Just to be clear on your point, you are giving W a pass because of the possibility of other Blockbuster movies coming out the same weekend? Again, I will refer you to the OP and the 3 movies listed that beat out "W".
Your analogy is pure fail, as "W" has only been out two weeks and nobody has any idea how long they will let is stay in theatres, or how much it will make by the time it leaves theatres. I doubt it will gross anywhere near 300% at the box office over time. But feel free to come back and rub it in my face if it ever does!
Arkaign
Lifer
- Oct 27, 2006
- 20,736
- 1,379
- 126
Corbett, learn something about the movie business, and leave politics aside with this one. We know that you are a conservative and you don't like 'Bush bashing movies'. That's fine. I'm not going to watch 'W' until it's for free on cable or whatever, if then. I've had more than enough of Bush, having lived through three terms of Bush presidencies.
Now that we've thrown politics out the window :
A film with a $25m budget is NOT intended to be a blockbuster. Sometimes they get lucky, notable stuff like 'Juno' and 'My Big Fat Greek Wedding' come to mind as great examples of little movies that unexpectedly ran away with huge grosses. But people don't sit around in rooms green-lighting $25m films expecting to see $250m on the backend. No, they look over things with a fine-toothed comb, and if they project that it will end up with double the production budget, it will be worth going for it.
By any reasonable expectation, 'W' should pull in 50-70m after adding in all the steps along the line, which makes it entirely profitable, worth producing, and simply put : a success. Not a raging out of control awesome success like MBFGW, which went on to make gargantuan box office receipts and even more home video rental and sales treasure, but a fully qualified and undeniable success.
If Stone and the producers thought that 'W' was going to be some monster huge hit, they would have budgeted it at 75m or more. No, they rightfully realized that there wasn't going to be some huge market for this film, so they chose a modest budget, and are on the way towards pocketing somewhere between 25 and 45 million dollars.
If you live in a world where making 100%+ profits, and 25-45m $ is a failure, then you are a first-class idiot, but I don't think you are. I think you're just trying too hard to look at things from a political spin and try to make it look like you're correct.
Is 'W' a box office giant? No.
Is 'W' a box office flop? No.
It just is what it is. Leave it at that.
Now that we've thrown politics out the window :
A film with a $25m budget is NOT intended to be a blockbuster. Sometimes they get lucky, notable stuff like 'Juno' and 'My Big Fat Greek Wedding' come to mind as great examples of little movies that unexpectedly ran away with huge grosses. But people don't sit around in rooms green-lighting $25m films expecting to see $250m on the backend. No, they look over things with a fine-toothed comb, and if they project that it will end up with double the production budget, it will be worth going for it.
By any reasonable expectation, 'W' should pull in 50-70m after adding in all the steps along the line, which makes it entirely profitable, worth producing, and simply put : a success. Not a raging out of control awesome success like MBFGW, which went on to make gargantuan box office receipts and even more home video rental and sales treasure, but a fully qualified and undeniable success.
If Stone and the producers thought that 'W' was going to be some monster huge hit, they would have budgeted it at 75m or more. No, they rightfully realized that there wasn't going to be some huge market for this film, so they chose a modest budget, and are on the way towards pocketing somewhere between 25 and 45 million dollars.
If you live in a world where making 100%+ profits, and 25-45m $ is a failure, then you are a first-class idiot, but I don't think you are. I think you're just trying too hard to look at things from a political spin and try to make it look like you're correct.
Is 'W' a box office giant? No.
Is 'W' a box office flop? No.
It just is what it is. Leave it at that.
Arkaign
Lifer
- Oct 27, 2006
- 20,736
- 1,379
- 126
*sigh*
It's not going to lose money.
It's not propaganda. Bush isn't running for re-election, and I'm not aware of any major message contained within beyond what pretty much everyone already knows regardless of political party : Bush is an affable but somewhat stupid man.
This thread is a long road of sighs. Very few have actually seen the movie.
It's populated with some repugs stamping their feet in frustration since their party is going down. Don't expect any logic.
You sure seem embarassed to dodge that one.. Haha... some people here are so pathetic.
Yeah, W is such a huge failure that it'll make a few million.
Didn't Fahrenheit 9/11 make well over 100 million?
Yeah, all these "failures"...
When will Hollywood "learn"...
Links?
And yeah, I do find it funny that you call people since you are one of P&N's finest at running away from arguments that go against you and cherry picking replies.[/quote]
I dont run from anything. I'm replying to your troll posts as much as I can!
Your premise has failed you. You see, the movie IS a political movie. Like I said, the movie debuted 4th with 3 awful movies above it. It went to 7th the next week. It doesnt matter if it turns a profit eventually, it failed at the box office like i said in my OP.
Again, fail at reading the OP. I said it failed at the box office. It did. I'm sure it will turn a profit over time, but it still doesnt excuse its abysmal turnout in the theaters for all the press it was getting.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter