FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM

LOG IN Forgot Login? Register General Discussion • Trading Post • Non-Film Score Discussion  Profile • Preferences • Community Rules • Help/Contact • Search Board Search Terms:  Search Within:  topics posts since 2019 2018 posts 2017 posts 2016 posts 2015 posts 2014 posts 2013 posts 2012 posts 2011 posts 2010 posts 2009 posts 2008 posts 2007 posts 2006 posts 2005 posts 2004 posts 2003 posts 2002 posts 2001 posts 2000 posts users  search tips  You must log in or register to post.   Go to page:  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22      General Discussion: GODZILLA. WHAT DO YOU THINK?    FIRST   PRIOR   14 15 16 17 18    NEXT   LAST   Last Post   Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 10:35 AM     By:   Octoberman   (Member) I always find the phenomenon of Confirmation Bias VERY fascinating, from a psychological point of view. Generally it's benign and usually leads to good discourse, but so often it gets taken to such ridiculous extremes that all perspective just goes out the window.    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 11:08 AM     By:   Solium   (Member) If movie audiences need to take their cues on how to think or feel about a movie from the opinions of others, rather than form their own, then they are basically sheep. Sorry for going meta for a second. (Baa-aaa. ) I wasn't taking my cues from what others think. I was stating the percentage of approval/disapproval on RT. If 80 or 90 percent liked the film I would say it was very well received. Less not so much.    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 11:09 AM     By:   Solium   (Member) Neither source is particularly authoritative--it's just a bunch of opinions. That was my point. So your opinion that Godzilla is a hit is just that. An opinion, and not a fact.    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 11:22 AM     By:   Khan   (Member) The point. You have missed it. Repeatedly.    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 11:26 AM     By:   Solium   (Member) The point. You have missed it. Repeatedly. I know you think your one sentence responses are clever, but their not. Care to make a challenging argument on anything?    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 11:36 AM     By:   Khan   (Member) The point. You have missed it. Repeatedly. I know you think your one sentence responses are clever, but their not. Care to make a challenging argument on anything? Not particularly, no, because it's clear you aren't interested in having a worthwhile discussion without resorting to utterly bizarre, wacky statements.    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 11:43 AM     By:   Ado   (Member) You guys really need to read this to understand how complex the finance system is, and how something enormously successful at the box office can still end in the red. http://www.deadline.com/2010/07/studio-shame-even-harry-potter-pic-loses-money-because-of-warner-bros-phony-baloney-accounting/ Even based on conservative math though, and without knowing the true extravagant cost of marketing involved here this picture might be barely profitable around the 400 million mark. But when you think about it, having to get $400,000,001 million of box office to make $1 is pretty bizarre. Any ordinary businessman would say this is the stupidest business plan in the world.    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 11:45 AM     By:   Solium   (Member) The point. You have missed it. Repeatedly. I know you think your one sentence responses are clever, but their not. Care to make a challenging argument on anything? Not particularly, no, because it's clear you aren't interested in having a worthwhile discussion without resorting to utterly bizarre, wacky statements. And exactly the response I expected from you.    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 11:55 AM     By:   drop_forge   (Member) Neither source is particularly authoritative--it's just a bunch of opinions. That was my point. So your opinion that Godzilla is a hit is just that. An opinion, and not a fact. Except when you refer back to my post and see that I was holding up IMDb as another wellspring of user feedback, one which you can acknowledge or dismiss at will. All in good fun, man.    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 11:59 AM     By:   drop_forge   (Member) I always find the phenomenon of Confirmation Bias VERY fascinating, from a psychological point of view. Generally it's benign and usually leads to good discourse, but so often it gets taken to such ridiculous extremes that all perspective just goes out the window.    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 1:17 PM     By:   Octoberman   (Member) I wasn't taking my cues from what others think. I was stating the percentage of approval/disapproval on RT. If 80 or 90 percent liked the film I would say it was very well received. Less not so much. Sol, please don't misunderstand me. My comment was directed at those who bring up quote after quote of what anonymous "others" have said to support their own opinions. As I see it, most of your comments were simply rebuttals to those who feel they need to use such validation. A balancing point of view, so to speak.    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 1:19 PM     By:   Octoberman   (Member) You guys really need to read this to understand how complex the finance system is, and how something enormously successful at the box office can still end in the red. http://www.deadline.com/2010/07/studio-shame-even-harry-potter-pic-loses-money-because-of-warner-bros-phony-baloney-accounting/ Even based on conservative math though, and without knowing the true extravagant cost of marketing involved here this picture might be barely profitable around the 400 million mark. But when you think about it, having to get $400,000,001 million of box office to make $1 is pretty bizarre. Any ordinary businessman would say this is the stupidest business plan in the world. Hey you! Stop making sense! Sum folks 'round heer won' like it!!    