Finally, some good fucking food

it looks breddy gud; as a hard sci-fi devotee i am cautiously optimistic.

Attached: penis necklace.jpg (672x816, 135K)

if they're going to make that much of a nonsense, nondescript trailer they might as well have just put "it's like a space movie or something" over a black background and played some music or whatever.

So is Fox now Disney's "good movie" brand?

...

Come to think of it, Disney never really had a proper major motion picture brand until now.

This will won't do well even with only a $50 million budget. Not based on an existing IP and its not capeshit/quipshit

>I want to know the plot, including the ending before I see the movie

>caring about financial success when it comes to kino

Dude, space movies sell. It has Brad Pitt and Tommy Lee Jones in space. It will sell. Interstellar, Gravity, First Man, Life, etc. They all get talked about, good or not.

I'd like it to do well to encourage more films like it to be made by studios

>I want a mindless string of disjointed dialogue which is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to show off what actors are in the kino
yeah, I'm seething, but this shit is as dumb as the old movie poster which were simply Cruise Control's fucking face and the name of the kino.

This. The trend of caring about the financial success of a movie is cancer. Pathetic in the truest sense of the word.

Found out why
imdb.com/name/nm0887227/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cr19

Hoping this will fix what Nolan so royally fucked up in Interstellar. This film had better not be Nolan-trademark soulless.

saw a trailer today, i agree
today op was not a faggot

Dude, what do you want? You want to see Cruise kino or not? You need to plot spelled out to you in the trailer?

I know Ad Astra has:
2 good actors and a hot actress
Good cinematography
Interesting setting
Action
Intruigue

I'm sold on that, I don't need to know the story beats in order.

It's impossible though. The average person has the intelligence of a peanut. It's just an economic impossibility for good filmmaking to (regularly) make bank.

The trend that has existed for over 100 years?

Not among film buffs, if that's even what we are. Yea Forums never cared about box office gross until capeshit got huge. Prove me wrong.

>docdroid.net/muJitYr/ad-astra.pdf

While I essentially agree with you, your definition of "good" is entirely subjective. But we have an objective definition of good filmmaking, and that is how much money the film makes. Films do not exist in a vacuum; if there is no one to watch films no one will make them. The market is the only way to reliably gauge how good a film is. Like it or not, anything else is opinion, and often inflammatory or overly effuse. These anecdotal accounts are not an objective measure of the film's success. In the marketplace of films AND ideas, the dollar speaks louder than words.

Attached: d'anconia.jpg (500x585, 66K)

You know what a lowest common denominator is, yes? You might think the dollar is almighty, but the man speaks the truth. To make the most money you must appeal to the lowest common denominator. The stupidest among us, if you will.

>opening random pdf files
it's a no from me, chief

Don't know about the reshoots, but the original screenplay is absolutely more soulless than Nolan. Imagine being worse than fucking Nolan. It was like a robot wrote it.

Furthermore this creates a feedback loop where money drives film and film informs culture and culture influences money. So if you keep this up the population gets dumber and dumber. This has been happening for generations.

>definition of "good" is entirely subjective
Where did I say it wasn't? Of course art is fundamentally subjective, no matter if it's high art or something else.

I know you opened it

I let a pic anyway

Attached: www.docdroid.net.png (643x313, 6K)

I think you might be stretching there. People are dumber because of public education and the abdication of parenting to the state, which is inept in all things including making children into well-equipped adults.

Not seeing how its cancer that I wouldn't mind seeing a movie by a filmmaker who I like do well. But I guess I'm just some retard my bad.

Other factors are at play, but I'm not stretching. You are influenced by what you see. You know when you are a kid and you react to a situation in the same way you saw someone on tv react? It's mirror neurons, a huge part of how we learn. If we grow up watching dumber and dumber movies, we will get dumber and dumber. Movies will then need to get dumber to retain the lowest common denominator. Feedback loop.

You are dishonest. Hoping it does well means you hope it's reviewed well. All you care about is money, your new god. Disgusting.

>Ruth Negga

Attached: 1563330023659.webm (456x626, 356K)

K

> «... A·S...»
>«... S...»
>«... S·S...»

Attached: 1200px-Himmler_besichtigt_die_Gefangenenlager_in_Russland._Heinrich_Himmler_inspects_a_prisoner_of_w (1200x1080, 223K)