• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Deadline: Ghost in the Shell will Lose $60M+

Status
Not open for further replies.

BlueTsunami

there is joy in sucking dick
Every trailer features that disrobing scene of her in a skin tight bodysuit. I'd actually say GitS marketing used her attractiveness more than any other movie she's ever been in.

They even had a scene of her being all hot lesbian action that wasn't even in the film
 

Got

Banned
I kind of thought it would happen 15 years ago, so I've already given up hope.

With Ghost in the Shell I thought "so 90s anime kids are grown up and have families now, so maybe anime adaptations will finally hit the mainstream on that nostalgia tip?" Nope.

Doubt it will ever happen at this point.

if the story can hold up it'll happen.
 
Every trailer features that disrobing scene of her in a skin tight bodysuit. I'd actually say GitS marketing used her attractiveness more than any other movie she's ever been in.

That CG bodysuit looks like ass tho lol

What I mainly meant though was that the "star power" idea usually has more weight when it's linked to an actor or actresses actual ability, not an interchangeable quality like attractiveness

It's not even just that. Lucy is pretty straight forward. Hot blonde becomes superpowered bad-ass through the power of drugs and shitty science. I haven't seen Lucy to comment on her performance outside of the trailers, but I know she can be pretty charismatic from things like Don Jon.

Ghost in the Shell's trailers has her stone-faced the entire time, dressed in the weird stealth costume that looked better in the anime than it does in live action, and set against a largely digital cyberpunk future Tokyo. There's a lot to turn people off who aren't already into those concepts, and I didn't see anything from Scarlett that would convince someone otherwise if they weren't already sold.

She was definitely more human in Lucy. It looks like the director had her play Major more stonefaced for some reason, but even in the anime she's more expressive.
 

LotusHD

Banned
6qjxVfd.png
 

Effect

Member
Does she actually draw people to the movies or just happens to be in movies people want to see?

There are like 5 people that can actually claim pure star power

I think with her Lucy was the film where she drew people to see it. She had just come off of Avengers when she landed that. Then before Lucy came out Winter Solider dropped and was a big part of movie and was awesome in it. She was HOT at that moment. Then people saw Lucy and whatever you might think about it that film did not keep the fire hot. After that she was in Jungle Book, Avengers 2, and few other roles but those are the movies people want to see that she just happens to be in.

I know some might say this hurts her chances for getting a Black Widow film but I don't think that's the case. That's still going to be a Marvel film and a large group of people will see it simply because it's a Marvel film. Look at Ant Man and Dr. Strange. Those actors didn't sell those films. That was brand alone doing work. I do agree that the pitch for Lucy is super simple compared to GITS. I would argue there is no easy pitch for GITS when it comes to any version. I don't think you can pitch any given episode of the series easily.
 
What's the next movie to have a whitewhasing controversy that white Gaffers will swear up and down that it absolutely nothing to do with it bombing? Already did it with this and Exodus.

To be honest, I really don't think America cares that much about whitewashing for it tank a movie. Maybe a movie with a boatload of other problems like Ghost In the Shell, but otherwise not really.

Hell even the article cited in the OP even disputed that it was one of the major factors behind it bombing.
 
If Asians in general still like the movie how does that not prove how much of an overreaction the white washing issue has been. That isn't to say they still should have done it. Of course an Asian lead would be nice. But to use that as the sole reason to just shit all over it is ridiculous.
 
Lucy's trailer was simple and easy to understand. It has a simple pitch and a simple premise.

Explain the GitS plot from just watching a trailer.

That's what killed it.
 
Stephen King talked about why star power was bunk a long time ago and I still agree with him:

Entertainment Weekly said:
Maybe the closest thing we have to a bona fide movie star these days is Will Smith. USA Today officially crowned him in that purple Life section of theirs after Hitch scored $43.1 million in its opening weekend. The Hollywood trades have preened over him; so has this very magazine. But while no one disputes that Hitch has had a terrific run, and Columbia Pictures has every reason to be delighted (as does Will Smith), let’s not get carried away.

...

Did people really go to see Will Smith just because he was Will Smith? Sorry, don’t think so. I think they went to see Smith’s character teach the fat guy (beautifully played by Kevin James) how to dance and kiss. To get the girl, yeah, sure, but mostly how to dance and how to kiss. It was sweet, it was charming, and it was simple. Too simple for most studio execs, apparently, who can’t believe such sweet simplicity works unless you’ve got a 20-million-dollar man like Will Smith toplining the show. But in fact it did work, more than 20 years ago, when a virtual unknown named Kevin Bacon starred in a similar movie called Footloose.

Star power is a myth, but story power exists. Filmmakers consistently turn away from this fact, and that’s why filmgoers so seldom get what they’re more than willing to stand in line for. Story power is why Boogeyman, with no so-called ”stars” (except for its producer, Sam Raimi, and its shrewd PG-13 rating), can do $19 million on its opening weekend, far exceeding industry expectations. It’s why Diary of a Mad Black Woman opened with a jaw-dropping gross of $22 million. Man of the House, starring Academy Award winner (and acknowledged ”star”) Tommy Lee Jones, opened on 939 more screens the same weekend, but grossed a third as much. Why? Moviegoers wanted to see what happened after the Stinking Lawyer kicked out the Faithful Wife, that’s why. The same way they wanted to see what happened when the Troubled Young Man finally went back to confront his childhood fears in Boogeyman. Never mind the mostly negative criticism these films generated; like The Passion of the Christ, which also featured a no-name in the starring role (Jim Caviezel), these movies had stories people were willing to line up to see. The Texas Ranger and the Jiggly Cheerleaders, on the other hand? Been there, done that.

The way Will Smith has chosen his roles suggests a man who understands he is not a star, but instead a bankable actor who can greenlight a project almost single-handedly. And how long will that state of affairs continue? As long as Smith continues producing successes like Hitch; I, Robot; Bad Boys; and Men in Black — the kind of movies that allow play-it-safe producers to believe in a magic-bullet movie world where stars can deliver big box office even if the movies themselves are just the same dumb old dreck. It’s not the Will Smiths and Tom Cruises of the world who are stupid; far from it. In fact, they’re the ones who every so often save the really stupid guys from their worst excesses…can you say ”Heaven’s Gate”?

Creative and interesting works marketed well matter a lot more than the starring roles. It's why unknowns can make bank with things like Chronicle and Cloverfield, Paranormal Activity and Saw etc. These are all movies that managed to grab people not by the staring roles but because people wanted to see more of what they got in the trailer. The star power ideology is such a simplistic, limiting way to view cinema and it's why execs keep making shit that looses them money thinking The Rock or Emma Stone is bound to fill up theaters. I still say GitS should have had an Asian actress in the staring role. But they also did nothing with the material that made the adaptation seem necessary. They didn't make it more interesting, they didn't make it daring, they didn't try and they lost money.
 

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Video games just don't work as movies, at least the ones that get made anyways.
I think they can. But you're right, they don't.

There must be some trait of Hollywood why they don't treat game properties with much reverence. They don't have to be artless trash, but that's seen as appropriate for that type of licensed property.

I have hope that someday there will be a "The Dark Knight" of game movies. Anime adaptations? Not this generation. Maybe never.
 

Chumley

Banned
That CG bodysuit looks like ass tho lol

What I mainly meant though was that the "star power" idea usually has more weight when it's linked to an actor or actresses actual ability, not an interchangeable quality like attractiveness

Was it CG? I watched BTS videos of her wearing it.

And the star power thing is definitely not as big of a deal as it was 20 years ago, but the male 20 and 30 something crowd still goes nuts objectifying the hell out of actresses with bodies like Scarjo's. I think it's gradually becoming less relevant, but were not quite there yet.
 

PsychBat!

Banned
"Guys, the studio had no choice but to cast Sam Worthington & Jai Courtney as Tetsuo and Kaneda. It would've bombed even more if they cast asians."

what happens if you put two black holes of charisma in there?

I mean you're holding onto yours too so what's the issue?
you provided no sources or data to back up your statement of star power and just said "you're wrong".
 

hollomat

Banned
The craziest thing to me about movies like this is the marketing cost. This movie was a clear bomb, but they spent more than the entire production cost on marketing making into an even bigger bomb.

Obviously revenue would've been even lower without marketing, but there is no way the $140M marketing brought in anywhere near $140M.
 

Haly

One day I realized that sadness is just another word for not enough coffee.
hey

hey trokil

hey

do you want to move those goalposts some more
 

Slayven

Member
Stephen King talked about why star power was bunk a long time ago and I still agree with him:



Creative and interesting works marketed well matter a lot more than the starring roles. It's why unknowns can make bank with things like Chronicle and Cloverfield, Paranormal Activity and Saw etc. These are all movies that managed to grab people not by the staring roles but because people wanted to see more of what they got in the trailer. The star power ideology is such a simplistic, limiting way to view cinema and it's why execs keep making shit that looses them money thinking The Rock or Emma Stone is bound to fill up theaters. I still say GitS should have had an Asian actress in the staring role. But they also did nothing with the material that made the adaptation seem necessary. They didn't make it more interesting, they didn't make it daring, they didn't try and they lost money.
Stepehen King articles for EW are the best

Bull. It doesn't look like a 180mil movie.

Wait until he 150 mil Gambit movie
 

BlueTsunami

there is joy in sucking dick
As much as I'm bitter over how this film turned out I'm not surprised after having watched Producer of Dredd 3D, and The Grey Adi Shankars video on how a movie like Dredd 2 would be possible. Which brings to light just how hard it is to get a film financed...

https://youtu.be/kWP88WKVBKs

A film with what would be considered an obscure IP would hinge completely on its star power. What chafes my ass is why would you use an obscure IP to deliver such a boilerplate premise.

In the age of rotten tomatoes and meta scores, its harder to get away with tentople schlock unless youre a comic book hero*

*excluding Green Lantern and Fantastic 4 lol
 

Got

Banned
The craziest thing to me about movies like this is the marketing cost. This movie was a clear bomb, but they spent more than the entire production cost on marketing making into an even bigger bomb.

Obviously revenue would've been even lower without marketing, but there is no way the $140M marketing brought in anywhere near $140M.

they made a gamble and it didn't work. pretty much the whole industry runs this way. they were already sunk in so deep they hoped spending more would dig them out.
 
If Asians in general still like the movie how does that not prove how much of an overreaction the white washing issue has been. That isn't to say they still should have done it. Of course an Asian lead would be nice. But to use that as the sole reason to just shit all over it is ridiculous.

Why would Japanese people care in the first place when they are the majority in their own country, where they have their own movie industry?

To them it's not taking a role away from a Japanese actor or actress, it's white people in Hollywood making an unoriginal movie using Japanese material.

Was it CG? I watched BTS videos of her wearing it.

And the star power thing is definitely not as big of a deal as it was 20 years ago, but the male 20 and 30 something crowd still goes nuts objectifying the hell out of actresses with bodies like Scarjo's. I think it's gradually becoming less relevant, but were not quite there yet.

Is it real? It always looks like a separate object to me.

And yeah, what you're saying about young guys and her body is true, but they can also easily see that for free anywhere, and not shell out 18 bucks to sit through a not-so-great movie.
 

Haly

One day I realized that sadness is just another word for not enough coffee.
I offered articles pointing to statistics showing the latter. It's not my opinion, it's simply what it is.

We live in a world where facts are also as subjective as opinions didn't you get the memo?
 

kswiston

Member
Bull. It doesn't look like a 180mil movie.

The loss in the title is based on the reported budget, which was $110M.

That said, I have heard someone on GAF claim that virtually every big budget film doesn't look like it costs what it was reported to cost.

I don't think people have a good grasp on what films cost, especially since production budgets are more than visual effects. Does the Revenant look like it cost $135M?
 

Haly

One day I realized that sadness is just another word for not enough coffee.
Movies that are actually happening.

It's actually happening but it's not getting whitewashed.

It's getting hispanicwashed, and I'm interested in seeing how that'll turn out.
 

Got

Banned
We live in a world where facts are also as subjective as opinions didn't you get the memo?

yes, the fact that she's involved in projects that earn substantial amounts of money so she earns a high paycheck for subsequent films.
 
Liam Hemsworth has 2 films over 600M, 1 over 700M, and 1 over 800M.

Star power. Pay the man.

how about they deport all these australian bums instead. except Joel Edgerton, Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe and Guy Pearce. They've proved their talent numerous times.

the hemsworth brothers, courtney and worthington are awful.
 

PsychBat!

Banned
how about they deport all these australian bums instead. except Joel Edgerton, Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe and Guy Pearce. They've proved their talent numerous times.

the hemsworth brothers, courtney and worthington are awful.

HEY! Chris still has a chance. If Thor 3 has a black hole of charisma in there, I'll concede to your demands.
 

Hitman

Edmonton's milkshake attracts no boys.
Its not Scarlett's fault, it's not white-washing's fault, it's cause the movie SUCKS. And you can blame that mostly on the shitty director Ruper Sanders.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom