Jack The Giant Slayer Should Make A Big Killing At The Box Office!

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02 February 2013   #1
Jack The Giant Slayer Should Make A Big Killing At The Box Office!

"The film is like a big Disneyland ride, full of wonder and myth."

"No, this is not your father's Jack in the Beanstalk: under Bryan Singer's watch, this giant reboot is one definitely for the 21st Century audience."

''Jack the Giant Slayer'' ends up being smart, thrilling and a whole lot of fun."

"Simply in terms of efficient storytelling, clear logistics and consistent viewer engagement, Jack is markedly superior to the recent "Hobbit."

"A surprisingly deft, enjoyable variation on the old tale... [with] a vibe reminiscent of Rob Reiner's 'Princess Bride."

"Fee-fi-fo-fum, this fairy-tale retread is pretty dumb."

"Marked by simple narrative and often silly dialogue, Singer's fantasy adventure offers the basic thrills (but no more) expected by fans of this subgenre."

"Bryan Singer does deliver the money shots; the beanstalks, giant attacks and a forest in the clouds make for a terrific adventure."

"Fee! Fi! Fo! Fum! I smell a hit with the little ones"

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/jack_the_giant_slayer/



__________________
“I will never be a fan of any kind of political correctness: I think it's instant death to creativity." - Mads Mikkelsen
 
Old 02 February 2013   #2
haha

The trailer screamed to me "stay away from meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee"
 
Old 02 February 2013   #3
I think it looks much more interesting then Hobbit...
__________________
a sztuka ... odnalezc to czego sie szuka
 
Old 02 February 2013   #4
Only two fee fi fo fum jokes in the reviews? Impressive.

But yeah, this was definitely a stay away film. Still wish the giants had been real actors, but I don't know the film enough to know why they went with cg.
__________________
-Michael

www.MichaelSime.com
 
Old 02 February 2013   #5
Originally Posted by Michael5188: Only two fee fi fo fum jokes in the reviews? Impressive.

But yeah, this was definitely a stay away film. Still wish the giants had been real actors, but I don't know the film enough to know why they went with cg.


If Alan Rickman was on the trailer as a giant or giants I would of seen it or even better Sean Connery.
 
Old 03 March 2013   #6
This wasn't a bad movie, darker than I thought it would be. FX were pretty good too, though I don't think it will make all that much money.
__________________
The Z-Axis
 
Old 03 March 2013   #7
Originally Posted by nakimushi: I think it looks much more interesting then Hobbit...


That is setting the bar fairly low.

It does look better than the original version

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/101..._the_beanstalk/
 
Old 03 March 2013   #8
Originally Posted by darthviper107: This wasn't a bad movie, darker than I thought it would be. FX were pretty good too, though I don't think it will make all that much money.

You might be right! Looks like another giant disappointment for Singer!

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...ck-giant-425715

Oh well, you know what they say, "The bigger they are, the harder they fall!"
__________________
“I will never be a fan of any kind of political correctness: I think it's instant death to creativity." - Mads Mikkelsen
 
Old 03 March 2013   #9
Originally Posted by Michael5188: Only two fee fi fo fum jokes in the reviews? Impressive.

But yeah, this was definitely a stay away film. Still wish the giants had been real actors, but I don't know the film enough to know why they went with cg.


I think for a studio exec or producer, the high concept approach to a bigger box office would only be greenlit with CG. Of course a star actor doing the performances, would even be more awesome! But I can't wait to see this, right up my alley. Kinda like those trolls in The Hobbit, that was right on--enjoyed them more than the crappy composited actors with false noses and fake wig hair.
 
Old 03 March 2013   #10
Originally Posted by Panupat: haha

The trailer screamed to me "stay away from meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee"

Same here. I don't know about the movie itself, but this trailer portrays the antithesis of what I find to be a good movie. Everything about it feels dull and redundant.
 
Old 03 March 2013   #11
They spent 300 million on this? Who is making these decisions?

Last edited by SheepFactory : 03 March 2013 at 09:06 PM.
 
Old 03 March 2013   #12
Originally Posted by SheepFactory: They spent 300 million on this? Who is making these decisions?


What I'd like to know is, how much of that 300 million went to VFX shops?
__________________
I like to learn.
 
Old 03 March 2013   #13
Guess I'll have to change the title of this thread to "Jack The Giant Turkey" cause it sure laid an egg! And it wasn't one of them there golden eggs neither!

"Fee, Fi, Fo, Fizzle: ‘Jack’ Disappoints at the Box Office

LOS ANGELES — “Jack the Giant Slayer” bombed at the North American box office over the weekend, teaching Warner Brothers a harsh lesson about derivative subject matter, flawed release dates and imperfect marketing.
The movie, a PG-13 adaptation of the “Jack and the Beanstalk” fairy tale directed by Bryan Singer, took in about $28 million, enough for No. 1 but roughly half of what would have been considered a success. First place does not always mean as much at a time when studios spend so heavily on so-called tentpole films designed to appeal to the widest possible audience."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/04/a...wanted=all&_r=0
__________________
“I will never be a fan of any kind of political correctness: I think it's instant death to creativity." - Mads Mikkelsen
 
Old 03 March 2013   #14
Originally Posted by SheepFactory: They spent 300 million on this? Who is making these decisions?


Hmm 300 Million? Boxofficemojo.com says 195 Million. Of course with marketing etc it is usually 2.5 times the amount so the profit for the studio starts at about 500 Million.

Am I the only one who thinks this one might become John Carter's little brother?

Cheers
Andre
 
Old 03 March 2013   #15
Originally Posted by ACantarel: Hmm 300 Million? Boxofficemojo.com says 195 Million. Of course with marketing etc it is usually 2.5 times the amount so the profit for the studio starts at about 500 Million.

Am I the only one who thinks this one might become John Carter's little brother?

Cheers
Andre

The article I posted figures about 80 million dollars in global marketing costs in addition to the $190 million dollar budget. And, yes, I was thinking of John Carter as well!
__________________
“I will never be a fan of any kind of political correctness: I think it's instant death to creativity." - Mads Mikkelsen
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.