Looks like ROTS will be the 2005 BO king.

Discussion in 'Revenge of the Sith' started by jedi8915, Dec 17, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Darth_Zoo Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 15, 2002
    star 4
    Yep all year critics and bashers have propped up blockbusters that would "top" RotS yet those contenders have all pretty much crumbled. WotW was first, BB, GoF, Narnia, KK, even F4 was supposed to be the movie that saved summer! 8-}

    Time Magazine gives some nice props to RotS. Naming vader a person that mattered in '05 and giving the DVD a nod as something to remember 2005 by.
  2. brook_33 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Dec 30, 2003
    star 4
    I've seen King Kong 3 times in a week. Just saying.
  3. SkottASkywalker Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 3, 2002
    star 4
    It bombed at the BO. Yet, this KK could prove to be the biggest disappointment of 2005--something many critics and bashers thought ROTS would be.

    ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY issue #855/December 23, 2005 refers to KING KONG on the cover as this year's biggest blockbuster. o_O

    I've seen King Kong 3 times in a week. Just saying.

    On December 21rst my Wife and I saw KING KONG for my fourth viewing and her second viewing.

    But, it's not STAR WARS.

    STAR WARS EPISODE III: REVENGE OF THE SITH will remain and finish as #1 at the box office for 2005. :cool:
  4. Billy_Dee_Binks Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 29, 2002
    star 4
    Batman, Batman Returns and Batman: Mask of the Phantasm are much better movies than Batman Begins. BB is a good Bruce Wayne movie, not a good Batman movie, though. It was way too realistic and uninspired looking. The action was badly handled. Shaky camera and in the middle of the fight cinematography really ruined these scenes. It had it's great moments:
    Ducard, reason why Bruce wanted to leave resulting in the killing of his parents, explanation for the glove fangs, Crime Boss played by Tom Willkinson, Commisioner Gordon played by Gary Oldman. Other than that, it really lacked the great design work (Batsuit, Gotham City, the Batmobile), a good woman on Batman's side (Bassinger, Pfeifer and Kidman are leaps better and more attractive) and of course, Danny Elfman's brilliant score.
  5. Formerly_Tukafo Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Nov 10, 2003
    star 1
    In what way has Kong failed? it got rave reviews and a huge majority of the audience liked it? So what if a trade paper declares it the blockbuster of the year? Qualitywise it may be. different publications have different audiences that prefer different movies. For Rolling Stone magazine and its readers a new album by Radiohead is the album of the year even though Britney Spears might sell twice as many. It's just that readers and editors and writers of that mag take no interest in her music. For them Radiohead is indeed the biggest music event of the year. For the Times Literary supplement a new novel by Haruki Murakami or John Updike would be the biggest literary event of the year even though Harry Potter outsells those books. For cineastes a new Tarantino movie is a huge event, for the general public it isn't (they prefer Jackass - The Movie and Bridget Jones). Can you imagine the music world declaring Radiohead a failure because Britney Spears outsells them? Can you imagine the world of literature declaring a John Irving novel a failure because a childen's book sells more? So why is Kong a failure just because a Star Wars movie sells more tickets?
  6. arwen_sith Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 30, 2005
    star 4
    Good questions FT. However, I tend to grin with glee when the movie execs and the media get it wrong. Haven't seen Kong yet, so I have no opinions on it yet. Ditto Narnia. I loved GOF, although I thought it was too short. ROTS is my favorite movie of the year so far, closely followed by Corpse Bride, though.
  7. mastersith69 Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Mar 10, 2005
    star 1
    Yeah. It's kinda sad, though. Even those who like KK want it at best to be the #2 pic of 2005. But it may not do as well as GOF, Narnia, WOTW, and BB. Don't know how FF did. And it is not like it is a flop with the critics or overall audience appreciation. The 1976 sucked in every way, FX, story, acting, direction. The critics hated it. It bombed at the BO. Yet, this KK could prove to be the biggest disappointment of 2005--something many critics and bashers thought ROTS would be. Even if KK bottoms out, I hope there are those who will not gloat. It's not necessary to do so to be a fan of ROTS. All we have to hope is that ROTS remains #1.

    i believe my good man that fantastic four pulled in only a $154,690,974 which is a good turn out for summer movies.

    this was not a bad year for movies it's just like i said the only reason the sales were down is because these dumb movies exec. spread the great movies so far apart were left with horrible independent movies to fill in 2 month or even 3 month gaps.
  8. Ekenobi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 4, 2002
    star 4

    Well I only follow demestic. And ROTS is looking good to be BO King.
  9. Ekenobi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 4, 2002
    star 4

    But all those things you mentioned were not what Bob Kane did. They was more recent writers.
  10. Ekenobi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 4, 2002
    star 4
    Not saying it failed it is a hit no doubt, but that it is not bringing in the money that it was suppose to make. And how funny is it that me and others SW ATOC fans were arguing the same thing here. $310m AOTC made and people were saying it was a flop!! $300m is not bomb.
  11. Formerly_Tukafo Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Nov 10, 2003
    star 1
    who said Clones was a flop? Nobody in their right mind could have said that, maybe some guy on the internet did but one shouldn't take everything so seriously. Pluto Nash is a flop. Final Fantasy is a flop. AOTC or King Kong aren't.
  12. RolandofGilead Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jan 17, 2001
    star 7
    Actually it was Entertainment Weakly who claimed that Attack of the Clones was the first $300+ Million failure. The claim was that since Phantom Menace earned $400+ Million and AotC didn't meet or exceed that number, it proved people hated the Prequels.
  13. Jumpman Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 12, 2003
    star 4
    What does Entertainment Weekly know?

