The Hot Blog

Oh come on. You have to put the money down. That's how it works. All of this is a fucking gamble. You, Mr. "I KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT THE BIZ" had Iron-Man doing jack and shit. Right now it's like at 310. So it's all a crap-shoot.

No one should spend over their heads, but these are corporations trying to give themselves a tent pole in a couple of years. So the risk -- while ridiculous and costly -- is worth it in terms of the reward.

You have to spend it to make it Heat. You can hate the geeks all you want, but they still made 300 happen. They still had a hand in making Iron-Man happen. They will also have you shitting your pants in less than two weeks, when THE BAT HAPPEN. So stop crusading.

How is spending so much money on The Incredible Hulk appreciably more foolish than spending so much on Speed Racer? Sorry, David, but I have to agree with IO on this, to this extent: If you set out to make a tentpole picture, then you goddamn well better be prepared to pay for a tentpole picture. Of course, you can make the counter-argument that maybe studios should make more non-tentpole pictures -- I'm sure Universal is very happy with its return on, ahem, 21 -- but that's another conversation.

Joe: why would Uni be happy with Sony's return on 21?

Whoops! William, you caught my error. It was indeed Columbia -- which I am sure is very, very happy.

The Fourth of July killed Friday's numbers. Based on what movies did in 2003 when the holiday last fell on a Friday, WANTED should be able to do $20 million for the weekend. That puts its second weekend drop at 60%, while while not being great, isn't disastrous. It's domestic gross will be close to $90 million after its second weekend, and it can still do another $35-45 million pretty easily.

I'm pretty sure "movie geeks" were not the audience for "8 Mile" or "2 Fast 2 Furious." The "geek" crowd generally avoids anything "hip-hop" or "urban." Those movies ought to have come with an old-school poison "skull and crossbones" label as far as most AICN/comic-book reader types are concerned.

I frequent a lot of "geek" and "niche" boards, and oftentimes the geek community is openly (and uncomfortably) hostile to such fare.

2 Fast and 8 Mile would seem to be marketed at the multiculti, hip-hop aware youth set. Your point stands that it's still niche, it's still young and it's still male... but the Hulk "geek" crowd is NOT the same as the B-boy street racer crowd.

Remember, Wanted was to open in late March. Universal was at least wise enough to move the release to something that would net them $40+ million. I wouldn't be surprised if the advertising budget was incredibly low due to, well, The Incredible Hulk.

That's a good point, LexG, especially about the uncomfortable hostility, but I'd add that while the Hulk "geek" crowd may not be the same as the b-boy street racer crowd, the b-boy street racer crowd *will* go for Hulk. That is to say that superhero movies hit both of those categories, which accounts -- I think -- for some of the similarities in gross patterns. Maybe it's just 'cause I live in NYC and see more stereotypically "urban" dudes overall, but when I go into comic book shops or comics movies here, I see a lotta dudes that one might (stereotypically) expect to see in line at 2 Fast 2 Furious. Which is cool! I don't necessarily disagree with you that the hardcore "geek" crowd can be hostile towards more urban stuff -- maybe it's just that the hardcore geek crowd on its own is not enough for $100 mil+ -- you need some broader young-male demos in there.

Anyway, I have to say, I'm a little relieved to see Wanted dropping so hard -- even though it's probably more about the crowd going first weekend than spreading bad word of mouth. I don't generally have a big taste overlap with DP, but I absolutely share his consternation over Wanted getting a pass from a lot of critics while Speed Racer (which until Wall-E was my favorite big movie of the summer) and Hancock (which was flawed, but certainly interesting and enjoyable) got beat up. I can party with a good ridiculous over-the-top cartoon of an action movie -- thumbs up for Crank, thumbs up for Shoot 'Em Up -- but Wanted is just stupid and weirdly smug crapola. Yet I went to a Times Square theater twice this holiday weekend, and both times the only movie selling out well ahead of time seemed to be Wanted. I'm guessing this is because Hancock got placed in a lot of the biggest rooms, giving Wanted a bunch of smaller rooms that sell out quickly, but I still had a moment of "holy jesus, are people actually telling their friends they have to see this crap?!" -- but if it's just another action movie with a big opening and a typically large drop-off, I can deal.

