Explore our other sites
  • jalopnik
  • kotaku
  • quartz
  • theroot
  • theinventory
    akabrownbear
    AKA
    akabrownbear

    Glenn Close was announced too - the cast is starting to look pretty good.

    Personally have the money to spend but I just don’t find going to the movies to be much fun. Nowadays, every movie has 30-40 minutes of true commercials and trailers that start at the listed start time of the film. And you’re also lucky if audience members don’t add their own soundtrack.

    I posted this in another thread here a week or two ago, but I don’t think your definition of a movie star really exists anymore. Moviegoers are more fickle these days, likely due to having way more entertainment options in general. Just about every actor I can think of has had notable flops, including The Rock. Tom

    I really don’t see why this is an issue for multiple reasons:

    Does this mean we’ll start getting daily casting announcements again?

    Maybe go sneak a peek at other character names in Mad Max.

    I mean...what they actually released was viewership for just about every one of the shows and movies on their service (I think they cap at a 100k views or something like that). So you can probably find that if you have a specific show in mind.

    Maybe. Or audiences just want traditional rom-coms. FWIW, Glen Powell is 35 so he’s not that much younger than Gosling or Blunt are.

    I’ve seen this definition before but by this definition, there are very, very few actual stars left. People don’t really go to movies solely for one individual actor anymore, at least not in masses. They don’t have to because they have way more entertainment options than before and they also can easily see how well a

    It’s literally mentioned in the article...

    Personally don’t understand what the appeal of being roasted by a bunch of random comedians is to begin with.

    I’ve watched Fringe start to finish like a half-dozen times, it definitely has monster of the week episodes that do little to nothing to advance the plot. Which again, is totally fine - it added to the show overall to have those episodes.

    There’s some irony in writing a review about a movie that the reviewer says is batshit insane in a batshit insane way.

    The reviews for this have been pretty good so far - even the bad reviews read as good in my book like the following:

    I mean there is context for why this is in the press. The movie is premeiring at Cannes and has largely been seen as a disaster production due to Coppola going severely over budget and having trouble finding a distribution partner. It makes sense that the press would be looking for insight into what happened.

    I’m surprised it took them this long - Donnie Yen was the standout of John Wick 4 and has been a great action star for some time now. Plus the very last scene clearly set up a sequel for his character.

    This isn’t a “group text” situation - Coppola is a powerful director who was also financing this whole film, he was everyone’s boss. People would rightfully be worried about losing their jobs if they criticized him publicly, even if they were in the right to do so. Especially given the state of Hollywood right now

    The director can, and did, spend his money however the fuck he wanted to. But the anonymous crew member has every right to talk about it and ridicule it as they want to. Just like every employee out there is entitled to blow off some steam about bosses they don’t particularly like doing things inefficiently or

    It’s funny that the co-producer thinks framing it this way makes it better. Coppola was funding and directing the movie - people would have felt compelled to accept his “kind” gesture whether they wanted it or not to secure their jobs.

    I thought Dumb Money was kind of mediocre. The surrealness of the Gamestop squeeze and all the hoopla that came with it was still pretty fresh on my mind and I felt like the movie did very little to add to it.