Posted on 01/22/2006 7:45:36 AM PST by television is just wrong
THE Da Vinci Code is one of the most eagerly anticipated films of the year but its significance to Hollywood may go deeper than mere box office success: Tom Hanks has delighted his studio bosses by accepting a pay cut for his role as the book’s art sleuth hero.
Maybe they ought to stop offending so many people with their politics.
There's a crack in the dam. Next thing you know, it will again be affordable to live in Kaleephornya.
Oh here's a thought
Maybe make decent movies and we might go to see them
95% of the movies put out today are trash and not worth even renting on DVD
Bummer.
12 million dollar homes gonna have to sell for only 10 million.
When the highlight of their season has to do with queer sheepherders (not cowboys) and their issues, they can jolly well starve as far as I'm concerned.
Good progress, but we're not there yet. I want to see something like "Paramount Declares Chapter 11" or "Actors Forced to Sell Mansions" or somesuch. *Then* it'll be time for the block party.
Are We All, Invited? ...each FR Chapter "throws" (the biggest in Wash. D.C.) its own. :D
That may help Hollywierd but not necessarily the theaters. While it would attract more people to theaters, the practice of 'dual release' will still cause many people to buy/rent the movie instead of going to the theater.
We could very well see a decline in theaters nationwide regardless of whether Hollywierd wakes up or not. The old promotional "Coming soon to a theater near you" may have to be changed to "Coming soon to a theater somewhere".
Facing declining cinema audiences, Hollywood is trying to persuade its top actors to set an example by cutting back a lucrative arrangement known as “first dollar”, under which the director, producer and stars receive a share of a film’s box office take regardless of whether the studio has covered its filming costs.In other words, they are reducing an essentially unreasonable deal ("I get my cut before anybody else makes a dime") down a notch or two.
yeah, I have to agree. That is pretty pathetic. I won't go see that movie.
I won't go see a lot of movies today.
It's odd that this is happening about the same time the rash of pro-terrorist/anti-America movies we heard about six months ago started hitting the big screen. Coincidence? NOT!
I could live for a year just on the amount of thier "paycut"
Actually, there are a number of movies I woud just as soon did not come to a theater near me.
Show 'Gone With the Wind', 'Fiddler on the Roof' or re-release other classics, and I'd go. It would only take one screen at the multiplex, and it might improve the gate.
It might help if the actors would simply turn down some parts, too, but maybe their contracts do not allow that.
I can always see 'agenda' material on the alphabet and cable networks, anyway.
You think Mel Gibson is worried? Nope. Quality movies earn BIG bucks.
If that was true, more people would be going to the movies instead of staying away in droves.
If they had to wait for payout on some of those flicks, they'd be back to waiting tables to eat.
Let's see, stars' salaries in the double-digit millions, and on top of that upwards of 40% of the box office take regardless of how well the movie does financially. IMHO that amounts to a death wish on the part of producers as and the financiers as a whole. Whatever got into these people's minds (assuming, of course they had one to begin with)...oops, I know, they jumped on the bandwagon themselves and are included in that 40%. How stupid of me to forget this. Sheeesh!
Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of RATS!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.