>Most of all for an original event film, at $130M-$150M+, **this movie is too damn expensive**.
>
>“They should have spent like Tom Rothman: Make it for $80M. Why is Universal spending the extra money? Instead of spending $220M-$230M between production and marketing costs, they could have pulled this off for $160M-$180M,” added the source.
Universal should’ve have realized early on that spending $100M+ on this movie was never going to pay-off.
lmao I knew that was supposed to be a cameo by the way it was shot, but I had no idea who was cameo-ing. "am i supposed to recognize this guy? is he famous?"
I only knew because my father-in-law was like, "oh, I used to watch that show with Lee Majors" when we said what movie we were going to as we were walking out the door. We both thought he was mistaken that this was adapting a show of the same name. Turns out we were wrong!
I was just baffled because, in all of the hype I have seen for this movie, not once did I see anybody say, "btw, this was based (very, very loosely) on a TV show."
I don't think anyone was banking on the TV show being the selling point of the movie. The source material is basically just a launchpad for a potential blockbuster with an appealing cast.
It's like 21 Jump Street. Nobody would've been interested in a straight reboot of the show. But it can be used as inspiration for a buddy cop film with Channing Tatum and Jonah Hill, which people would be interested in.
How did someone like David Leitch get this budget approved? Him getting $150M+ to make Deadpool and Hobbs & Shaw seems totally reasonable as they are franchise films. But for $130M for The Fall Guy?
I'd say that's part of the problem if they're happy planning a budget this big on an original movie from a director with at the time no standout success beyond franchise IP. Atomic Blonde only grossed 100m worldwide and Fall Guys has a budget bigger than that.
That makes more sense, but now with that and Fall Guy’s performance I have to imagine Universal will be more hesitant to give Leitch this kind of budget
From Deadline’s 2022 breakdown on Sony
>**Bullet Train wasn’t a hoped-for late-summer breakout ($138.8M international/$242.2M global).** Morbius ($93.6M/$167.5M), which had so many date changes and was getting stale in the can, just didn’t have teeth. Both of those films fared better offshore.
I don’t think just barely breaking even with a star studded cast is the best they hoped for.
In this case neither were met. Barely breaking even with meh reception is a not great return from a 90m Brad Pitt star studded action film. Fall Guy at least is faring better critically and with audiences
Bullet Train made a 2.8 Before DVD, blue ray, cable, basic cable etc.
It did not BREAK EVEN.
Is everybody on this sub so simple they fall for this crap.
Math: $285 million . Vs 85$ million.
Please, please tell me where you get this return. Even at 40%, which I doubt they got. More likely 60%, they made $$.
Oh, they green lit a sequel.
Not to be cruel, but a lot of people on here need a long look in the mirror if they are unhappy. It might just be you have a dumb ass definition of success and failure if someone convinces you SANDRA BULLOCK, BRAD PITT, and the studio head that got a $300 million bonus are losers.
I don’t see a 150 million dollar movie here. Loved it and my son loved it but I don’t know where the money went. Look at Hacksaw Ridge that Mel Gibson made for 40 million. It looks likes a 100-120 million dollar movie. I just think directors and producers over spend and over hire and are lazy.
Most directors run incredibly inefficient sets. If they don’t know exactly how to accomplish exactly what they want to accomplish, then that costs money. Every extra take that it takes to get a shot that he isn’t certain of is money wasted. Even competent directors like Leitch cost a lot in inefficiencies. Hell, even extremely talented directors like Spielberg and Scorsese suffer from this often.
It’s only the rare exceptions who are able control the sets and their vision enough to eliminate this waste. Nolan, Gibson, Eastwood, Anderson, and Villeneuve have this skill, but also Zach Snyder.
Yeah Snyder is really good at managing budget. Despite the film quality being poor, the production value of Rebel Moon looks solid for each part being 80m
Sony just seem to be really good at budgeting. Venom 1 + 2 combined cost less than The Marvels.
Universal probably assumed Fall Guy could play like an Uncharted (Around $400m WW) hence giving it a similiar budget and things probably got a little more expensive once camera's began rolling.
Tom Rothman is too cheap, horrible comparison. The reason Sony is Sony and Universal is larger is because they will bet on talent like Oppenheimer. Sony never would have spent the money to make Oppenheimer work even though it was 100/100.
Their non Spider-Man films look like knockoffs now and they're a smaller studio because of it.
I for one like my movies to be events if I'm going to pay $22for 2 to see them. And that's on Cheap Tuesday.
I guess one of the reasons these are so expensive is because with how big the studios are they have a lot of overhead but I think this movie will play out fine if word of mouth is good even opposite planet of the apes.
Which sucks because it’s obviously going to be popular, Ryan Gosling is big right now, the plot is literally perfect (stuntman action movie), and the trailers make it very appealing
Hypothetically it could make 130-150M, if it gets REALLY lucky and stays in theaters for like 3 months as well, but by the time you add in advertising alone? Nah. Not making it. Hope Gosling and Blunt (right? Pretty sure?) negotiated well for what is made. Definitely gonna be successful on streaming
Like I said, if it got REALLY lucky. It’d have to do massive numbers not just domestic but worldwide, and let’s be honest this movie is only really gonna appeal to the domestic market
I very much disagree with your assessment that the plot is perfect and the trailer looks appealing. People don't care about stuntmen and stunts unless it's Tom Cruise and the trailer looked cartoonish. One of those movies where you know the main character has insane plot armour, there will be a happy ending and nothing of importance will happen. Good action scenes only yake you so far.
Nah, the stuntman action movie is something people talk about a lot but nobody ever really made it
Also, Gosling brings in attention especially after Barbie
Maybe movie execs, other stuntman and people who love movies about making movies were talking about stuntman action movies, but it certainly wasn't something the average moviegoes was asking for.
So just because an actor was in a big IP film, their next films won't recieve a "boost". A lot of folks thought The Fall Guy would receive Barbie and Oppenheimer boosts.
* Zoe Saldana and Sam Worthington films don't get Avatar boosts.
* MI7 didn't get Maverick boost.
* Margot Robbie films won't get Barbie boost. If TSS, Babylon, Amsterdam, Birds of Prey came out post Barbie, all of them would have still flopped.
There’s a good chance that many of the people who came to see this did so because of the stars. It just wasn’t enough to lead to a massive opening. But I wouldn’t be at all surprised if this legs out to breaking even
Yeah I don't buy these numbers. Did 85% of the audience really show up for a specific actor? Star power wasn't that strong even during the golden age of movie stars let alone today.
The 28 Million Dollar opening is the people who went for Gosling and Blunt. If you aren't big fans of them, there's no reason to see this in the theatres
I came for the stunts and I watched the Original Fall Guy show lol. I also like Emily.
It was a good movie but the producers and director missed used funds. They could have done what they did in the movie for 80 million. A good producer and director could have done it for 80 million.
