is a regular tv series next for her?
she is at that stage in her career like halle berry, laura dern and kidman.
shareProbably after her Lady Thor movie bombs unless Marveltards make it a success.
shareHonest question: Marvel has put out 27 movies, and created the highest-grossing franchise of all time. They plan their every move carefully, and haven't come CLOSE to a "bomb." Do you *really* think the "Lady Thor" movie is going to be the first?
shareIt's not gonna bomb. People love "Thor". What would be a serious test was if they tried to put out a Lady Thor movie with just Natalie Portman and no Chris Hemsworth or traditional Thor. I don't think there is much appetite to see Natalie Portman as Thor, but Taika Waititi, Hemsowrth Thor and Marvel itself are enough of a draw that this movie will do fine.
shareEternals only broke even and made no profit, but as I said Marveltards will watch anything so Lady Thor probably won't bomb.
shareRegardless of what yammering knuckleheads on this site and others proclaim, NOBODY knows how much Eternals profited besides the studios. Don't believe the claims of "X times budget is necessary."
The labyrinthian nature of Hollywood contracts/financials is LEGENDARY. Do you know the *Only* group the IRS doesn't f**k with? Hollywood accountants. They are THAT good. So the idea that random people on message boards know how much a given movie made/didn't make is hilarious.
That said, to date Eternals has grossed about 400 million on a (reported) 200 million dollar budget. Trust me: we will NEVER know what those numbers really mean, but it's clear that the phrase "broke even and made no profit" simply has No Currency.
You want Eternals to have made a profit so you are twisting yourself into a pretzel now. To profit from a $200 mil budget, Eternals needed to make OVER $400 mil.
shareYou could've just said you're too stupid to read and comprehend, instead of wasting time. In any case, it's clear now, so: you can go.
shareSo "we will NEVER know what those numbers really mean" but then you tell us to trust you as you tell us what they really mean? It cuts both ways. You seem to believe them when they're favorable to the success narrative, but then they become sketchy and unbelievable when those same outlets reporting the numbers suggest a different outcome for this one in particular? (These numbers are reported by the industry trades. That's where "random people" get them.) Why doesn't every number for every film indicate a bomb? Wouldn't that be the best for them? To ALWAYS suggest a movie failed or broke even for tax purposes? Strange that the same sources that reported the gaudy box office success of those prior Marvel films is suddenly not to believed when it comes to their Eternals reporting.
shareAnother precinct heard from. Since reading comprehension isn't your thing, let's go over the bidding:
1) Point to where I said what ANY of the studios' numbers "really mean"
2) (Corollary): Point to where I said We Don't Know WHAT any of their real numbers are (this one should be easier)
3) Point to where I said those "same sources" should be believed on successes, but not failures.
As for your confusion as to why every movie isn't reported as a bomb/break even, THAT is inane. No business, regardless of how good their accountants are, could survive that narrative. (Cue discussion about the Orange Idiot's current problems.)
Clearly the studios are making money; it's a matter of Scale, and method, and Timing that keeps the lawyers/number crunchers busy.
Lots of words, but no answer. I pointed to what you said, yet somehow you reach conclusions about these numbers without meaning known to us. How do you know it's not true about Eternals? And speaking of inane, are you really suggesting that they decided to depict only one film as break even or worse? Rather than the obvious answer being that this film was not well received -- except by some weird clique of unpaid Marvel movie publicists who twist and turn to make this fit into their ongoing success story? They just applied funky hide-all-the-profit movie math to Eternals and not the 27 other films? That's the survival ratio for the business? They can only pull it off by using a 27 out of 28 narrative?
"They plan their every move carefully, and haven't come CLOSE to a "bomb.""
Some inside knowledge there. A studio plans their moves carefully, imagine that! Why preface with that? Are you really proposing that planning inoculates a movie from failure?? How stupid. And since a bomb is also measured against what it cost to make, market and distribute -- not just gross ticket sales -- how would you ever know what came close or not? If anything, after all that success, I'd think they're overdue for different results.
You make definitive sounding claims, give commandments about what to dismiss, and you love the word "clearly", but you provide nothing but conjecture to support them -- like any other random person on the internet aka "yammering knucklehead" who heard this or read that. You're just another self-anointed expert, pretending to know what's really going on. But, of course, the real giveaway is "Trust me." Nothing says "I don't have any actual evidence, but I need you to believe me anyway." like "Trust me." Clearly, you think you know, and you think the other guy doesn't, but that's the only "clearly" that's applicable here. You're just a snarkier --with more CAPS, but less evidence-- version of any "X times budget..." person.
That's a very, Very long-winded way of saying "I'm not capable of reading and comprehending."
I'm not bored enough to repeat myself. Find somebody w/some smarts to read you through my previous post(s); everything you babbled about has already been addressed.