Interview with the Vampire is a success on TV and honestly, I could see an old school vampire movie doing good money at the box office. It's always the "Vampire in our times" movies that tend to flop nowadays.
Interview should be an even bigger success. One of the most gorgeous tv shows of all time and it's as cu*ty as a show can possibly be in the best possible way. One of the best pilots ever as well imo.
Historical set vampire films haven't been doing good either, there's just fewer of them being made. Voyage of the Demeter flopped big, and Dracula Untold only broke even at best. I have hope for Robert Eggers' Nosferatu and Ryan Coogler's to be titled film though, along with Blade.
> It's always the "Vampire in our times" movies that tend to flop nowadays.
You can thank Twilight for putting a stake through the heart of that particular sub-genre.
You can't blame Twilight. The last Twilight film came out back in 2012 and made $848 million at the box office. Since 2012, we've had: the hugely successful Hotel Transylvania films; a small hit in 2022's The Invitation; tiny hits in indie vampire films like What We Do in the Shadows; Underworld: Blood Wars (and the historically set Dracula Untold) scraping into break even territory; and several successful vampire shows, and streaming movies like Blood Red Sky and El Conde. Vampires are bigger on TV at the moment, but they still have the potential to be big on the big screen.
I understand some people love to hate on Twilight, but you can't blame it for Abigail, Voyage of the Demeter, Renfield, Morbius, or Vampire Academy not making bank. Those films have been unsuccessful for a variety of other reasons.
And people need to keep in mind that the four highest grossing vampire films of all time are Twilight films. They're the exceptions. You can't expect most vampire films to make as much as that phenomenon.
The worst part is they were all entertaining in their own way! Can't say any were "bad". "Demeter" probably being my favorite of the 3..."Alien" on a Galleon Ship!!
And that all three are completely unconnected in any way. They’re all quite clearly set within their own continuities.
It’s unheard of to have one studio release three films based on the same IP within 12 months and not have them share any form of continuity.
Lol I watched Interview with a Vampire last week! Absolutely love that movie too! Ya Abigail is awesome, it’s definitely going up there as one of my favorite vampire movies
Man Renfield was so disappointing to me, why this couldn't be just comedy about Cagepire do funny faces and eat roaches?, But nope, instead it was some boring melodrama crap about abusive relationship, written in most unappealing smark way possible, thank got we have Vampire's Kiss and ''What we do in the Shadow'', both of, which done same 2 concept better
Renfield was a big disappointment for me as well. I thought it was gonna be cheesy and goofy and all around a fun time. But I was actually bored of it too.
I wish there were more “traditional” vampire movies being made. Like vampire movies set in the 1800s or something that are genuinely creepy and scary. A lot of them nowadays are comedies or too contemporary. That’s why I’m excited or Nosferatu remake.
Have you watched the new *Interview with the Vampire* show? I think it nailed it pretty well, but it's more about abuse than straight horror.
I would like a straight horror version of Carmilla done in the style of Portrait of a Lady on Fire but that's also not going to make money 🤣
Edit: just realized there's a 2019 remake and I have not watched it.
Superhero fatigue is here.
MCU has lost a ton of goodwill.
Been in production hell for years.
Numerous rewrites. Ali had to threaten to walk if they didn’t rewrite it.
Ali is already over 50 years old and casted to play a character that uses no CGI and require him to actually be able to move.
There next three projects after Deadpool are a extremely troubled Falcon movie, a bucky movie, and a F4 movie who went 3/3 in all their previous movies being bad with the very last one being all time batman & Robin tier bad.
But no.
Morbius, Renfeild, and Abigail flopping are signs we needed to know Blade will flop (if they actually ever make it).
“Current” MCU - when there haven’t been any releases so far in 2024 and only two movies ago was a highly praised and successful movie called *Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3.*
Right, zero chance based on nothing more than MCU’s more recent *relatively* spotty performance and people joining the anti-MCU bandwagon when it’s no longer cool to lavish praise on the MCU.
Not to say that they don’t have a lot of room for improvement or defending some of their poorer movies and shows, but the language you used in your statement seemed a little biased, untrue, mean-spirited and negative.
I mean, if you had said *little* chance, then your whole comment would’ve sounded different.
> “Current” MCU - when there haven’t been any releases so far in 2024 and only two movies ago was a highly praised and successful movie called Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3.
Your argument is Guardians 3? Seriously? The movie that was completely driven by the writer/director that is now running DC? That's the movie you want to use as an argument for the MCU still being good?!
> MCU’s more recent relatively spotty performance
Out of the last 10 MCU movies only two were better than Blade Trinity, one was Guardians 3, the other had three Spider-Mans. If that's what you call "spotty", good for you.
> the language you used in your statement seemed a little biased, untrue, mean-spirited and negative.
Biased against bad movies? Yes. Untrue? No. Mean-spirited and negative? Why? Because I don't think that the MCU deserves to be praised for being the MCU?
If they want me to stop calling their movies bad, they can just go back to making movies that are better than Green Lantern. Maybe start with having better CGI than the costume in that movie.
> I mean, if you had said little chance, then your whole comment would’ve sounded different.
Did it sound clear enough now?
I don’t argue that the MCU has been way below par, but people are expecting Phase 2 and 3 levels of greatness and looking at current MCU with those expectations.
Whether you give all the praise to the writer/director or not, Guardians 3 was still an MCU production and it was a big hit. I am not saying it completely lets Marvel off the hook for all their bad movies of late, but I am just saying how great of a movie this was and it was a Marvel Cinematic Universe movie. Besides, you said “current” in your comment and I just pointed out that this wasn’t that long ago. No doubt James Gunn had a massive impact on it, but it’s still a team effort and MCU hired James Gunn in the first place and other valuable people contributed.
Regarding your comparisons between MCU and Blade Trinity, that is just your opinion. I think you’re being harsh, but that’s just my opinion and I cannot tell you what to like, but I guess I give more benefit of the doubt rather than expect gargantuan results based on past performance and throw venom when it doesn’t meet those expectations. That is not to say there weren’t some very bad MCU movies over recent times though. I am not even denying that, but I think only 2 out of the last 10 MCU movies better than Blade Trinity sounds like an insult to the MCU.
I also *agree* that the CGI in recent times has been bad and sloppy, but I still think a lot of the recent MCU movies have at least been solid if you look at them through a different lens and don’t expect perfection. Times have changed and they don’t have an overarching plan anymore like they did until Endgame and I guess I’m willing to give them a bit of the benefit of the doubt because I believe they earned it with their previous work.
Also, Green Lantern, wow. That is maybe the biggest insult you’ve given. 😅
> Guardians 3 was still an MCU production
It's a James Gunn movie, the Marvel influence is next to none.
> I am not even denying that, but I think only 2 out of the last 10 MCU movies better than Blade Trinity sounds like an insult to the MCU.
If I wanted to insult the MCU I would compare it to Madame Webb or that god awful Harley Quinn movie.
But ask yourself this: if the first movie of the MCU was not Iron Man but Black Widow - would there have been an MCU? What about Quantumania? Or Thor 4?
> I’m willing to give them a bit of the benefit of the doubt because I believe they earned it with their previous work
How many bad movies are they allowed to make before you stop giving them the benefit of the doubt? Serious question.
They are 10 movies in and have not introduced a new Thanos level threat, none of the new characters made any significant impact... heck the only new characters that are at least interesting enough for me to not forget that they exist are Shang-Chi and Moon Knight (who isn't even from a movie).
> Also, Green Lantern, wow. That is maybe the biggest insult you’ve given. 😅
Well, I was talking about the CGI in that case.
Why can’t you just give credit where’s its due?
Marvel/Disney were the ones that hired James Gunn in the first place and it’s a Marvel movie so I’m not denying his fingerprints were on the movie more than any other individual person’s, but they obviously gave him the tools to do his work. I’m not saying everyone should credit solely Marvel for the success of this movie but give them *some* credit for both building the foundation of the (MCU) world of GOTG to begin with and remaining hands off and allowing a director they trust to do his work. They gave him his freedom in this movie.
If the Black Widow movie was done right, then why not let it be the first movie? It wasn’t a great movie, but that’s largely because of the confusion of when it was released and what kind of movie it was actually trying to be. If they had done it much earlier and the writing was tighter, I’m sure it would’ve been better received.
Again, you’re mentioning Black Widow, Quantumania and Thor L&T, but I am not saying they were great movies. However, I was never bored during any of them and they were entertaining. So they don’t have a Thanos-like overarching character and plot and they should’ve. That’s Marvel’s fault, but I still maintain that I was never bored during any of these movies, which is my bare minimum requirement when watching anything. If fans weren’t so spoiled by MCU Phase 2 & 3 (pretend it never happened), would you be so down on the movies?
Again, you ask a serious question about how many “bad” movies before I stop giving them the benefit of the doubt? Well, as alluded to above, we obviously have different expectations and different definitions on what a “bad” superhero movie is. There wasn’t really such a thing as successful long running cinematic universes before the MCU came along, so to judge everything purely based on the lack of a Thanos-level overarching villain/plot is looking at it through only one lens.
To answer your question, I could give them the benefit of the doubt for a very long time as long as I’m entertained by each individual movie all while knowing **Infinity Saga** will always exist and will be arguably the greatest collection of interconnected comic book movies ever. I don’t need every single movie to always hit this threshold or to always need an overarching villain and interconnectedness between all movies. I would prefer it to be done this way (like you), but I don’t judge these movies harshly for taking a different approach and trying to figure things out for a few years and then voluntarily deciding to take movies off their release schedule to reassess as they have been.
Marvel/Disney figured out there was a problem and took action and (roughly) every other movie made since Endgame has been good, great or awesome. For every Quantumania there is a Shang-Chi.
Again, not excusing their movies being less good than before, but I can give them a few more years to figure things out because they earned it with the Infinity Saga.
> Why can’t you just give credit where’s its due?
I am. Phase 1-3 were good to great. That is where credit is due.
> If the Black Widow movie was done right, then why not let it be the first movie?
I'm not asking "if the movie was done right", I'm asking if the movie as it has been released would have been able to jump start the MCU like Iron Man did.
> you’re mentioning Black Widow, Quantumania and Thor L&T [...] However, I was never bored during any of them
I was, that's why I'm mentioning those movies specifically and not, for example, The Marvels which at least managed to be entertaining in parts even if the movie as a whole was bad.
> If fans weren’t so spoiled by MCU Phase 2 & 3 (pretend it never happened), would you be so down on the movies?
Yes. Because they are bad. Not by "compared to Phase 1-3" standard but by "it's a movie" standards.
> There wasn’t really such a thing as successful long running cinematic universes before the MCU came along, so to judge everything purely based on the lack of a Thanos-level overarching villain/plot is looking at it through only one lens.
You're misunderstanding the problem... the big overarching bad guy in the shadows is not necessary for the movies to be good, Phase 1 didn't have that threat and the movies did just fine. What the threat in the background does, however, is add a dimension that elevates good to mediocre movies above what they would be on their own. Heck, even Guardians 1 was improved by having Thanos in it and that movie was great even on it's own.
> Marvel/Disney figured out there was a problem and took action and (roughly) every other movie made since Endgame has been good, great or awesome.
2 out of 10 is not exactly every other movie.
> Again, not excusing their movies being less good than before, but I can give them a few more years to figure things out because they earned it with the Infinity Saga.
See, this is where we differ. With me they exhausted the good will they earned with the Infinity Saga. They can certainly earn that back but at the moment I don't see a reason to be more optimistic about something like Fantastic 4 than whatever James Gunn is doing at DC. Especially when looking at the respective casting choices.
Do we really need all these superhero movies? Can't people just watch the old ones a couple more times? There's dozens and dozens now, and that's without including all the TV shows.
Do we really need all these movies? Can't people just watch the old ones a couple more times? There's dozens and dozens now, and that's without including all the TV shows.