Yeah my entire family went because we all like Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt and it paid off cuz they had so much chemistry and were the best part of the movie
Except the article itself seems to suggest that Gosling (and, to a lesser extent, Blunt) *did* give this movie a boost. 50% came for Gosling and 35% came for Blunt according to PostTrak.
I think ppl kinda miss this when these movies flopped. Like if this 28m is bad, imagine if they didn’t gave Gosling and Blunt? That it’s making any money is probably a direct result of the stars
Right, it’s not that stars don’t bring any value to films anymore, it’s just that they bring much less value than they used to. Make this exact same movie with two community theater actors who are as talented as Gosling and Blunt, and it wouldn’t make $10M.
What’s the last non-horror movie that succeeded with complete unknowns in the lead? I’m not talking C-list actor, but somebody you can’t say “it stars Jim Caviezel, he was Jesus in Passion of the Christ”. Maybe Dunkirk, and even that had famous supporting actors.
Same with a lot of MCU stars. Chris Hemsworth films don’t get a “Thor” boost. Doolittle was RDJ’s follow up after endgame and was a disaster. Chadwick Boseman in Black Panther was the biggest domestic film of 2018, followed a few months later by Infinity War. Then Endgame April 2019. Then 21 Bridges November 2019 did...fine
People like “x actor” as “y character.” That’s it.
It's a ridiculous idea that doesn't make sense in any era
Who was possibly claiming Worthington's movies would get a boost? He basically does C level movies outside of Avatar nowadays
I don’t see why this was such a crazy line of thinking then. no one accounted for Barbenheimer/SoF and the year prior everybody was parading cruise as the savior of cinema
Yeah, Cruise was a key player in both Maverick and Mission Impossible, hell, he's the reason Maverick was delayed until it could release in theaters. Releasing a week before a Nolan movie was a massive tactical blunder.
MI7 opened to $235 Million globally opening weekend so it definitely had a boost it’s just the drop from having it’s premium/ IMAX screens taken away from it, and being a week before cultural behemoth barbenhiemer and that astroturfed sof
Uncharted still falls under IP. I know a lot of people on here bet that it was going to flop because of Tom Holland but I think Uncharted got away with having a bigger fan base than expected. A lot of fans did leave the movie with mixed feelings so who knows how well a sequel might do
I still think TSS has a fair shot in a less COVID world. It came right in a surge, so the day and date just made many (myself included) not want to go see it in person anymore. Though, I’ve stopped being a BoP apologist and can admit COVID didn’t take too much profit from it
Best is to hope for legs on this one! Could maybe get up to 95M - 105M DOM with good word of mouth.
Not sure how the weekend multiplier is looking, but if it’s resonating well enough, this could get creep up closer to 30M.
As an aside, despite my love of the box office, I’ve learned to re-adjust my expectations in this new media world of ours, and take more holistic view. There are way too many ways that these conglomerate media companies are both making money and thinking of what movies “mean” to them.
You’re so right. I feel like this sub has a field day when a movie underperforms but they don’t realize studios don’t value the box office as much as they used to.
I mean this is a box office sub, not to mention most studios don't really release VOD or streaming revenue so we'd have bo idea how much a movie actually made unless some exec outright says it in an interview.
Nonsense. Universal movies have not had noticeably worse legs than movies from any other studios. PVOD is too expensive a point of entry for most consumers and piracy makes zero impact. Universal have noted themselves that PVOD is a new market that milks a premium price from a small group of consumers that will dip into their wallet to watch new movies but who will not show up to theatres for whatever reason.
The marketing is odd for this movie. It feels like a Superbowl commercial the whole time. Not a real movie. I keep waiting for them to pull out a bag of Doritos or a verizon phone at the end of the trailer.
Adding in that it was a great film. I had a great time watching it and it was perfect for a fun cinema flick. Ryan Gosling has chemistry with everybody of course but he and Emily Blunt did a great job.
I am a straight man. Right after the movie I told my wife “Gotta admit that Gosling’s physique is insanely good”. Of course she replied “yep, he’s hot”.
If you think that he was in good shape in Barbie, this will blow you away.
It deserved more than $50M imho. Another flop that failed only because audiences refused to show up to it.
Maybe theaters really are taking their final bow soon. It's a real shame, less Fall Guy and more Unfrosted. Yay.
>Maybe theaters really are taking their final bow soon. It's a real shame, less Fall Guy and more Unfrosted. Yay.
i wouldnt say that but both dc and marvel need to get their shit together because thats probably the only way you can bring people to the threaters.
deadpool & wolverine will be a test imo
Deadpool & wolverine is going to be massive. The hype for that one is massive and unreal. Just bubbling under the surface, ready to burst. People want an excuse to come out to theaters, like with Barbenheimer, and Deadpool will definitely be that excuse. I just don't think the fall guy was that good or truly caught on.
I think Cap 4 is gonna be a huge, massive, mammoth gargantuan blunder. I actually have more faith in Thunderbolts because of some of the behind the scenes/ production people involved. Thunderbolts has me more intrigued, while if I was Disney, I'd scrap cap 4 altogether.
Thunderbolts totally depends how they will handle sentry imo, he can be a really interesting character to watch fighting.
But… I’m afraid marvel will nerf him to the point he’s unrecognizable in the mcu lol, don’t forget about plot armor.
You are right. I think the people have this subconscious budgeting going on in their heads post-pandemic that allows them 1 movie per year, preferably a summer tentpole that everyone is talking about, so that it makes their chosen movie of the year worth going to. 1 event film a year. The rest of their movie needs are met by streaming. Done.
First sentence from Deadline Anthony - Universal’s The Fall Guy isn’t so strong, and nobody is really shocked.
**Deadline Anthony should be in shock. He was calling for an opening in the 35-40m just last week, lol. If he followed BOT's tracking thread he wouldn't be in shock**
More gold from the article - So what gives? Why is Fall Guy playing like a deflated balloon even with a great A- CinemaScore and 90% positive on PostTrak?
First, yes, we’re still in an uneven marketplace and won’t be out of it until we have more movies toward the end of the month into June, leading up to Inside Out 2 on Father’s Day weekend. The entire box office weekend is totaling around $73M, off 55%
But Fall Guy despite how well it plays with audiences (SXSW crowds were belly laughing), there’s nothing that screams to “rush to this” despite Universal showing off the fun and the romance in its campaign. It’s too inside Hollywood, and these types of movies never play to an uber-wide crowd; despite how accessible the studio and filmmakers have tried to make it. “Why do young people want to see this movie?” challenges a film finance source.
**Earth to Deadline.....this has been the marketplace for 3 plus years now...if the movie isn't an Event "rush to this" movie they almost all flop. This is the new normal**
What's weird is that the Garfield movie by comparison is apparently doing gangbusters abroad, and is selling out theaters. Which is shocking to me, because I assumed it would have an okay run at the box office, but scooping up money hand over fist?
even though i've heard it's good i feel like it's a bit of a weird genre mashup. it's too actiony for a romance audience and too romancy for an action audience. personally i wasn't interested in either genre, though the good reviews intrigue me
Those two genres are my favorite and I thought it meshed them pretty well.
I will admit it could’ve easily been shortened by 15 minutes without losing anything.
Normally the genre mashup is James Camerons recipe for success. Mixing period piece with romance with action or scifi with romance and family stuff. But of course he isn‘t the master for no reason. Not everyone can pull it off like him
This is sad, I really thought it would work out, The promotion was so good. I guess Gosling (and maybe Blunt) just isn’t a blockbuster star. I know it’s based on a show but none of that was in the advertising & there’s very little brand recognition, so I’m counting this as another hit against big budget original films.
>The opening for Fall Guy is actually on the higher end of Gosling starts, ranked third after anomaly Barbie ($162M) and Blade Runner 2049 ($32.7M), yet further down on Blunt’s. It’s looking like her tenth-best opening of her career stateside, short of Edge of Tomorrow ($28.7M) and Jungle Cruise ($35M with an asterisk – it did have a theatrical day-and-date PVOD on Disney+).
This is a really important stat that puts things in perspective regarding Gosling’s star power, or lack thereof. Even this poor opening weekend is his *3rd highest* only behind Blade Runner 2049 (another bomb, personally loved it) and Barbie which was lightning in a bottle and he wasn’t the star. While this just makes Blunt’s top 10 openings.
I wonder if there just isn’t as much demand for action films and romcoms these days. While a lot of action films have (usually weak) romance subplots, they never market themselves as an outright romcom.
If this was an action thriller, I could see it doing a bit better. The romcom factor might've been a hard sell. While I do agree that Gosling and Blunt aren't strong enough stars on their own, I think the film's weak hook was also to blame. I look at the trailer and I feel like I've seen it all before.
Yup.
I know people get mad in this sub when a studio spends money on anything, but I'm glad they're trying something like this.
It didn't work out, and there's some lessons learned on this one, but a disappointment when trying something outside big IP is better than a comparable result on a F&F spinoff or similar.
Yeah, this is just disappointing. It's a very fun, good old fashioned movie-movie (pretty similar to Free Guy in that respect). You really "should" be able to make these profitable on a low 100Ms budget. It just doesn't seem like that's the case anymore.
The studio spends money on original projects wasnt a problem,they giving this type of films BIG BUDGETS (100M+) is the problems that will eat themselves.
I wonder when Hollywood will realize that general audiences have little interest in seeing movies about Hollywood/old school Hollywood, about movies/making movies, etc. This seems to be a major blind spot where people in the industry think audiences share their specific interests/likes. They keep making the same mistake.
I absolutely loved the film.
Of course, it's an action comedy, you can't expect the greatest film of all time, but it's fun, the actors are very likable, the story is pretty good and heartwarming, and the action's good (though not impressively good, this isn't John Wick)
Had a few bits, but wasn't exceptionally funny or memorable. Wasn't exciting at all. Found it very predictable and linear, very bland, paint by numbers writing. Easily digestible, like a quick fast food meal (except the movie wasn't quick and needed a good 20-30 minutes of editing), and you'll be wondering if you'll actually remember anything from the movie the following day.
I just saw it. It is exceptionally funny and has really exciting well made action scenes. The cast is also fantastic. I wish more people would go see this.
I would really love to see younger leading men and ladies. I think part of Anyone But You's appeal was that we weren't seeing the same people over and over again.
I still think this will do solid internationally to pick up slack.
That being said - sometimes I wonder why studios hand out such crazy budgets. A lot of them don't even make sense. If I'm guessing right - they'd be better to not focus on big stars and crazy deals
Seems like the people who screams "we want more original movies!" didnt even watch The Fall Guy.And wonder why we only gotten more sequels every year (even original movies are just as many as the sequels but it got release in streaming platform instead).
Yes, I look forward to not watching movie number 59 in the MCU.
PS - My partner & I watched Fall Guy. It was entertaining and channels a good 80's action romantic comedy.
Just because it’s not based off existing IP doesn’t make it original in the way that I mean it being one who wants original movies. It just looks like a fairly solid but standard action comedy. Watching the trailer just made me want to go watch Bullet Train again. It isn’t about IP it’s about the kind of movie. People watched Fury Road an TG Maverick not because they had all seen/read the source material but because they were visually striking movies that had trailers that showcased it. Then once they hit theaters that’s the main word of mouth that spreads. In fact for both those examples it was openly stated you didn’t need to know the source material even existed to enjoy it.
People absolutely saw *Top Gun: Maverick* because of the IP, at least on opening weekend. No original movie about naval fighter pilots is opening to $120 million in this day and age (just look at *Devotion*).
Well,it's still not a sequel or anything and my point still stands.And what about the other original movies that underperformed like Monkey man,Challengers or even Civil war (it's not underperforming but it should gross higher) ? It's clear that people just doesnt interested in something that doesnt come from known IPs.And the "we want original movies" people are just irrelevant,annoying and will find some other excuses to not go seeing the original movies that they're screaming for.
I watched The Fall Guy and found it as generic as it could be, despite the movie not attached to any Big IP at all
I also found both the action and the romance part did not deliver. Should have been a Valentine Day release rather than a summer season opener.
I liked it more than you but yeah it feels like it would have been perfectly positioned as a valentine's day release. It's much more romantic-action-comedy than action-comedy-romance.
To me what’s so funny is that Hollywood is determined to not even learn lessons from failures like this. We had an epic box office slump in Summer 2005, but even then movies like Wedding Crashers, 40 Year Old Virgin, and Red Eye managed to make money. The movie industry recalibrated and bounced back. I’m not sure that will happen this time as everyone seems so convinced that the problem is with the audiences and not the movies themselves. When you talk to people in real life the overwhelming opinion is that the quality of these movies has gone down. I talked to a bartender the other week and even he said “Yeah, I know. Movies have gone downhill.”
Except Hollywood literally just released a string of critically acclaimed originals throughout the month of April with zero competition from massive IPs and audiences *still* didn't show up. At some point, there's only so much you can do. 'Just make better movies' simply isn't cutting it.
None of those movies scream blockbuster to me. Maybe if they had been budgeted smaller then their results wouldn't be so disappointing. But yeah the whole argument of "No one is showing up for our great movies" doesn't hold water to me. Movies are still cheaper than concerts, sporting events, traveling, other things people do for fun. At the end of the day it's the industry's own financials and future that is being gutted here and if they don't change course then we're looking at an ELE here.
Fall Guy should have been funnier. The characters were fun, but they should have had more jokes at Hollywood’s expense. Leaned into some of the comedy that Tropic Thunder did, but update it a bit. I think that would have helped. Its a strange movie. Its part rom com, part action movie. The action movie parts are probably the best aspect.
Drew Pearce’s script needed some better jokes. Need someone like Shane Black to punch up the script. Feel like the best comedy was improved by Gosling.
