Am I REALLY the only one disappointed with TFA?

[OldKen]

Am I REALLY the only one tired of seeing this thread?

And the pointless opinions posted as-nauseum?

We get it.



Now Wook. I've held back for the last few months. And I'm not trying to attack you.

But correct me if I'm wrong...

Weren't you an official LFL appearance Chewy? Don't I remember correctly how proud you were of all of the compliments about your stance and gait at appearances?

So....

Could THAT fact coupled by your first few complaints in the spoiler thread about the "running" chewy in the film and how he had it all wrong.......

Is there ANY way possible, MAYBE that THAT is what started your hatered and picking apart of everything about this movie that has ultimately led to the one and only point you can actually PROVE. That it didn't match avatar financially... ???

I have to know how you respond to that.

I can't help but feel that yeah, you were honestly disappointed about the movie. But your hate and daily diatribes actually have a more personal relation to your feelings that you would have been a much better choice?

Or am I thinking of someone else?

Again, I'm not attacking. Just curious as to how you will respond.

 

[Solo4114]

@The Wook, I saw it but it's more of the narrative you have decided is reality when it's not. Let me be clear, my job is to do analysis about companies and their products performance. Nothing about my feeling regarding the financial performance of TFA is predicated on my fandom, it's based on my experience of doing this since 1997. Most Wall Sreet analysts had modeled TFA to earn $1.9B. I thought that was low and felt they could earn more then Titantic, which they will over the next few years with rereleases of the film. No one at Disney thought they would reach $2.7B. I do get the impression they felt $1.5-$2B would be a major success.

Regarding your attempt to qualify the box office trajectory, all of you "points" are not factual. It's filled with supposition and assumptions not based on what actually happened. You try and use online blogs as proof of point when they demonstrate nothing. The reality was the film opened on 4000+ screens, the weekly change in audience numbers can't be compared to a film that may have opened on half that number. The mathematics are entirely different. The general audience word of mouth was exceedingly positive as indicated by audience reaction and opinions of the film as qualified by all the major film tracking services. It wasn't bad word of mouth, it was a film release front end loaded to get as many people to see it in the first 3 weeks by function of the number of screens.

I've explained this before, I'm not interested in convincing you, that meaningless to me at this point.

Honest question:

Does poor word of mouth usually kill a film between weeks 1 and 2? I've always been under the impression that "bad word of mouth" usually results in the film either opening very, very softly, and/or taking a massive hit (+60% drop) in week 2 box office.

 

[Bryancd]

Honest question:

Does poor word of mouth usually kill a film between weeks 1 and 2? I've always been under the impression that "bad word of mouth" usually results in the film either opening very, very softly, and/or taking a massive hit (+60% drop) in week 2 box office.

It's a much more common and likely occurrence in the modern age of film advance marketing. Studios do so many test screenings that opinions begin to leak out and bias the potential audience base. Then when the opening weekend dissapoints it reaffirms that bias. That is a way to quantify something as vague as word of mouth, followed by the companies that aggregate audience opinion and reaction.

In regards to TFA, any changes in box office week over week needs to be analyzed based upon the number of screens it opened on and the number of people who saw the film within the first 10 days. These were record breaking numbers. It's front end loaded. Far more people saw the film within that period then Titanic and Avatar possibly combined. The longevity of those films was predicated on the smaller number of screens they opened in and their 3 hour run time which limited amount of showings per day. They both also had a strong female audience participation. That's where TFA succeeded beyond other SW film releases.

I would also add that the comparisons of TFA to ANH were not unique to the third week of releases as Wook has suggested, it was part and parcel of many of the overwhelmingly positive critical reviews releases on opening day.

 

[The Wook]

You don't care for the film? Super. But you just look silly when you try to paint it as a failure on anything other than a "Failed to entertain li'l ol' me" level.

Danno, I defy you to show me any place where I've written that TFA was a commercial failure. In contrast, in several of my posts I've characterized it as a mega commercial hit. No one can deny that. The numbers don't lie. My point is that IF the film had not been an egregious rip-off of George's original story, and if it had a less cartoonish/more believable and relatable heroine, a better musical score, better editing, a role for the black guy that wasn't token but actually essential to the story, jeeez, the list goes on and on and on...THEN, the bad word of mouth that did catch up to TFA by week 2 or 3 would not have been happened, thus encouraging people to wait for the DVD, and people who had seen it would've seen it over and over again, and the film would've performed better in challenging global markets where the Star Wars brand is less well known, and TFA would've had a chance to race past Titanic and Avatar to take the worldwide trophy.

But TFA wasn't a special movie, that would inspire such viewing behaviors. And so, it failed to do what a better film could've done, backed by the Star Wars name and the Disney machine.

The Wook

The reality was [The Force Awakens] opened on 4000+ screens, the weekly change in audience numbers can't be compared to a film that may have opened on half that number.

Well, since we're comparing TFA's performance with Avatar's, I think it's an apt comparison. Avatar not only opened on 3,500 screens, but it was in over 3,000 screens for EIGHT weeks! Which is two weeks LONGER than TFA was in that many theaters.

The Wook

 

[NeoRutty]

I need to know where the bad editing is. I was going to leave it alone, but I need to know.

I'm an editor by trade, and if there's bad editing involved, I would like it pointed out... Cuz I must be missing it, which makes me question my abilities.

I need to be educated.

 

[jhazard]

I need to know where the bad editing is. I was going to leave it alone, but I need to know.

I'm an editor by trade, and if there's bad editing involved, I would like it pointed out... Cuz I must be missing it, which makes me question my abilities.

I need to be educated.

The scene where Finn escorts Poe and pulls him aside. First, Finn has beads of sweat all over his face. Switch to Poe, then back to Finn - his face is dry. Switch again - beads of sweat. When I noticed that, their conversation felt different to me - pieced together.

When Han gives the gun to Rey. He says something like "..you know how to use that?", she responds, and the cut after that feels un-natural (to me). It felt like there is conversation missing, like maybe he showed her some basic things like where the safety is. Later on she goes to fire, remembers the safety - and switches it off. But we never see her instructed to do so.

These are the ones that stuck out, there's more - mostly the way conversations are edited. But I do admit, it took several viewings to notice them, and I'm picking nits mostly. Still one my favorite Star Wars flicks.

 

[Solo4114]

Like I said, it's clear you didn't like the film and you have a long list of criticisms about it. That's fine. The rest of your argument doesn't seem to hold up, though. It's you mapping your own dislike of the film onto a theory to explain why the film "failed" to beat Avatar or Titanic. If you've got proof -- news reports, I mean, not just "Well, my friends said..." -- cool. Post 'em. But otherwise, it's just your own pet theory. I'd say it's far more likely that the film's "failure" to beat Avatar was down to different marketing and release strategies (e.g. winter vs. summer release, broad front-loaded release vs. longer term release on fewer initial screens, additional considerations in Disney's own release schedule, focus on release coinciding with merchandising strategy, etc.) that led to it. To say nothing of the whole re-release issue.


But in the end, none of this really matters. TFA was a smashing success. TFA was widely popular. TFA was a merchandising coup for Disney/LFL. TFA received widespread critical acclaim.

You didn't like it. You're in what appears to be an extreme minority there.


And that's fine.


I'm in the extreme minority of people who didn't particularly like either Memento or Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. I'm cool with that. I think Memento is a gimmick movie, and Crouching Tiger is basically Saturday Kung Fu Theater done with good production values. I don't think either is anything particularly special. BUT I'm also not going around talking about how each film could/should have been better if this that and the other thing had happened. It's enough for me to just say "Nah. Didn't really like 'em much" and move on. Maybe you should try doing the same with TFA.

- - - Updated - - -

I need to know where the bad editing is. I was going to leave it alone, but I need to know.

I'm an editor by trade, and if there's bad editing involved, I would like it pointed out... Cuz I must be missing it, which makes me question my abilities.

I need to be educated.

You're an editor?

Man, I'd LOVE to pick your brain about Quantum of Solace some day...

 

[karmajay]

I love Rey. Saying she needed to be "cartoonish/more believable and relatable"? Saying Finn was a token POC? Again, you are in the EXTREME minority with these opinions.

 

[NeoRutty]

You're an editor?

Man, I'd LOVE to pick your brain about Quantum of Solace some day...

I'm an editor, but not much of a Bond guy... heh, so not really in the know on that flick. I've been meaning to check it out though... just I rarely get time to go to the theater (though I made an exception to check out TFA multiple times... and Deadpool (though mostly cuz I was walking home once and saw them shooting... I was curious what that shot with a giant guy in a white mo-cap suit dragging deadpool by the hand was all about).

Anyway, Fin being sweaty/not sweaty is more a continuity issue... not editing. if the footage isn't there, or make sense shot wise, it's not going to happen.

for me, editing is all about timing the shots, knowing when a scene is running too long, and making sure everything is clear and reads in action scenes...

And all this in TFA was stellar.