Lex - maybe for 8 Mile, but AICN launched the good buzz for the first Fast & Furious. Diesel was only a name to the geeks at that point. The test screenings went apeshit, which AICN put over huge.

Joe - you can't directly compare Speed Racer to Inc. Hulk because Hulk already had a proven track record with Ang's film. Production 101 should have said to keep the costs below 125Mil. Instead they jumped passed the first's 135 to 150 - for a sequel/relaunch no one was asking for. You could argue Speed versus Scooby.

...and Speed died because it's about 10-15 years too late. Though it debuted at roughly the same time as most popular superheroes 40 years ago, comics and other media kept superhero properties relevant. Racer is like Lost In Space; popular with peak-age Boomers and no one else. So if it's a 40 year old show, it's core audience is around 50, meaning those with kids are going to range in age between 10-25 years. Once you break 14, kids see what they want with their friends. So, the majority of adults who know Speed from their childhood had no compunction to go see a family movie, and the teens/college age have very little recognition of it.

A future example of this will be if WB continues developing Jonny Quest. I love that cartoon, but no one under thirty has a real idea what it is. So it goes back to Dave's original point; if you can't make 'em for around 100Mil, then don't.

IO - geeks did not make 300, the movie. They did not make IM. If that was true, Inc. Hulk would have a much bigger number. You can't accept credit for one and disown the other. A very simple model; Starting with Blade, ending with Wanted, you have 30 comic book/graphic novel adaptations, averaging out to a 51Mil opening weekend. From 51, you can find your geek percentage, roughly 17Mil.

Poland, you think Wanted will do less than $126m. How? Which similar movie trajectory are you using? Explain it to us like I'm a two year old?

Martin S: WB seems to have these concerns in mind. The new Jonny Quest draft is set in the present and borrows from the "new adventure" cartoon that came out a decade ago. It's very Spy Kids meets National Treasure, to go the lazy logline route...

No one knew who Iron Man was and that didn't matter. The average moviegoer who made Ghost Rider a hit didn't know who he was, but everyone knows the Hulk, and that didn't go over so well. Speed Racer bombed because it I imagine looked silly and cheesy and no one wanted to see it.

Name recognition by itself isn't going to get anyone into a theater, the movie has to at least look all right.

IO - Poland's not going to admit he was wrong on Iron Man...and he won't admit he's wrong on TDK, which as of last week was outperforming Spider-man 3 in presales by 8 times (if fandango is any barometer that is). The signs are beginning to point towards TDK being the one to beat this summer.

Oh Martin, you really need to watch the VENTURE BROTHERS... GO TEAM VENTURE!

"A future example of this will be if WB continues developing Jonny Quest. I love that cartoon, but no one under thirty has a real idea what it is."

Bullshit. It's called the VENTURE BROTHERS. The VENTURE BROTHERS have pretty much been spoofying Johnny Quest for close to five years, and they even have their own version "ACTION JOHNNY" on their show. People under 30 know who Johnny Quest is, but the little kids are the one who will need a better sell or it's a Speed Racer situation all over again.

"So it goes back to Dave's original point; if you can't make 'em for around 100Mil, then don't.

IO - geeks did not make 300,"

You keep shovelling that bull, and someone might believe. I am not that guy because it did not happen that way. The online marketing geared towards certain sites is what pushed it over the top. Warners even admitted as much. So you are... let Mr. Luthor tell you.

"the movie. They did not make IM."

BULLSHIT. Come on, man. The geeks were the ones hyping this movie for well over a year. The geeks were the ones who got the word out. Let's move on to your next point.

"If that was true, Inc. Hulk would have a much bigger number."