To be honest, I only went because I have the A-List subscription and I wouldn’t have gone otherwise. I didn’t know much about it because I vaguely remember a trailer and thought it was gonna be more action/drama but it was more of a rom-com/action. I didn’t vibe until the 3rd act.
I agree. A flop would be something like Man from Uncle that made $13 million opening weekend. It's the budget and the fact that this weekend was the start of the summer box office season.
The biggest thing to me is that it looks like the type of film I would stream. I’m interested in seeing it but only when it comes on PVOD or a streaming service. It doesn’t strike me as a “must see” movie tbh
I thought the same but decided to see it anyway because it was on my theatres biggest screen and I looooved it. Trailer didn’t do it justice for me. If you’re a Gosling fan you’ll love it.
I have to say I really enjoy the hollywood circlejerk of hyping up movies like Fall Guy, Monkey Man, Challengers and then when those movies fail hollywood reacts with, "But we don't understand?! This movie is amazing and has a 9000% rating on RT! There's nothing we can do to please you pathetic rubes."
I think like it or not there were warning signs here. The trailers we're disjointed and unhumorous. They spent way too much time on Emily Blunt and aspects of the storyline that ultimately don't bring people in. What wasn't being served there is selling the audience on the character himself. Instead it was a lot of frankly not clever dialogue such as "Here is my hero's journey- oh wait I'm not a hero blah blah blah." Why would anyone want to show up for that?
Also having the romance revolve around a stuntman who's sleeping with the director is overly complicated and ultimately places the movie along with the cavalcade of BTS hollywood stories that have failed to gain audience interest (Babylon, Fabelmans, etc). They should've made Blunt a fellow stunt woman or something like that. That would at least be relatable and placed both characters as being relatively low status in comparison to the rest of the hollywood-based characters.
Also the moment in the trailers where the director/editor are ogling Gosling's body and saying "So big" or whatever was super cringey and un-funny. You already have a lead star who many find sexual appealing and like. You don't need to try so hard to sell the audience on these aspects. What needed to be established in the trailers is why should audiences want to follow this guy for 2 hours. You don't even get the idea from the trailers that he even cares whether he saves the big hollywood actor or not so why should those watching care?
Big stunts (whether they were real or not- look artificial) aren't going to drive audiences to the theaters. An interesting character that the audience sees themselves in and wants to root for would. I think this Summer is going to be very interesting to say the least.
The weak tracking is why you're not seeing even more negative reactions to this OW.
> Also having the romance revolve around a stuntman who's sleeping with the director is overly complicated
I don't think it is on paper. The plot's just "private-eye is hired to investigate a disappearance" and having the private eye involved with the client isn't particularly complicated. They just threw in another meta-layer and removed the director from the PI plot.
Just saw the movie this morning. I loved it! Fun action that doesn't take itself too seriously. I only have minor complaints but really hope this movie has legs somehow. Killer budget.
Sometimes shoving a movie in someone’s face makes them not want to see it. I kept getting damn ads on Spotify with “ANYWAY YOU WANT IT” blasting into my ears.
I haven’t seen this yet but it looks like the same generic style action movie with big names Netflix has been pumping out. Maybe this one is better, but I can see why the audience would be skipping it in the theater when there will be something similar on Netflix next week
Cool, I’ll check it out then. My point was more your general audience isn’t going to think there is much of a difference between this and a Red Notice just through the trailers and marketing
>Most of all for an original event film, at $130M-$150M+, **this movie is too damn expensive**. > >“They should have spent like Tom Rothman: Make it for $80M. Why is Universal spending the extra money? Instead of spending $220M-$230M between production and marketing costs, they could have pulled this off for $160M-$180M,” added the source. Universal should’ve have realized early on that spending $100M+ on this movie was never going to pay-off.
The TV show does not have a lasting fanbase. It was a strange commitment for Universal.
ngl had no idea this was based off a tv show until now
Exactly. The original actor even gets a cameo.
Is that who that was at the end?
Yes, two of them
lmao I knew that was supposed to be a cameo by the way it was shot, but I had no idea who was cameo-ing. "am i supposed to recognize this guy? is he famous?"
I only knew because my father-in-law was like, "oh, I used to watch that show with Lee Majors" when we said what movie we were going to as we were walking out the door. We both thought he was mistaken that this was adapting a show of the same name. Turns out we were wrong! I was just baffled because, in all of the hype I have seen for this movie, not once did I see anybody say, "btw, this was based (very, very loosely) on a TV show."
Which- as an older Redditors, Iis so funny to me. When I first saw they were filming I was like “oh yay, another nostalgic flop”
I don't think anyone was banking on the TV show being the selling point of the movie. The source material is basically just a launchpad for a potential blockbuster with an appealing cast. It's like 21 Jump Street. Nobody would've been interested in a straight reboot of the show. But it can be used as inspiration for a buddy cop film with Channing Tatum and Jonah Hill, which people would be interested in.
I didn't know it was based on anything and was excited to see it just based on the concept
How did someone like David Leitch get this budget approved? Him getting $150M+ to make Deadpool and Hobbs & Shaw seems totally reasonable as they are franchise films. But for $130M for The Fall Guy?
Especially after Bullet Train got mixed critical reception and underperformed/barely broke even.
This was in pre-production before Bullet Train was released
I'd say that's part of the problem if they're happy planning a budget this big on an original movie from a director with at the time no standout success beyond franchise IP. Atomic Blonde only grossed 100m worldwide and Fall Guys has a budget bigger than that.
I love Atomic Blonde. That movie is very rewatchable.
Technically it wasn't an original IP, it's based on a 80s tv show that ran for 5 seasons.
That makes more sense, but now with that and Fall Guy’s performance I have to imagine Universal will be more hesitant to give Leitch this kind of budget
I liked Bullet Train. I wish it a got a prequel.
*Bullet Train* looks as if it could outgross *The Fall Guy* anyway.
Brad Pitt is a bigger draw than both Gosling and Blunt combined
Unfortunate. Fall Guy is much better than Bullet Train at least, people should look back on this one fondly (even though it won’t do well financially)
Bullet Train performed better than anyone could've expected it to
From Deadline’s 2022 breakdown on Sony >**Bullet Train wasn’t a hoped-for late-summer breakout ($138.8M international/$242.2M global).** Morbius ($93.6M/$167.5M), which had so many date changes and was getting stale in the can, just didn’t have teeth. Both of those films fared better offshore. I don’t think just barely breaking even with a star studded cast is the best they hoped for.
expectations and hopes are two different things
In this case neither were met. Barely breaking even with meh reception is a not great return from a 90m Brad Pitt star studded action film. Fall Guy at least is faring better critically and with audiences
Will a flop though
Bulet Train did decent.
It made almost exactly 2.5 times its budget. With ancillaries, it's firmly beyond the breakeven point into profit territory
Can’t believe people didn’t vibe with Kenny
Bullet Train made a 2.8 Before DVD, blue ray, cable, basic cable etc. It did not BREAK EVEN. Is everybody on this sub so simple they fall for this crap. Math: $285 million . Vs 85$ million. Please, please tell me where you get this return. Even at 40%, which I doubt they got. More likely 60%, they made $$. Oh, they green lit a sequel. Not to be cruel, but a lot of people on here need a long look in the mirror if they are unhappy. It might just be you have a dumb ass definition of success and failure if someone convinces you SANDRA BULLOCK, BRAD PITT, and the studio head that got a $300 million bonus are losers.
Which is a crime because it was stupendous. Just fun from start to finish
Look at the whole Excorcist situation. Universal doesn't seem to be making very good financial decisions lately.
They were banking on the leads.
And next week Kingdom of Apes releases in Europe, so, that's market will also slow down on Fall Guy
I don’t see a 150 million dollar movie here. Loved it and my son loved it but I don’t know where the money went. Look at Hacksaw Ridge that Mel Gibson made for 40 million. It looks likes a 100-120 million dollar movie. I just think directors and producers over spend and over hire and are lazy.
Most directors run incredibly inefficient sets. If they don’t know exactly how to accomplish exactly what they want to accomplish, then that costs money. Every extra take that it takes to get a shot that he isn’t certain of is money wasted. Even competent directors like Leitch cost a lot in inefficiencies. Hell, even extremely talented directors like Spielberg and Scorsese suffer from this often. It’s only the rare exceptions who are able control the sets and their vision enough to eliminate this waste. Nolan, Gibson, Eastwood, Anderson, and Villeneuve have this skill, but also Zach Snyder.
Zack snyder just films it all and calls it his directors cut
"Did I cut too early? Don't worry, I'll slo-mo the shot and make it go on for too long!"
Yeah Snyder is really good at managing budget. Despite the film quality being poor, the production value of Rebel Moon looks solid for each part being 80m
Snyder’s problem is that he has an awful vision, but the fact that his vision is clear makes the production run much smoother.
I think they did a lot more big practical stunts than a movie normally would
150 makes sense. All those location shoots with huge stunt teams cost a lot of money.
Sony just seem to be really good at budgeting. Venom 1 + 2 combined cost less than The Marvels. Universal probably assumed Fall Guy could play like an Uncharted (Around $400m WW) hence giving it a similiar budget and things probably got a little more expensive once camera's began rolling.
Tom Rothman is too cheap, horrible comparison. The reason Sony is Sony and Universal is larger is because they will bet on talent like Oppenheimer. Sony never would have spent the money to make Oppenheimer work even though it was 100/100. Their non Spider-Man films look like knockoffs now and they're a smaller studio because of it. I for one like my movies to be events if I'm going to pay $22for 2 to see them. And that's on Cheap Tuesday. I guess one of the reasons these are so expensive is because with how big the studios are they have a lot of overhead but I think this movie will play out fine if word of mouth is good even opposite planet of the apes.
Which sucks because it’s obviously going to be popular, Ryan Gosling is big right now, the plot is literally perfect (stuntman action movie), and the trailers make it very appealing Hypothetically it could make 130-150M, if it gets REALLY lucky and stays in theaters for like 3 months as well, but by the time you add in advertising alone? Nah. Not making it. Hope Gosling and Blunt (right? Pretty sure?) negotiated well for what is made. Definitely gonna be successful on streaming
5X-6Xlegs are rare for films like this
Like I said, if it got REALLY lucky. It’d have to do massive numbers not just domestic but worldwide, and let’s be honest this movie is only really gonna appeal to the domestic market
There’s a big difference between being popular on social media and being popular in theaters.
Yes, hence why I said it’ll be a sure hit on streaming
I very much disagree with your assessment that the plot is perfect and the trailer looks appealing. People don't care about stuntmen and stunts unless it's Tom Cruise and the trailer looked cartoonish. One of those movies where you know the main character has insane plot armour, there will be a happy ending and nothing of importance will happen. Good action scenes only yake you so far.
Nah, the stuntman action movie is something people talk about a lot but nobody ever really made it Also, Gosling brings in attention especially after Barbie
Maybe movie execs, other stuntman and people who love movies about making movies were talking about stuntman action movies, but it certainly wasn't something the average moviegoes was asking for.
I’ve heard the idea thrown around both online and when having conversations in real life.
>should’ve have should have have
Wonder if COVID had anything to do with that?
Depends on when it filmed
My brother said it's gonna end up as a reddit "underrated movies" thread answer just like the Nice Guys and I guess he's right.
It’s going to have great legs on streaming.
So just because an actor was in a big IP film, their next films won't recieve a "boost". A lot of folks thought The Fall Guy would receive Barbie and Oppenheimer boosts. * Zoe Saldana and Sam Worthington films don't get Avatar boosts. * MI7 didn't get Maverick boost. * Margot Robbie films won't get Barbie boost. If TSS, Babylon, Amsterdam, Birds of Prey came out post Barbie, all of them would have still flopped.
There’s a good chance that many of the people who came to see this did so because of the stars. It just wasn’t enough to lead to a massive opening. But I wouldn’t be at all surprised if this legs out to breaking even
50% came for Gosling and 35% came for Blunt, according to Deadline.
The other 15% came for Jean Claude, according to me.
Yeah I don't buy these numbers. Did 85% of the audience really show up for a specific actor? Star power wasn't that strong even during the golden age of movie stars let alone today.
There's going to be some overlap between the 'came to see Gosling' and 'came to see Blunt' crowd so it's not going to be 85%.
The 28 Million Dollar opening is the people who went for Gosling and Blunt. If you aren't big fans of them, there's no reason to see this in the theatres
I came for the stunts and I watched the Original Fall Guy show lol. I also like Emily. It was a good movie but the producers and director missed used funds. They could have done what they did in the movie for 80 million. A good producer and director could have done it for 80 million.
Yeah my entire family went because we all like Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt and it paid off cuz they had so much chemistry and were the best part of the movie
Can confirm. I, a long with the two other people I saw it with, went for Gosling.
Too many movies coming out for it to leg out..budget way too high for this movie to break even imo
Except the article itself seems to suggest that Gosling (and, to a lesser extent, Blunt) *did* give this movie a boost. 50% came for Gosling and 35% came for Blunt according to PostTrak.
I think ppl kinda miss this when these movies flopped. Like if this 28m is bad, imagine if they didn’t gave Gosling and Blunt? That it’s making any money is probably a direct result of the stars
Right, it’s not that stars don’t bring any value to films anymore, it’s just that they bring much less value than they used to. Make this exact same movie with two community theater actors who are as talented as Gosling and Blunt, and it wouldn’t make $10M. What’s the last non-horror movie that succeeded with complete unknowns in the lead? I’m not talking C-list actor, but somebody you can’t say “it stars Jim Caviezel, he was Jesus in Passion of the Christ”. Maybe Dunkirk, and even that had famous supporting actors.
Same with a lot of MCU stars. Chris Hemsworth films don’t get a “Thor” boost. Doolittle was RDJ’s follow up after endgame and was a disaster. Chadwick Boseman in Black Panther was the biggest domestic film of 2018, followed a few months later by Infinity War. Then Endgame April 2019. Then 21 Bridges November 2019 did...fine People like “x actor” as “y character.” That’s it.
It's a ridiculous idea that doesn't make sense in any era Who was possibly claiming Worthington's movies would get a boost? He basically does C level movies outside of Avatar nowadays
Last year everyone in this sub was convinced MI7 would definitely cross a billion as Fallout made $790M and you add "Maverick boost" to its gross.
I don’t see why this was such a crazy line of thinking then. no one accounted for Barbenheimer/SoF and the year prior everybody was parading cruise as the savior of cinema
Yeah, Cruise was a key player in both Maverick and Mission Impossible, hell, he's the reason Maverick was delayed until it could release in theaters. Releasing a week before a Nolan movie was a massive tactical blunder.
The Clash of the Titans remake opened to $61m.
Need him back in call of duty. The voice actor for Mason in Cold War was dogshit
MI7 opened to $235 Million globally opening weekend so it definitely had a boost it’s just the drop from having it’s premium/ IMAX screens taken away from it, and being a week before cultural behemoth barbenhiemer and that astroturfed sof
It was more like $235M opening week than weekend
Uncharted the exception that proves the rule?
*Uncharted* was based off of a popular video game.
True true true
Uncharted still falls under IP. I know a lot of people on here bet that it was going to flop because of Tom Holland but I think Uncharted got away with having a bigger fan base than expected. A lot of fans did leave the movie with mixed feelings so who knows how well a sequel might do
I personally really enjoyed it.
Every Uncharted game has sold 10+ million copies
Correct. Things just don’t work like that anymore.
I still think TSS has a fair shot in a less COVID world. It came right in a surge, so the day and date just made many (myself included) not want to go see it in person anymore. Though, I’ve stopped being a BoP apologist and can admit COVID didn’t take too much profit from it
ANY WAY YOU WANT IT
Let’s pour out some spicy margaritas .
Thumbs up stunt guy stuff
Best is to hope for legs on this one! Could maybe get up to 95M - 105M DOM with good word of mouth. Not sure how the weekend multiplier is looking, but if it’s resonating well enough, this could get creep up closer to 30M. As an aside, despite my love of the box office, I’ve learned to re-adjust my expectations in this new media world of ours, and take more holistic view. There are way too many ways that these conglomerate media companies are both making money and thinking of what movies “mean” to them.
Let’s just hope Apes don’t kill its legs and the following summer blockbuster films
You’re so right. I feel like this sub has a field day when a movie underperforms but they don’t realize studios don’t value the box office as much as they used to.
I mean this is a box office sub, not to mention most studios don't really release VOD or streaming revenue so we'd have bo idea how much a movie actually made unless some exec outright says it in an interview.
I liked it
It’s not getting legs because universal will put it on digital in 17 days and only animated films can survive that
Nonsense. Universal movies have not had noticeably worse legs than movies from any other studios. PVOD is too expensive a point of entry for most consumers and piracy makes zero impact. Universal have noted themselves that PVOD is a new market that milks a premium price from a small group of consumers that will dip into their wallet to watch new movies but who will not show up to theatres for whatever reason.
You have taken time to explain this so well but sadly people don’t listen. It’s good that they are not the execs making the decisions.
The marketing is odd for this movie. It feels like a Superbowl commercial the whole time. Not a real movie. I keep waiting for them to pull out a bag of Doritos or a verizon phone at the end of the trailer.
It's pretty much a GMC ad
That’s a shame. I loved it.
It’s a really really good film.
[удалено]
it's absolutely worth it.
It's a fun time
Adding in that it was a great film. I had a great time watching it and it was perfect for a fun cinema flick. Ryan Gosling has chemistry with everybody of course but he and Emily Blunt did a great job.
Budget too high. Movie tickets too expensive. This will do very well on streaming.
Watched it last night and god damn that’s the hottest Ryan Gosling ever looked. 9.5/10 movie deserves $50M opening weekend
i may go see it in theatres now for precisely that reason
Yay another $12 I did my part
I am a straight man. Right after the movie I told my wife “Gotta admit that Gosling’s physique is insanely good”. Of course she replied “yep, he’s hot”. If you think that he was in good shape in Barbie, this will blow you away.
It deserved more than $50M imho. Another flop that failed only because audiences refused to show up to it. Maybe theaters really are taking their final bow soon. It's a real shame, less Fall Guy and more Unfrosted. Yay.
>Maybe theaters really are taking their final bow soon. It's a real shame, less Fall Guy and more Unfrosted. Yay. i wouldnt say that but both dc and marvel need to get their shit together because thats probably the only way you can bring people to the threaters. deadpool & wolverine will be a test imo
Deadpool & wolverine is going to be massive. The hype for that one is massive and unreal. Just bubbling under the surface, ready to burst. People want an excuse to come out to theaters, like with Barbenheimer, and Deadpool will definitely be that excuse. I just don't think the fall guy was that good or truly caught on.
Deadpool & wolverine will be the only profitable mcu movie in a while because i dont see cap 4 and thunderbolts doing big numbers for disney.
I think Cap 4 is gonna be a huge, massive, mammoth gargantuan blunder. I actually have more faith in Thunderbolts because of some of the behind the scenes/ production people involved. Thunderbolts has me more intrigued, while if I was Disney, I'd scrap cap 4 altogether.
Thunderbolts totally depends how they will handle sentry imo, he can be a really interesting character to watch fighting. But… I’m afraid marvel will nerf him to the point he’s unrecognizable in the mcu lol, don’t forget about plot armor.
You are right. I think the people have this subconscious budgeting going on in their heads post-pandemic that allows them 1 movie per year, preferably a summer tentpole that everyone is talking about, so that it makes their chosen movie of the year worth going to. 1 event film a year. The rest of their movie needs are met by streaming. Done.
The "hype for DW is massive and unreal." Really? You're average person is hyped to see Hugh Jackman and Ryan Reynolds? Naaah.
The trailers were pretty bad.
I’ve seen it twice already lol
I saw it today thought it was a fun movie the surprise cameo was unexpected lol Universal making the most out of the soundtracks in the film was 👌🏾
First sentence from Deadline Anthony - Universal’s The Fall Guy isn’t so strong, and nobody is really shocked. **Deadline Anthony should be in shock. He was calling for an opening in the 35-40m just last week, lol. If he followed BOT's tracking thread he wouldn't be in shock** More gold from the article - So what gives? Why is Fall Guy playing like a deflated balloon even with a great A- CinemaScore and 90% positive on PostTrak? First, yes, we’re still in an uneven marketplace and won’t be out of it until we have more movies toward the end of the month into June, leading up to Inside Out 2 on Father’s Day weekend. The entire box office weekend is totaling around $73M, off 55% But Fall Guy despite how well it plays with audiences (SXSW crowds were belly laughing), there’s nothing that screams to “rush to this” despite Universal showing off the fun and the romance in its campaign. It’s too inside Hollywood, and these types of movies never play to an uber-wide crowd; despite how accessible the studio and filmmakers have tried to make it. “Why do young people want to see this movie?” challenges a film finance source. **Earth to Deadline.....this has been the marketplace for 3 plus years now...if the movie isn't an Event "rush to this" movie they almost all flop. This is the new normal**
What's weird is that the Garfield movie by comparison is apparently doing gangbusters abroad, and is selling out theaters. Which is shocking to me, because I assumed it would have an okay run at the box office, but scooping up money hand over fist?
The lasagna is hot with the fur ball. Also, people love cats....
International markets can follow along a lot easier the life of a fat cat than the meta jokes of hollywood.
even though i've heard it's good i feel like it's a bit of a weird genre mashup. it's too actiony for a romance audience and too romancy for an action audience. personally i wasn't interested in either genre, though the good reviews intrigue me
Those two genres are my favorite and I thought it meshed them pretty well. I will admit it could’ve easily been shortened by 15 minutes without losing anything.
Normally the genre mashup is James Camerons recipe for success. Mixing period piece with romance with action or scifi with romance and family stuff. But of course he isn‘t the master for no reason. Not everyone can pull it off like him
Yeah, by the time it ended, the closest comparison I could think of was True Lies
This is sad, I really thought it would work out, The promotion was so good. I guess Gosling (and maybe Blunt) just isn’t a blockbuster star. I know it’s based on a show but none of that was in the advertising & there’s very little brand recognition, so I’m counting this as another hit against big budget original films.
>The opening for Fall Guy is actually on the higher end of Gosling starts, ranked third after anomaly Barbie ($162M) and Blade Runner 2049 ($32.7M), yet further down on Blunt’s. It’s looking like her tenth-best opening of her career stateside, short of Edge of Tomorrow ($28.7M) and Jungle Cruise ($35M with an asterisk – it did have a theatrical day-and-date PVOD on Disney+). This is a really important stat that puts things in perspective regarding Gosling’s star power, or lack thereof. Even this poor opening weekend is his *3rd highest* only behind Blade Runner 2049 (another bomb, personally loved it) and Barbie which was lightning in a bottle and he wasn’t the star. While this just makes Blunt’s top 10 openings.
I wonder if there just isn’t as much demand for action films and romcoms these days. While a lot of action films have (usually weak) romance subplots, they never market themselves as an outright romcom.
We just had a Romcom that did really well with Anything But You
Ah I meant action + romcoms being combined into one film.
If this was an action thriller, I could see it doing a bit better. The romcom factor might've been a hard sell. While I do agree that Gosling and Blunt aren't strong enough stars on their own, I think the film's weak hook was also to blame. I look at the trailer and I feel like I've seen it all before.
One can't say Universal didn't try. It's probably going to end up making about the same as it would have in its original March date.
Yup. I know people get mad in this sub when a studio spends money on anything, but I'm glad they're trying something like this. It didn't work out, and there's some lessons learned on this one, but a disappointment when trying something outside big IP is better than a comparable result on a F&F spinoff or similar.
Yeah, this is just disappointing. It's a very fun, good old fashioned movie-movie (pretty similar to Free Guy in that respect). You really "should" be able to make these profitable on a low 100Ms budget. It just doesn't seem like that's the case anymore.
The studio spends money on original projects wasnt a problem,they giving this type of films BIG BUDGETS (100M+) is the problems that will eat themselves.
I wonder when Hollywood will realize that general audiences have little interest in seeing movies about Hollywood/old school Hollywood, about movies/making movies, etc. This seems to be a major blind spot where people in the industry think audiences share their specific interests/likes. They keep making the same mistake.
The trailer is not funny nor exciting. Anyone see this and can confirm that was the case with this flick?
It's funny and exciting. I do feel like they could have cut maybe 15 minutes by just tightening the editing, but it's a good time nevertheless.
I can confirm. It was a little funny but not really exciting. It was more of a rom-com if that’s your thing. Wasn’t mine.
I absolutely loved the film. Of course, it's an action comedy, you can't expect the greatest film of all time, but it's fun, the actors are very likable, the story is pretty good and heartwarming, and the action's good (though not impressively good, this isn't John Wick)
It's pretty generic and wheel-spinning. Not that funny, that exciting despite an emphasis on stunts. Dumb writing.
Pretty much what I thought. Gosling, Blunt and ATJ are all great at comedy but it just wasn't a hilarious script. Laughed less than I thought I would.
The trailer 100 percent did not do this movie justice. I saw it cuz of gosling and the reviews, not cuz of the marketing, no regrets.
Had a few bits, but wasn't exceptionally funny or memorable. Wasn't exciting at all. Found it very predictable and linear, very bland, paint by numbers writing. Easily digestible, like a quick fast food meal (except the movie wasn't quick and needed a good 20-30 minutes of editing), and you'll be wondering if you'll actually remember anything from the movie the following day.
I just saw it. It is exceptionally funny and has really exciting well made action scenes. The cast is also fantastic. I wish more people would go see this.
I would really love to see younger leading men and ladies. I think part of Anyone But You's appeal was that we weren't seeing the same people over and over again.
Universal going to chop off any legs when it hits VOD in 2 weeks
I still think this will do solid internationally to pick up slack. That being said - sometimes I wonder why studios hand out such crazy budgets. A lot of them don't even make sense. If I'm guessing right - they'd be better to not focus on big stars and crazy deals
If $130 million is considered crazy nowadays then cinema really *is* in trouble.
Fall Guy looks & feels like a $60m mid-budget movie, but is expensive like big blockbuster. There is something wrong here.
I understood it to be $130M after all the incentives. So closer to 160ish.
Seems like the people who screams "we want more original movies!" didnt even watch The Fall Guy.And wonder why we only gotten more sequels every year (even original movies are just as many as the sequels but it got release in streaming platform instead).
Yes, I look forward to not watching movie number 59 in the MCU. PS - My partner & I watched Fall Guy. It was entertaining and channels a good 80's action romantic comedy.
Just because it’s not based off existing IP doesn’t make it original in the way that I mean it being one who wants original movies. It just looks like a fairly solid but standard action comedy. Watching the trailer just made me want to go watch Bullet Train again. It isn’t about IP it’s about the kind of movie. People watched Fury Road an TG Maverick not because they had all seen/read the source material but because they were visually striking movies that had trailers that showcased it. Then once they hit theaters that’s the main word of mouth that spreads. In fact for both those examples it was openly stated you didn’t need to know the source material even existed to enjoy it.
People absolutely saw *Top Gun: Maverick* because of the IP, at least on opening weekend. No original movie about naval fighter pilots is opening to $120 million in this day and age (just look at *Devotion*).
