EmperorPenguin's recent activity

  1. Comment on 28 Years Later | Official trailer in ~movies

    EmperorPenguin
    Link Parent
    Yeah I know, I was just mentioning some places that recognized the on-screen title. Most places didn't.

    Yeah I know, I was just mentioning some places that recognized the on-screen title. Most places didn't.

  2. Comment on 28 Years Later | Official trailer in ~movies

    EmperorPenguin
    Link Parent
    This makes me think about this compared to other products. When you buy food, for example, they tell you the size, the ingredients, and usually they give you a little picture of what it looks like...

    If you're selling half a movie, it would be good to be upfront about that.

    This makes me think about this compared to other products. When you buy food, for example, they tell you the size, the ingredients, and usually they give you a little picture of what it looks like or have some kinda transparent part so you can see it. If the picture is misleading or there's extra food also on the box, there's an astrisk with something like "enlarged to show texture" or "serving suggestion" or whatever. When you buy a toy, there's usually something on the box or in the ad about "batteries not included" if it needs batteries. Most people probably aren't gonna expect to do homework to buy most small purchases, especially not something like a movie. What these movies are doing would be deceptive, but similarly deceptive to everything else we buy in our lives, if the "part one" was small text with a semi-transparent font underneath the rest of the title. As it is, it's even worse than that.

    1 vote

  3. Comment on 28 Years Later | Official trailer in ~movies

    EmperorPenguin
    Link Parent
    Funny you say that, since the filmmaker did call it part 1 inside of the movie when they show the title. If you check on IMDb, you'll see it listed as Dune: Part One presumably for that reason....

    Funny you say that, since the filmmaker did call it part 1 inside of the movie when they show the title. If you check on IMDb, you'll see it listed as Dune: Part One presumably for that reason. Wikipedia similarly notes that it's titled Dune: Part One on-screen.

  4. Comment on 28 Years Later | Official trailer in ~movies

    EmperorPenguin
    Link Parent
    Like Khalos said, knowing that much info before going into a movie is not the norm. Also a big issue is people not expecting a movie to be two parts based on the source material, previous...

    Like Khalos said, knowing that much info before going into a movie is not the norm. Also a big issue is people not expecting a movie to be two parts based on the source material, previous adaptations, previous entries in the series not being two partners, or a movie that's a new IP not saying it's a two parter in the ads. Dune has sequel books, but the first book was previously made into only 1 movie. Wicked the play is 3 hours so in theory could be done in 3 hours in a movie.

    Spider-Verse 2 was the second movie in a series, but still it ending on a cliffhanger shocked people that I watched it with since the first movie had a satisfying ending. They expected each part in that series to be more self contained.

    4 votes

  5. Comment on 28 Years Later | Official trailer in ~movies

    EmperorPenguin
    Link Parent
    What the studios plan isn't the issue, multi partners can be really good and I enjoyed a lot of recent ones. The issue is how the first part is marketed.

    What the studios plan isn't the issue, multi partners can be really good and I enjoyed a lot of recent ones. The issue is how the first part is marketed.

    1 vote

  6. Comment on 28 Years Later | Official trailer in ~movies

    EmperorPenguin
    Link Parent
    Ok, this is really starting to get out of hand... Is no movie safe from being split into two parts, deceiving the audience that it's only one part, and only telling them once they've purchased...

    back-to-back with its sequel 28 Years Later Part II: The Bone Temple

    Ok, this is really starting to get out of hand...

    Is no movie safe from being split into two parts, deceiving the audience that it's only one part, and only telling them once they've purchased their ticket or if they read entertainment news?

    To clarify I don't just mean splitting a movie into two parts (like Harry Potter 7, which was abundantly clear about two parts in all the ads), I mean specifically lying about part 1 being a full movie.

    To be fair, so far for each of these films that's pulled this stunt, I have found that stretching the movie into a 5 hour runtime made sense. I did end up seeing Wicked Part 1 after making this Tildes thread and I found that movie handled it about as well as I could hope. Part 1 did expand on the first act of the musical to make it feel like a good pace and not padded, and ending where it did felt satisfying like I had seen a complete film, not half a film. They also were clear in the movie itself that it was part 1 (similar to Dune part 1, it only deceived audiences on the poster, not after they were watching the movie in the theater, so no surprise cliffhangers).

    But does every movie need to do this trick? It's just getting exhausting honestly.

    13 votes

  7. Favorite "A Christmas Carol" adaptation?

    ~movies Ask
    Warning: this post may contain spoilers

    There's a million of these adaptations, both direct adaptations of Scrooge himself, and parodies featuring various other characters. Which one did you grow up seeing the most? Which one do you find yourself coming back to? I just rewatched the Patrick Stewart one myself, which is the one I've seen the most.

    28 votes

  9. Comment on Wicked, Dune, It, and deceiving the audience about two-parters in ~movies

    EmperorPenguin
    Link Parent
    There's two aspects to splitting the last book into two movies: It started a trend where every YA novel adaptation felt the need to do the same thing, and that got old fast... It gave the finale...

    There's two aspects to splitting the last book into two movies:

    • It started a trend where every YA novel adaptation felt the need to do the same thing, and that got old fast...
    • It gave the finale to this long running series a kind of grander scope and finality.

    They were also abundantly clear that two parts was the plan: they actually gave part one the "part one" label, and they showed the release dates for each part in the theatrical trailer. Everyone who went to the theaters around when it was coming out would've understood what was going on.

    Overall, I think it worked out fine. It got memed on for the decision but I think the pacing would've been more rushed in 1 movie.

    2 votes

  10. Comment on Wicked, Dune, It, and deceiving the audience about two-parters in ~movies

    EmperorPenguin
    Link Parent
    Minor spoilers below In the 2018 film, Kingpin is defeated, all the main characters go home to their universe, no characters are in imminent danger, and things settle into something resembling a...

    Minor spoilers below

    In the 2018 film, Kingpin is defeated, all the main characters go home to their universe, no characters are in imminent danger, and things settle into something resembling a status quo. There's teasers that future movies can happen, but nothing too crazy.

    In the 2023 film, both Spot and Miguel aren't defeated, Miles' dad is still in danger, and Miles is trapped in a different universe. Practically nothing is resolved, except Gwen and her dad.

    12 votes

  11. Comment on The Game Awards nominees 2024: Controversially, DLCs/expansions can now compete for GOTY in ~games

    EmperorPenguin
    Link
    There's been a bit of a stir online due to the decision to allow expansions/DLCs to compete and possibly win GOTY, starting this year with Elden Ring Shadow of the Erdtree. One of the big talking...

    There's been a bit of a stir online due to the decision to allow expansions/DLCs to compete and possibly win GOTY, starting this year with Elden Ring Shadow of the Erdtree. One of the big talking points I've heard is that Elden Ring already won GOTY, so this takes attention away from other games. But what if there was a large expansion for a game that hasn't won GOTY yet, would that be ok? Game fans of Tildes, what do you think?

    13 votes

  13. Comment on Wicked, Dune, It, and deceiving the audience about two-parters in ~movies

    EmperorPenguin
    Link Parent
    Yes, part one was released before part two was greenlit, with part two greenlit shortly after part one came out. There was some attitude among fans and in articles "we better watch this so they...

    Yes, part one was released before part two was greenlit, with part two greenlit shortly after part one came out. There was some attitude among fans and in articles "we better watch this so they actually make part two." What's interesting is that onscreen in the movie's opening it calls it "Dune: Part One", but if you check the poster you'll see it's just called "Dune". Wikipedia and Rotten Tomatoes use the title "Dune", but IMDb uses "Dune: Part One". The deception is definitely there, and you're not warned until after your butt is in the seat and you've paid for the ticket.

    2 votes

  14. Comment on Wicked, Dune, It, and deceiving the audience about two-parters in ~movies

    EmperorPenguin
    Link Parent
    The first Dune book is divided into three "books" (parts): Dune Muad'Dib The Prophet Sidenote: this means that the first (physical) book and the first (story arc) book have the same name as the IP...

    I can’t remember if Herbert labels it part one and two, but the part with the fremen could have easily been published as a second book.

    The first Dune book is divided into three "books" (parts):

    • Dune
    • Muad'Dib
    • The Prophet

    Sidenote: this means that the first (physical) book and the first (story arc) book have the same name as the IP itself, which is a bit confusing.

    The Fremen part is actually two thirds of the book.

    6 votes

  15. Comment on Wicked, Dune, It, and deceiving the audience about two-parters in ~movies

    EmperorPenguin
    Link Parent
    Yes, I remember it being clear in articles and such that this was the plan, and I went into the theater with that knowledge. But Joe Schmo who doesn't follow movie news on Reddit or Twitter and...

    Yes, I remember it being clear in articles and such that this was the plan, and I went into the theater with that knowledge. But Joe Schmo who doesn't follow movie news on Reddit or Twitter and saw a poster for a Stephen King book adaptation at his local AMC and took his girlfriend to go see it was not aware the movie was a two parter. If scamming people like Joe Schmo wasn't the goal, and they wanted to be very transparent to everyone, there would be a "Chapter One" on the poster.

    It's very likely the creative talent behind the film always intended to make this clear, but the marketing team or other execs went with the deceptive route.

    9 votes

  16. Comment on Wicked, Dune, It, and deceiving the audience about two-parters in ~movies

    EmperorPenguin
    Link Parent
    Yeah, that makes sense, but it's more of a reason than an excuse for the practice. Unethical business practices, such as casinos not having windows or clocks so you lose track of time, or social...

    part of the blame for that film underperforming at the box office is placed on it being a part one

    Yeah, that makes sense, but it's more of a reason than an excuse for the practice. Unethical business practices, such as casinos not having windows or clocks so you lose track of time, or social media algorithms promoting anger since it gets more engagement, are done because they make money, and they'd be losing out on a lot of money to not min-max things in deceptive ways.

    For Dead Reckoning Part 1, that came out during the "Barbenheimer" thing which I think stole its thunder more than concerns over it being a two parter.