Uh no. If you were actually in the age group. You would know that the geeks were very hesistant about The Incredible Hulk. These are geeks. You know unless the flick is a STAR WARS FILM. They are very hesistant to support anything again. If they felt burnt the first time. This is how it works. If I know how it works, why exactly do you not know how it works?

"You can't accept credit for one and disown the other. A very simple model; Starting with Blade, ending with Wanted, you have 30 comic book/graphic novel adaptations, averaging out to a 51Mil opening weekend. From 51, you can find your geek percentage, roughly 17Mil."

Get the fuck out of here with that funky analogy. Those 30 adaptations are all very different films. Did you include Ghost World, Road to Perdition, and American Splendor?

Seriously, you lack the ability to get the point because you assume one is like the other. When trends seem to dictate that the audience and the geeks clearly make a difference between each and every comic book adaptation ever.

Made. Let me through a MADE out there.

You would have to admit IO, that if geeks could turn movies into hits, that Shawn of the Dead would have been huge, right? Or what about Snakes on a Plane? Or Equilibrium?

Snakes on the Plane was a flash in the pan that made everyone excited in the Winter, and lacking caring in the Summer. The other two films had limited release patterns, but made enough to earn both directors more commercial chances. One succeeded with his. While the other made Ultraviolet.

So geeks cannot overcome the retarded limited release pattern, but can help a red demon get another shot at the big time. Check it out this Friday. HBII!

JBM - Thanks. I'm guessing you mean the "cyber-insect" Quest. IIRC, the difference is a girl is in the mix.

Which brings me to IO...

The Venture Brothers

Adult Swim averages 1.5 Mil viewers, total, per week. So WB is going to bankroll a 40 year-old cartoon based on maybe 500K people knowing another cartoon that makes fun of it. Your logic could be served at Aunt Annie's with a side of cheese dip.

IO - Get the fuck out of here with that funky analogy. Those 30 adaptations are all very different films. Did you include Ghost World, Road to Perdition, and American Splendor?

No, no and no - but thanks for making my point; you want to cherry-pick what is and is not fanboy/geek. How does a studio marketing department decide "fanboy project", when the property was born within the geek world to begin with? Why are they buying the damn option if not for its genre qualities?

The funny thing is that 300 has more in common with Perdition than it does Spider-Man. Historical, alternative-press publishings that are non-superhero. But you'll take 300. What about From Hell? It falls into the same category, but with Alan Moore to boot. If you discount it, out goes Constantine and Vendetta. Then again, you're the supposed comic-lover who just disowned Harvey Pekar.

The online marketing geared towards certain sites is what pushed it over the top. Warners even admitted as much.

Yeah. They accredited it to viral on MySpace, not geek sites.

BULLSHIT. Come on, man. The geeks were the ones hyping this movie for well over a year. The geeks were the ones who got the word out. Let's move on to your next point.

Got the word out? IO, if that was remotely accurate, then why did they waste the millions on a Superbowl ad buy?

They are very hesistant to support anything again. If they felt burnt the first time. This is how it works.

Where is the hesitancy when Inc. Hulk, Ghost Rider, Batman Begins, Superman Returns, X-Men, Wanted, FF, FF2, Daredevil and Vendetta all did similar numbers? Hell, 300 only did several million more, but became idolized because its opening gross was its budget. As it goes to my original point, they are the median which includes the fanboys en totale.

Seriously, you lack the ability to get the point because you assume one is like the other. When trends seem to dictate that the audience and the geeks clearly make a difference between each and every comic book adaptation ever.

IO - the geeks were behind Daredevil in full-force on every fan site because of Spidey's tailcoats and it did 45Mil. The same geeks were not behind Ghost Rider from day one because the writer/director of Daredevil was making it - and it did 52Mil. There is no discernment.

Elektra opened to 14Mil. At roughly $8/person, that's around 1.7 Mil people. About the size of your Adult Swim audience. Garner couldn't open a revolving door let alone a movie, so who else but geeks went to see that? The best selling comics have roughly the same audience size. In the end, you're about 2Mil hardcore in a 300Mil population.

Martin: you really think the numbers make your case. When the numbers make the case to get someone some more money on a contract, but do not always add up. Again, you know this, but you love to act as if this is not case.

Let's move on to your points:

A hardcore movie going audience that buys DVDs at a ridiculous clip is not a good audience for a Johnny Quest movie? Really? Do I have to do the numbers about how many people see one movie a weekend to make it a success? Isnt it like a million or so? Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

It's not like I am stating Warners should spend 100 million on Johnny Quest, but Jackson and Doc have shown how to get it done. Too bad the suits at Warners want to make a live action film around the wrong comic property.

With your 300 response: BULLSHIT. Viral on MYSPACE? Come on man. You are either WITH IT or you are OUTSIDE OF IT. You were outside of it. Accept it, embrace it, and move on.

With your Iron Man SUPER BOWL AD BUY: BULLSHIT. COMIC-CON, last year, is where it all started. This is where the geeks started it going. Even with that fucking ad buy. No one had no idea it would be this big, but an entire group of people hyped it for a year. Geeks got the word out. If you want to undersell the geeks... good for you. It's not like all of that COMIC-CON YOU TUBE video did not get people excited a close to a year before Iron Man got out.

Now on to showing how NOT WITH IT you are: "Where is the hesitancy when Inc. Hulk, Ghost Rider, Batman Begins, Superman Returns, X-Men, Wanted, FF, FF2, Daredevil and Vendetta all did similar numbers? Hell, 300 only did several million more, but became idolized because its opening gross was its budget. As it goes to my original point, they are the median which includes the fanboys en totale."

Again, geeks in particular are hesistant to get into films that would be shit. If you have read enough geek post in your life. You seem to get their line of thinking.

You seem to think that all of those films are the same, and are viewed the same by geeks. This is simply not the case.

Finally, you really never watched Alias. Did you?

You sure are a conversation killer lately IOIOIOI, and you only want to talk to someone who agrees with everything you say son.

Well I am a geek, masquerading as a nerd because geeks often embarrass me by their overly intense tunnel vision. I don;t even think the audience is as big as 2 million. Half that and less still who are willing to pay opening weekend.

The interests in movies in Geekdom are so so narrow and I believe the interest in collecting things and the interest in Gaming is much more reliable an economic outlet compared to movies. Look at Comicon--movies are the freak sideshow compared to the collecting gear, gaming and getting your pin-up artist to sign a drawing or a cover. I go to Comicon I go to Wizard. I have eyeballs and I see what people spend their money and time on.

Gaming is much cheaper, for one. Geeks are more involved in the cyberworld than the movieworld.

Hollywood wants to sell to Everybody, not just a few people. Women are half the adult population, kids are half the total population. Those are populations to target. Most people don;t go to geek websites unless they are geeks, so they only get the word out to themselves. Preaching to the converted doesn't help a movie.

Of all of the graphic novel comic book adaptations, the successful ones financially have been either successful due to being a GOOD movie regardless of how faithful the book was to the source material (LA Confidential), in fact sometimes the movie turned out better by not being strictly faithful and appealing to a wider audience like Vendetta, **or**, because of well-known merchandising/TV shows across the generations...i.e. visible branding (Batman Spiderman). Depends on the property.

Producers/writers etc feel like they have to cowtow to the geek minority as they sometimes do, groveling at Comicon/Wizard and giving far too much info to the public during the adaptation/production process. It hardly seem's worth their trouble to appease a small minority of moviegoers.

I was amazed, absolutely amazed that Iron Man, a comic I loved (despite the Vietnam politics) was successful as a movie since what average American even knows who the F Iron man is? But it was a hit because of who was starring in it and marketing towards the audience (30s +) who would know who Robert Downey Jr was. RObert Downey Jr is every hipster bad boy's icon, and every female I know over 30 is nuts over him. Geeks had little to do with it.

"geeks in particular are hesistant to get into films that would be shit" IOIOIOI

Please--Geeks do not have any better taste in film than any other group of people.

Jonny Quest:
Jonny Quest and Arabian Nights are the best cartoons ever (minus the infrequent but pointed racist language at times), but only cartoon freaks who collect obscure tapes and watch classic oldies would know who they were.

I would love to see a live version Clutch Cargo with Perlman in the lead. Off. The. Hook.

But for those properties to be successful they will have to be the cool actor/actress who people of many ages want to see.

not Jennifer Garner, not Ben Affleck

Maybe stick Diane Lane's hub, Josh Brolin in Jonny Quest as Race. He can dye his hair white and he'd be rockin. Johnny and Hadji (will have to have a little bit of equal opportunity for him, have him not be so subservient) can be pulled from whoever is making the youngsters swoon on Nick.

But it still would be hard to pull off.

The might as well try to do the Bugaloos.

"The Bugaloos are a rock-n-roll band with bug wings who live in a magical forest. Benita Bizarre wants to put an end to their goody-goody behavior, and tries to capture and/or destroy them with the help of her henchthings Woofer and Tweeter. " IMDB

I loved the Bugaloos. It is SO RIGHTEOUS that it is out on DVD.

not that I would suggest an updated live-version Bugaloos. A live action Double Deckers would be more reasonable given the economy.

Lota: I still do not suffer bullshit. Martin and I disagree, but he's stating some bullshit stats I simply refuse to digest. The rest we simply agree to disagree one. Which is fine by me.

You also need to realize that I never stated geeks have better taste than the average moviegoer. They simply are very hesistant about being bitten by something twice. This is why you can go back three years and read the posts about Batman Begins, and notice the hesistance in those post about that film. While half the net dedicated to the movie BIZ, is ripe with post anticipation THE DARK KNIGHT. Geeks are a skittish lot. Why some people ignore this is beyond me.

It's sort of like stating Elektra's grosses had something to do with it being a geek film, and nothing to do with her being the star of a beloved show. Some statements simply ignore what happened in order to make a point, that really does not make much sense in the first place.

Conversation killer? Nah. CONVERSATION THRILLER, is more like it.

Posters herein are not opponents, and Dave's board is not a chessboard or Battleship. Relax.

Yes you simply "refuse to digest" what martin s. says, but that doesn;t mean it isn't true. You should give him the benefit of the doubt or at least be willing to consider it. Numbers not only make the case they ARE the case. Movies are business to the studios, period.

"Again, geeks in particular are hesistant to get into films that would be shit."

sounds like you are saying geeks have better taste than others--like they have a better shit sniffer than others, but they don't, is all I am saying.

Why on earth would anyone go back 3 years to read any posts from anyone? I lived though it the first time- on something like the Batman Begins board on IMDB...I thought the majority of those people needed meds as they devoted days of their lives arguing to the death how a movie should be made to every hairsplitting detail.

I think Hollywood should just give up trying to appease a small, skittish, audience everytime they do a Graphic--because they will never be able to please them. The focus should be on making a good, cost effective movie made accessible to the widest viewing audience or for a niche audience that is sizeable, though the heavens may fall. Damn the torpedos (geeks).

Come on. Let's take a walk.

"Posters herein are not opponents, and Dave's board is not a chessboard or Battleship. Relax."

Uh no. Sorry. This is how it is. Accept it, embrace it, and live it.

"Yes you simply 'refuse to digest' what martin s. says, but that doesn;t mean it isn't true. You should give him the benefit of the doubt or at least be willing to consider it. Numbers not only make the case they ARE the case. Movies are business to the studios, period. "

Coming to America, Forrest Gump, and the countless list of movies that apparently grossed nothing because the numbers always lie. They are a business, but the numbers are not the TRUTH. They have never been the TRUTH. Assuming they are the only TRUTH to be found. Ignores the fact that complete and utter strangers in this day and age, some how still find their way to sit in the dark and watch a movie.

