(Vanity) Brokeback Mountain, a Curious Attendance Story

Michael Medved Radio | 1-6-06 | Vanity

[Balding_Eagle]

Did anyone else hear this on the Michael Medved talk radio today?

A man called in, near the end of the hour. He said he had been taken his kids to the theater, and the kids movie they were waiting to see had a very long line. Brokeback Mountain was also showing at that theater. He said he sat near the ticket booth for 35 minutes, as his kids waited in line to buy tickets for their movie.

During that 35 minutes he never heard one person buy a ticket for Brokeback Mountain. However, during that 35 minutes, the “SOLD OUT” sign came on for Brokeback. Out of curiosity, he went in to the Brokeback theater, and only saw 4 people in there. The theater manager refused to comment when the man questioned him.

Is this how all those theaters are getting such high attendance for Brokeback? Imaginary theater goers?

Perhaps other theater goers can investigate for themselves this weekend.

I can only vouch for the fact that this man called in a related the story as I presented it here, not if it’s true. Callers can make up stories too. It peaked my interest though.

[purplepain]

No matter his motive he would be putting his job in jeopardy...Hollywood doesn't own theaters.

Either motive is just as valid as the other. As a matter of fact, if this story is even true, and I doubt that it is because it makes little sense, the idea that some redneck put up a sign in order to stop people from seeing the big evil gay movie is more reasonable than some big conspiracy involving the production company of the movie and Hollywood and the owner of this particular theater getting together to make fake numbers.

Why would they do it THAT way anyway? Makes no sense...they could just fudge the numbers. And as pointed out, this isn't happening because the numbers for this movie aren't that high.

This movie isn't propaganda, it's just a movie, plain and simple. I haven't seen it yet. My husband and I are going to go see it this weekend...so I'll hold my judgment of the movie 'til then...unlike many of you here.

[cdesign_proponentist]

You say that a theater worker putting his job on the line just to stop one showing of Brokeback is as valid an assumption as this "hollywood conspiracy" idea?

Welcome to FR.

You'll need to exercise more mental horsepower and discernment if you want to keep up with the rest of us.

Your only response is a rhetorical question and an insult? You're goin to have to do better than that.

The cinema employee would be risking his job either way. His motives, whether to supress sales or exaggerate them, are completely irrelevant in this regard.

But the idea that Hollywood would conspire with cinema managers to put up Sold Out signs, forgoing possible sales, so that they can give some sort of word-of-mouth impression that sales are high, rather than simply cooking the numbers, which would be a hundred times easer and a thousand times more effective, is beyond ridiculous.

Personally, I believe the story is false. I think that wild stories like this should be met with a bit more skepticism than what has been displayed here.

[Balding_Eagle]

Not an insult if it's true.

The idea that a lowly ticket seller would take it upon himself to turn on the 'sold out' sign is ridiculous. It seemed so obvious to me that I thought everyone would grasp that at once.

Sorry, I'll slow down next time.

After re-reading your reply, I see I need to slow down for this response too.

The insinuation in the original story, as told on air, was that the Theater Manager, or higher, made the call to turn on the sign. I think nearly everyone realized that.

Readers of this thread, if there are any still left who are still interested in a nothing movie, will find it interesting that two brand new FR members, who have posted only to this thread, seemed to miss that salient point. Surely YOU two don’t have an agenda, do you?

Re the made up part, I’m sorry you’re too busy to read the whole short story.

It has just nominated for 5 Oscars. Or some such number. That's for a controversial movie that few have seen, and lends credence to the idea that there has been manipulation of attendance numbers to further an agenda.

Welcome to FR. Watch out for the ZOT.

[purplepain]

Since when does attendance of a movie have anything at all to do with the Oscars?

[cdesign_proponentist]

Not an insult if it's true.

And either way, it's not an argument.

The idea that a lowly ticket seller would take it upon himself to turn on the 'sold out' sign is ridiculous.

