• Glowstick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    I called it based on only ever hearing the title. You have to have made a ton of bad choices to wind up at a place where that title seems like a good idea

      • Glowstick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        No, its pretentious and not understandable to a huge percent of people. Exactly how the movie is according to all reviews. It doesn’t matter if the technical meaning of the phrase is applicable or not. It’s an obviously bad title for a mass market movie. For an art film showing at indie theaters it would be ok, but for a mass market film it’s a horrible title that screams “this movie is cringe!”

        • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          I mean, the first one felt like an art film. Sure, it uses the Batman IP, but when I watched it I didn’t get the feeling that it was expected to have mass market appeal.

  • njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    From everything I’m reading were they even trying to be successful? I’ve heard a lot of stuff about how it was basically a character assassination cuz they didn’t like the fans and how they related to the character? Is that accurate?

    • janonymous@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Who would intentionally put their time and effort into a movie, risk hurting their careers and risk losing the studios money? And all that to upset fans of the characters?

      That movie could have easily went the way of Batgirl and be shelved for a tax cut.

      • njm1314@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        I honestly think Joaquin Phoenix is the kind of guy who would do all of that. I also think when your movie makes like a billion dollars you probably have a lot more creative control on the sequel than the people who directed Batgirl did. Not that I’m saying that’s what happened, it just freaking looks like it.

  • pachrist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    2 months ago

    You can’t use box office take to measure a movie’s success.

    Shawshank Redemption is often regarded as the best movie of all time. It was a box office flop.

    Battlefield Earth is often regarded as the worst movie of all all time. It was also a box office flop.

    Using those two examples, obviously the only true measure of a movie’s long term success is whether or not they overuse Dutch angles.

    If Folie a Deux doesn’t use a shit load of Dutch angles, maybe it’ll turn out OK.

  • Pringles@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I’m going to watch it tonight with my wife and despite the massive amount of negative reviews, I’m quite sure we will both like it.

    Update: We liked it.

    • GoosLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I watched it with my girlfriend. We both liked it. All the negativity seemed really exaggerated to me. I hope you guys will like it, too.

  • CCMan1701A@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    When I watched Sweeney Todd in theaters, half of the audience left when Johny Depp started singing. They didn’t know what they signed up for.

  • Tikiporch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    I think they’ll make their money back, but I don’t think part trois will be forthcoming.