Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: pcottraux

No, you're missing the loss leader aspect. Munich itself will NEVER make back the money, but Munich will cause Spielberg to do another movie with Universal that will make $200 million easy and more than make up for the money lost on Munich. That's the kind of relationship Universal and Spielberg have, they bankroll his "serious" movies and usually lose money on them, in exchange he does many of his blockbusters with them. They let him do Always and he pays them back with Jurassic Park. It's a friendly arrangement.

But Kong didn't make back the money on domestic grosses, so by the standard definition used in Hollywood it was a failure. I don't want anybody to apologize for anything, except maybe you for refusing to get a simple point. The FACTS are that when a $200 million budget movie only makes $200 million in domestic grosses that movie is a failure, it always has been, and it always will be. What happens after that is immaterial, it FAILED at the box office, and the reason it failed is because they spent too much money making it. You don't spend $200 million making a movie that only makes $200 million back, that's stupid, the point isn't to make "amazing" movies (which frankly Kong wasn't) it's to make PROFITABLE movies, which Kong also wasn't. Jurassic Park was just as humongous a monster epic, and only cost $63 million to make, and turned around and pulled $357 million in domestic gross, if Kong had pulled either half of that it would have been a success, it did neither and therefore was a failure.

Superman Returns was doomed to be a failure from day one and everybody knew it. The problem with SR is that the official budget didn't even count all the writers, producers, directors and even a few stars who had been paid to work on that movie (or what eventually became that movie) over the past 10 years. Half a dozen different writers, including Kevin Smith who has a great story about it, were paid to write for that movie, just as many directors, almost as many producers and a few stars also have gotten checks. The real budget for Superman Returns (at least from what I read somewhere) was in excess of $400 million bucks, basically the reported $270 million (way too high) plus all the people that got paid to not make the movie. The actual release of the movie was basically a desperate prayer that it actually rebirths the franchise and maybe they can make back the money by the third or fourth movie. And yes many many people have been fired for the saga that lead to making Superman Returns, Warner Brothers really screwed the pooch on that one, more than once.


77 posted on 09/03/2006 12:58:17 PM PDT by discostu (you must be joking son, where did you get those shoes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies ]


To: discostu
You just don't give up, do you????

You don't spend $200 million making a movie that only makes $200 million back, that's stupid, the point isn't to make "amazing" movies (which frankly Kong wasn't) it's to make PROFITABLE movies, which Kong also wasn't.

THE MOVIE MADE BACK TONS MORE MONEY THAN IT COST TO MAKE!!!!! Even if it was 200 million to make, I don't care, they don't owe you an apology for making an expensive film. That's my final argument and nothing you say is going to change my mind. It was a SUCCESS. The domestic gross was only part of it. IT MADE FAR MORE THAN 200 MILLION DOLLARS!!!!!

SUCCESS, SUCCESS, SUCCESS, SUCCESS!!!!!!!

I know I'm getting shrill, but you are friggin frustrating to talk about this with. You keep saying the same thing over and over, and I have presented a flawless counter-argument, and then you just say the same thing. All you're saying is "the movie cost 200 million to make!!! Oh my friggin' God!! They should be ashamed, and it only made that much in the domestic gross!!"

But you're wrong. The film made a huge profit for Universal. It did, it did, it did. I'm tired of saying it. The DVD sales were huge. Universal made tons more than the movie cost to make. THAT IS THE BOTTOM LINE.

And despite what you say, I haven't lost the argument. You just won't present a good counter-argument to the DVD sales. You have failed to convince me that Universal lost money on this venture and it was a financial bust. You will never convince me because I'm right.

Case closed. Over. Nada. Zip. That's the end. It's over. People who continue it are morons with squirrell-brains. They have broccoli in their socks.

78 posted on 09/03/2006 1:54:40 PM PDT by pcottraux (It's pronounced "P. Coe-troe.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]

To: discostu
I don't want anybody to apologize for anything, except maybe you for refusing to get a simple point.

I'd rather staple waffles to my face and brand myself with an iron that says "I voted for Kerry" than apologize to you.

79 posted on 09/03/2006 2:39:39 PM PDT by pcottraux (It's pronounced "P. Coe-troe.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson