second for Billy Baldwin. Yes, I then went and typed William but in a quiz where one answer is'indiana jones and the kingdom of the crystal skulls' shortcuts are appreciated.
Lionsgate is considered a "mini-major" -- if there was a seventh spot in the quiz, that's where it would be. DreamWorks is distributed mostly by Disney, although not owned by them.
Dreamworks, SKG, was founded by Spielberg, Katzenberg, and Geffen. Katzenberg had been a chairman at Disney before he left to co-found Dreamworks. They wanted to take market share away from Disney. I don't know if they ever acknowledged this but it was long rumored that Antz was made to compete directly with A Bug's Life, and that The Prince of Egypt was referred to in-house as "The Zion King." That was a long time ago and studios change hands, but, at least when it was founded it certainly was not owned by Disney.
DreamWorks Animation has been shuffling around distributors for a while now. First they were part of the main DreamWorks studio, then they had films distributed by Paramount, then 20th Century Fox, and now Universal. Apparently the animation studio was “spun off” in 2004 according to Wikipedia, and for a while other DreamWorks movies would be released by Disney through Touchstone. Kind of confusing but then again lots of Hollywood deals are sometimes.
It's not official but I agree : David Niven played James Bond in a movie (and to be exhaustive, there was Barry Nelson in an american TV film in 1954).
What exactly was it about the fourth film that made people dislike it so much? CGI Gophers? Old Indy? Nuking the fridge? Shia LaBeouf? CGI Monkeys? Aliens? Lack of nostalgia for those who grew up with the original trilogy? Or all of the above?
Really, when was the Ben Affleck movie with him playing Batman released? If it hasn't been released yet, is it accurate to say he has played him in a movie?
Also, you should add David Niven and Woody Allen to the actors that have played James Bond - both were in the 1967 Casino Royale as James Bond and Jimmy Bond.
The first movie was great, the second and third ones... not so much. Jurassic World was good, but doesn't even come close to the original. That's just my opinion, though.
and now... 20 years later... the special FX aren't so WOW! anymore. That was at least 80% of the reason you'd want to see it when it was first released. Though it's still a smart little sci-fi suspense/thriller in its own right.
Add me to the chorus: the original Jurassic Park was awesome. The second was pretty good. Everything after that is worthless. Jurassic World had one truly odious exchange in which a character tries to make some edgy meta-commentary about how everything now is branded and rebooted and only done as a bald cash grab, as if that somehow excuses what the makers of Jurassic World were doing. If you're going to shamelessly peddle garbage to maximize profits, at least own what you're doing.
@kalbahamut - Even if the special effects aren't as amazing now as they were then, you've got to admit that they still hold up pretty well for a 25-year-old movie.
I let myself get tricked on the Baldwins. After I got Alec, Steven, and William, I thought they were alphabetical. Should have noticed that none of the others in this quiz are!
Because the highest-grossing of its films -- Return of the King -- is currently 33rd domestically (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/domestic.htm) and 16th worldwide (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/).
And now Minions 2 which I've been told not to see with the grandkids because I have a seizure disorder. Somebody should think about these things ahead of time. At least they are now giving warnings - some TV shows are just as bad with the brightly flashing lights, and I have no advance warning for those.
It's just because parents need something to do with their kids. There's no point in comparing box office returns for Minions and In Bruges because people go see them for totally different reasons. Most of the box office receipts from Minions come from people who aren't expecting a good movie. They're expecting 90 minutes in which they don't need to wrangle their children every 30 seconds.
As of right now, Avengers: Endgame is the second highest grossing film (and may be first in the near future), and Incredibles 2 is the number 2 animated.
Have you not seen any of these movies? The first three are very good. And they all feature real back drops and actors, though they also use CG extensively.
Avengers passed Avatar? Aw. I didn't even like Avatar, and for some reason, that makes me sad. Maybe it's because Avatar was at least its own movie, whereas Endgame's receipts are so high because it's the last chapter in the MCU (or at least this version of the MCU? I get confused). I've heard Endgame is really good, but I just haven't taken to the Marvel movies, and now I'm so far behind that I can't fathom ever catching up. It's also pretty incredible that with all the inflation, superhero franchises, reboots, and everything else going on in the past 20 years, Titanic has held on at #3. It's mind-blowing that a tragic love story earned more, without inflation, than the first major Star Wars movie in 12 years.
My friend who has never watched a single Marvel movie before and didn't see any reason why he would be interested in comic book movies watched Endgame and thought it was great. He asked me for a "best of" list of MCU movies he could watch to catch up. He asked for 5 but I gave him 7. These were the top 5 though, IMO, both in terms of individual quality and how much they add to the story leading in to Endgame: (in viewing order)
1. The Avengers
2. Guardians of the Galaxy
3. Captain America: Civil War
4. Thor: Ragnarok
5. Avengers: Infinity War
And then of course Endgame if you hadn't seen that already.
If you wanted to watch all 7 I recommended I also told him to watch the first Iron Man, which would come before everything else, and Captain America: The Winter Soldier, which comes between the first Avengers and Guardians of the Galaxy.
I'm also amazed The Cameron held the #1 and #2 spots for so long, but IMO it was richly deserved.
and if any movie deserved to take the top spot from them both Endgame would. You say it's not "it's own thing"... but I think in a way it is more it's own thing than Avatar or Titanic. We have never seen anything even remotely like it in all of Hollywood's history. A franchise of franchises, 11 years and 22 films in the making of so many different characters and worlds all leading toward this one climactic event. Titanic and Avatar were both epic, transportative films, but Infinity War and Endgame were a cinematic experience like no other. It's hard to believe they managed to pull it off when you think about it. Look at all the other studios that have tried to copy Marvel's formula and failed. Every one of them.
Doesn't warrant adding - as the existing answers are leagues ahead in the fame stakes - but on behalf of those who fondly remember "Gregory's Girl" .... Dee Hepburn.
Anyway thanks for the reference, made my day :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_film_studio#Current
Also, you should add David Niven and Woody Allen to the actors that have played James Bond - both were in the 1967 Casino Royale as James Bond and Jimmy Bond.
1). Jurassic Park (best one by far)
2). The Lost World: Jurassic Park (still has problems but also some pretty great moments as well)
3). Jurassic World (also has some good moments but I actually dislike this movie now)
4). Jurassic Park III (not good)
5). Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (terrible).
That is if you use domestic, not adjusted for inflation.
1. The Avengers
2. Guardians of the Galaxy
3. Captain America: Civil War
4. Thor: Ragnarok
5. Avengers: Infinity War
And then of course Endgame if you hadn't seen that already.
If you wanted to watch all 7 I recommended I also told him to watch the first Iron Man, which would come before everything else, and Captain America: The Winter Soldier, which comes between the first Avengers and Guardians of the Galaxy.
I'm also amazed The Cameron held the #1 and #2 spots for so long, but IMO it was richly deserved.