• BigTrout75@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Well as long as profits are made there going to keep on churning out the same old.

    • ours@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Then good thing superhero movies are flopping and something like the biopic of a physicist made a ton of money.

      • Syntha@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Superhero movies are not flopping, dead on arrival capeshit schlock that no one asked for in the first place is flopping. Aquaman made 400 million dollars on a 200 million budget just in December.

        The “biopic of a physicist” was made by one of the most recognizable filmmakers in Hollywood and was further propelled forward by a once in a generation hype campaign that will be impossible to repeat, although there’s no doubt in my mind that studios will try nonetheless.

        • koberulz@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Making double your budget is basically breaking even, once you account for marketing costs and the cinema’s cut of the take.

          • Syntha@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Sure, and it’s very disappointing in comparison to the first Aquaman. But for being part of a retired cinematic universe and having comparatively little marketing it still performed alright.

            I’m just trying to point out that, because a few, even for superhero movie standards, shit films performed badly and Openheimer performed exceptionally, doesn’t mean that general audiences are tired of being fed recycled material.