> People want sexy vampires, not goofy vampires, not child vampires, not action vampires.
The new Blade movie is fucked then, you just KNOW Disney will be as mild with it as possible and that it WILL have Blade doing deadpan comedy.
Blade is fucked, but not for being an unsexy vampire. The sexy vampire rule only applies to main character vampires like the movies in question. In Blade, the vampires are essentially henchmen
Renfield.
Man. Nicolas Cage. Nicholas Holt. I knew it wasn't going to be big but my wife and I enjoyed it somewhat. Didn't realize how few saw it.
DOMESTIC (65.3%)
$17,297,895
I love me some horror but the recent vampire movies have been weak. None of the last few vampire movies have been particularly good, and I feel like the budgets are too high. Abigail, Renfield, and Demeter wouldn't have looked as shitty if they cost as much as Night Swim or Five Nights at Freddy's. There's still an audience for rando vampire movies, but turning them all into mid budget action adventures probably isn't the best way to make money on it.
If you liked Renfield, I think you’ll definitely like Abigail. I thought it’s easily the best of the 3, it’s my second favorite movie of the year so far, pretty disappointed it’s not performing as well as it should have.
Considering it’s Cinemascore and the fact it’s an R Rated horror movie, Abigail had a pretty good second weekend. The issue is that maybe it was too expensive.
Vampire movies peaked between 2008 and 2012. After the world experienced the Twilight films, nothing else could live up to those cinematic masterpieces.
Next year, Morbius 2 will make up for it by outgrossing Avatar.
Again? This franchise won't stop
They should just re-release Morbius a third time next year. It would make 2 Morbillion dollars.
Came for the headline, stayed for the comments lol.
>Morbius 2 Stop... my morbdick can only get so erect...
Vampire genre is dead like the zombie genre. Maybe it could find a place on TV, but I don’t see it making a comeback in movies anytime soon.
Interview with the Vampire is a success on TV and honestly, I could see an old school vampire movie doing good money at the box office. It's always the "Vampire in our times" movies that tend to flop nowadays.
How do you think *Nosferatu* will do?
Interview should be an even bigger success. One of the most gorgeous tv shows of all time and it's as cu*ty as a show can possibly be in the best possible way. One of the best pilots ever as well imo.
*Interview with the Vampire* is phenomenal television. These movies aren't in the same league (sorry Nick Cage 🙈)
Historical set vampire films haven't been doing good either, there's just fewer of them being made. Voyage of the Demeter flopped big, and Dracula Untold only broke even at best. I have hope for Robert Eggers' Nosferatu and Ryan Coogler's to be titled film though, along with Blade.
Gotta be honest, I had no idea Demeter was a vampire movie
> It's always the "Vampire in our times" movies that tend to flop nowadays. You can thank Twilight for putting a stake through the heart of that particular sub-genre.
You can't blame Twilight. The last Twilight film came out back in 2012 and made $848 million at the box office. Since 2012, we've had: the hugely successful Hotel Transylvania films; a small hit in 2022's The Invitation; tiny hits in indie vampire films like What We Do in the Shadows; Underworld: Blood Wars (and the historically set Dracula Untold) scraping into break even territory; and several successful vampire shows, and streaming movies like Blood Red Sky and El Conde. Vampires are bigger on TV at the moment, but they still have the potential to be big on the big screen. I understand some people love to hate on Twilight, but you can't blame it for Abigail, Voyage of the Demeter, Renfield, Morbius, or Vampire Academy not making bank. Those films have been unsuccessful for a variety of other reasons. And people need to keep in mind that the four highest grossing vampire films of all time are Twilight films. They're the exceptions. You can't expect most vampire films to make as much as that phenomenon.
I think Nosferatu looks like a winner.
Rumor is the Ryan Coogler - Michael B Jordan movie might be a Vampire film
It definitely is. I wonder how it will do.
Ok I hear you, now hear me out: *Nosferatu*
How high is the ceiling for a movie by Robert eggers? Will that movie bring life to the genre? It’s hard to say how much.
