ST Episode IX Box Office Discussion

FLOP confirmed.

 

The Phantom Menace could in some ways be deemed a classic - because a lot of Star Wars fans still look at it positively and TPM is still talked about decades later in all sorts of references - like it's amazing box office , classic light-saber fight and people still wanna talk Darth Maul a lot .........

 

I like your positivity.

 

Some fans may believe it’s a classic, but I don’t think there’s a consensus on that amongst general audiences or within SW fandom.

 

The other thing besides time when it comes to classics is geography. I think Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory is a classic, it still gets played on TV all the time, but does the rest of the world outside America care? I have no idea.

 

Which is fine, but I think you’re ignoring all the factors I referred to before. Who gets to define what is regarded as a ‘classic’? On what criteria?

An appropriate contrast would be something which wasn’t a big budget action movie e.g. Spotlight, Brooklyn, Sicario etc.

It’s a pertinent example of where a perception fast becomes the reality. It’s not about the individual merit of TDK, but wether it’s perceived value is justifiable in relation to its peers. I happen to think TDK doesn’t warrant the high regard it achieved, but I’m cognisant that it’s perceived as being the ‘best’ Batman film.

 

They do. Wonka's always on TV overseas too.

 

TPM is objectively speaking an absolute classic, and I say that with it being easily my least favorite SW movie. The special effects were groundbreaking and highly influential, like the movie or not. Some amazing artistry there.

 

I would say TPM fails to be a classic because it falls short in the single most important factor...It isn't good.

 

I think you missed my point in a big way. Artistic innovation is hard to come by, and is certainly not superseded by some half-baked opinion that the work "isn't good."

 

My opinion that it isn't good is far from half-baked. And I didn't miss your point, I just think your point misses the mark completely. Its technical achievements mean nothing to the general public. Especially when you consider that in spite of their groundbreaking and influential nature, the special effects in the prequels are almost universally derided by casual movie watchers.

 

I'd say that it's more than likely defined as being something that is fondly remembered collectively. I'd say this requires the film to actually be good rather than societal influence.

I don't really see why though. It's not like big budget action movies being regarded as classics is a modern phenomena. I also don't think that a particular genre coming to prominence (and therefore becoming highly regarded) is a sign of the decline in standards. I think every genre is capable of being a classic on their own terms.

It doesn't really prove your point though, because this has been said about any number of films. There are dissenting opinions about a lot of classics. It seems like this has always been a thing.

 

I think a good starting point would be a dictionary, which defines a classic in this sense as being a work of enduring excellence. Thus, it seems to me that being excellent would be the first and most critical factor for determining what is and isn't a classic.

 

I think we’d all agree on what constitutes the definition of ‘classic’, in our minds, but you ignore the question of who actually makes that decision in terms of a consensus within popular culture. No one has asked me. The only real influence we have, as consumers, is on the money a film makes at the box office. But as discussed elsewhere, box office is not necessarily evidence of quality... however, increasingly many perceive this to be the case.

You used the word ‘contrast’... which suggests comparing differences (not similarities). There’s no problem with suggesting an action/sci-fi film as a ‘classic’ (many of my favourite films are exactly those)... it’s that you selected a film (which is of course your prerogative) which directly feeds the position I was taking. I’d have pointed out the same if you’d said Star Trek 09 or Bladerunner 2049. To wit, our sample size (from which we derive context) is increasingly being filled with big budget action remakes/sequels.

Yes it’s all been said... so there’s nothing new here in what I’m positioning. It all comes down to wether one believes that a consensus re. popularity or quality of a piece of art (in this case a film) is free from external influences, and whether it reflects a perception or a reality. Do millions of people go and view the Mona Lisa because it truly is one of the greatest pieces of art, or do they go because they are told it’s one of the greatest pieces of art? Of course it’s not mutually exclusive, but that doesn’t mean either scenario doesn’t shape/distort reality.

