@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)

@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!

As someone who hates "psycho animal" movies, I approve of this so far 😂 The trailer is a riot.

Beyond the good stupid fun, I would love to see if it's making a pointed satire the way Paul Veerhoven did in Starship Troopers, where he took Heinlein's war propaganda book and turned it into the opposite, a scathing indictment of the war heads. In the disaster/horror genre there have been some great flicks ridiculing the genre itself, but I wonder how many pull a Veerhoven and put a deep social or artistic message within the stupid fun? That's what raises a flick above popcorn and into epic territory like ST and Robocop.

One way or another this looks like it's good for some laughs. I see it was directed by Elizabeth Banks and I really enjoyed Pitch Perfect and thought it was good stupid fun with some interesting social themes under the silliness. I'll probably give this flick a snort

@rooprect said:

As someone who hates "psycho animal" movies, I approve of this so far 😂 The trailer is a riot.

Beyond the good stupid fun, I would love to see if it's making a pointed satire the way Paul Veerhoven did in Starship Troopers, where he took Heinlein's war propaganda book and turned it into the opposite, a scathing indictment of the war heads. In the disaster/horror genre there have been some great flicks ridiculing the genre itself, but I wonder how many pull a Veerhoven and put a deep social or artistic message within the stupid fun? That's what raises a flick above popcorn and into epic territory like ST and Robocop.

One way or another this looks like it's good for some laughs. I see it was directed by Elizabeth Banks and I really enjoyed Pitch Perfect and thought it was good stupid fun with some interesting social themes under the silliness. I'll probably give this flick a snort

Please do circle back and let us know if/to what degree it met your expectations! (which is the basis of the CinemaScore, FWIW).

@DRDMovieMusings said:

Please do circle back and let us know if/to what degree it met your expectations! (which is the basis of the CinemaScore, FWIW).

Only if you see it on opening-day.

@rooprect said:

I'll probably give this flick a snort

I (finally) see what you did there, LOL!

@wonder2wonder said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

Please do circle back and let us know if/to what degree it met your expectations! (which is the basis of the CinemaScore, FWIW).

Only if you see it on opening-day.

Yes, you are right that only opening day reactions are captured for the official CinemaScore metric.

For our purposes here, even if @rooprect does not see it on opening day, the value is to get his reaction and to what degree it met his expectations as someone who "anticipated/wanted to go see" because he's likely not going to be among those who get polled for the official results anyway.

@DRDMovieMusings said:

@wonder2wonder said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

Please do circle back and let us know if/to what degree it met your expectations! (which is the basis of the CinemaScore, FWIW).

Only if you see it on opening-day.

Yes, you are right that only opening day reactions are captured for the official CinemaScore metric.

For our purposes here, even if @rooprect does not see it on opening day, the value is to get his reaction and to what degree it met his expectations as someone who "anticipated/wanted to go see" because he's likely not going to be among those who get polled for the official results anyway.

There was a buzz 1-2 month ago when the official trailer was released, but now it seems like it has all but been forgotten. So, I think that there should be a new trailer on Valentine's Day. It will be competing with another 'bear' movie.

‘Cocaine Bear’ Looks to Repeat a Box Office Strategy That Worked for ‘Violent Night’ and ‘M3GAN’

Some interesting insights, including:

• "Universal ran trailers for “Cocaine Bear” prior to screenings of “Violent Night” and “M3GAN,” hoping that the audiences for those films would build up an appetite for more absurd movies that can be satisfied this weekend."

• "In order for that word of mouth to be strong, “Cocaine Bear” must do something that “Violent Night” and “M3GAN” did: make its weird central idea last for 90 minutes. It’s one thing for such a premise to get YouTube and social media engagement from a three-minute trailer, but if early audiences feel like the joke gets old fast, that will dissuade others from spending the time and money to see it in theaters. That is what happened to “Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey,” which made $1.7 million from its limited engagement but got panned by critics and audiences for not doing much with its core idea beyond what was shown in the viral trailer."

Here is an interview with Jimmy Warden (screenwriter) if anyone is interested:

https://variety.com/2023/film/news/cocaine-bear-screenwriter-jimmy-warden-sequels-kids-trying-coke-1235531161/

Review: 'Cocaine Bear,' 100% pure, uncut junk with no high

Some interesting insights, including

• The filmmakers are also clearly trying their hand at satire, but ham-fistedly. Set during the Reagan-era “Just Say No” period, “Cocaine Bear” hopes to remark on the demonization of drugs and it also seems to have something to say about how humans misunderstand the balance of nature. Neither work.

So, apparently, there was some attempt to be more than just "stupid fun"...the writer of the above article acknowledges the effort...but opines that they did not do a good job of it and, yes, there is such a thing as bad art.

• If you want to use a bear to talk about larger things, look no further than 1997's dark “The Edge,” with a screenplay by David Mamet exploring masculinity and intellectualism, or even 1988's light “The Bear,” about the nobleness of creatures — it even has a bear cub eating hallucination-inducing mushrooms.

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.

• “Cocaine Bear” is like a dull butter knife against those two."

Well, here's the thing. If we think this movie should be compared to these two movies just because there's a bear in it, the joke may be on us. The way this movie is being promoted, its ambition is clearly to a low bar, closer to Snakes on a Plane, (which itself only hit a B-) and I'm betting people will approach it at that level of expectation, which should result in a solid CinemaScore and give it legs in its theatre run.

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.

@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!

@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

You say it like the tragedy on the set of Rust happens in every Alec Baldwin movie, which is factually just not true. And you know that.

If you'd said this about John Landis, you might be closer to appropriate since he made many bad choices and has seemed far from contrite or remorseful for all the death and pain he caused. But Baldwin ain't Landis by many criteria.

Of course, we know you can't help yourself - you're determined to test and push the limits as far as you can, then cry "unfair" when your account gets suspended, again, and again, and....

@NeoLosman said:

@DRDMovieMusings 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*strong text* wrap production without anyone on the crew ending up in a body bag is a film worth commemorating

You say it like the tragedy on the set of Rust happens in every Alec Baldwin movie, which is factually just not true. And you know that.

If you'd said this about John Landis, you might be closer to appropriate since he made many bad choices and has seemed far from contrite or remorseful for all the death and pain he caused. But Baldwin ain't Landis by many criteria.

What other Landis flick(aside from Twilight Zone)did people die during the making of?

Agree! It's not the number of movies, it's the number of bad decisions he made, with the power of being the director, that got a number of people killed. AND then he acts like he's somehow the victim.

All jokes aside, Coppola during the making of Apocalypse Now, and Herzog during the making of his early films, still hold the record for wantonly putting the cast and crew in danger on a regular basis

Yes, agree. There are lots of examples of, again, DIRECTORS, who made bad choices. But trying to shoehorn that into an off-topic comment about an actor with no similar PATTERN of same, is a stretch of questionable value, I'm wondering why you even thought it was worth the effort?

@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.