Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Movies' started by Jake Lipson, Apr 25, 2019.
This is the craziest thing I have ever heard. The Internet needs an entrance exam.
Deadline is seeing Endgame coming in 7th this weekend with $5.9 million. I don't see this "re-release" significantly helping it's chances of beating avatar.
The enhanced release isn't meant to push the worldwide grosses past Avatar. For one thing, they can't re-release in China by state law. It's only being done in select countries, and the anticipated grosses outside of the US are paltry. It's just a chance to make a little more money while helping promote Spider-Man FFH and the home video release of Endgame.
I saw Endgame for the first time only yesterday (I had gotten tired of superhero comic book films, and had not seen one for a few years. My wife and I decided to get caught up and we re-watched a few we had seen and then caught the ones we had missed, finishing with Captain Marvel on Wednesday).
We saw the version of Endgame with the "enhanced" post credit scene. That scene was underwhelming for us. Even if they had finished the Hulk animation, it did not need to be in the movie IMO. It's like all the unimpressive deleted scenes you watch on a Blu-ray in the special features. I was just glad the movie was still playing so I could see the end of the saga without having to wait for the Blu-ray.
I totally think that a big reason for the enhanced version was an attempt to pass Avatar. I believe that it is now about $30 million away so every little bit helps.
Maybe they hoped by some miracle it could, but realistically they had no chance. Writers were supposing this was the reason, but there is no reason to think this was the actual goal of doing this since it was just not possible.
I think it could absolutely be possible, but they're shooting themselves in the foot by releasing the digital version on July 30 and the disc on August 13.
If they were okay holding back the home releases a while -- like, say, October or November -- then there would be more interest in going back to see it again. Or, if they did the re-push around Labor Day as they did with some previous Marvel titles, that's a relatively empty time period. They could have done it then and gotten the IMAX screens and other premium format screens back., in addition to widening the gap between when people saw it originally and when the expansion was happening. (It's not a re-release if the original run never closed.)
By doing this now, they can't get the IMAX screens, and they're competing with a bunch of other big movies, including Toy Story which is Disney providing their own competition. By putting out the disc in August, they significantly decrease their chances of passing the record now.
But I also thought the Blu-ray release of Black Panther would prohibit it from passing $700 million and it still managed to do that. So you never know.
Also, it's all the same pot in terms of the all-time record regardless of how many releases a movie gets. So if they were to put Endgame out as a true re-release sometime after the original run is completely closed, and it hasn't been in theaters in a long time, they might then be able to get the record later. The Lion King grossed $312 million in 1994, but its cumulative gross is $422 million thanks to the re-releases in 2002 and 2011. So even if Endgame doesn't take the record right now, that doesn't necessarily mean they won't later. Avatar had a true re-release in the sense that by the time it came back out in August 2010, it had been out of theaters for some time, and those grosses are reflected in its total, so it would be fair game for Endgame to do the same thing.
Actually, if you're comparing just the original runs, Endgame beat out Avatar a while ago. The difference it needs to make up now was all generated from Avatar's re-release.
I was re-watching Homecoming tonight in advance of Far From Home tomorrow. Obviously I've seen this multiple times over the last couple of years, but this was the first time I have revisited it post-Endgame.
A line of Tony's jumped out at me in a way that it hadn't before given what we now know happens to Peter and Tony throughout those films.
Check out what Tony says at about 2:34-ish in this clip. Emphasis mine.
"What if somebody had died tonight? Different story, right? Because that's on you. And if you died...I feel like that's on me. I don't need that on my conscience."
We talked previously about how Spider-Man needed to succumb to the snap because Tony's guilt over losing Peter is what motivates him to figure out time travel and agree to the time heist.
I didn't think twice about this line because Peter had put himself in an extremely dangerous situation where he could have died, and it made sense for Tony to say exactly what he said. However, now I have to wonder about it. Infinity War came out less than a full calendar year after Far From Home, and of course it was shot back-to-back with Endgame. They probably knew at some point in the process of making Homecoming what was going to happen (although they also screwed up the timeline with the whole "8 years later" thing.) But still...