"'Again, geeks in particular are hesistant to get into films that would be shit.'

sounds like you are saying geeks have better taste than others--like they have a better shit sniffer than others, but they don't, is all I am saying."

No, I have STATED AS MUCH. Come the fuck on. Why would people be hesistant about a new Superman film? Singer and Donner obsession. Why would people be hesistent of a new freakin Batman film? BATMAN AND ROBIN!

Again, I can go on, but geeks spend a whole lot of time fixated on this shit. Right now, as I type this, there are countless geeks out there already speculation on AVENGERS CASTING! RIGHT FREAKIN NOW! When you fixate on something for years. You get trigger shy of anything that could not be worth your fixation. It's that simple.

"Why on earth would anyone go back 3 years to read any posts from anyone? I lived though it the first time- on something like the Batman Begins board on IMDB...I thought the majority of those people needed meds as they devoted days of their lives arguing to the death how a movie should be made to every hairsplitting detail."

Read above.

"I think Hollywood should just give up trying to appease a small, skittish, audience everytime they do a Graphic--because they will never be able to please them. The focus should be on making a good, cost effective movie made accessible to the widest viewing audience or for a niche audience that is sizeable, though the heavens may fall. Damn the torpedos (geeks)."

While I whole-heartedly agree on the making cost-effective films. The four quads are nice to hit, but the gaming industry demonstrates they are not always important. Men have the time to be skittish and spend years of their lives fixating on this stuff. So you have to put your money where the audience is and that audience is located on the first exit of Geekland. Right past the Stucky's!

IOI, numbers 'lie' but only when made to lie by skilled accountants. The rest of the time, they pretty much add up. The facts of the matter are that there simply aren't enough geeks to make a movie a hit unless the movie is made for a geek-sized audience. 300 was a hit because it struck a nerve in the general public. Ditto Iron Man. Not so much Speed Racer or Sky Captain. The argument of which of those movies are actually 'good' or 'bad' is completely separate from the issues of how they made money and why.

Jeff: we have not quantifiable knowledge as to how many geeks exist in this country. All we have are two opposing views. My view stands: geeks help get the word out. It's not like geeks do not have jobs, do not go to school, and remain in that figurative basement their whole lives. They are a functioning part of this society. Who tell their co-workers/classmates/family members about something cool, and those co-workers/classmates/family members go and check it out. This is how it works for me. This is how it worked for the geek at Target who told his friend about Iron Man. This is it. Ignore it all you want, but you would be rather silly if you did.

I don't know what your definition of 'silly' is, and I think our definitions of 'geek' probably differ too. It's obviously not a discrete, self-contained population. But I disagree that 'geeks made 300 and Iron Man happen'. Sure, they helped, but not by a really significant margin. I guarantee that 90% of the people who saw 300 don't know it was based on any source material other than (screwy) history.

90%? Come the fuck on Jeffery. Go find a news blurb about 300, and they will most likely source it as being a "COMIC BOOK ADAPTATION." The audience who gets out there to see these films occassionally have some idea what they are seeing.

This is not TV where the median age is 50. This is film. Most people seeing films have some idea what it's about. Imply they do not, has to make the WB marketing people really really sad.

On another random topic: I just saw a new TDK TV spot. My goodness, this flick seems tremendous even if people want it to lose 20 minutes. Somewhere Francis Coppola spits at those people.

Not everyone reads news on the internet. Most people - that is, most 'civilians' who see 5 or 6 movies a year - don't know anything about the movies they see beyond what stars are in it, maybe a director or two, and the basics of what it's about from the trailer or TV spots.

Oh, and now you're just refusing to spell my name correctly, right?

I'm not so sure about Hellboy II hitting that mark... the movie was great and deserves to do well, but I think there's no way it can get past Dark Knight and X-Files and then Mummy 3 in weeks 2, 3 and 4... I also think that not enough people really LOVED the first movie for the sequel to do that much better even if it did well on DVD. Guillermo del Toro might have found a wider audience since then with Pan's, but it still comes down to "do people want to see a movie about someone called Hellboy?" It's a shame for sure but I have a lot more about this in tomorrow's column.