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 1:42 PM     By:   Ado   (Member) Even based on conservative math though, and without knowing the true extravagant cost of marketing involved here this picture might be barely profitable around the 400 million mark. But when you think about it, having to get $400,000,001 million of box office to make $1 is pretty bizarre. Any ordinary businessman would say this is the stupidest business plan in the world. Hey you! Stop making sense! Sum folks 'round heer won' like it!! yeah October, I mean, more power to ya if you like this movie, or some other movie like this. But the business and money of this stuff has gotten preposterous.    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 1:59 PM     By:   drop_forge   (Member) Sol, please don't misunderstand me. My comment was directed at those who bring up quote after quote of what anonymous "others" have said to support their own opinions. As I see it, most of your comments were simply rebuttals to those who feel they need to use such validation. A balancing point of view, so to speak. Rebuttals should be expected. I merely posted current box office stats because he keeps declaring the film as some kind of misfire. As you saw, he "revised" his, uh, prediction (which is still an underestimation). In other words, Octoberman, stop buttering his bread. I'm sure he's more than capable of doing it himself.    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 2:02 PM     By:   Ado   (Member) Drop-Forge, Dude take it easy man. It is not a big misfire. But the real story these days is "monster box office hit" might mean, "barely makes a dime".    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 2:03 PM     By:   drop_forge   (Member) You guys really need to read this to understand how complex the finance system is, and how something enormously successful at the box office can still end in the red. http://www.deadline.com/2010/07/studio-shame-even-harry-potter-pic-loses-money-because-of-warner-bros-phony-baloney-accounting/ Even based on conservative math though, and without knowing the true extravagant cost of marketing involved here this picture might be barely profitable around the 400 million mark. But when you think about it, having to get $400,000,001 million of box office to make $1 is pretty bizarre. Any ordinary businessman would say this is the stupidest business plan in the world. All of that is irrelevant. Godzilla 2 is happening.    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 2:04 PM     By:   drop_forge   (Member) Drop-Forge, Dude take it easy man. It is not a big misfire. But the real story these days is "monster box office hit" might mean, "barely makes a dime". LOL! Dude, I'm starting to think I'm the only guy in this thread who's taking it easy. Like I told Sol, it's all in good fun. Scroll up.    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 2:05 PM     By:   Octoberman   (Member) In other words, Octoberman, stop buttering his bread. I'm sure he's more than capable of doing it himself. Heh-heh. Don't actually need your advice or permission for what to post, thanks.    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 2:11 PM     By:   Ado   (Member) Drop-Forge, Dude take it easy man. It is not a big misfire. But the real story these days is "monster box office hit" might mean, "barely makes a dime". LOL! Dude, I'm starting to think I'm the only guy in this thread who's taking it easy. Like I told Sol, it's all in good fun. Scroll up. Oh, yeah, Hollywood makes sequels, often against their own best interests, because Hollywood is about one thing since the past 20 years, and increasing moreso - playing it safe. These franchise properties like this, Star Wars, Star Trek, DC and Marvel are about making a safe product line with a built in audience, like Kellogg makes a line of cereals, and Little Debbie makes a variety of cupcakes and cookies. It is interesting to think this, (although hard to think it too) but wouldn't Star Wars be a more outstanding movie without all that came after?    Posted:   Jun 2, 2014 - 2:21 PM     By:   drop_forge   (Member) Oh, yeah, Hollywood makes sequels, often against their own best interests, because Hollywood is about one thing since the past 20 years, and increasing moreso - playing it safe. These franchise properties like this, Star Wars, Star Trek, DC and Marvel are about making a safe product line with a built in audience, like Kellogg makes a line of cereals, and Little Debbie makes a variety of cupcakes and cookies. I hear you, but they may not necessarily be taking the road well-travelled with G2-G3. The '98 film easily grossed enough that they could have cobbled together a sequel. They were discouraged by the critical backlash. The way things are, it seems like the thing to do. Even if G2/3 bomb, if Toho resumes making movies afterward, it's a win-win. If Gareth Edwards really does plan to revisit/reinvent Monster Island, though...yee-haw!     General Discussion: GODZILLA. WHAT DO YOU THINK?    << < 14 15 16 17 18  > >>  Go to page:  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22   First Post    General Discussion • Trading Post • Non-Film Score Discussion  Profile • Preferences • Community Rules • Help/Contact • Search Board You must log in or register to post.   Go to page:  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

© 2024 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved. Website maintained and powered by Veraprise and Matrimont.