Yes it is.

Even more ridiculous is the idea that a Hollywood higher-up would call a lowly ticket office and convince them to forgo possible sales by putting up a Sold Out sign, which could have no possible beneficial effect other than to create some sort of impression upon the relatively small collection of people who witnessed it that the movie is more successful than it actually is.

Both ideas are so ridiculous that I'm inclined to believe that the story is just plain untrue. The storyteller is either lying or mistaken.

It seemed so obvious to me that I thought everyone would grasp that at once.

That your conclusion was obvious to you is not at all persuasive.

Sorry, I'll slow down next time.

After re-reading your reply, I see I need to slow down for this response too.

I'm just wondering at this point if you're ever going to get around to posting something that resembles an actual argument, rather than the sort of insults and hand-waving that I've seen from you so far.

The insinuation in the original story, as told on air, was that the Theater Manager, or higher, made the call to turn on the sign. I think nearly everyone realized that.

As did I. I know what the original story was insinuating but I also realize that the bare facts of the story don't necessarily warrant that insinuation. For some reason you seem to think that I'm bound to draw a conclusion that is in agreement with the original caller, although I don't know why.

Readers of this thread, if there are any still left who are still interested in a nothing movie, will find it interesting that two brand new FR members, who have posted only to this thread, seemed to miss that salient point. Surely YOU two don’t have an agenda, do you?

Purple Pain is my wife. She stumbled upon this message board yesterday, and today she told me about this debate. I thought it was interesting, so I joined. Are you insinuating that I am a shill for the film industry?

Re the made up part, I’m sorry you’re too busy to read the whole short story.

I'm afraid I have no idea what you're referring to when you say "made up" part. I read the OP, though.

It has just nominated for 5 Oscars. Or some such number. That's for a controversial movie that few have seen, and lends credence to the idea that there has been manipulation of attendance numbers to further an agenda.

Attendence numbers have nothing to do with Oscar nominations, and it's not uncommon for the Academy to nominate and praise movies that mainstream folks don't like. I personally didn't like American Beauty. I thought it made light of a lot of controversial topics, and I feel like the Academy gave it the Best Picture award in part because they wanted to push the proverbial envelope.

Welcome to FR. Watch out for the ZOT.

Thanks. I don't know what the ZOT is, though.

[Balding_Eagle]

Since when does attendance of a movie have anything at all to do with the Oscars?

I have no idea if attendance has anything to do with Oscars. I've never followed them.

[Balding_Eagle]

'Made up part"

In the original post I addressed the distinct possibility that the caller just made up the whole story.

He may have been someone who had an agenda to discredit Brokeback.

Most of the questions you've raised have been covered upthread.

I can't speak for the others on these threads, but if you browse FR you'll find a common theme in regard to Hollywood. We don't trust them to have the good of the country in mind as they produce and promote their movies. There is evidence available (I don't have a link handy, but it's there) that they don't even have the profit motive in mind as they produce movies.

What's left? Why produce movies then? Most of us here would say it's because they want to promote some social agenda. Brokeback would be circumstantial evidence of that. So would The China Syndrome, which set back nuclear energy 30+ years in this country. There are hundreds of other examples, including the President and Vice-Presidents trip to Hollywood immediately following 9-11 to ask for their help in making movies supporting the USA's effort in WWIV. The only resulting movies are those which arguably support our enemies.

We've accepted the strength of Hollywood to influence our country, and are working to make a change, even if it takes 30 years, as it has with SCOTUS. Part of that effort is to alert common people, like most of us here at FR, to questionable activity. This thread was a contribution to that effort.

[purplepain]

Then why make the comment?

"It has just nominated for 5 Oscars. Or some such number. That's for a controversial movie that few have seen, and lends credence to the idea that there has been manipulation of attendance numbers to further an agenda."

You are the one who made it seem that movie attendance and the number of Oscar nods are linked...If you don't know how it works then why make that comment?

[Balding_Eagle]

Becasue i thought it did factor in.

[purplepain]

So, how can I trust anything you say? You have just admitted to saying something boldly and confidently with out knowing a damn thing about it. I'm much too skeptical for that myself but you can confuse a lot of people by behaving that way.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Why would anyone see a movie when they can write a review instead?

[Balding_Eagle]

So, how can I trust anything you say?

LOL! Wrong focus on your part.

Just because attendance doesn't factor in to the Oscars doesn't mean that there isn't an agenda behind the Oscar nominations. Or that there isn't an agenda at work with the "Sold Out" sign.

[purplepain]

I am just wondering why you'd make such a bold claim when you didn't know what you were talking about. I am going to be seriously suspicious of everything you say now because of that. Why would there be an agenda behind the oscar nods? Most conservatives don't pay attention to the oscars...so what exactly would the 'agenda' be? And have you seen the movie? For all you know it's a GREAT movie...

Ok...besides all that...

What is it about this movie? Why do you assume there is an agenda? It's just a movie. That's all. Why are you assuming that it is more than just that.

I've actually been wondering this for a few days, that is why I stumbled onto this site.

I understand that you aren't fond of homosexuality. I understand that you don't like hollywood, but why do you believe this particular movie has some motive other than, it was a short story that was well recieved and someone thought it'd make a good movie?

Some people may like it, some people may not...but I don't get why everyone is jumping on THIS movie...Help me, I really really really don't get it. And I'd love to understand.

[Balding_Eagle]

Suspicious of me and what I post? No problem, there are tens of thousands of others here, filter and question everything we all say.

You are asking questions that could be described as 'flavor of life' questions. The short answer and best answer I think is to explore other threads here at FR and see the flavor.

There's a whole lot more to life than a movie. As you can see by how quickly this thread died, most of us think so.

Good luck.

[purplepain]

Will you just answer my questions please? Your fancy foot work is duely noted.

I don't really know a damn thing about this place. I typed in "Michael Medved Brokeback Mountain" into google and I ended up here...among clones of my father who worships talk radio (my eyes are rolling incase you can't sense it)...

Just answer my questions, get real please.

You insulted me, you insulted my husband. My questions were honest to goodness plain questions. I know very well that people tend to project thier own behaviors onto other people but I have no other motive than to have you answer the qusetions...they are not "flavor or life" questions...JUST QUESTIONS...so JUST ANSWER THEM...it's easy. :)

I know the "flavor" of this place, you ALL say the same things the other rightwingers in my life say, word for word, more or less just repeating the nonsense you hear from those on daytime talk radio.

So suprise me be just being direct and answer my questions...I beg you.

[Balding_Eagle]

I know the "flavor" of this place, you ALL say the same things the other rightwingers in my life say, word for word, more or less just repeating the nonsense you hear from those on daytime talk radio.

So suprise me be just being direct and answer my questions...I beg you.

Two points in response:

My answers would strike you as ' just repeating the nonsense you hear from those on daytime talk radio'.

The bigger misconception you have is that we are just repeating what talk radio, Fox News, and all those others are spouting.

You've got it backwards. it is THEY who are feeding back to us things we've believed in our whole lives. When I first heard Rush, nearly 15? years ago, I was riveted. For the very first time in my life, I was hearing commentary that reflected what I believed my whole life. The moment I realized he was not just making up a speech to give on air, but that he really believed what he was saying, I was hooked. As were millions of others.

I've lived my life as a conservative since I was a kid, and to hear my beliefs being echoed was, and still is, very satisfying.

Roll your eyes, even laugh, I can take it.

Not only that, I have tremendous faith the the majority of the American voters see things my way. Test this out for yourself. I'll wager you have a good idea what answers the 'reighwingers' would give to your questions. Post them here, and I'll bet they align closely with what I would answer. I'll read them and let you know.