I know one thing about your life for sure. You have created 8 accounts on BOM just to come back and release your plague upon us. Someone like that, indeed, does not have a life.

Oh and by the way, I've gotta go now, time to go to my life and leave you to your existence here.

LOL Lecter, run away without answering my discussion points.

Hopefully you put more thought and effort into your next analysis. Nighty, nighty.

I agree with Doc about the Tom Hanks movies. I mean, such a successful career and then 2 movies that don't gross over 100 mil in the same year. UNTHINKABLE! Polar Express MAY break his slump he's in, but anything can happen.

OK, lets break this down. Ladykillers and The Terminal.

- Which of these movies did you like the trailers?
To me, Ladykillers was annoying and the Terminal didn't have any magical.

- On the Terminal, how big a draw was Catherine Zeta Jones?

- Are you a Tom Hanks fan and did you see either, paid money for, these movies.

- If you saw these movies, did you like them.

Like I said, to me, these BO weren't a surprise at all.

The terminal was sorta

Troy was the biggest dissapointment IMO followed by The Terminal. Troy should have done way over $220m and Terminal should have headed towards $150m.

Open Water kinda dissapointed me, although it's gross is fantastic for the movie, i was let down by how it never took off. In the UK, it was number 1 though so yay that helped.

Hello, my ancient foe.

So, how many people, exactly have agreed with your picks so far and how many with mine?

This is absolutely ridiculus.

Not that I agree with Goldie's own choice but if wasnt Goldie posting it but someone else who people around here don't seem to have a problem with, this thing would have been a normal discussion and no more.

Goldie argued Lecter with proper detailed answers and sorry to say, he isnt the first person on this message board to say that Team America (bkb), Lady Killers (just about everyone), Terminal (many including me), King Arthur (many again) and Harry Potter (go look at the straight up thread) made as much as was expected ... so I dont understand this argument its easier for Goldie to say these things after the movie comes out.

Sorry but it seems to me that people just picked on Goldie here because
a) He is Goldie
b) He responded to Lecter's thread.

A lot of people here need to mature up. This is the same reason why I saw some of Swimfan's threads get locked ... because they were guilty by association to him ...some of his threads (those rare occasions) actually made sense but people used to lock them up.

Imagine someone else's name here other than Goldie and look back at your response ... If Goldie had just said theyre stupid choices with nothing else posted, its understandable that hes just being a troll ... but the fact that he went through the effort to justify atleast earns someone enough respect for a proper reply.

But...

1. I gave good and detailed explanations to my picks, I don't see Goldie doing that to his. His sole purpose was to bash mine and stalk me to my threads to do so. If he really wanted to do some input in this thread, he would have made a little more explanations to his picks.

2. Arsi, you can do whatever you desire, but you will never prevent people from attacking him. Gold Master is one of the most hated posters to ever grace BOM with his presence and people will hate him over here as well. People will attack him and you won't be able to stop them. Just like you said, Swimfan was attack no matter what he did. The same will go for Goldie.

Films that deserved to do better, cause of good reviews or WOM:
- Wimbledon (somehow Europeans seems to like it , but probably if it was called U.S. Open, Roland Garros or Australian Open it would have grossed the same in the U.S.)
- Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (glowing reviews, but probably too old fashioned looking)
- Shaun of the Dead (glowing reviews. Wrong marketing strategy?)
- The Terminal (excellent crowd pleaser)

Films I did not expect to break the 100 million, but probably named by some members:
- The Ladykillers (it's still a Coens film, I don't why a Tom Hanks could change that)
- Open Water (why? the trailers did not fit with the general audience, cause of the film's look)

- Ladykillers, Why would you expect it to break the Coen brothers curse of 50 million. Don't you remember the trailers a black comedy with an annoying Tom Hanks in the trailers. NEXT

- King Arthur - it would do for knights what POTC did for pirates. Are you crazy. The trailer was dark and the moviue was postponed. PLus Johnny Depp in that amazing trailer vs. King Arthur.... NEXT

- The Terminal - Why would you expect it to make more. With Tom Hanks in the trailer and him speaking that foreign language. Plus that great shot with the fish. NEXT.

- Team America - South Park barely made 50 +. Plus this movie had the puppets, the hard R, the cursing, I don't even remember much advertising. Did you really expect as much as 911 100+. Can't even come close to comparing them. NEXT.

- Harry Potter - the first 2 went down, bo wise, this one was know to be darker. So again why. NEXT.

The details might be one line lecter but ask anyone who thought these movies did as expected and they'll give you the same answer.


Secondly, if people continue to bash someone for being who they are and not for any other substantial reason (even when they present an argument), I will not tolerate it.

This forum was started so we could have a new place where everyone could have fun again .. last i checked, goldie is part of 'everyone' and unless Goldie doesn't come and do something stupid, I'll treat the matter the same way if it was you or dolcevita or Krem getting bashed around for no reason.

You don't get it.

First of all, I meant that he gave no explanation for HIS OWN PICKS. He just used the post to bach mine, not to present his own. He wrote the explanations to why my picks are wrong, but not to why his are right. Got it?

Second of all, none of the posters on here has such a past as Gold Master and it's not like you had to deal with him trhoughout all that time, bABA, no? It is easy for you to speak from your standpoint of tolerance and whatnot.

Check your PM in 2 mins.

a)No. He put an explanation for yours. He didnt put one for his. One would ask him to put something for his (if it was someone other than Goldmaster), not outright start calling him names.

B) I know your history with someone and I'm completely entitled here for being tolerant and 'whatnot'. I'm not taking any explanations having to do with 'past personal history' cause then i might as well let Maverikk continue his flames with some other posters here and vice versa) and allow every other poster here to start saying things about someone else because "THE MODS HAVENT SHARed THIS HISTORY SO ITS EASY FOR THEM TO SPEAK FROM THEIR STANDPOINT AND EXERCIZE TolerANCE"

Sorry, thats no explanation.
I'm letting this go to one more incident between the 2 of you. If this happens again, I'm personally sending a very "unfair" warning to both to stay off each other's thread, whether to criticize or if one really means to just answer a yes or no answer.

Thanks Baba for sending the time and the reasoning to understand the post. All I did was detail what I thought was incorrect about his MAIN THREAD POST with answers.

Goldie. Next time, it would really help if when you post your choices as well, you hand out reasons for those too .. cause clearly, your own choices made absolutely no sense to me either.

Also, considering the tension you and lecter have, I would advice if you can make your messages towards him sound a little more friendlier ..

Thank you.

Sorry but at there more seperate rules for me. Does everyone have to provide a detailed answer. I could see if I provided nothing.

So we goes as YOU don't understand any of my answers.

- Troy - looking at the international numbers, the USA number of 140 is low. LOts of people agreed with me and this may be the #1 answer.
- Wimbledon - Both Kristen and Paul and the reviews should have gotten this movie 2 to 3x more. Plus it was made by the studio that makes more UK money - about a boy, 4 weddings, etc.
- Vanity Fair - great reviews plus someone above 1 already agreed
- Raising Helen - Kate has been in 2 100 movies, thinking that she is a very well liked actress, like a julia roberts, i thought this should have done better. Almost famous, 10 days.

No seperate rules fo ryou Goldie. Read what i said ... i said it helps ... not that you HAVE TO : )

secondly, about being friendlier to lecter, this message has gone out to almost everyone who is running into a problem with another poster .. so its not a seperate rule .. its not even a rule at all .. again, the word above is advise .. not DO IT! : )

Goldie, just stop it!, move on!!
post in another thread

- Troy - looking at the international numbers, the USA number of 140 is low. LOts of people agreed with me and this may be the #1 answer. - I listed that under minor disappointments and I have not specified that I am talking about disappointments at the American box-office only. I don't think that almost $500 million worldwide is all that disappointing, eh?

- Wimbledon - Both Kristen and Paul and the reviews should have gotten this movie 2 to 3x more. Plus it was made by the studio that makes more UK money - about a boy, 4 weddings, etc. - Okay, I give you that, although I doubt many people on here actually cared that much about what this movie would gross.

- Vanity Fair - great reviews plus someone above 1 already agreed - Great reviews? Well, I suggest you to go and check out RT. I don't see too many great reviews there. Four of my choices, Ladykillers, The Terminal, HP3 and Team America all had better reviews. Oh and one might have agreed with you, but more have agreed with me.

- Raising Helen - Kate has been in 2 100 movies, thinking that she is a very well liked actress, like a julia roberts, i thought this should have done better. Almost famous, 10 days. - I don't remember almost famous being a huge box-office smash... Movies like Alex and Emma and Four Feathers also pretty much have proven that she is anything, but a box-office magnet. More like a box-office poison. Oh and by the way...she has been in two $100 million movies and Tom Hanks has been in over 10 and while Raising Helen got sub-par reviews, The Terminal got very decent ones. Oh and it had Spielberg. Yet, The Terminal only managed to gross slightly more than twice as much as Raising Helen did....So much about being disappointing.


PS: Owned

Now isnt a discussion like this more healthy : )

I am waiting for his "golden" comeback now.

OK, Lecter here goes.

Owned. LOL.

- Wimbledon - you agreed with me.

- Troy - you noticed that I said 140 USA. So I am only talking about the USA #. Again, I am right. I wasn't talking about WW.

Also, I wonder why you pick on me with Troy about of course I am talking WW. Were you talking WW on Harry Potter also, Cause I think the WW HP # was pretty good.

- Vanity Fair - The only critic I read is Ebert ( maybe the most popular or well known US critic with his tv show ) Ebert gave it 4 stars. Based on your criteria, it fits, the bo was a disappointment.

- OK on Kate Hudson. But still forget about Alex and Emma, that wasn't the moneymaker as you could see by the trailers.

It was a light movie as was 10 days and it had John Corbett, Sex in the City and Greek Wedding, as the guy so this movie can't be compared to Alex & Emma.

OWNED, NO.

Here we go, Goldie:

- Troy - you noticed that I said 140 USA. So I am only talking about the USA #. Again, I am right. I wasn't talking about WW.

Also, I wonder why you pick on me with Troy about of course I am talking WW. Were you talking WW on Harry Potter also, Cause I think the WW HP # was pretty good. Did I say that HP's worldwide gross was bad? No, I don't think I did. But it is disappointing that it made less than its predecessor in the USA as well as internationally. Oh and the statement "Again, I'm right" falls into the category "Most arrogant statement of the day"

- Vanity Fair - The only critic I read is Ebert ( maybe the most popular or well known US critic with his tv show ) Ebert gave it 4 stars. Based on your criteria, it fits, the bo was a disappointment. - Ok, now this is the lamest reasoning ever. I am sure there was one critic who gave Catwoman a good review. Does it make Catwoman a well-reviewed movie? C'mon, come up with something better.

- OK on Kate Hudson. But still forget about Alex and Emma, that wasn't the moneymaker as you could see by the trailers. You said

It was a light movie as was 10 days and it had John Corbett, Sex in the City and Greek Wedding, as the guy so this movie can't be compared to Alex & Emma. - You said Kate Hudson had 2 $100 million hits. Would you mind telling me WHICH? Because I know only one...Get your facts right at least, if you are trying to prove a point...Oh and John Corbett is of course a huge draw...just like Nia Vardalos who made Connie and Carla such a huge hit.

Enjoy yourself

NO Owned I guess cause you agreed that I was right on Wimbledon and Troy USA. (Better choices right there then yours)

At least, I was 2 out of 4 but your choices, as the thread starter, were easily proven wrong in my prior analysis which you never answered.

Then the other 2 movies included Reese and Kate. It is too late to go into this and explain this to you tonight.

Talk about being owned.