Christopher Nolan's time inverting spy film that follows a protagonist fighting for the survival of the entire world.
Joined:
May 2010
Location: in a dream
shadmag wrote: ↑May 6th, 2020, 2:03 pm
Jax_Teller wrote: ↑May 6th, 2020, 8:28 am
The previous page alone with choruses of "oh let's live with the risk already, what are they waiting for?"
I'm with you. Both here and reddit have a few people like this (I suspect they might even be the same user haha). The difference between the average Canadian and the average American during this pandemic has been astounding to see. Hell, just contrasting the response from various levels of government between our countries is noteworthy. Stay safe everyone.
I wish the US government response was stronger.
This movie now is so hard to predict. It could do very well or bomb. The way thing look in early May. It feels like people may not want to theaters. I do feel like some point a movie in the next year and half a movie will exploded at the box office.
MorenoVL wrote: ↑May 6th, 2020, 11:15 am
ninenin wrote: ↑May 6th, 2020, 10:54 am
StarWarsIsAwesome123 wrote: ↑May 6th, 2020, 10:49 am
It would be nothing short of a miracle if a vaccine releases this year, let alone an actually effective one. I'm not saying theaters should re-open if things aren't improved enough by July, but I doubt simply going to a movie is going to kill someone unless they're 80 or have a condition, but those people would likely avoid going anyway. In some areas the chances of getting the virus may not even be high.
Too bad we live in a time where nuance is forgotten, and sensationalism reigns supreme. I really do think that the media, although doing a service in disseminating important COVID-19 information, has also done us a disservice in causing wide-spread panic and over-reaction.
Very true, people are so influenced by what media and journalists have to say nowadays it's downright scary sometimes.
For me personally, here in Belgium: if I'm allowed to go to the shops following the strict health safety measures, why wouldn't it be allowed to go watch a movie with enough space between each other. Just my personal opinion though of course
Exactly. I think more people would actually die in the long run if we didn't ease our lockdown policy. If for a whole year we were only allowed to exit our homes for the absolute necessities and only essential workers were allowed to work, the economy would never recover. Millions of people would find themselves in poverty, crime-rates would sky-rocket, suicide rates would sky-rocket, people would be dying of starvation. This can be mitigated with a coordinated loosening of restrictions. Yet some people, perhaps with good intentions, have been so brainwashed into believing the virus is the most deadly thing in the history of mankind that any talk of easing lockdowns is met with condemnations of selfishness and ignorance.
ninenin wrote: ↑May 6th, 2020, 3:04 pm
MorenoVL wrote: ↑May 6th, 2020, 11:15 am
ninenin wrote: ↑May 6th, 2020, 10:54 am
Too bad we live in a time where nuance is forgotten, and sensationalism reigns supreme. I really do think that the media, although doing a service in disseminating important COVID-19 information, has also done us a disservice in causing wide-spread panic and over-reaction.
Very true, people are so influenced by what media and journalists have to say nowadays it's downright scary sometimes.
For me personally, here in Belgium: if I'm allowed to go to the shops following the strict health safety measures, why wouldn't it be allowed to go watch a movie with enough space between each other. Just my personal opinion though of course
Exactly. I think more people would actually die in the long run if we didn't ease our lockdown policy. If for a whole year we were only allowed to exit our homes for the absolute necessities and only essential workers were allowed to work, the economy would never recover. Millions of people would find themselves in poverty, crime-rates would sky-rocket, suicide rates would sky-rocket, people would be dying of starvation. This can be mitigated with a coordinated loosening of restrictions. Yet some people, perhaps with good intentions, have been so brainwashed into believing the virus is the most deadly thing in the history of mankind that any talk of easing lockdowns is met with condemnations of selfishness and ignorance.
Agreed. The scientific research that suggests lockdown are also not as definitive as the media purports to be. As long as the hospitals are not overwhelmed, the economy should be allowed to re-open so people can pay their rent and feed themselves.
Having said that, I am not suggesting that social distancing rules to be thrown away to the garbage. I do think that cinemas should be allowed to be open at a limited capacity with staff well-trained to ensure that rules are being adhered to at all times.
Joined:
May 2010
Location: in a dream
dragon_phoenix wrote: ↑May 6th, 2020, 3:19 pm
ninenin wrote: ↑May 6th, 2020, 3:04 pm
MorenoVL wrote: ↑May 6th, 2020, 11:15 am
Very true, people are so influenced by what media and journalists have to say nowadays it's downright scary sometimes.
For me personally, here in Belgium: if I'm allowed to go to the shops following the strict health safety measures, why wouldn't it be allowed to go watch a movie with enough space between each other. Just my personal opinion though of course
Exactly. I think more people would actually die in the long run if we didn't ease our lockdown policy. If for a whole year we were only allowed to exit our homes for the absolute necessities and only essential workers were allowed to work, the economy would never recover. Millions of people would find themselves in poverty, crime-rates would sky-rocket, suicide rates would sky-rocket, people would be dying of starvation. This can be mitigated with a coordinated loosening of restrictions. Yet some people, perhaps with good intentions, have been so brainwashed into believing the virus is the most deadly thing in the history of mankind that any talk of easing lockdowns is met with condemnations of selfishness and ignorance.
Agreed. The scientific research that suggests lockdown are also not as definitive as the media purports to be. As long as the hospitals are not overwhelmed, the economy should be allowed to re-open so people can pay their rent and feed themselves.
