The point is not necessarily to say the same thing over and over again but to recognize what kind of corporate behaviour has or doesn't have the consumer's best interest at heart, which films get marketed how and what kinds of films get made and do well...that stuff changes. That I come to the same conclusion most of the time is merely an indication of a trend. Whether or not you can live with that trend is up to you. It's just interesting to me what it says about mainstream cinema today and by extension what a large portion of the audience chooses to spend its money on.
In this case, I cannot see why you'd make plans for a third film without knowing what the reception and financial performance of your second film will be and it's arrogant to think that people will give you their money no matter what (also what the MCU is doing, albeit they have enough financial successes to be confident in their brand).LelekPL wrote: ↑February 22nd, 2018, 10:59 amNormally I'd agree but when your first movie makes 1.5 billion dollars, even if the second one makes half of that, it'll be a financial success.Batfan175 wrote: ↑February 22nd, 2018, 4:12 amI have found it rather presumptuous of studio executives to greenlight films before the film that is actually coming out soon has been successful or not. You put all your effort into the film you are currently making to make it the best film possible, hence my aversion to a lot of the implications of the MCU as it exists today.
It would be like Disney announcing a sixth POTC film before the fifth one had been seen by anyone. I know the first Jurassic World made loads of money but audiences' tastes change. Like, the first couple of POTC films made tons of cash but for instance POTC5 was not nearly as successful as the studio had wanted.
