Yeah, like how today it was revealed Munk doesn't even know who Manohla Dargis is. MANOHLA FUCKING DARGIS!
| World of KJ http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/ |
|
| Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=41691 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Michael. [ Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
I just seem to be reading thread after thread after thread on this site of people who clearly have no fucking idea what they are talking about. Now usually this kind of aggression is fuelled by someone who is pissed off that someone else is dissing a movie they like. But i can guarantee you this has no focus to any particular film, rather a general questioning to why people with no clue about the film industry at all think its okay to make ridiculous statements and flippant predictions and then get really agressive and over the top in their defence of those things? I'm not saying no one knows their shit here. It's clear we have some really clever analysts and more importantly, some industry insiders in our midst. But what the fuck must they think when they see some of the threads here? Filled with smug one-uppery about things people aren't involved in. An industry people can't see the cogs moving in. Now i know we all like to think that box office figures give us an inside look at the movie industry, but they are a publicity tool now, behind the scenes in Hollywood the picture is dramatically different and no one should assume too much to know all about it unless they are there, shaping it. Now i don't claim to know a massive deal about the film industry. I know a bit having studied film, media and television for four years now and having done some very brief work within the industry as well as reading up a lot for various reasons over the years, but none of that constitutes real, long-term hands on experience. That said, I'm also not mentally retarded, which is the only explanation for like 90% of all threads i see In the cinema forums these days. But what really get's me is the arrogance. The sheer flippant "this is right, and everyone else is wrong" when it's so frequently abundantly clear that there is no background knowledge of anything other than genre and box office statistics. Please people, before you get a thread together with your theory, sit and read it and think about any background research, information or basically anything interesting you could put in there to support your theory. I'm so tired of seeing ridiculous statements supported by ropey logic in this forum. Yeah i was probably guilty of the same damn crime, but I mean we are talking 15, 16 year old stuff here coming from 30 something year old men. That's not right. I'm obviously not expecting industry quality predictions, discussion and debate here. But i just wish people would at least think about things in the forums outside of the water cooler a bit more, because it's getting dull reading the same fucking ridiculousness each week. |
|
| Author: | snack [ Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
Yeah, like how today it was revealed Munk doesn't even know who Manohla Dargis is. MANOHLA FUCKING DARGIS!
|
|
| Author: | Michael. [ Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
Skyblade wrote: Yeah, I think Charlie's Angels was the last time people were aghast at a sequel's performance. Keep in mind it still made two thirds of the first one, and the first Charlie's Angels was not the huge moneymaker folks claim it was. But that's the last time there was such a big media deal about a deprecation. This is a great example. Oh really Skyblade? Carhlies Angels wasn't the huge monespinner people claimed? Who claimed this exactly? Where was it claimed? In addition, where is the evidence to support this? Did you log the dvd sales and ancillary sell-offs? Wait, whats that, how many times has it been screened on TV now? Why I'd say i've seen it at least four of five times on TV. Why yes, that might suggest that the studio recieved a higher fixed sum for British tv to show the movie more frequently, just one of many cash sources no doubt flowing into the franchise. Maybe, just maybe, this means the internationally recognized brand of Charlies Angels actually DID make some money after all. Although you know, a sequel is generally never a good indication that the first movie was profitable. It's things like this, people just blatantly saying "Although this movie wasn't really the smash folks thought" and then never being able to back that kind of shit up which has forced me to almost completely withdraw from film chit chat. |
|
| Author: | snack [ Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
Dude, Michael, people do this for fun, not work. They can research to whatever extent they want. |
|
| Author: | Harry Warden [ Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
snack wrote: Dude, Michael, people do this for fun, not work. They can research to whatever extent they want. 
|
|
| Author: | Mister Ecks [ Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
For future reference in case I'm ever investigated, let it be known that I know absolutely nothing about anything. |
|
| Author: | Darth Indiana Bond [ Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
I'll be the first to admit I am no Box Office guru, I just enjoy it when movies I like to well financially. My main passion with film is analysing it, and I usually am too lazy to sit down and give a true analysis of a film on an online forum...sorry, but that's just how I am. |
|
| Author: | Harry Warden [ Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
Mr. X wrote: For future reference in case I'm ever investigated, let it be known that I know absolutely nothing about anything. 