Did they know the shape of the next story to such a degree that this particular line was written in this way as foreshadowing? Because, of course, that's exactly what happens. Peter dies, Tony blames himself and it weighs on his conscience so much that he agrees to help the time heist to have a chance at getting Peter back. (And everyone else too, of course...but there is no question that Peter specifically is a huge motivating factor for Tony.)
So, it was either foreshadowing dropped plain as day right under our noses, or a massive coincidence. Knowing Marvel, it seems like the former. But there's subtle foreshadowing and then there's literally describing Peter's future exactly in the movie before it happens. I just got taken aback by realizing that such a major central part of the forthcoming story was literally right there word-for-word the whole time and didn't demand attention before.
Due to the momentous scale of a Infinity War and Endgame, the writing and planning had to start earlier than the average film. The Russos and Markus/McFeely were hired in 2015, and I believe the screenplays were mostly written throughout 2016. I’d imagine that at least Feige and the Avengers writers & directors knew what would happen to Peter at the time Homecoming was being made. I don’t know if that is info that would have been shared with Jon Watts and/or the multiple writers who worked on a Homecoming, but Feige could still have suggested such a scene even if those making the movie didn’t know the future significance.
There may have been a connection, but I think it's just an organic extension of Tony's developing protective instincts after he essentially sought out Peter Parker, encouraged him, and provided him with some of the tools of his trade. When he saw that his assistance was leading Peter to put himself in increasingly dangerous positions, his father-figure instincts kicked in, not to mention self-preservation since if anything happened to Peter none of Tony's Iron Man gadgets could save him from the wrath of Aunt May.
It may have been pre-planned, but I think it's just more of a neat coincidence at how it fit into the overall story line.
On another note, does the title Far From Home feel a little...insignificant compared to what Peter experienced in Infinity War?
I mean, he went to space. Now he's "just" going to Europe (and in fact, he's already been to Berlin, too, in Civil War.) So, he's been farther from home last year in space than he will be in this movie.
I suspect it works well enough on its own terms for the movie -- which I'm seeing tonight -- but comparatively speaking, a little trip to Europe isn't as far as he's gone.
It was actually Leipzig.
I saw this again today which will be my final time in a movie theater. I wanted to see the new end credits. I'm glad I have the A-List.
RDJ on what he did with Marvel and what he will do next:
Nothing will ever convince me this is NOT true
Seeeeerious spoiler alert
Dont think you needed to spoiler that.
The lede on that article is awkardly worded.
"Avengers: Endgame Theory Suggests Old Man Rogers Was Supposed to Be Stan Lee"
I get what its supposed to mean after reading that article but it also infers that when Rogers appears at the end as an old man they considered having Lee play the part onscreen.
Otherwise I like the idea that he was The Watcher.
So,Sam why a spoiler on this?
I like that idea. I don't like that we will never know.
Yikes. I never liked these weird, out there fan theories that “go viral” for some reason. And I really don’t like this one. Frankly it doesn’t make sense other than being “cute”.
I love Stan Lee, but the Stan Lee cameo character is not Steve Rogers. Physically, or personality-wise.
This concept is kinda funny as a joke that you don’t actually think about in any way. But are the people that think this forgetting that James Gunn already showed a more fun explanation for the Stan Lee cameos that isn’t, well... stupid?
There is seriously no way that something like that would have happened. It would have robbed Chris Evans of a moment that his entire portrayal of Captain America was leading up to, and it would have completely taken the audience out of the film.
If there is one thing that the MCU has been very, very good about, it's been creating a near-total suspension of disbelief.
I cannot believe for a second that they would do anything that would, at the film's emotional climax, draw your attention away from the character you've been invested in for nearly ten years, shattering the illusion the films have created, so that they could make a not-very-clever joke that only a tiny percentage of the audience would even get, at the expense of ruining the entire universe that it takes place in.