    The renaming fiasco is dumb for sure. The damage for part one is already done so renaming it is pointless, people are expecting the next one to be named "Dead Reckoning Part Two" and will be confused when it's not called that, maybe even think they missed a movie, and part two wouldn't have this "part one-itis" anyways, so the change is counter productive if anything. The new name is also bad.

    Infinity War/Endgame is an interesting thing to bring up. Even though those are technically a two-part series, they feel like two separate movies moreso than the other examples in this thread. Infinity War has a beginning, middle, and end. Sure the villain wins, but the movie is essentially framed from his perspective, and from his perspective things are resolved. He seems to really rest on his laurels at the end of the film as he said he would, as the heroes are sad as they realize they were defeated, instead of feeling motivated to go fight Thanos. Compared to Dune part one or Across the Spider-Verse, it's a very different cliffhanger. I distinctly remember going into Infinity War, expecting just the arc of Thanos getting the stones the first time to get split into two parts, and was surprised he got the job done in one movie. I think MatPat or other people like him made that assumption which primed me to expect that.

    8 votes

  17. Comment on Wicked, Dune, It, and deceiving the audience about two-parters in ~movies

    EmperorPenguin
    Link Parent
    I wouldn't say it's really a different situation. The other examples of the issue are adaptations, but that doesn't mean the issue has anything to do with adaptations. The issue is a film not...

    I wouldn't say it's really a different situation. The other examples of the issue are adaptations, but that doesn't mean the issue has anything to do with adaptations. The issue is a film not setting your expectations for a standalone movie vs part one of a series appropriately. People can feel similar about that for Spider-Verse as they did for Dune.

    There is something to be said, of course, about if the movies that are adaptations stretch the material into more movies to make money, or if it warranted the extra screen time. This is more of a separate debate. As I mentioned in the post, for Wicked that's probably a "no" (but I have heard some people argue in favor if the extra screen time), and for It or Dune that's definitely a "yes".

    For original stories, of course by all means take 10 movies if that's what it takes, just be clear that's what the plan is.

    10 votes

  18. Comment on Wicked, Dune, It, and deceiving the audience about two-parters in ~movies

    EmperorPenguin
    Link Parent
    This is an issue I also was going to address in the original post but didn't get around to adding it. When a movie is split in half like this, there's always a risk that part two will get delayed...

    This is an issue I also was going to address in the original post but didn't get around to adding it. When a movie is split in half like this, there's always a risk that part two will get delayed thanks to things like strikes, a disaster like covid, or any number of things. Or worst case, maybe the first one bombs so they never make part two. That raises the anxiety for the fans of that movie to unnecessary levels, and that fear has become very warranted after both Dune and Spider-Verse ran into delays between movies, Spider-Verse's delay being far worse. The point for Spider-Verse's cliffhanger was a quick turn around to the next movie. When that plan fell through... you're left with pissed off fans and half a movie.

    16 votes

  19. Comment on Wicked, Dune, It, and deceiving the audience about two-parters in ~movies

    EmperorPenguin
    Link Parent
    A standalone movie that's really good getting a sequel (which is what you describe) isn't my issue. My issue is when they make it look like a complete movie, but it's actually a two parter. That...

    A standalone movie that's really good getting a sequel (which is what you describe) isn't my issue. My issue is when they make it look like a complete movie, but it's actually a two parter. That makes part two not "a sequel", that makes it "the rest of the same movie". Big difference.

    7 votes

  20. Wicked, Dune, It, and deceiving the audience about two-parters

    ~movies Ask
    So I just heard, less than a week before release, that Wicked (2024) is the latest film in the current maddening trend to lie (by omission) to audiences by not including the "part one" in the...

    So I just heard, less than a week before release, that Wicked (2024) is the latest film in the current maddening trend to lie (by omission) to audiences by not including the "part one" in the title.

    Sure, that information is available online, but not everyone will see that, and that's clearly what their intention is. Get butts in seats, then hit them with a cliffhanger so they have to buy a second ticket. Or possibly to save budget on the second movie (which is likely to have more climactic action scenes) if the first is a flop.

    When I was discussing Wicked with some friends recently, someone said they heard it was pulling this two-parter stunt so we looked it up, and sure enough it was! We were all genuinely shocked. For Dune and It, yeah those are big novels, but surely a 3 hour play adapted to a nearly 3 hour movie wouldn't need to be 2 parts? The musical buff in the group was especially surprised. For that musical buff, the deception and the padding out to two movies made them a lot less motivated to see it. The Google AI summary also goofed and said it wasn't 2 parts, citing a source that said it was two parts, which caused a lot of laughs, but that's another issue.

    I'm not against movies being multiple parts, it's a much better solution than cutting a lot of content or making a bloated movie. My issue is the deception, it always rubs me the wrong way. The newest Mission Impossible went ahead and included "part one" in the name so it was clear. It helps to temper your expectations when you don't expect all the plot lines to be resolved by the time the credits roll. Compare this to the newest Spider-Verse movie, where several of my friends went in with no indication that this one would have a cliffhanger and very little would be resolved. It's a very bad feeling and can sour a theater going experience for some people.

    Movie fans of Tildes, what do you think? Are you also annoyed with this trend? Or does it not bother you?

    54 votes