157
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) by TheImpressiveX@lemmy.ml to c/movies@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Bonesy91@lemmy.world 5 points 2 hours ago

Good. Hope this thing flops.

[-] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 1 points 1 hour ago

I think these clown regime whores are proving the ol' maxim untrue...

not all publicity is good publicity.

when these clowns act like a child, people take notice.

they forgot who pays their bills in the end it seems.

"stfu and dribble" or whatever.

[-] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 17 points 3 hours ago

Just make it long with an intermission.

Lots of old musical films did that. Like Oklahoma!, Fiddler on the Roof, and Hello Dolly.

[-] Cort@lemmy.world 14 points 3 hours ago

They don't want to pay for the special effects for the sequel if the first movie bombs

[-] thisphuckinguy@lemmy.world 7 points 4 hours ago

I saw the trailer yesterday at the theaters. Looks like hot garbage

[-] Thcdenton@lemmy.world 20 points 3 hours ago

I dunno i went to wicked.com and it looked pretty nice :]

[-] FinishingDutch@lemmy.world 9 points 7 hours ago

It’s annoying when they do it for sure. And personally, I love a long movie. I’d rather watch a three hour epic than two 90 minute movies.

But I don’t have the attention span of a goldfish like many people seem to have these days. So it’s understandable that they feel the need to split, especially if there’s going to be kids watching it.

[-] HeartyOfGlass@lemm.ee 4 points 2 hours ago

I like a good epic as much as the next person, but this is pushing 3 hours itself. Assuming Part 2 is similar, I definitely don't have the attention span to hold me through a 5 1/2 hour, 2-part musical. Yikes.

I'm trying to think of any musical that would be tolerable at 2x the original runtime.

[-] FinishingDutch@lemmy.world 5 points 2 hours ago

I hadn’t seen the runtime before; you’re right! 161 minutes! That’s definitely three hours with trailers and intermission. Yowza.

It does seem strange to have a part 2 with that much runtime.

[-] bcgm3@lemmy.world 56 points 20 hours ago

Just you wait...

  • 2024: Wicked (Part 1)
  • 2025: Wicked Part 2 (Part 1)
  • 2026: Wicked Part 2 (Part 2)
[-] Rusty@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 hours ago

Is Wicked directed by Gabe Newell?

[-] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Starting to look like a prog album:

2028: Wicked, are you there? I’m destroying Dorothy volume iii Through the eyes of Oz

[-] BenutzterName@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 4 hours ago

Zeno’s triology: Part 1 Part 2 (Part 1) Part 2 (Part 2 (Part 1)) Part 2 (Part 2 (Part 2 (Part 1))) …

As long as you lose less than half the audience in every fraction, you’ve got to make infinite money.

[-] ElPussyKangaroo@lemmy.world 14 points 14 hours ago

Someone's been to the Attack on Titan School of Numbering.

[-] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 43 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

I really don't care anymore .... when a new movie is announced, I really don't care to do anything special to go out and see it. I just forget about it and wait a year or two and watch it as a stream on one of the services I already pay for.

It usually works out. If the movie was crap, everyone will tell me, I'll read about it or see low review scores for and just never bother watching it ever ..... or it's released on Netflix, Disney or Amazon and I watch it there a year or two later.

If it has great reviews and not available anywhere, then I just wait a year and rent it for $5 and watch it at home.

There's more than enough content to last a lifetime, I'm not spending any more money to watch the latest greatest movie as soon as it comes out.

[-] GBU_28@lemm.ee 11 points 19 hours ago

Yep. Being a patient consumer is the way.

[-] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 110 points 23 hours ago

Oh lord. This did not need to be a two parter. Man, I miss movies being well contained 90 minute stories.

[-] dditty@lemm.ee 83 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

The whole Broadway show can be done in a 2 hour-ish performance live, there is no justification to stretch this to two movies other than corporate greed milking every IP to the limit

[-] bollybing@lemmynsfw.com 44 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

I don't know, I thought the Broadway show was missing an interspecies love triangle.

And maybe a long scene with barrels.

[-] falidorn@lemmy.world 9 points 22 hours ago

Why does it hurt so much?!

[-] DScratch@sh.itjust.works 5 points 23 hours ago

Because it was Reeeeeel!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 7 points 22 hours ago

From everything I've seen so far about Wicked the movie(s), yes that's exactly what it is.

The show is still touring folks, go see the show if you can

[-] ME5SENGER_24@lemmy.world 16 points 23 hours ago

Unless its a planned trilogy with 3 strong stories that could semi-standalone (short of context being lost without the other installments) then any movie that needs more than 2 hours should just be a mini series. You wanna tell a 4 hour long story about the Wizard of Oz? Fine, stick it on Netflix and anyone who wants to binge watch it can to make it “feel like a movie” and those who don’t will have 4 - hour long episodes.

[-] Syntha@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 hours ago

They wouldn't make 4 episodes, they'd make 8 and half of them would be filler episodes.

[-] Flamekebab@piefed.social 8 points 23 hours ago

I'm starting to suspect that this is why I don't watch as many films as I'd like to. They've all become such a time commitment. Show me what you can do with an hour and a half!

[-] njm1314@lemmy.world 19 points 20 hours ago

Wow I didn't know they cut it in half. After the whole poster thing I wasn't super enthused to see the film, after all I thought the play did amazing job, now I'm even less enthused.

