Posted: 6/12/21 at 3:58pm
I think that word of mouth is going to make this a sizable hit. You could only sit in every other seat in our theater and it was sold out for every performance. Plus, I suspect it will be back next spring before the Academy Awards. We'll see.
Posted: 6/12/21 at 4:42pm
Posted: 6/12/21 at 4:46pm
I'm sorry, what are you sick of? (I'm usually good at figuring out what some meant to type, but....???)
Updated On: 6/12/21 at 04:46 PM
Posted: 6/12/21 at 4:47pm
Posted: 6/12/21 at 5:02pm
ctorres23 said: "A hit would've meant more movie musicals. Studio executives are dumb animals that just try and recreate whatever the last success was.
So in that respect I do care about its success, because I would personally like more musicals to be made. If ITH fails it will make them think twice the next time someone pitches a musical."
We say this every time, but there doesn't seem to be a shortage of musical movies coming out. And we should ENCOURAGE them to be selective about what ones they make movies of, not just slap every successful show on the screen. Lest we forget the only reason this movie was pulled out of the developmental hell was LMM's name recognition with Hamilton. It's not because someone saw it and said "Yes!", It was opportunistic. The rights were cheap because of the Weinstein fiasco and they went for it.
Posted: 6/12/21 at 6:27pm
Posted: 6/12/21 at 6:32pm
TheatreFan4 said: "Lest we forget the only reason this movie was pulled out of the developmental hell was LMM's name recognition with Hamilton. It's not because someone saw it and said "Yes!", It was opportunistic."
This is basically my point. Hamilton's success begot the ITH film. If Hamilton had failed, there would be not ITH.
Now the chain begins anew with ITH. If ITH is a success, it will probably lead to all kinds of interesting and diverse musicals being produced. If it fails, it won't. Simple as that.
For that reason I'd prefer its success (again, this is me responding to the "should we really care?" argument).
jpbran said: "Cheap? The rights were purchased by Warner Bros for $50m in a bidding war with Netflix etc.
This actually shocks me. Wasn't the Hamilton film bought for $75m? You're telling me the license to distribute a fully completed version of a mega-successful Broadway show was only worth 50% more than just the rights to be able to make an In the Heights film? That seems nuts. There must be some financials I'm not understanding.
Updated On: 6/12/21 at 06:32 PM
Posted: 6/12/21 at 6:49pm
The fate of the movie musical does not rest on the shoulders of the IN THE HEIGHTS movie.
The movie rights to IN THE HEIGHTS were auctioned to the highest bidder. Many major studios need distributors bid with Warner Bros. placing the winning $50 million bid.
Updated On: 6/12/21 at 06:49 PM
Posted: 6/12/21 at 6:56pm
Posted: 6/12/21 at 6:56pm
Posted: 6/12/21 at 7:04pm
Warner will be coy about streaming viewership (or they'll lie to us like Netflix) but releasing it day-and-date on HBO Max killed its box office. A $13m opening is flat out bad for a movie of this scale, which was never going to be a massive international grosser. It's also bad for the future of movie-musicals and the future of Latinx stories. The film cost $55m to make, PLUS marketing and overhead. The people who cover film box office for a living view these numbers as bad, and Warner's gamble of putting the films on HBO Max isn't making the dent that they set out to make.
That said, the next two weekends are quiet in theaters unless Pixar's Luca really surprises. Heights will have awards buzz so it could stay on limited screens in major markets for 9 months, or return to theaters around Oscar time. But that all costs marketing money, and there are a lot of big movies coming out in the second half of 2021 that will need as many screens possible.
Greatest Showman had once-in-a-generation legs (the likes of which have only been seen with the rare film like Big Fat Greek Wedding and Titanic) and made a good deal of money in January, a pretty dead time for movies. It is an anomaly. It also had stars and was more appealing to middle America and international audiences than Heights, which will play best on liberal coasts.
It's frustrating and sad, because if you're a studio money-counter it makes you ask "why bother taking risks?" or "why make critics' darlings?"
Posted: 6/12/21 at 7:06pm
CarlosAlberto said: "The fate of the movie musical does not rest on the shoulders of the IN THE HEIGHTS movie."
A strawman argument in the wild. Very exciting.
You took my reasonable argument ("more future musicals would be produced if In the Heights is a success" ) and exaggerated until it was ridiculous ("the fate of the movie musical rests on the shoulders of In the Heights" ), and then argued against it. Pretty cool.
CarlosAlberto said: "The movie rights to IN THE HEIGHTS were auctioned to the highest bidder."
Hamilton was also purchased in a bidding war.
I did a little research and it seems like the "rights" they bought for $50M was more of a package that included Jon Chu attached as director, who had just done Crazy Rich Asians, so it was a bit more valuable than just the mere "rights to produce it". Makes a little more sense to me now.
CarlosAlberto said: "Girl bye… the only thing that’s ridiculous on this forum is your presence. #NMFF"
Rude.
Updated On: 6/13/21 at 07:06 PM
Posted: 6/12/21 at 9:15pm
I also spotted Javier Muñoz during the finale!
Posted: 6/12/21 at 9:54pm
ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "Greatest Showman had once-in-a-generation legs (the likes of which have only been seen with the rare film like Big Fat Greek Wedding and Titanic) and made a good deal of money in January, a pretty dead time for movies. It is an anomaly. It also had stars and was more appealing to middle America and international audiences thanHeights, which will play best on liberal coasts."
Even if In the Heights had all the intangibles that would lead to it having legs in normal times, its availability on HBO Max should utterly kill that. If people want to see it 2, 3, 4 times, there's no reason to keep buying a ticket if you can watch it at home.
Posted: 6/12/21 at 10:03pm
ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "Warner will be coy about streaming viewership (or they'll lie to us like Netflix) but releasing it day-and-date on HBO Maxkilled its box office. A $13m opening is flat out bad for a movie of this scale, which was never going to be a massive international grosser. It's also bad for the future of movie-musicals andthe future of Latinxstories. The film cost $55m to make, PLUS marketing and overhead. The people who cover film box office for a living view these numbers as bad, and Warner's gamble of putting the films on HBO Max isn't making the dent that they set out to make.
That said, the next two weekends are quiet in theaters unless Pixar's Luca really surprises. Heights will have awards buzz so it could stay on limited screens in major markets for 9 months, or return to theaters around Oscar time. But that all costs marketing money, and there are a lot of big movies coming out in the second half of 2021 that will need as many screens possible.
Greatest Showman had once-in-a-generation legs (the likes of which have only been seen with the rare film like Big Fat Greek Wedding and Titanic) and made a good deal of money in January, a prettydead time for movies. It is an anomaly. It also had stars and was more appealing to middle America and international audiences thanHeights, which will play best on liberal coasts.
It's frustrating and sad, because if you're a studio money-counterit makes you ask "why bother taking risks?" or "why make critics' darlings?""
Very astute observations!
WarnerBros has already announced that the policy of same-day release in cinemas & streaming will revert to its traditional cinemas-first before streaming release for 2022!
Greatest Showman had poor ratings and bad movie press on its release and not much studio support. But audiences gave it its thumbs up for the next months in cinemas earning over $ 436 million at the box office and fought the latest Star Wars movie for top home video honors in the USA for 2018 ($81 million in the USA alone). Also, the album sold some 6 million copies worldwide and beat even pop song albums to become the best selling album for 2018. Also, cast-wise, it has the advantage of top draws at the box office.
https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Greatest-Showman-The#tab=summary
Its top song, This Is Me, was a strong statement towards inclusivity! It drew a standing ovation at the Oscars where it was nominated for Best Song. It even became the theme song for the Winter Olympics at that time. The movie was likely helped by FOX releasing 2 studio workshop scenes ( This Is Me and From Now On) right before its cinema release. Curiously, it is still screening these days in some places as an Open Air summer movie.
In a sense, it paved the way for the burst of movie musicals like In The Heights, Dear Evan Hansen, The Prom, etc. Ironically, unlike the newer musicals, The Greatest Showman was not a film adaptation of a Broadway musical but an original film musical with Broadway stars Hugh Jackman and Keala Settle and Broadway songwriters Pasek & Paul.
Updated On: 6/12/21 at 10:03 PM
Posted: 6/12/21 at 10:43pm
Posted: 6/12/21 at 11:26pm
kofler22 said: "I also spotted Javier Muñoz during the finale!"
Oh good find, I couldn't spot him until now, thank you! Looks like he's also the voice of Vanessa's dance partner in the club.
https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2568861/lin-manuel-miranda-reveals-in-the-heights-cameos-you-missed-hamilton
Posted: 6/13/21 at 12:32am
ctorres23 said: "CarlosAlberto said: "The fate of the movie musical does not rest on the shoulders of the IN THE HEIGHTS movie."
A strawman argument in the wild. Very exciting.
You took my reasonable argument ("more future musicals would be produced if In the Heights is a success" ) and exaggerated until it was ridiculous ("the fate of the movie musical rests on the shoulders of In the Heights" ), and then argued against it. Pretty cool.
CarlosAlberto said: "The movie rights to IN THE HEIGHTS were auctioned to the highest bidder."
Hamilton was also purchased in a bidding war.
I did a little research and it seems like the "rights" they bought for $50M was more of a package that included Jon Chu attached as director, who had just done Crazy Rich Asians, so itwas a bit more valuable than just the mere "rights to produce it". Makes a little more sense to me now."
Updated On: 6/13/21 at 12:32 AM
Posted: 6/13/21 at 2:07am
Miranda is an impressive musical theatre song writer. I thought the actors were all quite good. I normally detest quick edits in movie musicals but I found them more acceptable in this for some reason. But by going that route the viewer can feel cheated especially when the choreography on its own is so strong.
Posted: 6/13/21 at 6:44am
Posted: 6/13/21 at 7:39am
Posted: 6/13/21 at 10:24am
theminutepast said: "I’d love to hear more reactions to the movie itself and how others think they did in translating from stage to screen. (Point me to the correct pages if I’m mistaken but all I saw were a few reactions from those who saw previews).
Seeing the film transported me back to seeing it on stage with most of the original cast, and all the emotions and thrills watching the incredible choreography. They managed to improve upon the big numbers, actually almost all the numbers. I loved the fantasy of some of the dance numbers and noticed some tips of the hat to classic movie musicals and dancers.
I didn’t mind the excising of Camilla despite her song being one of my favorites. I thought it made the stakes higher between Nina’s dad’s hopes and dreams for her and Nina’s own dreams and feelings of guilt and confusion on leaving the Heights and her community to pursue them.
They moved around some numbers and for awhile I thought they were completing cutting out who won the lotto. I don’t know if I liked where they placed that reveal because part of what makes Abuela’s death so sad is that we the audience know she just won and that she and Usnavi are both going to realize their dreams of returning to the islands.
I also felt the middle of the film starting around Blackout started to drag, in part, because all the tensions were removed or relocated: no problem with Benny dating Nina and being rejected for not being Latino or good enough for Nina; no sense of dashed dreams for Abuela Claudia; no anger from Benny toward Nina about losing his job to fund her college; no tension between Camila and Kevin for obvious reasons; no problems with the bodega being looted; etc.
I was disappointed not to get Sunrise but I can live with it. What I can’t understand is WHY did they cut the final notes of When You’re Home. I love that ending and the film song went from soaring to quiet, and it felt incomplete. Did they think the audience wouldn’t like it? Were the actors not capable of singing it?
Loved the cameos especially Chris as Mr. Softee. And I thought everyone was well cast. It was kind of weird how the new salon character was basically a third wheel to the now couple of Daniela and Carla. I don’t think that character was necessary.
Overall this was one of the best movie musicals I’ve seen in a long time, probably the best since Chicago. I’d love to hear what everyone else thought about it!"
I felt the same way as you did about the changes when I first saw the film. I liked some of the changes, but some of the ones they chose to make didn't make sense to me. I definitely did not like the fact they chose to eliminate "Sunrise", but my guess is they chose between that song and "When The Sun Goes Down" and the latter won out - as they probably felt one love duet between Nina and Benny was enough.
Again, just my hunch.
Posted: 6/13/21 at 10:31am
Posted: 6/13/21 at 10:39am
Posted: 6/13/21 at 10:42am
teddy1996 said: "the movie has been getting a lot of backlash. many black latinx people have spoken out on twitter against the movie for the lack of dark skinned afro latinx people in leading and supporting roles and for reducing them to be background talent. and they are absolutely right. i’m glad that they are voicing their perspective and i hope that there is a change in prominent latino media that allows for black latinx representation and imagery to be in the forefront. "
Get a life.