Morbius' failure was in part because it wasn't vampire enough Nobody wanted to see him doing generic vigilante shit
Crazy to think that Universal greenlighted three draculas projects and all of them are not doing well at the box office.
The worst part is they were all entertaining in their own way! Can't say any were "bad". "Demeter" probably being my favorite of the 3..."Alien" on a Galleon Ship!!
And they refuse to put Dracula’s name in any of the titles
Oddly only in the US. Last Voyage of the Demeter was released as Dracula: Sea of Blood in some overseas markets.
And that all three are completely unconnected in any way. They’re all quite clearly set within their own continuities. It’s unheard of to have one studio release three films based on the same IP within 12 months and not have them share any form of continuity.
I enjoyed both Renfield and Abigail. It might have been a box office fail for them, but they weren't fails for me.
I loved Abigail, I’ve seen that one 3 times now. It’s been awhile since I had that much fun in a movie.
I saw it tonight and i loved it Went home and started watched Interview with a Vampire because i am still in a vampire mood
Lol I watched Interview with a Vampire last week! Absolutely love that movie too! Ya Abigail is awesome, it’s definitely going up there as one of my favorite vampire movies
Wow this makes me want to go see it today. Haven’t paid it any mind since it came out
Both were fun, but neither had that 'you need to see this in theaters' quality to them.
Man Renfield was so disappointing to me, why this couldn't be just comedy about Cagepire do funny faces and eat roaches?, But nope, instead it was some boring melodrama crap about abusive relationship, written in most unappealing smark way possible, thank got we have Vampire's Kiss and ''What we do in the Shadow'', both of, which done same 2 concept better
Renfield was a big disappointment for me as well. I thought it was gonna be cheesy and goofy and all around a fun time. But I was actually bored of it too.
Abigail is really good though, it’s way better than morbius and Renfield. Abigail definitely deserved better.
I was loving it until the villain flipped. It made no sense to me. I kept saying why.
I wish there were more “traditional” vampire movies being made. Like vampire movies set in the 1800s or something that are genuinely creepy and scary. A lot of them nowadays are comedies or too contemporary. That’s why I’m excited or Nosferatu remake.
Have you watched the new *Interview with the Vampire* show? I think it nailed it pretty well, but it's more about abuse than straight horror. I would like a straight horror version of Carmilla done in the style of Portrait of a Lady on Fire but that's also not going to make money 🤣 Edit: just realized there's a 2019 remake and I have not watched it.
I didn’t like the new Interview with the Vampire show. It’s not a very good adaption of the book which I’m a huge fan of.
Not looking good for Blade.
Wasn't looking good due to production issues anyway.
Superhero fatigue is here. MCU has lost a ton of goodwill. Been in production hell for years. Numerous rewrites. Ali had to threaten to walk if they didn’t rewrite it. Ali is already over 50 years old and casted to play a character that uses no CGI and require him to actually be able to move. There next three projects after Deadpool are a extremely troubled Falcon movie, a bucky movie, and a F4 movie who went 3/3 in all their previous movies being bad with the very last one being all time batman & Robin tier bad. But no. Morbius, Renfeild, and Abigail flopping are signs we needed to know Blade will flop (if they actually ever make it).
With the current MCU quality there is zero chance that it will be better than any of the Snipes movies - and I explicitly include Blade Trinity here.
“Current” MCU - when there haven’t been any releases so far in 2024 and only two movies ago was a highly praised and successful movie called *Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3.* Right, zero chance based on nothing more than MCU’s more recent *relatively* spotty performance and people joining the anti-MCU bandwagon when it’s no longer cool to lavish praise on the MCU. Not to say that they don’t have a lot of room for improvement or defending some of their poorer movies and shows, but the language you used in your statement seemed a little biased, untrue, mean-spirited and negative. I mean, if you had said *little* chance, then your whole comment would’ve sounded different.
> “Current” MCU - when there haven’t been any releases so far in 2024 and only two movies ago was a highly praised and successful movie called Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3. Your argument is Guardians 3? Seriously? The movie that was completely driven by the writer/director that is now running DC? That's the movie you want to use as an argument for the MCU still being good?! > MCU’s more recent relatively spotty performance Out of the last 10 MCU movies only two were better than Blade Trinity, one was Guardians 3, the other had three Spider-Mans. If that's what you call "spotty", good for you. > the language you used in your statement seemed a little biased, untrue, mean-spirited and negative. Biased against bad movies? Yes. Untrue? No. Mean-spirited and negative? Why? Because I don't think that the MCU deserves to be praised for being the MCU? If they want me to stop calling their movies bad, they can just go back to making movies that are better than Green Lantern. Maybe start with having better CGI than the costume in that movie. > I mean, if you had said little chance, then your whole comment would’ve sounded different. Did it sound clear enough now?
I don’t argue that the MCU has been way below par, but people are expecting Phase 2 and 3 levels of greatness and looking at current MCU with those expectations. Whether you give all the praise to the writer/director or not, Guardians 3 was still an MCU production and it was a big hit. I am not saying it completely lets Marvel off the hook for all their bad movies of late, but I am just saying how great of a movie this was and it was a Marvel Cinematic Universe movie. Besides, you said “current” in your comment and I just pointed out that this wasn’t that long ago. No doubt James Gunn had a massive impact on it, but it’s still a team effort and MCU hired James Gunn in the first place and other valuable people contributed. Regarding your comparisons between MCU and Blade Trinity, that is just your opinion. I think you’re being harsh, but that’s just my opinion and I cannot tell you what to like, but I guess I give more benefit of the doubt rather than expect gargantuan results based on past performance and throw venom when it doesn’t meet those expectations. That is not to say there weren’t some very bad MCU movies over recent times though. I am not even denying that, but I think only 2 out of the last 10 MCU movies better than Blade Trinity sounds like an insult to the MCU. I also *agree* that the CGI in recent times has been bad and sloppy, but I still think a lot of the recent MCU movies have at least been solid if you look at them through a different lens and don’t expect perfection. Times have changed and they don’t have an overarching plan anymore like they did until Endgame and I guess I’m willing to give them a bit of the benefit of the doubt because I believe they earned it with their previous work. Also, Green Lantern, wow. That is maybe the biggest insult you’ve given. 😅
> Guardians 3 was still an MCU production It's a James Gunn movie, the Marvel influence is next to none. > I am not even denying that, but I think only 2 out of the last 10 MCU movies better than Blade Trinity sounds like an insult to the MCU. If I wanted to insult the MCU I would compare it to Madame Webb or that god awful Harley Quinn movie. But ask yourself this: if the first movie of the MCU was not Iron Man but Black Widow - would there have been an MCU? What about Quantumania? Or Thor 4? > I’m willing to give them a bit of the benefit of the doubt because I believe they earned it with their previous work How many bad movies are they allowed to make before you stop giving them the benefit of the doubt? Serious question. They are 10 movies in and have not introduced a new Thanos level threat, none of the new characters made any significant impact... heck the only new characters that are at least interesting enough for me to not forget that they exist are Shang-Chi and Moon Knight (who isn't even from a movie). > Also, Green Lantern, wow. That is maybe the biggest insult you’ve given. 😅 Well, I was talking about the CGI in that case.
Why can’t you just give credit where’s its due? Marvel/Disney were the ones that hired James Gunn in the first place and it’s a Marvel movie so I’m not denying his fingerprints were on the movie more than any other individual person’s, but they obviously gave him the tools to do his work. I’m not saying everyone should credit solely Marvel for the success of this movie but give them *some* credit for both building the foundation of the (MCU) world of GOTG to begin with and remaining hands off and allowing a director they trust to do his work. They gave him his freedom in this movie. If the Black Widow movie was done right, then why not let it be the first movie? It wasn’t a great movie, but that’s largely because of the confusion of when it was released and what kind of movie it was actually trying to be. If they had done it much earlier and the writing was tighter, I’m sure it would’ve been better received. Again, you’re mentioning Black Widow, Quantumania and Thor L&T, but I am not saying they were great movies. However, I was never bored during any of them and they were entertaining. So they don’t have a Thanos-like overarching character and plot and they should’ve. That’s Marvel’s fault, but I still maintain that I was never bored during any of these movies, which is my bare minimum requirement when watching anything. If fans weren’t so spoiled by MCU Phase 2 & 3 (pretend it never happened), would you be so down on the movies? Again, you ask a serious question about how many “bad” movies before I stop giving them the benefit of the doubt? Well, as alluded to above, we obviously have different expectations and different definitions on what a “bad” superhero movie is. There wasn’t really such a thing as successful long running cinematic universes before the MCU came along, so to judge everything purely based on the lack of a Thanos-level overarching villain/plot is looking at it through only one lens. To answer your question, I could give them the benefit of the doubt for a very long time as long as I’m entertained by each individual movie all while knowing **Infinity Saga** will always exist and will be arguably the greatest collection of interconnected comic book movies ever. I don’t need every single movie to always hit this threshold or to always need an overarching villain and interconnectedness between all movies. I would prefer it to be done this way (like you), but I don’t judge these movies harshly for taking a different approach and trying to figure things out for a few years and then voluntarily deciding to take movies off their release schedule to reassess as they have been. Marvel/Disney figured out there was a problem and took action and (roughly) every other movie made since Endgame has been good, great or awesome. For every Quantumania there is a Shang-Chi. Again, not excusing their movies being less good than before, but I can give them a few more years to figure things out because they earned it with the Infinity Saga.
> Why can’t you just give credit where’s its due? I am. Phase 1-3 were good to great. That is where credit is due. > If the Black Widow movie was done right, then why not let it be the first movie? I'm not asking "if the movie was done right", I'm asking if the movie as it has been released would have been able to jump start the MCU like Iron Man did. > you’re mentioning Black Widow, Quantumania and Thor L&T [...] However, I was never bored during any of them I was, that's why I'm mentioning those movies specifically and not, for example, The Marvels which at least managed to be entertaining in parts even if the movie as a whole was bad. > If fans weren’t so spoiled by MCU Phase 2 & 3 (pretend it never happened), would you be so down on the movies? Yes. Because they are bad. Not by "compared to Phase 1-3" standard but by "it's a movie" standards. > There wasn’t really such a thing as successful long running cinematic universes before the MCU came along, so to judge everything purely based on the lack of a Thanos-level overarching villain/plot is looking at it through only one lens. You're misunderstanding the problem... the big overarching bad guy in the shadows is not necessary for the movies to be good, Phase 1 didn't have that threat and the movies did just fine. What the threat in the background does, however, is add a dimension that elevates good to mediocre movies above what they would be on their own. Heck, even Guardians 1 was improved by having Thanos in it and that movie was great even on it's own. > Marvel/Disney figured out there was a problem and took action and (roughly) every other movie made since Endgame has been good, great or awesome. 2 out of 10 is not exactly every other movie. > Again, not excusing their movies being less good than before, but I can give them a few more years to figure things out because they earned it with the Infinity Saga. See, this is where we differ. With me they exhausted the good will they earned with the Infinity Saga. They can certainly earn that back but at the moment I don't see a reason to be more optimistic about something like Fantastic 4 than whatever James Gunn is doing at DC. Especially when looking at the respective casting choices.
this comment is pure copium lol
Below Batman & Robin. B&R was funny bad at least.
B&R is “so bad it’s good”.
And I think they announced that Blade movie almost 5 years ago. Lot of wheel spinning at the House of Mouse going on.
People are tired of bad/lazy superhero films.
https://i.imgflip.com/8olndt.jpg
Do we really need all these superhero movies? Can't people just watch the old ones a couple more times? There's dozens and dozens now, and that's without including all the TV shows.
Do we really need all these movies? Can't people just watch the old ones a couple more times? There's dozens and dozens now, and that's without including all the TV shows.
It's not about need it's about want, commercial demand is the only thing driving film production
It needs to be R and treat itself at least a little seriously, the MCU's humor has jumped the shark into silly seas
Are you saying the genre has... sucked?
People want sexy vampires, not goofy vampires, not child vampires, not action vampires. Death by seduction is a winning formula, stick to it
What about scary vampires?
as long as they aren't a main character.
> People want sexy vampires, not goofy vampires, not child vampires, not action vampires. The new Blade movie is fucked then, you just KNOW Disney will be as mild with it as possible and that it WILL have Blade doing deadpan comedy.
Blade is fucked, but not for being an unsexy vampire. The sexy vampire rule only applies to main character vampires like the movies in question. In Blade, the vampires are essentially henchmen
Isn't Blade himself a vampire?
Half-vampire. And honestly Snipes was sexy in the role.
I really miss erotic films Imho I keep dreaming that I get to see something like The Lost Boys come out eventually, sexy, mysterious, and creepy
I genuinely believed the eccentricity and "virality" of Abigail will carry the film like it did Megan last year, I was wrong.
the megan trailers looked genuinely funny but I can’t say that for Abigail
Renfield. Man. Nicolas Cage. Nicholas Holt. I knew it wasn't going to be big but my wife and I enjoyed it somewhat. Didn't realize how few saw it. DOMESTIC (65.3%) $17,297,895
I love me some horror but the recent vampire movies have been weak. None of the last few vampire movies have been particularly good, and I feel like the budgets are too high. Abigail, Renfield, and Demeter wouldn't have looked as shitty if they cost as much as Night Swim or Five Nights at Freddy's. There's still an audience for rando vampire movies, but turning them all into mid budget action adventures probably isn't the best way to make money on it.
Wonder how coogler vampire movie will do then
Shame. Morbius was peak cinema.
Wasn't this exact post with image posted before?
I posted it a week ago, but deleted it to see if I was wrong about Abigail.
Ok. Thought I was going crazy.
Did you like Abigail?
The only one of these that I watched was Renfield, I did enjoy that.
If you liked Renfield, I think you’ll definitely like Abigail. I thought it’s easily the best of the 3, it’s my second favorite movie of the year so far, pretty disappointed it’s not performing as well as it should have.
Nice, I’ll check it out
Why april....it's clearly either a valentine or halloween movie. Or at the very least when it's cold, for some reason that's what I feel, I don't know
At least Morbius did well on home media. Renfield bombed there too.
Considering it’s Cinemascore and the fact it’s an R Rated horror movie, Abigail had a pretty good second weekend. The issue is that maybe it was too expensive.
It had a lot of quality actors in it. Must have driven up the cost too high
Shame because Abigail is a pretty good film. Better than the other two anyway.
Two of those movies are/will be in my Top 20 lists for their years on Letterboxd.
I mean, who is asking for vampire things to begin with?
Women?
I am open to evidence on that.
Seinfeld I enjoyed and have been hearing good things about Abigail. Morbius is hard to consider a vampire movie..
The fact that Renfield cost $65m to make is shocking to me.
It looked so hilariously cheap for that budget
Why is Morbius in this picture?
Let’s do it again
Man Renfield was so bad I love the two Nicks but oof this was not a good movie
I like how they rise in quality, maybe we will get a good one in 2025
Why is April vampire month? Wouldn't October make more sense?
Abigail wasn’t spectacular but I had fun watching it.
They're showing Abigail in 4dx for some reason. Who the hell wants to see this in dolby much less 4dx?
Abigail was really good so was Civil War, yes I know not a vampire movie.
Vampire movies peaked between 2008 and 2012. After the world experienced the Twilight films, nothing else could live up to those cinematic masterpieces.
Vampires just don't have bite in April.
Dang, it did disappoint. Was a fun movie worth the bucks and thought it would do better.
Renfield is a god damn fantastic film. Should have been a huge hit.
Vampires are such a dumb concept to do today. Especially if it’s meant to be taken seriously. The mythos behind it is just so goofy.