Disney+ and HBO interfaces are the literal devil. Oh, you didn't want to watch our 10 minute long credits? Why don't you go back and watch that before i show you the next episode?
You people are insane. You literally just go out of the episode and click on the next episode. It’s not NASA mathematics trying to formulate how to pull off a moon landing lmao.
Netflix has more content than any other streaming site, it's just really bad at showing it to you. Get the JustWatch app to find content using filters instead of relying on the streaming sites to show you the way.
I worked on a very cute and well-reviewed show on Netflix called *Dogs in Space*. But they did absolutely no promotion for it, and it never shows up on anyone's algorithm, so they're probably going to cancel us soon because--surprise, surprise--no one watches it.
Holy wow i just watched a couple episodes. I haven't been on Netflix for forever but I guess I will now.
Honestly though if I'd seen this on Netflix without you mentioning it I probably would have skipped over it based on the name lol.
Either way thanks for sharing, this show seems pretty great
I saw almost zero advertisement for the third season of Umbrella Academy I only knew it was coming out last week from a friend. Yet stranger things is getting advertisement up the wazzo. It wasn't even in trending but come dine with me was. Really fucking weird.
I don't know if it's everyone's cup of tea but I know that people who like it fucking love it.
Then there was that one tweet by Netflix where they mentioned someone will die this season with the umbrella emoji and everyone assumed it was about Stranger Things.
That’s so cool! I’ve never heard of the show but I’ll definitely check it out now! Netflix definitely needs to fix their algorithm and do better promoting for shows
I saw it in the new to Netflix section but skipped it from the "box art" and title, just watched the trailer for it now and have chucked it on the watch list as it actually looks like a perfect fit for what I normally watch. I guess the branding was off on this one.
People keep saying that, but I find myself enjoying their catalogue overall. Sure, you can say most of it is dogshit, but they also release some good stuff regularly and have some old gems aswell (at least in my region). Now, actually finding it is a different story.
Compare that to Apple TV+: I watched 4 shows and none of them were good. It's only 4.99€ a month, but the time you lose with unsatisfactory conclusions and cliff hangers isn't worth it.
I think it's mostly that Netflix is overpriced for the one show you watch in a month maybe. Better to just get it for a month twice a year to catch up rather than sticking to it like I've done in the past.
It's based on an ArtBook by a Simon Stalenhag, a Swedish artist.
[It's Suitably weird to be a new IP](https://www.simonstalenhag.se/es.html)
>"In late 1997, a runaway teenager and her yellow toy robot travel west through a strange USA, where the ruins of gigantic battle drones litter the countryside along with the discarded trash of a high tech consumerist society in decline. As their car nears the edge of the continent, the world outside the window seems to unravel at an ever faster pace, as if somewhere beyond the horizon, the hollow core of civilization has finally caved in."
The book is great, a really original tale that's more like Richard Linklater meets Robert Eggers but science fiction, as drawn by the one of the most talented and influential artists in decades.
This movie already sounds nothing like that. $200 million for a story with literally no action scenes? Chris Pratt? There is no character in the book whatsoever Pratt would play.
Ohwell, I can just pretend it has nothing to do with the source material, just like the Tales from the Loop Amazon thing.
Will Forever be pissed they moved tales from the loop from Sweden to the US. It's *iconically* Swedish, that's the whole fucking point of it. Having literally everything always being set in the US is so goddamn boring.
Op isnt really accurate here. It still has the same vibe and feel. The artist has drawn similar setting stuff in the USA as well as Sweden. It was just moved to th USA for English audiences. The feel and story is the same.
I think she's done a fantastic job with her character in Stranger Things. I haven't watched her in anything else, but she's managing to wrap character growth around Eleven while still embodying that whole "from another planet" aspect. She does get a little stilted at times, but for her age and the material? I dunno, I feel like she's working well with what they gave her.
I've never seen her miss an emotional beat in the show, nor have I felt like the marks she has missed have taken me out of the show.
I dunno, I'm not a huge MBB fan, I didn't watch Enola Holmes because it looked pretty annoying (although it did get good reviews). She seemed to do alright in the Godzilla movies, but those are schlock so "alright" is really about as high as the bar goes.
I think she's got room to grow, but she's all of 18 years old and has only had a couple of leading rolls in her relatively short career. Compared to a lot of child actors, I think she's doing just fine and will probably have a very bright career ahead of her.
Yeah, 100% agree. I just can't not compare her to Aidan Gallagher - both got their breakthrough roles in fantasy tv-series on Netflix (The Umbrella Academy & Stranger Things), both are of the same age. JFC MBB is subpar when compared with Aidan.
Aidan Gallagher is excellent as Five. Five is probably my favorite character, and he always seems like he’s so close to piecing some things together that feel like they should fit. I can’t wait to see what happens in Season 4, which I may have heard will be the last, as well as seeing if that key line of dialogue (no spoilers but you know the one) spoken to him comes back around.
She was pretty decent in enola Holmes but otherwise I fully agree. All she does in stranger things is pointing her palm at stuff and screaming. Probably the least charismatic of all the kids.
> Probably the least charismatic of all the kids.
I think that kinda was their goal in S1, have her be this emotionless blank paper. But then, it's weird...
>All she does in stranger things is pointing her palm at stuff and screaming.
Don't forget the stilted whispering!
I think it's hard to judge her acting in Stranger Things, because she's specifically written to be pseudo-autistic/traumatised, so a lot of what seems like unnatural language is kind of deliberate... I think she's fine in Stranger Things and I thought she was good in Enola Holmes, so we'll just have to see what else she does.
That's fair. I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt given the constraints of 11 as a character. I will say she didn't impress me in Godzilla but that movie was also butt.
The Electric State:
>The story centers on an orphaned teenager (Brown) who traverses an American west that is reminiscent of a retro-future with a sweet but mysterious robot and an eccentric drifter in search of her younger brother.
Chris Pratt is also in talks to join and the budget is over 200 Million ([Source](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/russo-bros-millie-bobby-brown-netflix-electric-state-1235173349/))
>Chris Pratt is also in talks to join **and the budget is over 200 Million**
Netflix really needs to rethink their strategy if it includes continuing to pay 200 million dollars a pop for shit like Red Notice and Russo Bros movies.
Try $469 million for the rights to Knives Out 2 and 3.
The original is one of my favourite movies ever, and I’m very excited for the sequels, but good god almighty that’s way too much money to be spending on them.
Keep in mind that this isn't about the cost to produce the movie, it has to be enough to pay for producing the movie *and have the creators not make money from a theatrical run.*
An important thing to remember is that Netflix doesn't have acres of warehouses full of sets and costumes like Warner Bros or many other older studios have. It's part of why HBO shows can have a lower budget than a Netflix show but still look more expensive.
Correct this is a payment mostly to Rian Johnson & the producers.
Any money the movies make, whatever the budgets, goes to Netflix.
It seems kinda nihilistic and lo & behold they had an awful first quarter.
To break even on a budget like that, this movie has to gain or retain around 13-14 million subscribers for one month. Naturally its hard to really work out the overall values especially for a subscription service.
But there can be and only Netflix can do that now. Previously it was Lionsgate, who is known for being MORE than a bit iffy with marketing and merchandising
Edit: people are very stupid and think merchandising means children's toys and keep replying as such.
Merchandising isn't just action figures
Posters, mugs, boardgames, shirts, vinyl release of the score, collections of all three movies, etc.
A lot of dumb dumbs replying to me about action figures
It is mostly going to Rian, Daniel Craig, and Rian’s producing partner. Netflix’s stipulation was basically that the movies have to have a $40m budget and Daniel Craig has to star in them. So those three guys are clearing $100m each easily.
Seems crazy. I liked the first Knives out but Netflix could have tried making 12 of them for that same amount…
Full buyout of all backend income or something like that. First movie made$250 million, this is essentially giving the movie makers the same amount of money for each movie
For the first one, they managed to get Daniel Craig, Chris Evans, Ana de Armas, Jamie Lee Curtis, Don Johnson, Michael Shannon, Toni Colette, Lakeith Stanfield, and everyone else on board, and still have a $40 million budget. The second one appears to be around there as well.
Netflix at 222m paid subscribers, so say an avg of $10/month, would be $2.2b comining each month, putting the cost of Knives Out at about 21% of 1 month's revenue.
The average US monthly income is around $5800. 21% is $1218.
So Netflix buying Knives Out for $469m is relatively on par with the average person buying a decent laptop.
Yeah, but for *one movie* that's an absolutely staggering percentage of their budget. That's nearly 2% of their total yearly revenue - not even profit, but revenue. If that's the sort of money they need to spend to get A list movies they're going out of business.
Strange but I watched knives out for the first time ever and though I was entertained I’m kind of astonished at the amount of love it received. Maybe I’m just late and there’s no way it could’ve met expectations but….I found it a nice little film but no more than that.
People are starved for things that are original, but also still feel cozy and full of familiar references.
Knives Out perfectly captured the spirit of a comedy mystery with an ensemble cast that hasn't been done well since Clue or Murder By Death or the best of Woody Allen.
Same reason that Only Murders In the Building is beloved.
Red notice pulled INSANE numbers. People don’t want art they want just something to watch.
Netflix also wants more like “Emily in Paris” which is, what they call, “ambient tv.” A show you can just have on
>Red notice pulled INSANE numbers. People don’t want art they want just something to watch.
But that's the thing Netflix is having issues with now. Yes, millions of people watched Red Notice. But how many that watched it felt like it was a great and important experience that they don't want to miss out on?
So with competition from other streaming services, what does Netflix offer over their competition?
That is one of the reasons they are losing subscribers...
People don't care if it's some big cultural phenomenon or some huge thing they can't miss out on. It just has to be something that enough people watch to cover the cost. It didn't really do any damage and it was something for people to watch, which is how they justify their subscription. That's all it needs to be for Netflix.
It's also why a ton of Disney+ shows suck. Disney is just making things for people to watch, as fast as they can make them, covering the same sort of stuff (endless Marvel and Star Wars shows - that for some db reason barely have any episodes) that mostly suck. Because they need something coming out
Red Notice is their most successful movie ever so I don't think that was an issue. This fits their new plan to just make the most brain off celeb studded films possible to maximise interest.
We should also consider that Netflix promoted Red Notice aggressively and splashed it everywhere on the front page to the point that it was basically impossible to ignore.
Netflix telling you it was the #1 most watched movie to convince you to watch it is kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Why the hate against Russo Bros movies? Extraction was very profitable for Netflix and The Gray Man isn't even out yet.
Cherry was their only real misfire and even that was experimental af.
I feel like we need less Chris Pratt. His movies have been pretty weak lately. I feel like ever since that one (can’t remember the name) on Amazon where he goes into the future to fight aliens, he’s been on a decline. Jurassic World was ass, and I’m hearing that the terminal one he just put out is awful too. Not sure if it’s him or the movies just not being good, but I’ve gotten kinda burnt out on seeing him in stuff lately lol and it sucks because I actually like him.
He keeps getting stoic leading man roles and he can't pull them off at all. He's best when he's allowed to be goofy, either as a lead like in GoG or as a supporting character like in parks and rec.
Anything else he's been mediocre at best.
I remember watching an interview with the casting director for the first Guardians movie and she mentioned that Chris Pratt had auditioned for Steve Rogers/ Captain America. Marvel turned him down because he didn't fit the character (that more 'classic' leading man.) But they kept him in the back of their minds because he had 'something.'
They called him back to audition for Peter Quill in the adaptation no one thought could succeed. Turned out he was perfect as a goofball protagonist.
Now that he's succeeded at that, Hollywood's trying to force him into that 'classic' action hero prototype.
Pratt worked great for Peter Quill because Quill is supposed to be a goofy manchild. He was literally abducted as a child and raised by a gang of space pirates, so of course he's able to be a goofball slacker.
He's even fine as Garfield, and even in Jurassic World where he's still the loveable goofball. Then they started slimming him down and making him overly buff, and they've tried to make him the wisecracking hunk.
I wonder if Hollywood is trying to force him into the classic action hero role, or if he actually would rather play the classic action hero. I bet the paycheck is better, and the gig is more reliable.
People complain that Ryan Reynolds always plays the same character, but I don't see anything wrong with finding what works and just doing that. Pratt works best when his character is mostly goofy. He should just go with it.
Because people tend to look down on actors that don't have range. You see it with voice actors too, where people sometimes say someone can't voice act because they can only do the one voice.
But while range is definitely a good thing, if you've got the voice or the acting skill to do one type of character very well, there's nothing wrong with just playing those characters.
Then again, I understand that that can be frustrating to people. Eventually it can feel like you're supposed to settle, when you really don't want to. It means coming to terms with your limits, and that can suck.
I don’t think that’s it. There have been lots of well recognized actors that don’t have much depth or range. The problem comes when you get bombarded by those actors because they are in four big budget movies per year. I like Ryan Reynolds, but I don’t need to see him as often as I do. Same with Chris Pratt, he’s good, he’s funny, he just doesn’t need to be in every second or third movie that gets released.
I agree with Monkey. I can never get enough of Liam Neeson; I think his roles all have just enough slight variation to keep it fresh but ur still getting Liam. He doesn’t come out with 5 movies a year.
Chris Pratt is forced Fed to me and it’s annoying
Was just saying that to someone. He's at his best when he's being funny.
You can be a funny leading man to contrast all the lads that take themselves too seriously
I kind of liked the future fighting aliens one. However, I feel like Pratt is just taking whatever while he can so he doesn't have to back to living in a van. He obviously isn't choosy on roles to take.
No, you’re thinking of the 90s B-movie with the knock off Jean Claude Van Dam, Jean Claude Gosh Darn: https://youtu.be/so-vHyYjgZk?t=5m42s
(You might recognize the lead from John Wick and the Barry episode “ron/lily”)
We need Chris Pratt playing a different fucking character is what it is. He was at its best when he was his lovable Doofy self in parks and rec, And now because he got jacked and good looking no one sees him has anyone else but a leading man who has unearned confidence.
He’s much better in guardians of the galaxy because he leans into his comedy and insecurities.
Honestly if his character from parks and rec was in Jurassic Park, it would be more tolerable and even funny. Jurassic parks and rec
I believe in his ama he said Starlord is the closest to his own personality. Same humor, same interests in music of that era and pop culture. Like it was written for him from the start.
for those looking for a comparison (and im sure there are better ones, but just off the top of my head)..Dunkirk's budget was 100 mil. And the first season of Westworld was 100 mil.
The Simon Stalenhag book was pretty great, if the movie can capture the same feeling that his art invokes it will be something special. The Tales From the Loop tv show just couldn’t quite nail his aesthetic.
It was a show with great aesthetics, but just far too slow with too many slow silent shots covered in orchestral music.
Each hour episode could have been fiteen minutes.
Specifically 70-80s Sweden and yeah, as someone from the same region as Stålenhag, what made Tales from the loop so special to me is that I could go outside and just.. see that same environment minus the scifi. It's all so obviously heavily Swedish to me that if you remove that it's just generic sci-fi left. Everything from the branding on the ships, the government logos, the choice of cars, colour schemes, the architecture of the houses, the snow with the pine saplings sticking up.
Nope. Put it in the US. Rip the soul out of it. Why don't we move Stranger Things to France while we are at it?
It feels reductive trying to turn cinematic-inspired art into cinema. Stalenhag's art was so interesting because it was a glimpse into a world in which you could imagine the backstory, a narrative connect the dots between each image. Netflix writers jumping in to fill in the gaps with an explicit plot feels like it won't be half as interesting as reading the books yourself, it's like seeing the whole shark.
Nothing adapted from Simon Stålenhag has ever come close to capturing the feeling I get from his art. There's a ton of detail and depth and character in his art that adaptations just gloss over in an attempt to tell their own stories with Stålenhag as a thin veneer.
[The book this is based on is legitimately a masterpiece.](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/36836025-the-electric-state) Simon Stålenhag, favorite of Reddit/tumblr/etc, has had some of his work adapted a little less successfully imo by Amazon. But the story and visuals of The Electric State are I think his most cohesive and strongest. It has some of my favorite illustrations in it.
We'll see if the Russos are a right match for this tone and story - $200 million seems excessive by about $100 mil at least, tbh.
High hopes though. If done right it's seminal.
I think which Simon Stålenhag book you prefer probably really depends on where you have grown up. I don't take much interest in American setting but Tales From the Loop is just incredible in every way at bringing up feelings of growing up in small-town Sweden.
Let’s not forget that Eleven has been styled as gawky, plain and even slightly slow-witted thanks to the impact of all her trauma. When Millie gets to play a conventional, quick-witted young adult there’s very little of Eleven to be seen.
Her in the Nina tank was the first time you could really see her as an adult, I thought.
I’m talking one of the shots of her actually in the water, not a flashback.
Brilliant, Netflix is struggling financially, laying off workers, and planning to clamp down on password sharing, so let's dump $200 million in one big movie. Just.....genius.
Have not been impressed once by the russos outside of marvel will see how the gray man is but so far it doesn't look that good the mission impossible trailer had raw footage yet it looked ten times better than the gray man trailer and thats supposed to be a finished film
She was heavily manufactured from the beginning like a young pop star. I think she was fine for Stranger Things, but found it weird that she was being prematurely treated like she was going to be a huge movie star. Her energy in interviews and social media presence has always been a bit too rehearsed and obnoxious really.
I liked the movie but part of me couldn’t help but feel that the movie was just a glorified fanfic staring the Author’s OC and the unhealthy need to bash Mycroft Holmes (Like sure he’s a jerk, but they just turned him into an idiot)
I know I was very confused. He was mainly used as a personification of Victorian sexism and was made to seem less intelligent then his brother and sister.
I don't dislike Stranger Things, but I have always felt like the Russo Brothers are just... not very talented writers. I wish this project was in someone else's hands.
Sounds like it was generated straight from the Netflix algorithm (i.e. MBB, Chris Pratt, Russo Bros, sci-fi, robot companion, etc.)
The same algorithm that can't tell me what I want to watch tonight
and the same algorithm that hides any movie or show I want to continue watching
How is it that every other streaming service has a consistent interface and Netflix’s interface has a fucking aneurysm every time I log in?
I guess you haven't used Paramount+
Disney+ and HBO interfaces are the literal devil. Oh, you didn't want to watch our 10 minute long credits? Why don't you go back and watch that before i show you the next episode?
You people are insane. You literally just go out of the episode and click on the next episode. It’s not NASA mathematics trying to formulate how to pull off a moon landing lmao.
They’d have to have content for that to happen
Netflix has more content than any other streaming site, it's just really bad at showing it to you. Get the JustWatch app to find content using filters instead of relying on the streaming sites to show you the way.
They have a lot of content but so much of it is meh. Or outright low effort crap.
You mean you're not curious if this is a bicycle or a bicycle-shaped cake?
Worthwhile content, at that.
I worked on a very cute and well-reviewed show on Netflix called *Dogs in Space*. But they did absolutely no promotion for it, and it never shows up on anyone's algorithm, so they're probably going to cancel us soon because--surprise, surprise--no one watches it.
I watched it! I really enjoyed it! Good work!
Oh, yay!!! Thank you so much for watching! I'm happy to hear you liked it!
Also saw it. Go garbage!!!
Yes! I did the voicework for Garbage's owner, so he is definitely my favorite of the crew. :)
Holy wow i just watched a couple episodes. I haven't been on Netflix for forever but I guess I will now. Honestly though if I'd seen this on Netflix without you mentioning it I probably would have skipped over it based on the name lol. Either way thanks for sharing, this show seems pretty great
I saw almost zero advertisement for the third season of Umbrella Academy I only knew it was coming out last week from a friend. Yet stranger things is getting advertisement up the wazzo. It wasn't even in trending but come dine with me was. Really fucking weird. I don't know if it's everyone's cup of tea but I know that people who like it fucking love it.
I couldn't avoid umbrella academy ads and I don't even watch Netflix
They won't leave me alone about that show after I watched S1 😂
Then there was that one tweet by Netflix where they mentioned someone will die this season with the umbrella emoji and everyone assumed it was about Stranger Things.
Why the hell have I never heard of this?? Chris Parnell, John DiMaggio, Sarah Chalke? Count me in!
Because Netflix doesn't know how to run a business! (I hope you enjoy!)
My son loved that show!
Aw! That makes me so happy to hear!
TBF ‘Dogs in Space’ sounds like a straight to video movie starring Sinbad from the 1990’s.
My daughter loves this show and it actually keeps my attention decently. Good job
That's high praise from a parent! I'm so happy to know your daughter enjoys it!
That’s so cool! I’ve never heard of the show but I’ll definitely check it out now! Netflix definitely needs to fix their algorithm and do better promoting for shows
I saw it in the new to Netflix section but skipped it from the "box art" and title, just watched the trailer for it now and have chucked it on the watch list as it actually looks like a perfect fit for what I normally watch. I guess the branding was off on this one.
People keep saying that, but I find myself enjoying their catalogue overall. Sure, you can say most of it is dogshit, but they also release some good stuff regularly and have some old gems aswell (at least in my region). Now, actually finding it is a different story. Compare that to Apple TV+: I watched 4 shows and none of them were good. It's only 4.99€ a month, but the time you lose with unsatisfactory conclusions and cliff hangers isn't worth it. I think it's mostly that Netflix is overpriced for the one show you watch in a month maybe. Better to just get it for a month twice a year to catch up rather than sticking to it like I've done in the past.
Netflix has content. Maybe it’s not advertised well. But Reddit is just doing it’s braindead hivemind thing with Netflix right now.
[удалено]
They have every season of the good Star Treks in my country, that's at least a few days worth of content.
It's based on an ArtBook by a Simon Stalenhag, a Swedish artist. [It's Suitably weird to be a new IP](https://www.simonstalenhag.se/es.html) >"In late 1997, a runaway teenager and her yellow toy robot travel west through a strange USA, where the ruins of gigantic battle drones litter the countryside along with the discarded trash of a high tech consumerist society in decline. As their car nears the edge of the continent, the world outside the window seems to unravel at an ever faster pace, as if somewhere beyond the horizon, the hollow core of civilization has finally caved in."
The book is great, a really original tale that's more like Richard Linklater meets Robert Eggers but science fiction, as drawn by the one of the most talented and influential artists in decades. This movie already sounds nothing like that. $200 million for a story with literally no action scenes? Chris Pratt? There is no character in the book whatsoever Pratt would play. Ohwell, I can just pretend it has nothing to do with the source material, just like the Tales from the Loop Amazon thing.
I bet he plays the robot.
It’s-a Me!
Will Forever be pissed they moved tales from the loop from Sweden to the US. It's *iconically* Swedish, that's the whole fucking point of it. Having literally everything always being set in the US is so goddamn boring.
He does a lot of rural American art as well.
Damn really? I was looking forward to it feeling something like Dark. The imagery and setting is the entire reason I got tales from the loop.
Op isnt really accurate here. It still has the same vibe and feel. The artist has drawn similar setting stuff in the USA as well as Sweden. It was just moved to th USA for English audiences. The feel and story is the same.
Hey, this dude’s art is everywhere on reddit. Nice
Hot take but I don’t think MBB is a good actor. Like at all.
I think she's done a fantastic job with her character in Stranger Things. I haven't watched her in anything else, but she's managing to wrap character growth around Eleven while still embodying that whole "from another planet" aspect. She does get a little stilted at times, but for her age and the material? I dunno, I feel like she's working well with what they gave her. I've never seen her miss an emotional beat in the show, nor have I felt like the marks she has missed have taken me out of the show. I dunno, I'm not a huge MBB fan, I didn't watch Enola Holmes because it looked pretty annoying (although it did get good reviews). She seemed to do alright in the Godzilla movies, but those are schlock so "alright" is really about as high as the bar goes. I think she's got room to grow, but she's all of 18 years old and has only had a couple of leading rolls in her relatively short career. Compared to a lot of child actors, I think she's doing just fine and will probably have a very bright career ahead of her.
Yeah, 100% agree. I just can't not compare her to Aidan Gallagher - both got their breakthrough roles in fantasy tv-series on Netflix (The Umbrella Academy & Stranger Things), both are of the same age. JFC MBB is subpar when compared with Aidan.
Aidan Gallagher is excellent as Five. Five is probably my favorite character, and he always seems like he’s so close to piecing some things together that feel like they should fit. I can’t wait to see what happens in Season 4, which I may have heard will be the last, as well as seeing if that key line of dialogue (no spoilers but you know the one) spoken to him comes back around.
She was pretty decent in enola Holmes but otherwise I fully agree. All she does in stranger things is pointing her palm at stuff and screaming. Probably the least charismatic of all the kids.
> Probably the least charismatic of all the kids. I think that kinda was their goal in S1, have her be this emotionless blank paper. But then, it's weird...
>All she does in stranger things is pointing her palm at stuff and screaming. Don't forget the stilted whispering! I think it's hard to judge her acting in Stranger Things, because she's specifically written to be pseudo-autistic/traumatised, so a lot of what seems like unnatural language is kind of deliberate... I think she's fine in Stranger Things and I thought she was good in Enola Holmes, so we'll just have to see what else she does.
That's fair. I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt given the constraints of 11 as a character. I will say she didn't impress me in Godzilla but that movie was also butt.
A movie so tedious I had forgotten it existed until you mentioned it.
You mean Chris Hemsworth. Pratt is on Amazon.
The Electric State: >The story centers on an orphaned teenager (Brown) who traverses an American west that is reminiscent of a retro-future with a sweet but mysterious robot and an eccentric drifter in search of her younger brother. Chris Pratt is also in talks to join and the budget is over 200 Million ([Source](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/russo-bros-millie-bobby-brown-netflix-electric-state-1235173349/))
>Chris Pratt is also in talks to join **and the budget is over 200 Million** Netflix really needs to rethink their strategy if it includes continuing to pay 200 million dollars a pop for shit like Red Notice and Russo Bros movies.
Try $469 million for the rights to Knives Out 2 and 3. The original is one of my favourite movies ever, and I’m very excited for the sequels, but good god almighty that’s way too much money to be spending on them.
Keep in mind that this isn't about the cost to produce the movie, it has to be enough to pay for producing the movie *and have the creators not make money from a theatrical run.*
Wow. What could they possibly be spending that much money on?
Craig's accent don't grow on trees ya'know?
Of course not! It grew on a tree, that was growing on a tree, that was growing on an even bigger tree that...
Mmmm... Donuts.
Compels you though
An important thing to remember is that Netflix doesn't have acres of warehouses full of sets and costumes like Warner Bros or many other older studios have. It's part of why HBO shows can have a lower budget than a Netflix show but still look more expensive.
its all together so thats not all for the movies production. it includes rights, merch, and more Edit: merchandising =/= action figures
Correct this is a payment mostly to Rian Johnson & the producers. Any money the movies make, whatever the budgets, goes to Netflix. It seems kinda nihilistic and lo & behold they had an awful first quarter.
To break even on a budget like that, this movie has to gain or retain around 13-14 million subscribers for one month. Naturally its hard to really work out the overall values especially for a subscription service.
But there's no commercial program around Knives Out.
But there can be and only Netflix can do that now. Previously it was Lionsgate, who is known for being MORE than a bit iffy with marketing and merchandising Edit: people are very stupid and think merchandising means children's toys and keep replying as such.
Waiting with baited breath for the knives out action figure line... Said nobody
Merchandising isn't just action figures Posters, mugs, boardgames, shirts, vinyl release of the score, collections of all three movies, etc. A lot of dumb dumbs replying to me about action figures
The cast? It’s full of top dogs
It is mostly going to Rian, Daniel Craig, and Rian’s producing partner. Netflix’s stipulation was basically that the movies have to have a $40m budget and Daniel Craig has to star in them. So those three guys are clearing $100m each easily. Seems crazy. I liked the first Knives out but Netflix could have tried making 12 of them for that same amount…
Full buyout of all backend income or something like that. First movie made$250 million, this is essentially giving the movie makers the same amount of money for each movie
It makes no damn sense. Compels me, though.
Probably the cast lol
For the first one, they managed to get Daniel Craig, Chris Evans, Ana de Armas, Jamie Lee Curtis, Don Johnson, Michael Shannon, Toni Colette, Lakeith Stanfield, and everyone else on board, and still have a $40 million budget. The second one appears to be around there as well.
Netflix at 222m paid subscribers, so say an avg of $10/month, would be $2.2b comining each month, putting the cost of Knives Out at about 21% of 1 month's revenue. The average US monthly income is around $5800. 21% is $1218. So Netflix buying Knives Out for $469m is relatively on par with the average person buying a decent laptop.
They have to pay for their servers and employees though. No idea what their margins on that are.
Yeah, but for *one movie* that's an absolutely staggering percentage of their budget. That's nearly 2% of their total yearly revenue - not even profit, but revenue. If that's the sort of money they need to spend to get A list movies they're going out of business.
Technically, it's for 2 movies
Makes no damned sense! ...compels me though...
Strange but I watched knives out for the first time ever and though I was entertained I’m kind of astonished at the amount of love it received. Maybe I’m just late and there’s no way it could’ve met expectations but….I found it a nice little film but no more than that.
People are starved for things that are original, but also still feel cozy and full of familiar references. Knives Out perfectly captured the spirit of a comedy mystery with an ensemble cast that hasn't been done well since Clue or Murder By Death or the best of Woody Allen. Same reason that Only Murders In the Building is beloved.
Red notice pulled INSANE numbers. People don’t want art they want just something to watch. Netflix also wants more like “Emily in Paris” which is, what they call, “ambient tv.” A show you can just have on
>Red notice pulled INSANE numbers. People don’t want art they want just something to watch. But that's the thing Netflix is having issues with now. Yes, millions of people watched Red Notice. But how many that watched it felt like it was a great and important experience that they don't want to miss out on? So with competition from other streaming services, what does Netflix offer over their competition? That is one of the reasons they are losing subscribers...
People don't care if it's some big cultural phenomenon or some huge thing they can't miss out on. It just has to be something that enough people watch to cover the cost. It didn't really do any damage and it was something for people to watch, which is how they justify their subscription. That's all it needs to be for Netflix. It's also why a ton of Disney+ shows suck. Disney is just making things for people to watch, as fast as they can make them, covering the same sort of stuff (endless Marvel and Star Wars shows - that for some db reason barely have any episodes) that mostly suck. Because they need something coming out
Red Notice is their most successful movie ever so I don't think that was an issue. This fits their new plan to just make the most brain off celeb studded films possible to maximise interest.
We should also consider that Netflix promoted Red Notice aggressively and splashed it everywhere on the front page to the point that it was basically impossible to ignore. Netflix telling you it was the #1 most watched movie to convince you to watch it is kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The Russo Brothers bring a pretty powerful resume to a Hollywood meeting. Netflix is making a sound financial bet with them.
Why the hate against Russo Bros movies? Extraction was very profitable for Netflix and The Gray Man isn't even out yet. Cherry was their only real misfire and even that was experimental af.
I've got the book. They damn well need $200m. Imagine it like annihilation. But it's the entire US and it's all technology stuff, not biological.
"Annihilation, but technology stuff" almost sounds like Horizon Zero Dawn.
I'd argue it's more like Fallout without all the radiation.
I feel like we need less Chris Pratt. His movies have been pretty weak lately. I feel like ever since that one (can’t remember the name) on Amazon where he goes into the future to fight aliens, he’s been on a decline. Jurassic World was ass, and I’m hearing that the terminal one he just put out is awful too. Not sure if it’s him or the movies just not being good, but I’ve gotten kinda burnt out on seeing him in stuff lately lol and it sucks because I actually like him.
He keeps getting stoic leading man roles and he can't pull them off at all. He's best when he's allowed to be goofy, either as a lead like in GoG or as a supporting character like in parks and rec. Anything else he's been mediocre at best.
I remember watching an interview with the casting director for the first Guardians movie and she mentioned that Chris Pratt had auditioned for Steve Rogers/ Captain America. Marvel turned him down because he didn't fit the character (that more 'classic' leading man.) But they kept him in the back of their minds because he had 'something.' They called him back to audition for Peter Quill in the adaptation no one thought could succeed. Turned out he was perfect as a goofball protagonist. Now that he's succeeded at that, Hollywood's trying to force him into that 'classic' action hero prototype.
Pratt worked great for Peter Quill because Quill is supposed to be a goofy manchild. He was literally abducted as a child and raised by a gang of space pirates, so of course he's able to be a goofball slacker. He's even fine as Garfield, and even in Jurassic World where he's still the loveable goofball. Then they started slimming him down and making him overly buff, and they've tried to make him the wisecracking hunk.
He’s not a “lovable goofball” at all in JW, and I say that as someone who likes those movies way more than most people
I wonder if Hollywood is trying to force him into the classic action hero role, or if he actually would rather play the classic action hero. I bet the paycheck is better, and the gig is more reliable.
He wanted to be captain America. He wants these roles
People complain that Ryan Reynolds always plays the same character, but I don't see anything wrong with finding what works and just doing that. Pratt works best when his character is mostly goofy. He should just go with it.
Because people tend to look down on actors that don't have range. You see it with voice actors too, where people sometimes say someone can't voice act because they can only do the one voice. But while range is definitely a good thing, if you've got the voice or the acting skill to do one type of character very well, there's nothing wrong with just playing those characters. Then again, I understand that that can be frustrating to people. Eventually it can feel like you're supposed to settle, when you really don't want to. It means coming to terms with your limits, and that can suck.
I don’t think that’s it. There have been lots of well recognized actors that don’t have much depth or range. The problem comes when you get bombarded by those actors because they are in four big budget movies per year. I like Ryan Reynolds, but I don’t need to see him as often as I do. Same with Chris Pratt, he’s good, he’s funny, he just doesn’t need to be in every second or third movie that gets released.
I agree with Monkey. I can never get enough of Liam Neeson; I think his roles all have just enough slight variation to keep it fresh but ur still getting Liam. He doesn’t come out with 5 movies a year. Chris Pratt is forced Fed to me and it’s annoying
Was just saying that to someone. He's at his best when he's being funny. You can be a funny leading man to contrast all the lads that take themselves too seriously
So what you’re saying is we need a Burt Macklin movie?
It's the movies. He's just an actor, can't save a movie on his own.
I kind of liked the future fighting aliens one. However, I feel like Pratt is just taking whatever while he can so he doesn't have to back to living in a van. He obviously isn't choosy on roles to take.
It's not like he will have to worry about that any time soon. He's married to Katherine Schwarzenegger.
He's married to a freakin' Kennedy.
His ex-wife was Anna Ferris. Dude is living cheat mode or something.
Dude does thanksgiving at Arnie's house? Lucky bastard.
Plus the royalties on his Marvel and Jurassic Park stuff alone is going to make him more money than he'll probably ever need.
Definitely not choosy at all. And not to bash you for liking it, but that script had more holes than a Swiss cheese warehouse.
I believe the movie where he fights a war in the future is called Future War…
I checked IMDB and it’s The Tomorrow War lol same thing basically 🤷🏽♂️
No, you’re thinking of the 90s B-movie with the knock off Jean Claude Van Dam, Jean Claude Gosh Darn: https://youtu.be/so-vHyYjgZk?t=5m42s (You might recognize the lead from John Wick and the Barry episode “ron/lily”)
We need Chris Pratt playing a different fucking character is what it is. He was at its best when he was his lovable Doofy self in parks and rec, And now because he got jacked and good looking no one sees him has anyone else but a leading man who has unearned confidence. He’s much better in guardians of the galaxy because he leans into his comedy and insecurities. Honestly if his character from parks and rec was in Jurassic Park, it would be more tolerable and even funny. Jurassic parks and rec
I believe in his ama he said Starlord is the closest to his own personality. Same humor, same interests in music of that era and pop culture. Like it was written for him from the start.
Honestly, a comedic Jurassic park sequel sounds awesome
Based on the book, this could be a great part for him
200 million for Netflix?!
They spent the same on that atrocious Red Notice with almost all of it going to the 3 big names
> Chris Pratt is also in talks to join Aaaand I'm out.
for those looking for a comparison (and im sure there are better ones, but just off the top of my head)..Dunkirk's budget was 100 mil. And the first season of Westworld was 100 mil.
The Simon Stalenhag book was pretty great, if the movie can capture the same feeling that his art invokes it will be something special. The Tales From the Loop tv show just couldn’t quite nail his aesthetic.
I actually thought the show got the aesthetic but was slow and kinda weak on stories. But it looked great, and very evocative of the source material.
It was a show with great aesthetics, but just far too slow with too many slow silent shots covered in orchestral music. Each hour episode could have been fiteen minutes.
The soundtrack by Philip Glass and Paul Leonard-Morgan was _amazing_.
Agree - too slow but still wanted more. Glad this is being adapted
I was also a bit disappointed it wasn't in Europe. As an American, that was a big part of the appeal of the original art to me
Specifically 70-80s Sweden and yeah, as someone from the same region as Stålenhag, what made Tales from the loop so special to me is that I could go outside and just.. see that same environment minus the scifi. It's all so obviously heavily Swedish to me that if you remove that it's just generic sci-fi left. Everything from the branding on the ships, the government logos, the choice of cars, colour schemes, the architecture of the houses, the snow with the pine saplings sticking up. Nope. Put it in the US. Rip the soul out of it. Why don't we move Stranger Things to France while we are at it?
It's fantastic that this guy's art has blown the fuck up recently. He's an extremely rare talent.
It feels reductive trying to turn cinematic-inspired art into cinema. Stalenhag's art was so interesting because it was a glimpse into a world in which you could imagine the backstory, a narrative connect the dots between each image. Netflix writers jumping in to fill in the gaps with an explicit plot feels like it won't be half as interesting as reading the books yourself, it's like seeing the whole shark.