IO - Do I have to do the numbers about how many people see one movie a weekend to make it a success? Isnt it like a million or so? Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

My god. You can't even do basic math?

1 Mil people x $9/ticket = $9Mil

Inc. Hulk (55Mil) @ $9/ticket = 6.1 Mil people

So how many people had to go see IM to open at 100Mil?

t's not like I am stating Warners should spend 100 million on Johnny Quest

100 has become the norm for this kind of picture. That's the point.

With your 300 response: BULLSHIT. Viral on MYSPACE? Come on man. You are either WITH IT or you are OUTSIDE OF IT. You were outside of it. Accept it, embrace it, and move on.

http://www.marketingvox.com/warner-builds-buzz-for-300-on-myspace-027832/

I guess "with it" means living in an insular bubble.

With your Iron Man SUPER BOWL AD BUY: BULLSHIT.

From WSJ about the Superbowl ad strategy: "Paramount Pictures is using its ad spending to promote the May release of superhero film "Iron Man." People who watch the game on TV will see a commercial for the movie. People who visit any of the major online Super Bowl ad polls will also see the spot. Visitors to MySpace can see an Iron Man profile on the site. And if people search for terms related to Iron Man on Google, it will turn up there as well. On ESPN.com, ads will show the TV spot and prompt visitors to go to the "Iron Man" Web site to register for downloads and giveaways".

So, you pick 500K in San Diego over 20+ Mil people. Sure.

Again, geeks in particular are hesistant to get into films that would be shit. If you have read enough geek post in your life. You seem to get their line of thinking.

You seem to think that all of those films are the same, and are viewed the same by geeks. This is simply not the case.

Finally, you really never watched Alias. Did you?

You seem to think that all of those films are the same, and are viewed the same by geeks. This is simply not the case.

You set the standard IO by saying Harvey Pekar, a comic icon, does not count. You made it a marketing decision - superheroes from DC and Marvel. Now, you once again want to cherry-pick and pick certain ones. How the F do you disown Superman Batman and Hulk, IO, when they are three of the five biggest characters, ever? Ghost Rider made more than Batman Begins - and the geeks helped choose Bale according to WB.

Finally, you really never watched Alias. Did you?

Alias averaged 8.8 Mil viewers over 5 seasons. At $8/ticket, that crowd would have brought in around $70Mil. A 1/4 of that showed for Elektra, which is roughly the same size of the hardcore geek number of 1.7 Mil.

But 13 Going on 30 did 21 Mil, which came out during the peak of Alias. If she was sooo beloved for starring on an action soap, why didn't the audience shrink for Elektra, a movie closer to Alias than a rom-com?

You're argumment is sad, IO. That's not a personal attack, it's a fact. You say the blog is a chess board, but bring nothing but vague anecdotes stated as absolutes. You dismiss hard numbers by saying they lie, at a site that is known to have a devotion to the business side. Your new name is Bubble Boy.

Code error in the middle. My Bad.

Ghost Rider made more than Batman Begins

What the hell are you talking about?

Anyways, do a Johnny Quest movie as period, on the cheap, and just have fun with it. If it is a hit, THEN go bigger.

Exactly Tofu. Exactly. Seriously Martin: I never stated it was a chess board. I will roll with that though. Did someone miss Searching for Bobby Fisher back in the early 90s? Look at the board not the pieces.

All I read is someone whose obsessed with the pieces, and not really looking at the board. If you want to fixate on the numbers. Fixate on them because my argument, much like yours, does not have any quantifiable way to make it right. It's just an argument.

Unlike yours... mine is based in what I have known and read on a daily basis for close to over a decade. If that's not good enough for you. Well, you are not my agent, and I do not have to worry about some big guy like you handling my money.

So we agree to disagree. Move the fuck on and DO NOT PLAY, sir. Do not play.

One more thing ginger. Only HEAT and you have a hard-on for the numbers. I would wager everyone else would be just as happy to ignore all of this number discussion. You know the numbers? The ESTIMATES? Do not trust it until it's in your bank. Until then ginger... there's nothing real to it.

I would like to encourage Martin to play.

Jeff: I am finished with this discussion. Much like Tic Tac Toe, there is not winner. Would you like to play a game of chess?

No.

You are no fun. You never have been, you never will be, and you pretty much are the Cloverfield monster of this board. I hope you are happy... HATER-MAN!

Oh yeah... Bubble-Boy? Really? Go take care of your clients, ginger.

Jason, I've said it before and I'll say it again, we clearly do not understand each other.

Oh, I'm playing, Jeff.

Tofu - The whole argument is over who pushes the opening weekend. Batman Begins did $48Mil and was gushed over by fanboys from pre-prod. Ghost Rider did $52Mil but was disowned the minute after Daredevil's release because of Mark Steven Johnson, director/writer of both pics.

Bubble Boy - mine is based in what I have known and read on a daily basis for close to over a decade

NOW - can I take that as confirmation of what I've believed all along, that you're not some teen/20ish year old kid, but some guy staring at thirty?

Bubble Boy - I never stated it was a chess board.

I'm sorry. Didn't this exchange occur fourteen posts earlier?

Tofu - "Posters herein are not opponents, and Dave's board is not a chessboard or Battleship. Relax."

Bubble Boy - "Uh no. Sorry. This is how it is. Accept it, embrace it, and live it."

OK. Are we clear?

Bubble Boy - my argument, much like yours, does not have any quantifiable way to make it right.

I have numbers that you can't wish away with some paranoid conspiracy about studio bookkeeping, which is only applicable to making the film, not the dollars collected at the door which is reported and banked by the theater.

So we agree to disagree. Move the fuck on and DO NOT PLAY, sir. Do not play.

...Only HEAT and you have a hard-on for the numbers. I would wager everyone else would be just as happy to ignore all of this number discussion.

Bubble - why are you here? Seriously.

You've spent countless threads attacking Dave because he's been deemed an enemy of the geek movement. You ride him about IM, and are trying to parlay that by taking credit for TDK. Now, you're saying he's obsessed with the numbers and that no one else cares.

Bubble - It's. His. F'ing. Site.

You want more people to give attitude and less business talk - when the whole point of this blog is the exact opposite.

I don't care for the political, but you know what? It's Dave's site. He foots the bill for this to be free use. If he wants to talk politics for a month straight, that's his right. I respect it by not commenting. If he wants to write about business for a month, maybe you should try and show a little respect and just move the F on.

So we don't agree to disagree.

And save the tough talk. It reads like a bad wrestling promo.

The whole argument is over who pushes the opening weekend.

Ah, I see. Well then that point of fact is incorrect, in that Begins had opened up on a Wednesday, and had $24 million in the bank before the $48 million opening weekend.

Martin: I'M THE BEST! THE BEST! NOTHING'S GOING TO KEEP DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWWWNNNNNNN!!!!

A little respect? Where's the discussion with you? All you want to do is bully me around, when I damn well know you sure the hell are not the right age or the right size to do that to me in real life. So why on earth do you assume you have the right to push me around on a blog?

Again, it's over, and we are moving on. If you want to bully someone. Bully around your freakin assistants. Seriously ginger: you should not play. Although a middle-aged agent acting all tough on a blog does crack me up.

"when I damn well know you sure the hell are not the right age or the right size to do that to me in real life"

???

Tofu - I kept it to weekend/weekend for that purpose. To count five days versus three is an assumption that all viewers from Wed/Thursday could/would have gone on the weekend and that there was no repeat viewers.

IO - I think that last post sums you up perfectly. Everything written is an assumption based upon hunches made by other people. The fact you melted down and once again bring up this bullying victimization you've suffered, explains why you're here.

And if I'm bullying you, then what have you been doing to Poland?

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: