoyed the film despite the horrible CGI, kinda wish I'd gone to see it in the theater

such a tone deaf jumping the shark scene

@@Izomak12 that scene did actually make my mother leave the film when she tried to watch it along because “it was just to strange”

My thoughts exactly!!!

There were COVID costs for a lot of movies

@@Xeno7373but what does that MEAN?! I hear that a lot and it’s not a criticism of you relaying that thought, but how could covid cost that much? Production delays, sick pay, supplies (masks, Covid tests, etc) can only cost so much and I feel that most of these movies would’ve been mostly unaffected by Covid at this point since the industry disregarded the pandemic years ago. I work in healthcare alongside Covid and just cannot fathom how that can inflate the budget by so many MILLIONS

There needs to be less focus on visual spectacle and special effects because eventually audience just become numb to it. Instead more comedies, romances, dramas, and thrillers. Movies do not need to be this expensive to be good.

@@leahkreizenbeck7247 COVID protocols ended in 12 may 2023

And what’s crazier is they won’t throw that money at the strike demands! Instead opting for mediocrity and ai !!!

@@littleguy8714 literally, if they don’t step up their game they are going to go bankrupt in a few years

ESG money

It seems like its a money laundering scheme with an agenda to kill anything we can believe in. Seems like

@@reservationatdorsias3215it’s crazy to me that more people don’t realize this. They obviously would make better decisions if the money would run out. The powers that be are eating the loss to continue to propagandize the masses.

How did this rando on the internet had a better strategy than the Disney execs 🤯

That does make a lot of sense, I was wondering why they released it in the summer

The most likely reason being it can be the streaming service in october as thay released ot in the summer

Parents don’t like Disney anymore as they are grooming children now

It's sad we don't get slow burner dramas and comedies anymore but I suppose you're more likely to find those genres in TV shows on streaming. There's more pressure now for movies to be a spectacle to make it feel big enough to be worthy of the big screen viewing experience, I guess.

The problem with that argument is they dont make good action movies anymore either. Like that series of action movies Matt Damon himself starred in. They dont make good thrillers anymore either. Something like Enemy of the state. I guarantee if you make a good original thriller with a big name attached like Will Smith was 20 years ago, people would pay to see it. Hell, I'd go see it and I havent been inside a cinema in 15 years.