|
|
| Author: | Speevy [ Sun Jun 01, 2008 11:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
This is probably the dumbest rant I have seen in a while. I must have missed the memo telling us that we were being paid to analyze the box office. People on this website come here for fun, it's not a freaking day job. People have lives outside of the box office and can't be bothered spending hours doing research. |
|
| Author: | Mannyisthebest [ Sun Jun 01, 2008 11:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
I enjoy watching the amazing box office runs of films like DMC, Spiderman 2, ROTK, Shrek 2 and Titanic and such... Even though I do not really like the films that much, however I find it interesting... |
|
| Author: | The Mr Pink [ Sun Jun 01, 2008 11:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
I think Micheal misses the point of this site. I believe, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that we come here to have fun and chat with like minded individuals about movies and the industry in general. I don't think anyone here has really claimed to be an expert on anything, we are more like armchair quarterbacks providing insight from a fans perspective. I'm sure those on this site who are in the biz don't look to this site for industry news or insight, but come here to be a fan just like the rest of us. |
|
| Author: | Chippy [ Sun Jun 01, 2008 11:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
snack wrote: Yeah, like how today it was revealed Munk doesn't even know who Manohla Dargis is. MANOHLA FUCKING DARGIS! I only know like... 5 critics... MAYBE. I don't really care about critics... AT ALL. |
|
| Author: | O [ Mon Jun 02, 2008 12:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
Real analysis is done by computers nowadays. We are merely here to observe them, and press control/alt/delete when they act up. Otherwise, we must enjoy the ride! |
|
| Author: | Price [ Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
Munk·E wrote: snack wrote: Yeah, like how today it was revealed Munk doesn't even know who Manohla Dargis is. MANOHLA FUCKING DARGIS! I only know like... 5 critics... MAYBE. I don't really care about critics... AT ALL. And I thought you were cool.
|
|
| Author: | Argos [ Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
... and I thought it was about films, not about money. |
|
| Author: | Michael. [ Mon Jun 02, 2008 7:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
Joe wrote: snack wrote: Dude, Michael, people do this for fun, not work. They can research to whatever extent they want. I read this for fun, and reading shit like that on a daily basis is no fun any more. FIX IT people. I wouldnt really mind if people didn't get so pissy about it all and make such a huge deal about everything all the time. You might say its for fun, but there are people who take this stuff very seriously, and that's what im getting it - if everyone was blase about the thing I wouldn't have an issue, it's because people take it so effing seriously that it gets to me. |
|
| Author: | getluv [ Mon Jun 02, 2008 7:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
Michael I avoid all movie parts of this forum now for that sort of reason and a whole bunch of ignorant posts on the subject at hand. I only delve into it when a movie im interested appears. the rest are full of pompous shit. including the Oscars forum, thats just as bad. |
|
| Author: | Speevy [ Mon Jun 02, 2008 10:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
Michael. wrote: Joe wrote: snack wrote: Dude, Michael, people do this for fun, not work. They can research to whatever extent they want. I read this for fun, and reading shit like that on a daily basis is no fun any more. FIX IT people. I wouldnt really mind if people didn't get so pissy about it all and make such a huge deal about everything all the time. You might say its for fun, but there are people who take this stuff very seriously, and that's what im getting it - if everyone was blase about the thing I wouldn't have an issue, it's because people take it so effing seriously that it gets to me. If you don't like here then leave. Don't let the door hit you on the way out. |
|
| Author: | dolcevita [ Mon Jun 02, 2008 1:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
Michael. wrote: I just seem to be reading thread after thread after thread on this site of people who clearly have no fucking idea what they are talking about... I'm obviously not expecting industry quality predictions, discussion and debate here. But i just wish people would at least think about things in the forums outside of the water cooler a bit more, because it's getting dull reading the same fucking ridiculousness each week. Not my fault you and getluv aren't reading the best thread in the forum. 
|
|
| Author: | Shack [ Mon Jun 02, 2008 1:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
Quote: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? Only in theory We don't know anything |
|
| Author: | Darth Indiana Bond [ Mon Jun 02, 2008 1:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
Michael. wrote: Joe wrote: snack wrote: Dude, Michael, people do this for fun, not work. They can research to whatever extent they want. I read this for fun, and reading shit like that on a daily basis is no fun any more. FIX IT people. I wouldnt really mind if people didn't get so pissy about it all and make such a huge deal about everything all the time. You might say its for fun, but there are people who take this stuff very seriously, and that's what im getting it - if everyone was blase about the thing I wouldn't have an issue, it's because people take it so effing seriously that it gets to me. Oh, so you're the problem it sounds like. |
|
| Author: | getluv [ Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
Speevy wrote: Michael. wrote: Joe wrote: snack wrote: Dude, Michael, people do this for fun, not work. They can research to whatever extent they want. I read this for fun, and reading shit like that on a daily basis is no fun any more. FIX IT people. I wouldnt really mind if people didn't get so pissy about it all and make such a huge deal about everything all the time. You might say its for fun, but there are people who take this stuff very seriously, and that's what im getting it - if everyone was blase about the thing I wouldn't have an issue, it's because people take it so effing seriously that it gets to me. If you don't like here then leave. Don't let the door hit you on the way out. who the fuck are you? you people are very retarded. it's hard for us people with no heart to bend our ways. Silencing you is better. |
|
| Author: | getluv [ Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
Darth Indiana Bond wrote: Michael. wrote: Joe wrote: snack wrote: Dude, Michael, people do this for fun, not work. They can research to whatever extent they want. I read this for fun, and reading shit like that on a daily basis is no fun any more. FIX IT people. I wouldnt really mind if people didn't get so pissy about it all and make such a huge deal about everything all the time. You might say its for fun, but there are people who take this stuff very seriously, and that's what im getting it - if everyone was blase about the thing I wouldn't have an issue, it's because people take it so effing seriously that it gets to me. Oh, so you're the problem it sounds like. you're one of the worst ones. I remembered on BOM how you basically had 56 posts a day or some shit, and you barely made 1 point a day. |
|
| Author: | Skyblade [ Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
Michael. wrote: Skyblade wrote: Yeah, I think Charlie's Angels was the last time people were aghast at a sequel's performance. Keep in mind it still made two thirds of the first one, and the first Charlie's Angels was not the huge moneymaker folks claim it was. But that's the last time there was such a big media deal about a deprecation. This is a great example. Oh really Skyblade? Carhlies Angels wasn't the huge monespinner people claimed? Who claimed this exactly? Where was it claimed? In addition, where is the evidence to support this? Did you log the dvd sales and ancillary sell-offs? Wait, whats that, how many times has it been screened on TV now? Why I'd say i've seen it at least four of five times on TV. Why yes, that might suggest that the studio recieved a higher fixed sum for British tv to show the movie more frequently, just one of many cash sources no doubt flowing into the franchise. Maybe, just maybe, this means the internationally recognized brand of Charlies Angels actually DID make some money after all. Although you know, a sequel is generally never a good indication that the first movie was profitable. It's things like this, people just blatantly saying "Although this movie wasn't really the smash folks thought" and then never being able to back that kind of shit up which has forced me to almost completely withdraw from film chit chat. Charlie's Angels was arguably the most hyped movie of 2000, it cost something like 90 million dollars, and had a good deal of profit pariticipation. It made 125 million, and yes, a little more than that worldwide. It's good money for a sleeper, and really, I don't think anyone at Sony lost their jobs over it, but I'm saying that 125 million for a heavily advertised and highly expensive film doesn't really scream "We got a live one here folks". It wasn't a "megahit", a word the press did use for it. Likewise, sales and rentals weren't bad, but I'm pretty sure it was sub 50 million. That's not a cash cow. That's not "This is really building an audience". It was in theory supposed to be a studio tentpole and it was neck-and-neck with Traffic. Two years earlier, Sony's own Godzilla was crucified as an underperformer, and it actually made more. As for television revenue, that's kind of a moot point since most movies are sold to TV. If you want to take the route of "every movie's a winner", that's fine, but it really kind of renders any box office talk useless. My point was, there seemed to be a large amount of shock when Full Throttle made less than expected, as if Sony had struck a well that spat out gold coins when greenlighting the franchise. |
|
| Author: | getluv [ Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aren't you people supposed to know something about movies? |
dolcevita wrote: Michael. wrote: I just seem to be reading thread after thread after thread on this site of people who clearly have no fucking idea what they are talking about... I'm obviously not expecting industry quality predictions, discussion and debate here. But i just wish people would at least think about things in the forums outside of the water cooler a bit more, because it's getting dull reading the same fucking ridiculousness each week. Not my fault you and getluv aren't reading the best thread in the forum. dolce while you've watched movies Darth Indiana Bond never knew existed, I take your opinion far more seriously. You often acknlowedge your ignorance when it comes to the box office but you can still have a worthwhile discussion about it without making wild accusations. this differentiaties you from the rest. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|