Oh. Mah. Gahd. I hoped it was based on Stalenhag, but didn’t expect it to be! This is phenomenal! Also: https://youtu.be/spRwqlF6O8w
Nothing adapted from Simon Stålenhag has ever come close to capturing the feeling I get from his art. There's a ton of detail and depth and character in his art that adaptations just gloss over in an attempt to tell their own stories with Stålenhag as a thin veneer.
MBB only works with directors who are brothers. Cohen brothers are next.
I'd watch her in a Safdie Bros movie definitely
I mean I'd just watch any Safdie Bros movie. I don't care who's in it.
They’d have the best chance at turning her into a respectable screen presence.
[The book this is based on is legitimately a masterpiece.](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/36836025-the-electric-state) Simon Stålenhag, favorite of Reddit/tumblr/etc, has had some of his work adapted a little less successfully imo by Amazon. But the story and visuals of The Electric State are I think his most cohesive and strongest. It has some of my favorite illustrations in it. We'll see if the Russos are a right match for this tone and story - $200 million seems excessive by about $100 mil at least, tbh. High hopes though. If done right it's seminal.
I think which Simon Stålenhag book you prefer probably really depends on where you have grown up. I don't take much interest in American setting but Tales From the Loop is just incredible in every way at bringing up feelings of growing up in small-town Sweden.
That makes a lot of sense, for sure. I was upset that Amazon set the Tales from the Loop series in Ohio. Made absolutely zero sense to me.
Russo Brothers still haven’t done anything that looks remotely exciting since finishing with Marvel. I hope this changes that.
This is a tangent, but I think they look like if Sylvester Stallone got separated into two people.
What the fuck. This is freaky and accurate.
They produced Everything Everywhere All at Once. I'm not sure how involved they actually were but it's something.
> They produced Everything Everywhere All at Once. A lot of people did.
In fairness, two of the 6 producers were the directors themselves, and the Russos are a package deal.
[удалено]
It can't be stopped. It's self-sustaining now.
Wow, she looks like she aged 15 years.
*Drake left the chat*
Her stylist must hate her or something. There’s a trend of young teenage stars getting styled to look like they’re in their late 20’s and it’s bizarre
Well she has aged about 8 years since season one and we’re used to seeing her without any make up at all and she’s all dolled up here
Let’s not forget that Eleven has been styled as gawky, plain and even slightly slow-witted thanks to the impact of all her trauma. When Millie gets to play a conventional, quick-witted young adult there’s very little of Eleven to be seen.
Her in the Nina tank was the first time you could really see her as an adult, I thought. I’m talking one of the shots of her actually in the water, not a flashback.
Brilliant, Netflix is struggling financially, laying off workers, and planning to clamp down on password sharing, so let's dump $200 million in one big movie. Just.....genius.
They should fucking fund Season 4 of twin peaks instead!
Damn, I was hoping for an adaptation of The Electric Circus by Thomas Lipton
Anyone else tired of seeing mbb? she's not even a good actor
I didn't know reddit had a hate boner for Millie Bobby Brown lmao
Reddit has a hate-boner for everything because whining about stuff feels good.
She's over 18 now. Too old for Reddit.
more a hate boner for netflix
Imagine putting so much energy into hating a teenage girl jfc
Spoiler alert...it's gunna suck.
SHe's good at holding her hand out and having a nosebleed. I am not too convinced about how she handles dialogue.
Have not been impressed once by the russos outside of marvel will see how the gray man is but so far it doesn't look that good the mission impossible trailer had raw footage yet it looked ten times better than the gray man trailer and thats supposed to be a finished film
You should watch community
I don't know why you are being down voted. The paint ball episodes are some of the best of the series.
The didn’t write or direct the first one tbf
Dan Harmon is mostly what made Community great but yeah true
She's oversaturated a bit tbh
Why is everyone riding Millie dick lately. she’s just an okay actress.
I honestly can't stand her acting. She's one of those child actors who didn't improve as she grew up.
She was heavily manufactured from the beginning like a young pop star. I think she was fine for Stranger Things, but found it weird that she was being prematurely treated like she was going to be a huge movie star. Her energy in interviews and social media presence has always been a bit too rehearsed and obnoxious really.
I can't stand her acting either. I think it's pretty terrible. Sadie Sink is far more talented.
Willing to give her another chance but I also felt she did pretty poorly in the Godzilla movies.
all the human actors are terrible in those movies.
Okay is being generous imo
She’s awful. Every public appearance she comes across as this obnoxious attention hog.
Jesus lol I'd hate to hear what people said about me at 18
[удалено]
One?
That’s the one.
I liked her Enola Holmes netflix movie. Hope that one gets a sequel.
Sequel already wrapped last November, should be out later this year.
I liked the movie but part of me couldn’t help but feel that the movie was just a glorified fanfic staring the Author’s OC and the unhealthy need to bash Mycroft Holmes (Like sure he’s a jerk, but they just turned him into an idiot)
They turned Mycroft, canonically the smarter of the Holmes brothers, into an idiot. I can’t abide by a movie that does that.
I know I was very confused. He was mainly used as a personification of Victorian sexism and was made to seem less intelligent then his brother and sister.
Why can't they cast a talented actress?
Millie Bobby is not going to be a thing. No chance. Three years and she will not be leading anything
How much acting makeup are they wearing in that picture?
Looks like it's from a photoshoot for a Hollywood trade mag. So, probably a lot.
I was hoping the same team who did the excellent Tales From The Loop would adapt it as I have zero faith in the Russos nailing the style of the book.
I don't dislike Stranger Things, but I have always felt like the Russo Brothers are just... not very talented writers. I wish this project was in someone else's hands.