 

Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory is a good example of how what a true "classic" is. The film wasn't well received on first release. It barely made any money (I think it essentially broke even). The writer of the book, Roald Dahl disowned the book saying it put too much emphasis on Willy Wonka and not enough on Charlie. He also hated the casting of Gene Wilder over Spike Milligan. And yet it's become apart of every kid's childhood for four plus decades. Meanwhile you have a movie like TPM which yeah made a ton of dough but honestly is barely remember except for negative things (Jar Jar Binks, kid Anakin etc).

 

I’m sure your observation was made with tongue in cheek, given you predilection for TLJ...

 

I don't really think anyone judges whether something is a classic or not on the box office.

Yes, I was contrasting two big budget action films: one that I think is a classic and one I don't. The fact I chose that doesn't feed your point in any way because your assumption why I chose it was wrong.

Your point was that this phenomenon of external influence has lowered the standard of what modern films are considered classics because poor films make alit of money and people will start to consider box office being correlated with a good film. But it seems that you simply don't know what are considered modern classics since your example was TFA. You're likely percieving something that isn't there.

 

I’ve never claimed TLJ is a classic.

 

While TPM itself has had a mixed reception at best as to its quality, I think it's worth considering that its impact (as well as AOTC and ROTS) on modern filmmaking is pretty undeniable. For example, the new Star Wars films might be more aesthetically, narratively and tonally inspired by the OT, but the ways in which they are made is built off the foundation of the prequels. Also, the entire trend of prequels and origin stories in franchise films seems to have been started by the PT. So while the quality of prequels will always be up for debate, their legacy and impact on modern cinema is pretty assured to me.

 

While a lot of movies that seem to be considered classics and/or fondly remembered as childhood darlings of people in the US were also movies of my (and my friends) childhoods, Willy Wonka is pretty much a non-entity here. Somehow that one never "happened". But it`s definitely an outlier that way.

 

No idea why anyone would even try to find a proper definition for a classic. Whether someone considers something to be a classic depends entirely on his personal opinion, there is no "official" stance that declares whether a movie is a classic or not. You might as well try to declare a movie to be "factually good / bad". While you can certainly judge some technical elements of a movie, though even that is open for interpretation, the overall picture is still very much defined by personal opinion.

You may find the occasional movie where plenty of people talk openly about how much of a classic it is, but that is hardly the deciding factor. A movie that isn't talked about a lot can after all still be considered a classic by most people as well.

 

I think The Rise of Skywalker is going to make around 750 million dollars at the North American box-office, but only around 650 million internationally.

 

Hmmm.... we seem to be going around in circles here. The only thing we really have the power to influence is the relative popularity of something... which is usually measured by how much we consume/spend. Popularity, and by its very definition, the money made from being ‘popular’ is a very clear indicator of how we value the product/art. You may think you’re judgment is based solely on artistic or technical merit, but most of those products are bankrolled primarily on their ability to sell. Again, this isn’t to say that great art/films can’t come from an economic transaction (they do and always have)... the point is, there’s an argument that films that would have been financed 15-20 years ago (and that would have gotten an audience) are increasingly being squeezed by the proliferation of what’s deemed more ‘popular’ now I.e. big budget, action, visual effects movies.

As I said, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt (as the example you gave seemed to suggest not much thought), as of all the films you could have suggested, as a modern classic (to refute my claim) you chose a film which is basically a 2 hour car chase with explosions. It sort of makes my point.

I don’t believe TFA is a modern classic at all... simply because there’s nothing to demonstrate it’s regarded as such... as yet. I suggested TFA as the kind of film that could be considered classic in years to come due to its box office (which was considerable), and the relative positive critical response it received... That it’s a very poor film (IMO) is why I cited it, but obviously your example of Mad Max is a more pertinent one, given you suggested it.

 

I also think it'll probably make around 260 million on its opening weekend.

 

I think it really just depends on initial fan reaction to the movie. I, for one, am not planning on going to see TROS in the theaters unless the fan reaction is very positive after the first weekend. I'm not talking RT reactions, especially from "professional" critics. I'm talking about coming on to boards like this, reading the reactions of fans, and deciding if I think the movie is going to be good or just another TLJ.

In any case, my point is if the fans overwhelmingly label this movie another turd, I don't think you'll even see "Solo" numbers in the BO.

Word of mouth has a very significant impact on a movie's BO IMO.