In what way, the number of razzies he won?


You're starting to sound like a broken record... Something you have in common with your buddy BKB btw...


You really need to inform yourself, pal, the great Star Wars was beaten by a little boy.

Nuff said...

The other one, too. *crosses fingers*

Not really, I see it as playing both sides of the fence and I would think Mav would really throw it at your faces too if Kong made over 250 million also from that low opening. Wheter you are on or not on the Kong side of the fence, those types of comments does look very shady. It would of been alot more respectable if Mav has chosen one side or the other

Either way, I don't consider it a "HUGE DISAPPOINTMENT" like you call it, so don't project it on to some of us sane people in this thread. I think I can make my own opinion about whether Kong did well or not, and it did.

That goes for the rest of you, too. Like, go ahead and call it a disappointment or failure all you want now. I don't care. But, if some of us consider it as a good box-office performance, let us. Don't be trolls and constantly bring up useless arguements, stupid excuses, and a bunch of "laughing" emoticons over and over again.

As for Maverikk, we can all see how he flip-flopped. I proved it a couple of pages back. No amount of arguement can argue with facts; he said he wasn't "with" the rest of you. It was clearly stated. And, now, he denies it, and the anti-Kong posse is trying to back him up like it the fault of the studio that blinded Maverikk from the truth or something. Well, if an article on Yahoo saying "we think Kong will act like Titanic" can trick someone like Maverikk, he's very weak.

For all I care you can believe that this is bigger than Titanic. It doesn't change the facts.

The disappointment tag for the studio is not based on Maverikk, jb007 or zingaling predictions.

It is a disappointment since the movie cost around $300M to produce, print and market, the studio was expecting a lot more than $540-$550M worldwide. That is a great sum for Madagascar which cost a third of what KK did, but pathetic when KK would have to get into ancillary revenue to pay Jackson and earn any profit.

P.S: BTW The disappointment and in some cases failure has been bought up in the media and is the reason people like Berardinelli have had to write articles defending it. It is not like only a few people on KJ or BOM are talking it down.

Kong was taken out by Madagascar and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

Why not making it $350m...

If Kong is a huge disappointment than Batman Begins is a flop (which it obviously isn't - they wouldn't produce a sequel to a flop).

Why are you laughing, as it's definatelly really close to the truth.

Wrong. It already passed Charlie and will probably pass Madagascar as well...

According to BOM, Kong's still $4 million behind Charlie. But fine, it's obviously it'll past it. On the Madagascar subject, though... you think Kong's going to manage another $57 million?

Its best case scenario is #5 of 2005 with the highest budget of the year.

All that we know and which was officially confirmed is that its budget was $207m, the cost of advertisement (probably around $50m) and prints is anyone's guess...

Well, it opened in 3,627 theaters. If we assume two prints per theater:

3,627x$5000/per x2 = $36,270,000

BOM is not up to date. With $475m (before friday) it needs to make another $52m to pass Madagascar which i think it'll manage...

Jeez...I didn't expect such a hostile reaction to my very objective comments that the numbers back up 100%. I didn't mean to hurt any Jackson lover's feelings by saying the words out loud.

And no, Roid, I wouldn't throw anything in their faces, and you don't even know me enough to decide that for everybody...

I could have really made life miserable for all of you loonies, but I have been very restrained, so instead of bitching about me, how about a "thank you" for the effort!

Thank-you, sir - may I have another?

By the way Mav, at least Jackson actually tries non-franchise movies. He could've made the Hobbit this year, and it would've been a 4th 300 mil+ movie in a row.

But he actually went for something different, and while it didn't meet the massive expectations, it was still a solid performer.

Lucas has a lot of big movies, but has he really done anything substantial outside of SW and IJ? No. If he directed a 200 mil budget King Kong, I seriously doubt it would've done much better.

Last time I checked, 500 mil+ worldwide is not "The biggest disappointment of the decade." It's a damn decent number. It's almost(if not) twice as much as A.I., and Spielberg is still the biggest director that ever lived.

We will never recover. How dare you!

I wouldn't consider myself as a Kong "loonie," but I'd love to see how you could crawl out of the hole, Maverikk.

I've already shown that you lied and flip-flopped.

What next?

No, he couldn't have.



It was either something different or nothing.



Yes.

American Grafiiti is bleh.

All you've shown is that you lacked the insight on past history at the forums to realize I would never side with the loonies. If you fell for something, that's your fault, not mine.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

We all know.

You have assumptions, me and others know facts. Guess which would win in any court of law?

Actually, I do have facts. I showed them.

Anybody can just say "oh, I was joking." That's not a fact.