*see Batman Begins for WTF action editing

 

[Jaitea]

I'm an editor, but not much of a Bond guy... heh, so not really in the know on that flick. I've been meaning to check it out though... just I rarely get time to go to the theater (though I made an exception to check out TFA multiple times... and Deadpool (though mostly cuz I was walking home once and saw them shooting... I was curious what that shot with a giant guy in a white mo-cap suit dragging deadpool by the hand was all about).

Anyway, Fin being sweaty/not sweaty is more a continuity issue... not editing. if the footage isn't there, or make sense shot wise, it's not going to happen.

for me, editing is all about timing the shots, knowing when a scene is running too long, and making sure everything is clear and reads in action scenes...

And all this in TFA was stellar.

*see Batman Begins for WTF action editing

Yeah,...those dont seem like bad editing to me either,....one stand out strange edit was the conversation between Leia & Han in the Resistance Base.......shot of Leia in mid conversation over the shoulder of Han,.....then cuts to a tighter shot of her mid conversation,.....not a bad edit,....just unusual in the flow,.....all the conversation cuts from over her shoulder to see Han,...then over his to see her

J

 

[The Wook]

Am I REALLY the only one tired of seeing this thread?

And the pointless opinions posted as-nauseum?

We get it.



Now Wook. I've held back for the last few months. And I'm not trying to attack you.

But correct me if I'm wrong...

Weren't you an official LFL appearance Chewy? Don't I remember correctly how proud you were of all of the compliments about your stance and gait at appearances?

So....

Could THAT fact coupled by your first few complaints in the spoiler thread about the "running" chewy in the film and how he had it all wrong.......

Is there ANY way possible, MAYBE that THAT is what started your hatered and picking apart of everything about this movie that has ultimately led to the one and only point you can actually PROVE. That it didn't match avatar financially... ???

I have to know how you respond to that.

I can't help but feel that yeah, you were honestly disappointed about the movie. But your hate and daily diatribes actually have a more personal relation to your feelings that you would have been a much better choice?

Or am I thinking of someone else?

Again, I'm not attacking. Just curious as to how you will respond.

Hi Oldken,

Now, before I address the personal question, you know the simple rule about threads that don't interest you: don't click on them.

As to the personal question, yes, you are thinking of me. However, my issues with the way Joonas played Chewie are very minor, when compared to the rest of my issues with the film. Do I think he could've done a better job imitating Peter's movements? Yes. But he wasn't awful to the point of it being a major distraction, and I believe I conceded in the post where I mentioned him--I'm pretty sure I only mentioned his performance once, btw--that I might be being picky because I've studied the character so thoroughly over the years, and yes, have been blessed to play the character on many occasions for official LFL promotional appearances--in my costume, in the LFL tour costume, and even the ROTS mask.

But more than his movements/gait being off, I was displeased with the TFA mask. And that's not Joonas' fault, he didn't make the mask, an artist named Neil Scanlon did. As for me playing Chewie in the movies? I'm not tall enough. They need a legitimate 7-footer to pull that off. Joonas is not quite there, at 6' 10", but he's a few inches closer than I am. If they ever offered the role to me (which they wouldn't), I'd' turn it down. I seriously would. Because while I reach 7' 3" tall with some lifts and the height of the mask, Peter was 7' 2" tall in real life and 7' 9" tall in the movies, with longer arms a longer neck than I could ever have--and I'm such a big Star Wars fan, that my answer to them would be, "Thanks, but I'm not big enough...let me cast the right giant for you! And let me make the costume.". I get asked all the time by people if I'll get to play Chewie in the new movies some day, and this has always been my answer to them. I suppose at most, I'd let them have me in the film costume for one shot, while seated, as long as I didn't look *off* in the shot. That way, I could say I got to be Chewie in a Star Wars movie. But no, I'd turn the role down. (Again, all a moot point, as they would never cast anyone shorter than Joonas.)

If you don't believe me, and still suspect I'm bitter, I would point you to this thread I started a couple weeks prior the film's release. When I authored this thread, I certainly knew I wasn't in the movie...lol...and I was optimistic about the film. Cautiously optimistic, but optimistic, nonetheless. I thought, with JJ at the helm, we'll have someone directing who is of our generation, who *gets* why we didn't like the SEs and PT films. Who would make a Star Wars movie with the same heart and soul and practical fx of ANH and ESB! I had stayed spoiler-free, avoiding all the trailers, but I was hopeful I'd love the film. And I got quite nostalgic leading up to its release, as is evidenced by this thread I wrote shortly before TFA's premiere:

http://www.therpf.com/showthread.php?t=251436

No, Oldken, I'm happy for Joonas. I don't know the man, but what a thrill for him to be Peter's heir apparent! Joonas is the second Penn Stater to play Chewie for Lucasfilm...so he must be great guy, having matriculated at my alma matar!

The Wook

ps~Now that I've answered your question--publicly--because that's where it was asked, I must say that I think a question of such a personal nature would've been more appropriately asked via PM. Not mad, just sayin'. Poor form, Oldken.

 

[Bryancd]

Well, since we're comparing TFA's performance with Avatar's, I think it's an apt comparison. Avatar not only opened on 3,500 screens, but it was in over 3,000 screens for EIGHT weeks! Which is two weeks LONGER than TFA was in that many theaters.

The Wook

That is a function of a longer run time for Avatar which limited the number of screening per day. Also TFA earned more domestically then Avatar but quit a bit. Where Avatar had more traction was overseas, especially China. Star Wars doesn't have the same cultural signifigance there and Avatar was a unique visual experience. But TFA's overseas numbers were excellent and likely setting the rest of the films up well there.

 

[batguy]

How well is the next Fantastic-4 movie likely to do in theaters - no matter how good it is?


Previous movies in a franchise affect the box office take of the next one. By the end of the Star Wars PT a lot of the public was sticking it out just to see the end of the story. The fact is that this was as a drag on the box office of TFA. It helped the feedback (people were pleasantly surprised) but it hurt the raw earnings (people's expectations were that much lower in the first place.)

It's fanboy-centric thinking to assume the public already knew that TFA was a clean-slate restaffing of the SW franchise. Most people are not aware of such things. They don't have the interest level.


Batman Begins was a complete, utter, total restart compared to the 1990s Batman movies. And it still financially suffered from the public's post-1990s Batman hangover. It took until Dark Knight before the public was really giving Batman a full chance again.

 

[Bryancd]

How well is the next Fantastic-4 movie likely to do in theaters - no matter how good it is?


Previous movies in a franchise affect the box office take of the next one. By the end of the Star Wars PT a lot of the public was sticking it out just to see the end of the story. The fact is that this was as a drag on the box office of TFA. It helped the feedback (people were pleasantly surprised) but it hurt the raw earnings (people's expectations were that much lower in the first place.)

I'm not sure I would agree with that analysis. If anything people were very much willing to look beyond their dislike of the PT and were more eager to see this. And then when they were not disappointed, it generated very positive buzz and word of mouth. The Wooks entire theory is simply wrong, it exists only in his mind. All the quantifiable data tells the opposite story.

 

[The Wook]

@The Wooks entire theory is simply wrong, it exists only in his mind. All the quantifiable data tells the opposite story.

Oh yeah? Well I say Bryancd is wrong.

The Wook

 

[Bryancd]

Oh yeah? Well I say @Bryancd is wrong.

The Wook

Damn! Foiled again!

 

[glunark]

You know the people that have come into this thread, said their reasons for not liking the film, and then gotten on with their lives, I can respect that.

You come back almost every day for more than two months to repeat the same stuff, it seems less like an opinion, and more like an obsession.

 

[The Wook]

You know the people that have come into this thread, said their reasons for not liking the film, and then gotten on with their lives, I can respect that.

You come back almost every day for more than two months to repeat the same stuff, it seems less like an opinion, and more like an obsession.

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/trekkies/n9511

 

[OldKen]

I apologize Wook. I just see this thread as your everyday diatribe and could help but feel that your position had to have something to do with it.

I'd say others have wanted to ask. I just finally did.

Now we all know. (Move along, move along)

And BTW I loved your old threads and do think you make an awesome chewy.

And I should have prefaced my post with that plus the fact that I personally feel that you had the movements down to a much more Mayhew level than Joonas.

I have had many a Dinner and stout with Mr. Mayhew. Even took him through gatlinburg and the Smokey mountains just him, his wife, my close friend and I.

I would've voted for you if there was a vote!

Your posts are soo deep with... Idk... Feels like there was more to it.

I appreciate the detailed response and I think it makes your posts seem less like a personal agenda to everyone arguing against you. (I may be wrong, but it's cool to have more incite!)

Thanks for the response.

And I do apologize, but I think I wasn't the only one that wanted to ask....

 

[Brent M]

You know the people that have come into this thread, said their reasons for not liking the film, and then gotten on with their lives, I can respect that.

You come back almost every day for more than two months to repeat the same stuff, it seems less like an opinion, and more like an obsession.

Amen, brother. :thumbsup