Lounge of Tomorrow

Lounge of Tomorrow (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/index.php)
-   Disneyland and all things Disney (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Jungle Cruise - The Movie (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/showthread.php?t=11013)

CoasterMatt 03-10-2011 05:34 PM

Fvck it all, if it doesn't have airtime, TAER IT DOWN!!

Sorry if nobody else gets the joke, I've been chatting with some long lost rrc'ers & there's a lot of fumes in here still...

Kevy Baby 03-10-2011 06:41 PM

WHOOSH









The sound of that going right over my head.

Stan4dSteph 03-11-2011 12:21 PM

I remember when everyone thought the Pirates of the Caribbean movie was going to suck.

Snowflake 03-11-2011 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stan4dSteph (Post 343579)
I remember when everyone thought the Pirates of the Caribbean movie was going to suck.

It did. ;)

Cadaverous Pallor 03-11-2011 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stan4dSteph (Post 343579)
I remember when everyone thought the Pirates of the Caribbean movie was going to suck.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowflake (Post 343592)
It did. ;)

It did eventually. It was good and successful and therefore they had to make sucky sequels. Why do they have to make (most) everything suck??? Sigh.

Alex, I think this is where you and I have the largest distance between us. I am infatuated with living in nostalgia. My iPod's playlist hasn't changed much in the last 4 years either, but only because I can't let the old things go.

Alex 03-11-2011 03:09 PM

Because when you are faced with the question "Do I stick to a sense of artistic integrity and just walk away or do I make millions of dollars, put food on the table for hundreds or thousands of people, entertain 100,000s of people even if it does suck and maybe even not actually suck" it really isn't that hard of a decision.

Moonliner 03-11-2011 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex (Post 343600)
Because when you are faced with the question "Do I stick to a sense of artistic integrity and just walk away or do I make millions of dollars, put food on the table for hundreds or thousands of people, entertain 100,000s of people even if it does suck and maybe even not actually suck" it really isn't that hard of a decision.

I guess making sequels that sucked less was not an option? Good movies would have made more money, put more food on the table, entertained more people and cured cancer.

(ok, maybe not that last one)

Alex 03-11-2011 06:52 PM

Do you think they were trying to make bad movies (and I don't necessarily agree they were bad, though they weren't as good as the first one)?

Stan4dSteph 03-11-2011 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowflake (Post 343592)
It did. ;)

Well to a lot of people it didn't. It made craploads of cash, and still does. So, I'm not going to just dismiss something as being a POS until it's actually done.

RStar 03-11-2011 08:33 PM

Interestingly, the two sequels made nearly twice as much money as the first one did. The second movie made a over billion dollars worldwide ($1,066,179,725), and the third just under ($960,996,492). The first made only ($654,264,015). I think that bit of info may nudge it out of the "crappy" category. Of course, what people choose to spend their money on and what is a good work of art may not always agree. And I have to admit that I like all of the POTC films, including the sequels. I can say the same about the Shrek franchise, but not many others.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.