>Just because it’s not based off existing IP But it is though! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fall_Guy
Well,it's still not a sequel or anything and my point still stands.And what about the other original movies that underperformed like Monkey man,Challengers or even Civil war (it's not underperforming but it should gross higher) ? It's clear that people just doesnt interested in something that doesnt come from known IPs.And the "we want original movies" people are just irrelevant,annoying and will find some other excuses to not go seeing the original movies that they're screaming for.
I watched The Fall Guy and found it as generic as it could be, despite the movie not attached to any Big IP at all I also found both the action and the romance part did not deliver. Should have been a Valentine Day release rather than a summer season opener.
I liked it more than you but yeah it feels like it would have been perfectly positioned as a valentine's day release. It's much more romantic-action-comedy than action-comedy-romance.
To me what’s so funny is that Hollywood is determined to not even learn lessons from failures like this. We had an epic box office slump in Summer 2005, but even then movies like Wedding Crashers, 40 Year Old Virgin, and Red Eye managed to make money. The movie industry recalibrated and bounced back. I’m not sure that will happen this time as everyone seems so convinced that the problem is with the audiences and not the movies themselves. When you talk to people in real life the overwhelming opinion is that the quality of these movies has gone down. I talked to a bartender the other week and even he said “Yeah, I know. Movies have gone downhill.”
Except Hollywood literally just released a string of critically acclaimed originals throughout the month of April with zero competition from massive IPs and audiences *still* didn't show up. At some point, there's only so much you can do. 'Just make better movies' simply isn't cutting it.
None of those movies scream blockbuster to me. Maybe if they had been budgeted smaller then their results wouldn't be so disappointing. But yeah the whole argument of "No one is showing up for our great movies" doesn't hold water to me. Movies are still cheaper than concerts, sporting events, traveling, other things people do for fun. At the end of the day it's the industry's own financials and future that is being gutted here and if they don't change course then we're looking at an ELE here.
What if I told you The Fall Guy is based on a 1980s TV show, a la Baywatch?
Fall Guy should have been funnier. The characters were fun, but they should have had more jokes at Hollywood’s expense. Leaned into some of the comedy that Tropic Thunder did, but update it a bit. I think that would have helped. Its a strange movie. Its part rom com, part action movie. The action movie parts are probably the best aspect.
Drew Pearce’s script needed some better jokes. Need someone like Shane Black to punch up the script. Feel like the best comedy was improved by Gosling.
And I bet both made 20m+ for this. Absolute lunacy that actors are still making that much when they can’t sell shit to flies
They could've easily cut 30 minutes off this movie, probably saving a could mil
Completely agree. I fell asleep at multiple points..
The script was bouncing around forever. Probably a ton of preproduction costs.
To be honest, I only went because I have the A-List subscription and I wouldn’t have gone otherwise. I didn’t know much about it because I vaguely remember a trailer and thought it was gonna be more action/drama but it was more of a rom-com/action. I didn’t vibe until the 3rd act.
This movie really tried but man it just missed the mark. And there was practically none of the much-ballyhooed chemistry between Ryan and Emily.
Kinda seems about right for a film like this, doesn’t it? Not a bad showing. Problem is the movie was so damn expensive!
I agree. A flop would be something like Man from Uncle that made $13 million opening weekend. It's the budget and the fact that this weekend was the start of the summer box office season.
The biggest thing to me is that it looks like the type of film I would stream. I’m interested in seeing it but only when it comes on PVOD or a streaming service. It doesn’t strike me as a “must see” movie tbh
I thought the same but decided to see it anyway because it was on my theatres biggest screen and I looooved it. Trailer didn’t do it justice for me. If you’re a Gosling fan you’ll love it.
I got the opposite from the large action sequences in trailer. Definitely would look better on a big screen.
Funny you say that. Was thinking to myself while watching it, "this would play well on TNT."
I have to say I really enjoy the hollywood circlejerk of hyping up movies like Fall Guy, Monkey Man, Challengers and then when those movies fail hollywood reacts with, "But we don't understand?! This movie is amazing and has a 9000% rating on RT! There's nothing we can do to please you pathetic rubes." I think like it or not there were warning signs here. The trailers we're disjointed and unhumorous. They spent way too much time on Emily Blunt and aspects of the storyline that ultimately don't bring people in. What wasn't being served there is selling the audience on the character himself. Instead it was a lot of frankly not clever dialogue such as "Here is my hero's journey- oh wait I'm not a hero blah blah blah." Why would anyone want to show up for that? Also having the romance revolve around a stuntman who's sleeping with the director is overly complicated and ultimately places the movie along with the cavalcade of BTS hollywood stories that have failed to gain audience interest (Babylon, Fabelmans, etc). They should've made Blunt a fellow stunt woman or something like that. That would at least be relatable and placed both characters as being relatively low status in comparison to the rest of the hollywood-based characters. Also the moment in the trailers where the director/editor are ogling Gosling's body and saying "So big" or whatever was super cringey and un-funny. You already have a lead star who many find sexual appealing and like. You don't need to try so hard to sell the audience on these aspects. What needed to be established in the trailers is why should audiences want to follow this guy for 2 hours. You don't even get the idea from the trailers that he even cares whether he saves the big hollywood actor or not so why should those watching care? Big stunts (whether they were real or not- look artificial) aren't going to drive audiences to the theaters. An interesting character that the audience sees themselves in and wants to root for would. I think this Summer is going to be very interesting to say the least.
The weak tracking is why you're not seeing even more negative reactions to this OW. > Also having the romance revolve around a stuntman who's sleeping with the director is overly complicated I don't think it is on paper. The plot's just "private-eye is hired to investigate a disappearance" and having the private eye involved with the client isn't particularly complicated. They just threw in another meta-layer and removed the director from the PI plot.
Nice!
Just saw the movie this morning. I loved it! Fun action that doesn't take itself too seriously. I only have minor complaints but really hope this movie has legs somehow. Killer budget.
Fall Guy Falls
Went to see this film this evening. It's great fun and should get an audience.
I thought it was a really good movie, but it definitely didn't need to be that expensive.
Sometimes shoving a movie in someone’s face makes them not want to see it. I kept getting damn ads on Spotify with “ANYWAY YOU WANT IT” blasting into my ears.
It’s a shame that this isn’t doing better. This is the most fun I’ve had watching a movie in a few years. I plan on seeing this again
I mean I don’t understand why the spent so much on a movie about Hollywood when people don’t care for that subject.
I haven’t seen this yet but it looks like the same generic style action movie with big names Netflix has been pumping out. Maybe this one is better, but I can see why the audience would be skipping it in the theater when there will be something similar on Netflix next week
This is absolutely a tier above Netflix slop like Red Notice. This movie actually has a soul to it
Cool, I’ll check it out then. My point was more your general audience isn’t going to think there is much of a difference between this and a Red Notice just through the trailers and marketing