Having said that, I am not suggesting that social distancing rules to be thrown away to the garbage. I do think that cinemas should be allowed to be open at a limited capacity with staff well-trained to ensure that rules are being adhered to at all times.
Hardest thing is to have cinemas to be reopen and making sure they are safe. Cinemas are going to viewed the same as casinos. There will be a slow roll out to ensure the hospitals are overwhelmed. I do think it would be bad time to be in theater business and movie industry. No company wants millions dollars on marketing and have no one show up. Or a big second wave to shut everything back down.
I wouldn’t be surprised if WB is talking to lot of medical disease experts to discuss what the likeky outcomes and what the models are showing. WB has to worry about the US and the world. Just imagine if 20% of the world markets are shut down still.
Jax_Teller wrote: ↑May 6th, 2020, 8:28 am
The previous page alone with choruses of "oh let's live with the risk already, what are they waiting for?"
So nobody actually said they didn’t care about lockdowns. Got it.
Anyways, here's a good piece from Variety about the potential opening of Tenet and Mulan
https://variety.com/2020/film/columns/t ... ssion=true
Viewed in that light, the announcements, made by Warner Bros. and Disney, that those studios are sticking to relatively early releases dates for two major films, Christopher Nolan’s “Tenet” (still scheduled for July 17) and Niki Caro’s live-action remake of “Mulan” (now set for July 24), amounts to a revolution, a kind of declaration of war against the conundrum. “Tenet” has a reported budget of $205 million; “Mulan,” a budget of at least $200 million. According to the profit model I’ve just described, these movies will have an uphill battle at the box office, to put it mildly.
So why are they opening? It’s likely that their respective studios have outlined a radically revamped model for profitability — one based not on the mythic blast-off of a record-setting opening weekend (which isn’t close to possible), but one that’s much longer term, based on the idea that the films will play on a platform release schedule over a slowly unfolding period, and will possibly collect a greater percentage of their revenue than usual from the ancillary markets (VOD, DVD, etc.).
Yet it’s not just about the money. According to reports, while Warner Bros. made the corporate decision to release “Tenet,” the company did so after the passionate lobbying of Nolan, who in recent years has become the film industry’s most dynamic public advocate for the movie-theater experience. In the war that’s now taking place between studios and exhibitors, Nolan has made himself the bard of theatrical. And since “Tenet,” a sci-fi thriller about a secret agent, played by John David Washington, who travels through time to prevent World War III, is the kind of movie that carries event status, its release on July 17 now symbolizes something. It says to the world: On that day, the dream of movies lives.
For viewers to care, the films that need to open in theaters must represent the seductive religious compulsion of moviegoing. The beautiful oversize dream of it. And that’s what “Tenet” and “Mulan” do. Their studios know this. In a sense, you could say that on the bottom-line level the two studios are taking a hit for the team — taking a hit for the dream. They’re putting these movies out there, ahead of everyone else, to jump-start the act of moviegoing. To say to American viewers, “Come on in, the water’s fine.” Even though you have to wear a mask and sit a seat or two away from others and wait, longer than you would have before, for the picture to show up at a theater near you.
Joined:
August 2019
Location: Shanghai
StarWarsIsAwesome123 wrote: ↑May 6th, 2020, 11:26 pm
Anyways, here's a good piece from Variety about the potential opening of Tenet and Mulan
https://variety.com/2020/film/columns/t ... ssion=true
Viewed in that light, the announcements, made by Warner Bros. and Disney, that those studios are sticking to relatively early releases dates for two major films, Christopher Nolan’s “Tenet” (still scheduled for July 17) and Niki Caro’s live-action remake of “Mulan” (now set for July 24), amounts to a revolution, a kind of declaration of war against the conundrum. “Tenet” has a reported budget of $205 million; “Mulan,” a budget of at least $200 million. According to the profit model I’ve just described, these movies will have an uphill battle at the box office, to put it mildly.
So why are they opening? It’s likely that their respective studios have outlined a radically revamped model for profitability — one based not on the mythic blast-off of a record-setting opening weekend (which isn’t close to possible), but one that’s much longer term, based on the idea that the films will play on a platform release schedule over a slowly unfolding period, and will possibly collect a greater percentage of their revenue than usual from the ancillary markets (VOD, DVD, etc.).
Yet it’s not just about the money. According to reports, while Warner Bros. made the corporate decision to release “Tenet,” the company did so after the passionate lobbying of Nolan, who in recent years has become the film industry’s most dynamic public advocate for the movie-theater experience. In the war that’s now taking place between studios and exhibitors, Nolan has made himself the bard of theatrical. And since “Tenet,” a sci-fi thriller about a secret agent, played by John David Washington, who travels through time to prevent World War III, is the kind of movie that carries event status, its release on July 17 now symbolizes something. It says to the world: On that day, the dream of movies lives.
For viewers to care, the films that need to open in theaters must represent the seductive religious compulsion of moviegoing. The beautiful oversize dream of it. And that’s what “Tenet” and “Mulan” do. Their studios know this. In a sense, you could say that on the bottom-line level the two studios are taking a hit for the team — taking a hit for the dream. They’re putting these movies out there, ahead of everyone else, to jump-start the act of moviegoing. To say to American viewers, “Come on in, the water’s fine.” Even though you have to wear a mask and sit a seat or two away from others and wait, longer than you would have before, for the picture to show up at a theater near you.
Nah, the Disney CEO said that they would base whether to release Mulan or not based on Tenet's performance the week before, so Tenet alone is the one taking the risks.
Joined:
May 2010
Location: in a dream