    Episode III investiment=100 million/50 million marketing.
    Episode III gross=310 domestically/338 worldwide.

    Not a failure....
  14. RolandofGilead Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jan 17, 2001
    star 7
    Not much apparently seeing as how they declared The Matrix Sequels the greatest sci-fi trilogy in history sight unseen. Only to backpeddale and turn into haters when the movies didn't hold up to expectations.
  15. DINVADER_RETURNS Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 10, 2003
    star 3

    Episode III investiment=100 million/50 million marketing.
    Episode III gross=310 domestically/338 worldwide.

    Not a failure....

    It was 380 domestic
  16. lovelucas Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 2004
    star 4
    perhaps these were figures for AotC?
  17. voodoopuuduu Classic Trilogy Trivia Host

    Game Host
    Member Since:
    Mar 22, 2004
    star 5
    Episode III investiment=100 million/50 million marketing.
    Episode III gross=310 domestically/338 worldwide.

    Not a failure....


    380 million domestic, 468 million overseas, 848 million worldwide.

    AOTC - investment = 115 million/25 million marketing. 310 million domestic, 338 million overseas, 649 million worldwide. Heh, thats the complete opposite of a failure. :p
  18. Gobi-1 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Dec 22, 2002
    star 5
    Entertainment Weekly declares that King Kong is this years biggest blockbuster ignoring the fact that Sith has already busted all the blocks.
  19. sithscotti418 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 27, 2005
    star 3
    It was a typo. EW meant to say that King Kong wasthe biggest blockbuster flop of the year.
  20. darth-sinister Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2001
    star 9
    Gotham has always been an average city. It was only gothic because Burton wanted it that way and Anton Furst went with it. Since "No Man's Land", it's gone back to being a less gothic looking city. The Batmobile may not be as sleek as the 89 and 92 design, but it's also got the armored look that Frank Miller created. I give you that Katie Holmes' acting wasn't that great, but then it never was. I don't even think she'll be in the second film. I also give you that on the score. Overall, it wasn't that bad and the fights didn't bother me as much. Better than some of the clunkiness of the other films. Look how stiff Keaton, Kilmar, Clooney, O'Donnel and their doubles looked in the suits. And the realism helped after how bad the last two films were unrealistic. The safe in Forever was the worst offender.
  21. SkottASkywalker Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 3, 2002
    star 4
    Actually it was Entertainment Weakly who claimed that Attack of the Clones was the first $300+ Million failure. The claim was that since Phantom Menace earned $400+ Million and AotC didn't meet or exceed that number, it proved people hated the Prequels.

    That is weak.

    What does Entertainment Weekly know?

    Guess it doesn't matter what they know. Just what they prefer (or don't prefer). ;) Going by that, anything they prefer can be "This Year's Biggest Blockbuster."

  22. darth-sinister Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2001
    star 9
    Entertainment Weekly just jumps on whatever bandwagon's in vogue.
  23. jedi8915 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2004
    star 1
    Check out Wednesdays BO at BOM, KK has fallen behind TCON. Its about $150 000 behind. It will be interesting to see how KK will fair this weekend, will it make less that TCON, maybe so.

    It will also be interesting to see its percentage drop compared to last weeks earnings, if its more than 40% I think it will be fair to say that it doesn't have titanic grossing legs. It percentage drop will need to be at most 30%, unlikely with the type of competition it will be up against.

    After this weekend I think we will be able to fairly and accurately determine KK's BO plight and confirm what we already thought would be; ROTS will be 2005 BO champ (at least domestically) and KK will fall well short of the medias massive expectations.

  24. Jedi_Master_342005 Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Nov 19, 2005
    The biggest mistake with KK was that it is over three hours long. No question this film would have gotten better reviews and made a lot more money if it had been two hours or so.
  25. Formerly_Tukafo Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Nov 10, 2003
    star 1
    the film got EXCELLENT reviews. Many people love it. Why are you talking about mistakes being made? I am and millions other are glad the film is the way it is. It won't please everybody. That doesn't mean it made a mistake though. Quality is simply not for everybody. Made Richard Kelly an artistic mistake with Donnie Darko considering the movie bombed ? No, there are many who love the film dearly.

    The problem with most blockbusters these days is that they are no organic artistic vision, they're created by focus groups, endless marketing and studio execs to reach the biggest demographic and make maximum profit. "Let's throw in a feisty female character to appeal to the girl audience. Let's throw in a comic relief character to appeal to the kids. Let's put in a bit of two-bit morale to appeal to the pseudo-intellectual parents. Let's throw in a gorgeous hunk for the older females. And make sure there's always an action scene every 10 minutes so that guys with ADD won't fall asleep, even if there's no artistic reason to have an action scene at this point".

    These films are very successful. But how many of those are really loved? There's nothing to love in them because they're products, not pieces of passion and artistic drive. They make 500 Million at the box office and 1 year later they're totally forgotten (The Mummy Returns anyone?)

    Give me the flawed but passionate visions of a Peter Jackson or Terry Gilliam any day before the bombastic "products". Yeah, KK is self-indulgent. In a lot of ways PJ shows the finger to the wider audience. It won't reach the box office of the Mummy Returns. But KK won;t be forgotten. That's the difference. And that's why he didn't make mistakes. A focus group would have cut the film by half. A focus group would have added an action scene after 10 minutes in New York for no reason other than to appeal to the ADD crowd. It would have made more money. But it would be forgettable.

    In 1983 Blade Runner bombed at the box office. Flashdance made lots of cash. Today the former is beloved by millions while the latter is completely forgotten.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.