@DRDMovieMusings said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

In other words, if it hits a CinemaScore A or A- (or, perhaps even a B+), it should find its audience and do fine. Any lower than a B, and the verdict will be it was even below expectations for those who wanted to see it early, which may hamper box office success sufficiently to revisit any plans for a sequel or franchise.

It's official: CinemaScore B-

Quick reminder of what CinemaScore is - it gets reviews from movie-goers who were so interested in the movie that they went on opening night. So, people like me, who had no interest in it, did not rain on the review parade.

I'm not trying to interpret this score to say the movie will be a flop. But it does suggest the trailers attracted a type of audience and they didn't love it, so their word of mouth may discourage others from spending money to see it more than encourage them to get out and see it.

Will you be seeing it? I see that it is getting pretty good reviews around the interwebs.

@DRDMovieMusings said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

In other words, if it hits a CinemaScore A or A- (or, perhaps even a B+), it should find its audience and do fine. Any lower than a B, and the verdict will be it was even below expectations for those who wanted to see it early, which may hamper box office success sufficiently to revisit any plans for a sequel or franchise.

It's official: CinemaScore B-

Quick reminder of what CinemaScore is - it gets reviews from movie-goers who were so interested in the movie that they went on opening night. So, people like me, who had no interest in it, did not rain on the review parade.

I'm not trying to interpret this score to say the movie will be a flop. But it does suggest the trailers attracted a type of audience and they didn't love it, so their word of mouth may discourage others from spending money to see it more than encourage them to get out and see it.

Really interesting... I never knew about CinemaScore, but it presents an unusual angle. The opening night audience is different from the general film crowd. Tbh I can't remember any movie I was so excited about that I saw it on opening day, or even opening month. These days I prefer home vieweing, meaning I generally don't see any movies until 2 years after opening night, when they've been released on home media (AND to further delay matters, I buy everything used on ebay so I don't even get the new home releases). In other words, I'm part of the more judicious or even skeptical crowd who waits to see which movies garner critical acclaim before I bother. Somehow I doubt Cocaine Bear is on the road to critical acclaim lol. But that's not to say it might not become a cult classic, which I'm always hunting for.

In any case, a B- from fans who rushed out to see it doesn't look good. UNLESS (if we indulge some wacky logic...) maybe the movie is such an artistic masterpiece that it disappointed the thrill seekers on day 1, but there's actually some real substance that takes time to digest. The ole Citizen Kane syndrome... a box office flop in 1941; it wasn't until the mid 50s that it got some traction with critics and 2nd wave audiences.

Yes I just compared Cocaine Bear to Citizen Kane 😂

@bratface said:

Will you be seeing it?

Perhaps, eventually, although not likely in theatre. While it generally did not interest me, it is Ray Liotta's last role, so I'd be curious on that basis.

I see that it is getting pretty good reviews around the interwebs.

The reviews I've seen generally affirmed my expectations which, again, aren't particularly compelling to me. But who knows? I sat through Snakes on a Plane once (just, not in theatre, of course).

@rooprect said:

Really interesting... I never knew about CinemaScore, but it presents an unusual angle. The opening night audience is different from the general film crowd.

It's pretty brilliant! Opening-night movie-going is an event, it is a social experience. It's more than just seeing the movie, it's also being seen on the scene of seeing the movie on opening night.

The opening night audience not only wants to like it, but also wants to tell others about how much they liked it... or not. That enthusiasm can be forgiving if the movie comes close to their expectations, or crucifying, if the movie insults them beyond even their higher tolerance level (and I use the term "tolerance" simply to describe how fans of a genre, or director, or style, etc. are wired to overlook/forgive/tolerate shortcomings while those who aren't fans are much more critical).

Insiders stay up at nights waiting for the CinemaScore to give them a sense of how the movie will do numbers-wise because the word-of-mouth from the opening night crowd (the "want to tell others part") carries a lot of weight, influencing people to "go see it, it was awesome" or "don't waste your money, what a turd".

Tbh I can't remember any movie I was so excited about that I saw it on opening day, or even opening month. These days I prefer home vieweing, meaning I generally don't see any movies until 2 years after opening night, when they've been released on home media (AND to further delay matters, I buy everything used on ebay so I don't even get the new home releases). In other words, I'm part of the more judicious or even skeptical crowd who waits to see which movies garner critical acclaim before I bother. Somehow I doubt Cocaine Bear is on the road to critical acclaim lol. But that's not to say it might not become a cult classic, which I'm always hunting for.

I hear you. And yep, cult classics are great, and shows critics or even fans don't always see it at first. And it's another reason why box office performance is a poor gauge of movie quality - so many great movies did not perform well in their theatrical releases.

In any case, a B- from fans who rushed out to see it doesn't look good.

I may have incorrectly interpreted a B- as low, and I can see how I may have done so.

In the MCU, the expectation is A+ or A. Eternals and Quantumania both hit B and are the lowest CinemaScores in the MCU! That's a disappointment for MCU, but not necessarily for other genres.

So, it may be that B- for Cocaine Bear is still pretty good.

UNLESS (if we indulge some wacky logic...) maybe the movie is such an artistic masterpiece that it disappointed the thrill seekers on day 1, but there's actually some real substance that takes time to digest. The ole Citizen Kane syndrome... a box office flop in 1941; it wasn't until the mid 50s that it got some traction with critics and 2nd wave audiences.

Yes I just compared Cocaine Bear to Citizen Kane 😂

Yes you did! Your logic makes sense :-) but I think we can all agree that the makers of CB have no such ambition.

That said, we all have a favourite movie we always enjoy on repeated viewing that did not do well at the box office (I made a list that includes several of mine).

That may be the test - for how long will it remain watchable? Sometimes a movie captures a vibe, a moment in time, but just doesn't hold up over time. I watched Snakes On A Plane. Once. I never bothered with Sharknado.

But I'll always love Office Space, Other People's Money, The Specialist, The Distinguished Gentleman,...

@rooprect said:

Yes I just compared Cocaine Bear to Citizen Kane 😂

Well, there you are, it's officially a crap movie! 😁

Yes, I did call Citizen Kane a crap movie. 😉

@bratface said:

@rooprect said:

Yes I just compared Cocaine Bear to Citizen Kane 😂

Well, there you are, it's officially a crap movie! 😁

Yes, I did call Citizen Kane a crap movie. 😉

LOL!

@DRDMovieMusings said:

And yep, cult classics are great, and shows critics or even fans don't always see it at first. And it's another reason why box office performance is a poor gauge of movie quality - so many great movies did not perform well in their theatrical releases.

... That said, we all have a favourite movie we always enjoy on repeated viewing that did not do well at the box office (I made a list that includes several of mine). That may be the test - for how long will it remain watchable? Sometimes a movie captures a vibe, a moment in time, but just doesn't hold up over time.

In this case the movie's brief moment in time may be limited to a few weeks if not days. I just read a mostly negative review on BBC that spells out this movie's failings. In a nutshell it's too timid. I hate to base my opinion on what critics say, but in this case the critic addressed all the points I was worried about. The movie isn't superficial enough to be a raucous comedy, nor is it deep enough to carry a poignant message. From the article:

"Given the premise, the film could have made some provocative points about the environment, or cruelty to animals, or America's war on drugs. Alternatively, it could have made no points whatsoever, and just been a helter-skelter, blood-and-guts exploitation movie in which a bunch of manic misfits are chomped to pieces. But what we actually get is strangely timid for a film called Cocaine Bear. Ironically, it doesn't have much bite. Rather than focusing on being outrageous and entertaining, Banks and Warden focus on sappy musings about the importance of being a caring parent and a loyal friend. But if you pay to see a B-movie about a furry giant with a taste for class-A narcotics, why would you want to hear those?"

So bummer, sounds like a miss. I guess we'll have to stick with Asylum Films for our doses of immature fun. I haven't seen the Sharknado films either but I really dug the awesome awfulness of Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus. The scene where the shark jumps out of the water 20,000ft to eat a passing airplane had me sold. Sounds like Cocaine Bear can't compete with that level of stupid.

@rooprect said:

In this case the movie's brief moment in time may be limited to a few weeks if not days. I just read a mostly negative review on BBC that spells out this movie's failings. In a nutshell it's too timid. I hate to base my opinion on what critics say, but in this case the critic addressed all the points I was worried about. The movie isn't superficial enough to be a raucous comedy, nor is it deep enough to carry a poignant message. From the article:

"Given the premise, the film could have made some provocative points about the environment, or cruelty to animals, or America's war on drugs. Alternatively, it could have made no points whatsoever, and just been a helter-skelter, blood-and-guts exploitation movie in which a bunch of manic misfits are chomped to pieces. But what we actually get is strangely timid for a film called Cocaine Bear. Ironically, it doesn't have much bite. Rather than focusing on being outrageous and entertaining, Banks and Warden focus on sappy musings about the importance of being a caring parent and a loyal friend. But if you pay to see a B-movie about a furry giant with a taste for class-A narcotics, why would you want to hear those?"

So bummer, sounds like a miss. I guess we'll have to stick with Asylum Films for our doses of immature fun. I haven't seen the Sharknado films either but I really dug the awesome awfulness of Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus. The scene where the shark jumps out of the water 20,000ft to eat a passing airplane had me sold. Sounds like Cocaine Bear can't compete with that level of stupid.

This BBC review was by Nicholas Barber. He is also active on Rotten Tomatoes, and below are some of his ratings for other movies:

. "Knock at the Cabin (2023)": 2/5

. "Avatar: The Way of Water (2022)": 2/5

. "She Said (2022)": 4/5

. "The Banshees of Inisherin (2022)": 4/5

."The Whale (2022)": 3/5

."White Noise (2022)": 4/5

."Jurassic World Dominion (2022)": 4/5

."Top Gun: Maverick (2022)": 5/5

."Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022)": 5/5

."The Northman (2022)": 3/5

."Turning Red (2022)": 5/5

."The Batman (2022)": 3/5

."Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021)": 5/5

."Eternals (2021)": 3/5

."No Time to Die (2021)": 5/5

Someone I know went from:

February 24th, 11:09 AM: "The most excited I've been to see a movie in a while. My tickets are at 8pm." (clearly, he wanted to like it).

to

February 24th, 11pm: "All the fun, anything even mildly interesting, was in the trailer. It wasn’t even good bad. It was the biggest sin for this kind of movie; it was boring." and "There’s usually one or two surprises they hold. Nope, the trailer is the movie." (clearly, he couldn't wait to share his thoughts, good or bad, and they're bad.)

That's the magic of CinemaScore - he was exactly the kind of reviewer to give us a sense of whether this movie will find its audience. They want to like it, and they want to tell others how they felt about it.

For those who've seen it, is he on or off the mark?

Cocaine Bear has currently paid back $2.29 ($80m in revenue over a $35m production budget).

It may have covered its costs - just bearly (sorry, I couldn't resist) and even paid better than Snakes on a Plane ($1.88), but I think movie-makers have got to know by now that this kind of movie is only capable of mustering this kind of ROI, and I can't help wondering what makes it even worth the hassle.

@DRDMovieMusings said:

Cocaine Bear has currently paid back $2.29 ($80m in revenue over a $35m production budget).

It may have covered its costs - just bearly (sorry, I couldn't resist) and even paid better than Snakes on a Plane ($1.88), but I think movie-makers have got to know by now that this kind of movie is only capable of mustering this kind of ROI, and I can't help wondering what makes it even worth the hassle.

It's worth producing this genre, if there is an audience out there who are willing to pay to see it in the theatres.

As the title of this thread says, it is 'Stupid fun', and sometimes that's all what moviegoers want.

That it got this far is a bit surprising, as so many people seem to 'hate' any movie directed by Elizabeth Banks. They didn't like "Charlie's Angels (2019)" and it flopped, and according to them "Cocaine Bear (2023)" wasn't any good either.

@Damienracer said:

@bratface said:

@NeoLosman said:

I've seen both movies, and I'm impressed the writer actually mentions The Bear, a seemingly forgotten gem which I saw in theatres and absolutely loved. As for The Edge, I didn't love it, but Anthony Hopkins and Alec Baldwin working together on screen made it watchable.

Any film starring Alec Baldwin that was able to wrap production without anyone on the crew ending up in a body bag is a film worth commemorating

Don't be a moron!

Did you just assume the role of online school teacher without a hint of shame?

Yep! Now go stand in the corner!

@DRDMovieMusings said:

@bratface said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

From Jaws: The Revenge to Snakes On A Plane, preposterous creature movies seem popular but don't tend to make a lot of money (of course, I have not done an exhaustive study of preposterous creature movies; perhaps they make enough money that producers keep making them, although neither of the two above-mentioned performed very well at the box office).

I'll be interested to see if this bucks the trend and people go out for mindless, silly fun, or if the initial reviews come in strongly enough to discourage wasting time and money in theatres watching.

I'm betting the latter - this just looks too stupid.

Well, it is based on a true story.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cocaine_Bear_(bear)

Apparently very loosely "based", more like "inspired by", since the real cocaine bear did not become some unstoppable monster, it sadly just died from ingesting the stuff. [Edit] And, when I say "just died", I don't mean it languished and suffered and wandered off to be found elsewhere after a period of time, oh no...I mean, it ingested a bag of the stuff and dropped dead right on the spot. There's no extension of an idea that a bear would become anything more than dead by eating cocaine.

But, thanks for the link, I'd never have guessed it was even remotely real!

It ingested a couple packages of the stuff; not even a whole duffle bag. It actually didn't have that much in its system.