galahadfairlight's Replies


No chance it will outright flop like Solo did, theres too many curious people that will want to see if its the trainwreck they hope it is. Plenty of people were not going to see Captain Marvel, but, so they could moan about it, went to see it, so they could moan about it. Solo wasn't a needed movie, Rise of Skywalker is closing a trilogy. Plenty of people want to know if JJ can undo some of the damage of TLJ, but like that movie, Rise of Skywalker needs great word of mouth right out the gate, because if it performs like TLJ or even worse, it will damage the Star Wars brand. After Rise of Skywalker, Kennedy is out. There is ZERO chance that Rise of Skywalker tops or gets anywhere close to Force Awakens. But for the movie to outright flop, is a mathematical impossibility. I'm largely indifferent to the movie, but when a cheap showing is available, i'll go see it with my son, but the days of me watching a Star Wars movie at midnight are over. Plenty of people like me, that will ensure that the movie makes a profit. At this point, Rise of Skywalker will be considered a success if it bests The Last Jedis Box Office, if it does less...... And Crash won best picture Oscar in 2006, whats your point? Richard E Grant hasn't been relevant for years, and he has a part in the movie. I'll not cling to his every word as if it means something. I usually get irritated by changing stuff to women for the sake of changing it to women, but i'm not quite sure how THIS movie qualifies it for being an "SJW mess"? Its always been about 3 women kicking ass in a mans world. How is a property that has ALWAYS been predominantly aimed at women, played by women, "SJW crap"? This is almost as fucking useless an argument as saying "Goddamn, Little Women, WTF were they thinking?!" Huh? What the fuck is woke about Charlies Angels? Did I miss that it was about 3 women kicking ass ever since its inception? The guy reading the news in the credit scene? You have nothing worthwhile critiquing. Same old spanners, same old tired excuses. As for trolls and socks, you wish ;) Not likely, for a start the end credits scenes of Spider-Man still tie it to the MCU, its at $635million already, and its going to get close to a billion for sure. Amazing Spider-Man 2 did $708million over its entire run, Far From Home is in its second week and nearly bested it already. I think Sony/Amy Pascal would be monumentally stupid to screw around with Spider-Man now, leave it be in Marvels hands and reap the rewards. Yeah, fuck your strong female characters Tim, we don't need them, because we don't like them in our manly movies......they scare us! What? Terminator franchise has had a strong female character since it was first created? Yeah but nobody likes Terminator 1 & 2 did they? Oh, they did, they are beloved classics. So..... what the hell are you on about Tim??? It will get a sequel regardless, its in profit at the Box Office, it just didn't make as much as Warners hoped, but that was entirely down to when it was released and less to do with the quality of the movie as most people seemed to like it. I thought it was OK. So, a question for you. Do you think Disney want to release those Avatar sequels, or do you think they'll pass? As for him being past his prime, this is the same director that made Titanic and Avatar, you know, those box office MONSTERS. Sure, you can say "but they were not great", but the likes of Disney will simply see Camerons ability to make dollars, and I think they might just be a bit more enthusiastic and interested in keeping him happy. Here in the UK it was: Terminator Dark Fate, The Lion King, Hobbs & Shaw, Jumanji: The next level I like her in the role, she doesn't act like a typical "damsel". And you think Captain Marvel was a popular character? Shazam! sank because of the stupid release date, sandwiched between Captain Marvel and Avengers: Endgame. No idea what Warner Bros were thinking, had they released it as an August release, it would likely have done much better. All I heard was "waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa...people dont agree with me and they are mean." Same old spanners, isnt it time you had another breakdown and took a sabbatical from here? :) How do you figure that out? I have to say, of all the Star Trek movies, this was the one that was or at least felt like a "must see", which i'd never done with a Star Trek movie up until then, and I think it got none Star Trek fans to see it as well, because it wasn't a typical Star Trek movie. The humour in it was great, the VFX for the day was great, and flying the Bird of Prey was a nice change from the Enterprise. Just a shame then that they followed it up with The Final Frontier, which Paramount skimped on, even though Voyage Home was the most profitable Star Trek movie at that point. Loved Voyage Home back then and still do now, easily the most watchable with Wrath of Khan a close second. Things never change! What was your username on imdb? Was it Sinister Prog? I don't like to be the contrarian for the sake of it, but I'm betting it WILL get a sequel. The only reason Disney gets a bite of the Avatar sequel pie is because of them buying 20th Century Fox so get distribution rights. Disney will be keen to keep James Cameron happy, and i'm betting as part of the sweetener, they'll happily greenlight a sequel or allow 20th Century Fox to do it (fact fans: Alita was 20th Century Foxs last truly independent release before being bought by Disney). "Stay tuned".......... do we still "stay tuned" to all the other predictions you got hopelessly wrong? When do we stop tuning in?