[-] danc4498@lemmy.world 50 points 23 hours ago

I’m still bitter about Spider-Man. Had no idea it was a part one until it ended. Maybe we just create whole movies with the 2+ hours we are using.

[-] Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world 7 points 12 hours ago

I was so psyched for that movie, but when I found out it was a part one, I lost interest and still haven't seen it

[-] caseofthematts@lemmy.world 8 points 8 hours ago

It completely killed any narrative cohesion or pay-off by just ending. I remember thinking "it's been a really long time... how are they going to wrap this up?"

Turns out the answer is "don't wrap it up". It truly makes me not recommend it - though I had other issues with it aside from just that absurd decision. Rewatch the first again, instead.

[-] emax_gomax@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

I agree the split in half angle was horribly handled but the movie wasn't totally ruined. ::: spoiler Narratively across the spider-verse was gwens story. It started with her and ended with her and miles was the backdrop for much of what happened spoiler ::: . I've seen the movie 3 times and I still love it. I don't think the take away is movies should be shorter because it had so much amazing visuals and story telling and really ramped up the expectations for the next one. The take away is don't lie to your audience pretending it's a single movie. Also don't lie and say the next one is coming out in 8 months, it's been 2 years lol. They were never gonna make that deadline.

[-] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 22 hours ago

Ah fuck you reminded me of the ending of Spiderverse. Probably at least 2 years away still...

[-] danc4498@lemmy.world 12 points 22 hours ago

I don’t think they were even making part 2 when they ended it that way. Made it so much worse.

[-] emax_gomax@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

And the fact they said we'd have this to you by EOY. Absolute BS. Still no updated release date.

[-] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 4 points 23 hours ago

Which Spiderman was a part 1 of 2?

[-] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 16 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

The second spider-verse movie, I think. No mention of it being a trilogy but the story clearly ended setting up a third movie.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 3 points 22 hours ago

Same, caught it on a plane and was pissed I had to keep sitting there not knowing the actual ending

[-] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 22 hours ago

This did have PART 1 early in reveal but then realized people wouldn't see it so they lied about this being a complete movie. Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning did the same thing

[-] Artyom@lemm.ee 1 points 2 hours ago

Infinity War did that too. Ragnarok was also announced as a 2-parter at the same time, but I guess they backed off on that.

Ugh thank God they did. I can't imagine two movies like that.

[-] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 6 points 21 hours ago

People aren't going to see a movie that lies about it being a part 1 either, at least not after the first weekend when the word gets out

[-] hopesdead@startrek.website 6 points 22 hours ago

I pretty sure it was public knowledge (even talked about in publicity) Dead Reckoning was two parts.

[-] paraphrand@lemmy.world 7 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

Yeah, they scrubbed it from the title once it was on digital/streaming for awhile.

Here’s what AppleTV looks like:

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 11 points 22 hours ago

Damn, I planned on watching this too. No point now.

[-] Whelks_chance@lemmy.world 7 points 20 hours ago

I was surprised when Dune did it, not sure why they hid it.

[-] makeshiftreaper@lemmy.world 20 points 19 hours ago

Dune I can give a pass to because Frank Herbert originally wrote it as a trilogy and combined it into one book. It has pretty clear chunks breaking it up. They absolutely should have been better about advertising what it was, but it's hard to cover all that content succinctly

Wicked however is based off a 2 hour and 45 minute Broadway show with a 15 minute intermission. There is no good reason that a movie that can have tighter transistons, faster costume changes, and no reused cast should be longer than the Broadway show. Let alone twice as long and spread over multiple films

[-] keckbug@lemmy.world 5 points 18 hours ago

Strictly speaking, the show is somewhat based on a series of novels. There’s an awful lot of story in those that is simply not present t in the musical, but could possibly have been included in the movie. I don’t know if that’s actually what happened, but there’s certainly a canon source for substantially more content.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] lolola@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 19 hours ago

Deathly Hallows

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
157 points (94.4% liked)

Movies

7479 readers
463 users here now

Lemmy

Welcome to Movies, a community for discussing movies, film news, box office, and more! We want this to be a place for members to feel safe to discuss and share everything they love about movies and movie related things. Please feel free to take part and help our community grow!


Related Communities:

!books@lemmy.world - Discussing books and book-related things.

!comicbooks@lemmy.world - A place to discuss comic books of all types.

!marvelstudios@lemmy.world - LW's home for all things MCU.


While posting and commenting in this community, you must abide by the Lemmy.World Terms of Service: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

  1. Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, ableist, or advocating violence will be removed.

  2. Be civil: disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally insult others.

  3. Spam, self promotion, trolling, and bots are not allowed

  4. Shitposts and memes are allowed until they prove to be a problem.

    Regarding spoilers; Please put "(Spoilers)" in the title of your post if you anticipate spoilers, as we do not currently have a spoiler tag available. If your post contains an image that could be considered a spoiler, please mark the thread as NSFW so the image gets blurred. As far as how long to wait until the post is no longer a spoiler, please just use your best judgement. Everyone has a different idea on this, so we don't want to make any hard limits.

    Please use spoiler tags whenever commenting a spoiler in a non-spoiler thread. Most of the Lemmy clients don't support this but we want to get into the habit as clients will be supporting in the future.

Failure to follow these guidelines will result in your post/comment being removed and/or more severe actions. All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. We ask that the users report any comment or post that violates the rules, and to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS