I feel a little sad whenever a movie flops these days, especially movies trying something different, because the entire business of making films for theaters is teetering on an edge of profitability right now and I want it to continue as long as possible.
are theaters actually teetering on profitability after barbenheimer? after top gun maverick? eeaao? poor things did very well at the box office too, and i’m pretty sure films like american fiction and past lives made back their budgets too. it’s mostly the big $300 million blockbusters and the art house foreign films (anatomy of a fall, zone of interest, etc.) that seem to be struggling financially. i could be wrong, but we’ve been saying theaters are struggling, but right as we start saying it again, another film comes out and breaks box office records or breaks out into the mainstream on an indie budget. idk, i could still be wrong 🤷♂️🤷♂️
@@BROJANGSTER There are a handful of exceptions, but the global box office for 2023 adjusted for inflation was about half the global box office of the average from 2017 to 2019. And 2024 so far is looking worse than 2023. You look back just a couple of years and almost all movies were profitable. Now it seems most are not profitable, with just a handful of "you need to see it in theaters" success stories. Very few people go to the movies just to go to movies anymore.
@@BROJANGSTER Cinemas don’t keep most of the box office revenue, it goes to the studios, especially at the start of a film’s theatrical run when most people will see a film. Cinemas get a bigger slice of the box office in the latter stages of a film’s theatrical window, however by then fewer people will be buying tickets. Cinemas rely heavily on the concessions stand for their income and in some cases that might even be the majority of their revenue.
@@BROJANGSTER Art movies often get financing from other sources like grants and public funding at least outside the US and often don't cost too much to make so I don't think those are struggling as much. The ones that have really struggled are mid-tier movies in the US. Some have done well like Civil War but that's more the exception.
@@ssssssstssssssss ok, didn't know that. but still, movies like past lives, american fiction, and civil war are doing well at the box office. i already mentioned eeaao, and now challengers is the latest mid budget film to at least make back its budget and marketing costs (if $50+ million counts as "mid budget"). bottom line, people still wanna go to the movies, you just gotta make good movies (*cough* *cough* disney *COUGH*)
Im hearbroken. I think what happened is that studios have told him to be as safe as possible his howle career so he decided to make a 180. But Hollywood let alone our culture does not see things on a individual basis which if Megapolis fails all future original auter films with blockbuster budgets that aren't Nolan will go down with it.
What I’m reminded of, hearing various things about this, is Terry Gilliam’s The Man Who Killed Don Quixote. Like Coppola, Gilliam had tried getting that film off the ground for MANY years, with multiple different actors in the lead roles. There’s even a documentary that was made about the attempts to make the film. And then he finally got the film made (also starring Adam Driver, ironically enough), and the film was… decent. It’s not up to par with any of Gilliam’s previous masterpieces during his prime, but you can tell where the heart and passion was, and why Gilliam wanted to make it. So at least that film had that. This… I have so many questions, with all that I’m hearing about it.
This is a good/bad comparison in te same time, since The Man Who Killed Don Quixote is not an original idea, it is very much based on the literary classic, but with a twist. Also, no one cared for The Man Who Killed Don Quixote, it has only 22K votes on IMDB and a box office of $2.4 million, Megalopolis will be much more widely seen, at least, among cinephiles.
@@manantial773 I guess I can see your point. You could say TMWKDQ is more well known for the efforts to get the movie made (including the Lost In La Mancha documentary) than the actual movie itself. With this, I’m not sure how many times Coppola tried making this movie, if he tried with other actors and so on, but I don’t know if there’ll be a making-of documentary with this one.
W. I'm checking Brother Bro's twitter a couple of times a day, just to see what's up. Doing a very good job with the updates. I hope you and Oscar Expert can both go Cannes next year. I've heard it's a very good time over there. Exciting time of the year. I'm really excited to see Megalopolis.
Shame on film twitter nerds who haven't even seen it doxxing and attacking the critics at Cannes who gave negative thoughts. We have to stop this mindset over there that everything has to "rock" or "rule". You don't have to pretend to like everything.
The last time Coppola made a film that was anywhere near Oscar nominations was "John Grisham's The Rainmaker" (1997), which garnered buzz for both Danny DeVito and Jon Voight in supporting roles but ultimately failed to make it to Oscar.
I really liked Tetro, though it didn't garner any Oscar noms. I also know alotta people didn't like Tetro at all, so it's not considered a masterpiece or anything like that. Definitely the best Coppola flick of the last few decades tho, imo
Ever since watching challengers, I can’t help but think yall look like mike faist. My friends who watched challengers with me said they fancy brother bro
It's always felt like The Oscar Experts (plural) to me, ever since I discovered this channel years ago. Never understood why the channel is called The Oscar Expert, in singular, but it's hosted by two people, only one of whom is the oscar expert in question (so the name of a two-person channel is the pseudonym of just one of the two persons), while the other one is just "Brother Bro", despite the fact that both of them appear to have similar movie and Oscars knowledge (from what I've seen). That was a long-winded sentence, sorry lol
Do you think it could be edited into a better film? Like either go total trippy or totally linear narrative? It sounds like the tone is two different, or three different films needing to be separated.
I hope it still gets a theatrical run. Coppola once described the movie as "a beautiful girl you cannot have". It sounds like the film is too heavy with its themes and collapses under its own weight. Still really looking forward to it. The comparisons drawn in these reactions are crazy. Everything from Wachiowski to Tommy Wiseau to Neil Breen!!! Insane
Good point, FFC is factor that pique my intellectual curiosity for the film. LOL, that said, if Neil Breen made a movie with the same cast and scale it would pique my morbid curiosity just as much.
So it’s if Ayn Rand made a movie? She was never questioned by her inner circle, surrounding herself with yes people, and shunning anyone that would give logical reasoning against her philosophy.
@@actualityfilms nah, I’m a realist that knows that any power vacuum will be filled and in that regard the powerful men argument of history and social dynamics crumbles.
@@josefonseca6144 In either case I can tell that Coppola's film sucks. He has a huge ego but lack discipline.Ingmar Bergman didn't make gaudy and incoherent junky films when he was an old man.
I'm going to watch it, regardless. I suspect from everything I've heard and read. Coppola stubbornly held on to this project for so long. He took a minimalist approach to direction and allowed the actors to self-direct. Editing will be the winning or losing stroke for this film. In your judgement, it clearly lost. Hopefully, I can make sense of it.
he said that he thought perhaps Coppola has a mind set that says only powerful people shape society. As well he said this is how we are taught history. I believe that IS how society worked before the enlightenment and the founding of the USA. So perhaps Coppola did this to reflect the way Rome worked and perhaps he was Trying to tell a story in a way romans would tell a story. This is a fat perhaps, I have not seen the movie so maybe Coppola did it just because that’s the way he believes the world should work. Even if he did it, not because it was personal ideology, but because it works with the story, he was trying to tell. His ideology probably still aligns with it somewhat. Otherwise he probably wouldn’t have told that story.
Looking forward to the film. (Giving me vibes of southland tales, titus, cloud atlas and chi-raq- all films I adore) Ambition goes a loooong way for me. I could never financially support this film though due to the casting of von voight. Voight is as vile a creature as they come.
There is no need to be confused, as some are here, about whether Brother Bro wants the film to be a box-office hit. His take is more nuanced than that. As he describes it, the movie is an honest interesting failure - made by one of the great visionary artists of our times. An epic failure worth talking about and figuring out what went wrong. Why wouldn't you want your friends to go see such a fascinating oddity? In the end, the movie doesn't seem to work even on its own terms, and not everyone will be interested in something like that, obviously, but great artists are entitled to their mistakes and follies. We owe them everything. That's the thing that will draw people to the theater - certainly not enough of them to turn the movie into a financial success (and from everything we know, it's shaping up to be a huge box-office flop). But Francis Ford Coppola doesn't care about the money - that's why he invested his own fortune, he was savvy and cleare-eyed enough about its commercial prospects to know that no studio would give him the money to make it - and he himself sounds remarkably blase about actually getting a return on his investments when all is said and done. He's made peace with that. You've got to honor that. It's called artistic integrity (which few people talk about these days and may well be the source of people's confusion). Let's talk about THAT, and put aside the issue of whether the film will make a killing at the box office. In order for the film to "do well" at the box office, it would have be one of the biggest blockbusters of all time. As far as I can tell, no one ever thought that was going to happen; certainly not Coppola - but clearly he was never banking on it to begin with.
This sounds like it would have been a better animated film. IF you are going to make an art film you may as well use the medium of paint or drawing, or art. Then at least, it would satisfy that need.
Haven't seen it but it sounds like it is destined to be a Cult Film. Such films are rarely successful, on first release, but thay play for decades and have a following and end up being a subject taught about in film and art schools. Also, I am reminded of when Coppola was doing Apocalypse Now and was over budget and MIA on location and the studio couldn't find him. Not unlike Marlon Brando's character in the plot. I like your analogy that Driver's Character was mirroring Coppola, in a way. Driver's Character was trying to create something big and great while trying to convince people of his vision and the politics around all that. I was a Philosophy student in college and I understand much of this film was based on Greek literature and Philosophy. So, I would probably get some references that many people wouldn't. I already know this film will be studied for decades in film schools. Either for being ahead of it's time or what NOT to do in making a film. Sounds like Coppola was letting actors do what they wanted to do.
The actor said they were just sitting around a lot and they weren't really sure what was going to happen because Coppola was writing the movie as they went along. It'd be sitting in his trailer waiting for inspiration and they'd have to just sit there and entertain themselves waiting for him to come up with some great idea. It's really a stupid way of doing things and it almost destroyed him in his career on Apocalypse now. In the end everyone loved apocalypse now including me. But you know what's wrong with starting with a script?
Other than similarities in name alone - "Megalopolis", "Metropolis" - do you think there are any comparisons to this film and the 1927 classic? From the look of it, it seems that it has the aesthetic of "Babylon" and story of "Metropolis".
Anybody know the movie quote that goes something like “when things are good we feel them way up here but when they’re bad we feel them way down here” not exact quote but it’s driving me crazy
Thank you for this review. It sounds like there were no test screenings? I plan to be there opening weekend when it opens in the U.S. because I'm a Coppola fan.
Coppola is a rich, old, self indulgent hack at this point. There are so many master directors who made great films in old age that are coherent, interesting and profound.
@@jagmeetjhajj Accept that Coppola is more nakedly self indulgent and inept? I can see even ihe trailers that his own decadence is the main feature of the film. Coppola is a pot head and from what I've hear is also a porn addict.
As someone who truly appreciates Coppola and believe that he’s made the greatest film in cinema with apocalypse now and such masterful classics such as the godfather series, the conversation and rumble fish, to see his passion project and dream finally be realised and turn out to be such an underwhelming film in soo many critical aspects is genuinely quite saddening. We all would have expected this be at minimum a competent film, but it has received such negative reviews it really puts in question how he was not able to produce something that was objectively ‘fine’ and in turn make such a messy final product
Copolla does not make good films anymore for a couple decades now. I would love, LOVE, for that to be untrue, and that I am wrong....but he's just not doing good work anymore. Proof of that is his director's cut, re-releases of his classic movies. He's ruined The Outsiders and Apocalypse with his recuts.
“Failed” films by good directors often become cults. John Boorman’s “Zardoz” (1974) is a personal favorite. That Could also happen with this one. Besides, anyone can be a critic.
I am giving it a chance. I was drawn in by the looks of Blade Runner, Streets of Fire, The 300, and The Watchmen. This has the visual bling. Hopefully there is something behind it. This is a movie Hollywood would never make.
I’ve been curious about this film going back to when I first heard about it as a kid in the early 90s! I remember when John Cusack was his choice to front the film. It’s crazy & exciting to see that Coppola finally got his white whale… but sweet baby Gebus the reaction to it has not been good. It’s sad considering everything it took to make and everything he’s gone through personally (his wife’s passing). Regardless of quality or using it’s 100million dollar budget well I am so curious just to watch the thing. Bat shit crazy Neil Breen esque epic was never what I expected from Coppola but that’s piqued my interest even more!? That’s insane!
Check your neck on the left side. It may just be the lighting but it looks like your lymph node may be enlarged? Just make sure you don't feel a lump at the side of your neck near your collar bone. Concerned citizen.
I haven't heard about this much controversy and disappointment about a major film since when Michael Cimino's Heavens Gate premiered in 1980. Perhaps decades from now, long after Coppola has passed away, some brilliant filmmaker will come along and re-edit Megalopolis into something that makes sense and therefore result in some appreciation by the public.
“If Neil Breen was given $100 million to make a movie” should be the official tagline for this film. Get the Neil Breen fans out in droves to see this movie.
It’s a total mess of a film. It’s incoherent and unbelievably dull. It’s not just worst of the year awful, but potentially worst of the decade. I can’t think of anything positive about it. I would like to say it’s good to see a big budget original non-sequel non-franchise film, but this is so bad it might make it less likely for studios to put their trust and money into original ideas. _“The cinematic equivalent of toothache”_ - Mark Kermode 1/10
This movie is gonna be like the man who killed Don Quixote or Crimes of the future. Old filmmaker, massive budget, white protagonist guy who talks about philosophy
I feel sorry for great directors to leave the directing on the peak, return is always a let down, mostly failure. QT said better leave the stage before the audience gets bored
I remember when Apocalypse Now came out and how some people claimed it was a boondoggle, but it aged well and is considered a classic. This might be similar.
Casting mistake number one: Adam Driver in the lead. I don't get his success. He has virtually no charisma at all. He's an okay actor, but I would never go to a movie because he's in it. Casting mistake number two: Shia LeBeouf. Ugh. Casting mistake number three: Jon Voight. No need to say why.
You are pretty alone in that and no one cares what you think. Adam Driver is among the top 5 most important actors of our lifetime. Shia LaBeouf is a stellar actor. And Jon Voight will never be canceled. Also, you are pretty dumb to think that this would have turned different with other actors, do you have any emotional intelligence to even comprehend the review?!
Ngl this movie having such a disastrous reputation only makes me want to see it more.
Ngl urgay
@@nikkingmanNo he's not from Uruguay.
And it made me want to see it less. Don’t waste my time with shit
Yep, already this is gonna be a 'cult' movie.
Yea definitely want to watch this
I feel a little sad whenever a movie flops these days, especially movies trying something different, because the entire business of making films for theaters is teetering on an edge of profitability right now and I want it to continue as long as possible.
are theaters actually teetering on profitability after barbenheimer? after top gun maverick? eeaao? poor things did very well at the box office too, and i’m pretty sure films like american fiction and past lives made back their budgets too. it’s mostly the big $300 million blockbusters and the art house foreign films (anatomy of a fall, zone of interest, etc.) that seem to be struggling financially. i could be wrong, but we’ve been saying theaters are struggling, but right as we start saying it again, another film comes out and breaks box office records or breaks out into the mainstream on an indie budget. idk, i could still be wrong 🤷♂️🤷♂️
@@BROJANGSTER There are a handful of exceptions, but the global box office for 2023 adjusted for inflation was about half the global box office of the average from 2017 to 2019. And 2024 so far is looking worse than 2023. You look back just a couple of years and almost all movies were profitable. Now it seems most are not profitable, with just a handful of "you need to see it in theaters" success stories. Very few people go to the movies just to go to movies anymore.
@@BROJANGSTER Cinemas don’t keep most of the box office revenue, it goes to the studios, especially at the start of a film’s theatrical run when most people will see a film. Cinemas get a bigger slice of the box office in the latter stages of a film’s theatrical window, however by then fewer people will be buying tickets.
Cinemas rely heavily on the concessions stand for their income and in some cases that might even be the majority of their revenue.
@@BROJANGSTER Art movies often get financing from other sources like grants and public funding at least outside the US and often don't cost too much to make so I don't think those are struggling as much. The ones that have really struggled are mid-tier movies in the US. Some have done well like Civil War but that's more the exception.
@@ssssssstssssssss ok, didn't know that. but still, movies like past lives, american fiction, and civil war are doing well at the box office. i already mentioned eeaao, and now challengers is the latest mid budget film to at least make back its budget and marketing costs (if $50+ million counts as "mid budget"). bottom line, people still wanna go to the movies, you just gotta make good movies (*cough* *cough* disney *COUGH*)
Oscar Expert by himself in a video I'm used to. Brother Bro by himself on the other hand...
Enough to make a grown man go into heat
Is also great!
Which one is who?
Brother Bro solo video debut 🫡
and that for one of the most anticipated and discussed movies of all time
🫡
Everyone wanted n needed that!!!!
@@palemoonlight96yeah, gotta say this movie is def not that.
In other words, Coppola seems to have been high for the last 40 years.
Justin did a really good job going solo this video!
Im hearbroken. I think what happened is that studios have told him to be as safe as possible his howle career so he decided to make a 180. But Hollywood let alone our culture does not see things on a individual basis which if Megapolis fails all future original auter films with blockbuster budgets that aren't Nolan will go down with it.
Im still going to see this opening night in IMAX knowing that it will be messy.
What I’m reminded of, hearing various things about this, is Terry Gilliam’s The Man Who Killed Don Quixote. Like Coppola, Gilliam had tried getting that film off the ground for MANY years, with multiple different actors in the lead roles. There’s even a documentary that was made about the attempts to make the film. And then he finally got the film made (also starring Adam Driver, ironically enough), and the film was… decent. It’s not up to par with any of Gilliam’s previous masterpieces during his prime, but you can tell where the heart and passion was, and why Gilliam wanted to make it. So at least that film had that. This… I have so many questions, with all that I’m hearing about it.
This is a good/bad comparison in te same time, since The Man Who Killed Don Quixote is not an original idea, it is very much based on the literary classic, but with a twist.
Also, no one cared for The Man Who Killed Don Quixote, it has only 22K votes on IMDB and a box office of $2.4 million, Megalopolis will be much more widely seen, at least, among cinephiles.
The worst thing ahout don quioxte was how generic it was especially structurally, it doesn't feel like it's taking any risks..i hope megalopolis does
@@manantial773 I guess I can see your point. You could say TMWKDQ is more well known for the efforts to get the movie made (including the Lost In La Mancha documentary) than the actual movie itself. With this, I’m not sure how many times Coppola tried making this movie, if he tried with other actors and so on, but I don’t know if there’ll be a making-of documentary with this one.
I read something that might explain this film.
It's a movie about making a movie. Is that at all possible?
W.
I'm checking Brother Bro's twitter a couple of times a day, just to see what's up. Doing a very good job with the updates. I hope you and Oscar Expert can both go Cannes next year. I've heard it's a very good time over there. Exciting time of the year.
I'm really excited to see Megalopolis.
Thanks for the Shout Out Brother 🫡
You're welcome, bro.
...love you
Wait hold up. Brother Bro is now in charge?
I think he went to canne pretending to be the Oscar expert
He went to Cannes this year and the Oscar Expert did not.
@@gabrielcastaneda9700 lol who could tell
They said previously that only he could go to Cannes this year, so he's recording the reactions.
Omg yes, about damn time
Time for me to drop everything, Oscar expert has come out with a new video
We love this brother bro keep it up! Love to see it
"But you should go see it because... you know, what the hell"
Shame on film twitter nerds who haven't even seen it doxxing and attacking the critics at Cannes who gave negative thoughts. We have to stop this mindset over there that everything has to "rock" or "rule". You don't have to pretend to like everything.
"if neil breen was given $100 million dollars" I'm in
I’m so looking forward to see this - and that the reviews are so divergent only makes it more interesting.
The last time Coppola made a film that was anywhere near Oscar nominations was "John Grisham's The Rainmaker" (1997), which garnered buzz for both Danny DeVito and Jon Voight in supporting roles but ultimately failed to make it to Oscar.
I really liked Tetro, though it didn't garner any Oscar noms. I also know alotta people didn't like Tetro at all, so it's not considered a masterpiece or anything like that. Definitely the best Coppola flick of the last few decades tho, imo
Ever since watching challengers, I can’t help but think yall look like mike faist. My friends who watched challengers with me said they fancy brother bro
I mean, my hopes for this movie weren't strong, but comparing it to The Room was not at all what I was expecting
Leanne
At what point does Brother Bro get promoted to co-Oscar Expert and the channel becomes The Oscar Experts
No. The Brother Bro Expert.
It's always felt like The Oscar Experts (plural) to me, ever since I discovered this channel years ago. Never understood why the channel is called The Oscar Expert, in singular, but it's hosted by two people, only one of whom is the oscar expert in question (so the name of a two-person channel is the pseudonym of just one of the two persons), while the other one is just "Brother Bro", despite the fact that both of them appear to have similar movie and Oscars knowledge (from what I've seen). That was a long-winded sentence, sorry lol
@@Robalexe I think that in the beginning Justin wasn't in the video. He just helped film them.
@@kassiogomes8498 At this point adding an s at the end of the channel's name feels more appropriate though
@Robalexe It's a gimmick. We're used to it and we love it like that. 😁
Do you think it could be edited into a better film? Like either go total trippy or totally linear narrative? It sounds like the tone is two different, or three different films needing to be separated.
Never thought we'd get solo Brother Bro
Hoping Oscar Expert does his review on this fall. 🤣💯
Brother bro is going to love kinds of kindness. I’m predicting it.
He does not get Lanthimos, neither of them does.
@@manantial773 why do you say that?
I'm going to see this one on acid
You slammed dunk this review. Very helpful. Thank you.
I hope it still gets a theatrical run. Coppola once described the movie as "a beautiful girl you cannot have". It sounds like the film is too heavy with its themes and collapses under its own weight.
Still really looking forward to it. The comparisons drawn in these reactions are crazy. Everything from Wachiowski to Tommy Wiseau to Neil Breen!!! Insane
I guarantee in 10 years you will love this movie when you understand it.
Brother bro with the strongest debut since Celine Song
Everyone here should see "The Man Who Killed Don Quixote." Borderline masterpiece.
Good point, FFC is factor that pique my intellectual curiosity for the film. LOL, that said, if Neil Breen made a movie with the same cast and scale it would pique my morbid curiosity just as much.
Even if it’s a commercial failure, I’m still extremely happy it got made and his way
This is the first time I prejudged a movie by deciding I’m going to love it before I’ve watched the movie.
Me too!!! I know I'm going to love it, even if it's absolutely terrible
So it’s if Ayn Rand made a movie? She was never questioned by her inner circle, surrounding herself with yes people, and shunning anyone that would give logical reasoning against her philosophy.
Are you a socialist angry about Rand dismantling it?
@@actualityfilms nah, I’m a realist that knows that any power vacuum will be filled and in that regard the powerful men argument of history and social dynamics crumbles.
@@josefonseca6144 In either case I can tell that Coppola's film sucks. He has a huge ego but lack discipline.Ingmar Bergman didn't make gaudy and incoherent junky films when he was an old man.
Yes but would Ayn Rand have smoked pot in her trailer all day making her film?
I want to see it because it because it's giving a cross between, Metropolis (1927) and Babaloyn vibes.
I've heard this film called a piece of art on a par with Picasso's Guernica and a flop on a par with The Room.🤷♂️
The fact that there isn’t an embargo for this review should tell us everything we need to know.
Megaflopolis confirmed?
No, Half-Billion Dollar Club.
@@Wired4Life2 wouldn't that be something
MegaHITopolis
Yes
I'm going to watch it, regardless. I suspect from everything I've heard and read. Coppola stubbornly held on to this project for so long. He took a minimalist approach to direction and allowed the actors to self-direct. Editing will be the winning or losing stroke for this film. In your judgement, it clearly lost. Hopefully, I can make sense of it.
I'm one of those people who wants to see what tf happened. I will go alone & not invite anyone to come with me.
he said that he thought perhaps Coppola has a mind set that says only powerful people shape society. As well he said this is how we are taught history. I believe that IS how society worked before the enlightenment and the founding of the USA. So perhaps Coppola did this to reflect the way Rome worked and perhaps he was Trying to tell a story in a way romans would tell a story. This is a fat perhaps, I have not seen the movie so maybe Coppola did it just because that’s the way he believes the world should work. Even if he did it, not because it was personal ideology, but because it works with the story, he was trying to tell. His ideology probably still aligns with it somewhat. Otherwise he probably wouldn’t have told that story.
Looking forward to the film. (Giving me vibes of southland tales, titus, cloud atlas and chi-raq- all films I adore)
Ambition goes a loooong way for me.
I could never financially support this film though due to the casting of von voight. Voight is as vile a creature as they come.
They should definitely give Neil Breen a $100 million to make a movie. That would be amazing on so many levels.
Coppola and Orson Wells both peaked with their early masterpieces and suffered for decades because of setting the bar so high for themselves.
I love you Mike Faist ❤
Bo Is NOT Afraid. He's doing well.
There is no need to be confused, as some are here, about whether Brother Bro wants the film to be a box-office hit. His take is more nuanced than that. As he describes it, the movie is an honest interesting failure - made by one of the great visionary artists of our times. An epic failure worth talking about and figuring out what went wrong. Why wouldn't you want your friends to go see such a fascinating oddity? In the end, the movie doesn't seem to work even on its own terms, and not everyone will be interested in something like that, obviously, but great artists are entitled to their mistakes and follies. We owe them everything. That's the thing that will draw people to the theater - certainly not enough of them to turn the movie into a financial success (and from everything we know, it's shaping up to be a huge box-office flop). But Francis Ford Coppola doesn't care about the money - that's why he invested his own fortune, he was savvy and cleare-eyed enough about its commercial prospects to know that no studio would give him the money to make it - and he himself sounds remarkably blase about actually getting a return on his investments when all is said and done. He's made peace with that. You've got to honor that. It's called artistic integrity (which few people talk about these days and may well be the source of people's confusion). Let's talk about THAT, and put aside the issue of whether the film will make a killing at the box office. In order for the film to "do well" at the box office, it would have be one of the biggest blockbusters of all time. As far as I can tell, no one ever thought that was going to happen; certainly not Coppola - but clearly he was never banking on it to begin with.
Brother bro solo debut fuck yes!
Very insightful review
This sounds like it would have been a better animated film. IF you are going to make an art film you may as well use the medium of paint or drawing, or art. Then at least, it would satisfy that need.
Haven't seen it but it sounds like it is destined to be a Cult Film. Such films are rarely successful, on first release, but thay play for decades and have a following and end up being a subject taught about in film and art schools.
Also, I am reminded of when Coppola was doing Apocalypse Now and was over budget and MIA on location and the studio couldn't find him. Not unlike Marlon Brando's character in the plot.
I like your analogy that Driver's Character was mirroring Coppola, in a way. Driver's Character was trying to create something big and great while trying to convince people of his vision and the politics around all that.
I was a Philosophy student in college and I understand much of this film was based on Greek literature and Philosophy. So, I would probably get some references that many people wouldn't.
I already know this film will be studied for decades in film schools. Either for being ahead of it's time or what NOT to do in making a film.
Sounds like Coppola was letting actors do what they wanted to do.
Someone called this Coppola’s “Chi-Raq.”
😂😂😂😂😂😂
The actor said they were just sitting around a lot and they weren't really sure what was going to happen because Coppola was writing the movie as they went along. It'd be sitting in his trailer waiting for inspiration and they'd have to just sit there and entertain themselves waiting for him to come up with some great idea. It's really a stupid way of doing things and it almost destroyed him in his career on Apocalypse now. In the end everyone loved apocalypse now including me. But you know what's wrong with starting with a script?
It's funny, they said he was smoking pot all day. Based on what The Oscar Expert said maybe it was the wrong source of inspiration.
needed to see u alone to realize you look like Mike Faist
Other than similarities in name alone - "Megalopolis", "Metropolis" - do you think there are any comparisons to this film and the 1927 classic? From the look of it, it seems that it has the aesthetic of "Babylon" and story of "Metropolis".
BROTHER BRO!!!!!!
5:22 “ideated in a slightly altered state” yeah the altered state is francis being old
Francis is a known heavy cannabis user lol.
“The film is kind of like if Neil Breen were given a $100 million to make a movie”
SOLD!
Can we get Adam Driver in a great movie again please
Ferrari was solid I thought
Anybody know the movie quote that goes something like “when things are good we feel them way up here but when they’re bad we feel them way down here” not exact quote but it’s driving me crazy
Brace yourselves for the Megaflopolis memes.
Justin: i just saw megalopolis
Me: i just saw u Justin
also Me: more like megaflopolis, i ain't watching that!!!! Stop smoking, Coppola
"Megalopolis". More like Mega...Lop...i'm gay.
Justin, you are the man!!
Thank you for this review. It sounds like there were no test screenings? I plan to be there opening weekend when it opens in the U.S. because I'm a Coppola fan.
Coppola and test screenings?! Hahaha.
These decades in the making passion projects never turn out well, no matter who's project it is.
Like Boyhood. That was horrible.
Passion projects mostly turns out terrible.....
You're just edgy
Self financed = RED FLAG
Just look at Avatar
@GTAxpertPlay overhyped garbage that only rips off better movies. It does appeal to the brainless sheep tho.
10:07 That's a great question for all the people calling this thing a masterpiece or some shit
I wish Babylon had this much hype :(
Babylon was so amazing
I cant wait to see it, but Francis Ford Coppla’s best movies are the godfather and 1992’s Bram Stoker’s Dracula
Coppola is a rich, old, self indulgent hack at this point. There are so many master directors who made great films in old age that are coherent, interesting and profound.
It has always been his nature, but he is now demonstrating it in a manner that is devoid of any semblance of regret. Kindly accept this reality.
@@jagmeetjhajj Accept that Coppola is more nakedly self indulgent and inept? I can see even ihe trailers that his own decadence is the main feature of the film. Coppola is a pot head and from what I've hear is also a porn addict.
As someone who truly appreciates Coppola and believe that he’s made the greatest film in cinema with apocalypse now and such masterful classics such as the godfather series, the conversation and rumble fish, to see his passion project and dream finally be realised and turn out to be such an underwhelming film in soo many critical aspects is genuinely quite saddening. We all would have expected this be at minimum a competent film, but it has received such negative reviews it really puts in question how he was not able to produce something that was objectively ‘fine’ and in turn make such a messy final product
Copolla does not make good films anymore for a couple decades now. I would love, LOVE, for that to be untrue, and that I am wrong....but he's just not doing good work anymore. Proof of that is his director's cut, re-releases of his classic movies. He's ruined The Outsiders and Apocalypse with his recuts.
Which of the two of you appear in the movie Challengers ¿
I really like your comparison to The Room, because I’ve been getting that kinda vibe this whole time. also… did they really show 9/11 in it?
“Failed” films by good directors often become cults. John Boorman’s “Zardoz” (1974) is a personal favorite. That Could also happen with this one. Besides, anyone can be a critic.
I am giving it a chance. I was drawn in by the looks of Blade Runner, Streets of Fire, The 300, and The Watchmen. This has the visual bling. Hopefully there is something behind it. This is a movie Hollywood would never make.
And Hollywood would be right.
And good. Why watch this trash when the Hollywood movie Dune 2 just came out
I’ve been curious about this film going back to when I first heard about it as a kid in the early 90s! I remember when John Cusack was his choice to front the film. It’s crazy & exciting to see that Coppola finally got his white whale… but sweet baby Gebus the reaction to it has not been good. It’s sad considering everything it took to make and everything he’s gone through personally (his wife’s passing). Regardless of quality or using it’s 100million dollar budget well I am so curious just to watch the thing. Bat shit crazy Neil Breen esque epic was never what I expected from Coppola but that’s piqued my interest even more!? That’s insane!
It's sad, instead of Ahab's whale we may have ended up with The Old Man's marlin.
Good job Brother Bro! Enjoy France :)
Check your neck on the left side. It may just be the lighting but it looks like your lymph node may be enlarged? Just make sure you don't feel a lump at the side of your neck near your collar bone. Concerned citizen.
When does an Emipre die? Or how does in get destroyed, Return To Planet Underground (Part1)
I haven't heard about this much controversy and disappointment about a major film since when Michael Cimino's Heavens Gate premiered in 1980. Perhaps decades from now, long after Coppola has passed away, some brilliant filmmaker will come along and re-edit Megalopolis into something that makes sense and therefore result in some appreciation by the public.
Well, maybe you're right, we'll know for sure in about 20 years!
Lol
I’ve been waiting to hear about this…
Wow! He got a Cahnn Festival lanyard
“If Neil Breen was given $100 million to make a movie” should be the official tagline for this film. Get the Neil Breen fans out in droves to see this movie.
It’s a total mess of a film. It’s incoherent and unbelievably dull. It’s not just worst of the year awful, but potentially worst of the decade. I can’t think of anything positive about it. I would like to say it’s good to see a big budget original non-sequel non-franchise film, but this is so bad it might make it less likely for studios to put their trust and money into original ideas.
_“The cinematic equivalent of toothache”_ - Mark Kermode
1/10
Is it a " So bad it's good," movie?
No
This boy discusses weed like he was always offered but never tried it because the adults said that it is the root of evil
This movie is gonna be like the man who killed Don Quixote or Crimes of the future. Old filmmaker, massive budget, white protagonist guy who talks about philosophy
Brother Bro? More like brother based
I feel sorry for great directors to leave the directing on the peak, return is always a let down, mostly failure. QT said better leave the stage before the audience gets bored
Great review, wild neck vein
A fair swap. I would want to go to Cannes if I was Brother Bro.
It sounds like a twisted "The Fountainhead with Ayn Rand, Howard Roark, Guy Francon, Dominique Francon and Peter Keating all on acid.
I'd love that movie, unfortunately this looks more hunger games than fountain head
Maybe Francis should have gone ahead with his idea of filming Ain Rand's The Fountainhead...
I remember when Apocalypse Now came out and how some people claimed it was a boondoggle, but it aged well and is considered a classic. This might be similar.
Justin's like : move over cole, this is my time to shine now!!!!
Deservedly so, i would say!!!!!
Does anyone knows when it will be released internationally ?
Casting mistake number one: Adam Driver in the lead. I don't get his success. He has virtually no charisma at all. He's an okay actor, but I would never go to a movie because he's in it. Casting mistake number two: Shia LeBeouf. Ugh. Casting mistake number three: Jon Voight. No need to say why.
You are pretty alone in that and no one cares what you think. Adam Driver is among the top 5 most important actors of our lifetime. Shia LaBeouf is a stellar actor. And Jon Voight will never be canceled.
Also, you are pretty dumb to think that this would have turned different with other actors, do you have any emotional intelligence to even comprehend the review?!
As much as I'm looking forward to this film, I 100% agree with everything in this comment
im a avid watcher of the fantasy filmball yt channel, very amazing stuff!