Originally posted by: dxkj
so who makes all the extra 2.4 billion?
If those costs listed were for shooting the film and paying all the people involved, does New Line pocket the 2.4 billion plus DVD sales?
Originally posted by: Dedpuhl
But don't forget: piracy is hurting the movie industry...
Originally posted by: austin316
Originally posted by: fivespeed5
Originally posted by: Dedpuhl
But don't forget: piracy is hurting the movie industry...
nice
I didn't contribute one cent to that $1 billion... no way am I spending 3 hours in a theater sittin' on my a$$. I'll rent it at Hollywood Video when it comes out.... with a rent 1 get 1 free coupon.
I think it was worth all $24 I spent on the 3 movies. a nice theater with SDDS sound, nice re-clining seats and friggin huge screen can beat any home set up.
Originally posted by: Kev
Originally posted by: Dedpuhl
But don't forget: piracy is hurting the movie industry...
If it wasn't for piracy this movie would have made 6 billion dollars and ended world hunger.
I disagree. I purposely waited and did not see either the first movie or the second in the theaters or on DVD until the third was released. Then in 1 week I sat down and watched the first two on DVD and went to the theater to see the third. My whole family did the same. None of us wanted to wait.Originally posted by: TubStain
I find it funny that the last movie gets more $$ when people would probably want to see the first two before watching the last one, instead the most $$ is going from last to first.
Originally posted by: Arkitech
This could open up a great new trend. Who would have thought that a fantasy movie with elves and wizards would generate so much attention and money?
I nominate the following books for movies:
William Gibson - Neuromancer
Terry Brooks - The Shannara (sp?) series
L Ron Hubbard - Mission Earth Series
You're a scientologist, aren't you?Originally posted by: Arkitech
This could open up a great new trend. Who would have thought that a fantasy movie with elves and wizards would generate so much attention and money?
I nominate the following books for movies:
William Gibson - Neuromancer
Terry Brooks - The Shannara (sp?) series
L Ron Hubbard - Mission Earth Series
Originally posted by: Rudee
How much a movie made in receipts is not as good of a indicator as the total number of receipts sold. Movies 5 years ago were quite a bit cheaper than they are today, thus the same movie seen 5 years ago by the same number of people - when compared to today - will obviously be a different dollar amount.
Originally posted by: Rudee
How much a movie made in receipts is not as good of a indicator as the total number of receipts sold. Movies 5 years ago were quite a bit cheaper than they are today, thus the same movie seen 5 years ago by the same number of people - when compared to today - will obviously be a different dollar amount.
Originally posted by: ucdbiendog
Originally posted by: Rudee
How much a movie made in receipts is not as good of a indicator as the total number of receipts sold. Movies 5 years ago were quite a bit cheaper than they are today, thus the same movie seen 5 years ago by the same number of people - when compared to today - will obviously be a different dollar amount.
youre just another titanic fan who is trying to downsize the accomplishment of this film
Originally posted by: austin316
Originally posted by: Rudee
How much a movie made in receipts is not as good of a indicator as the total number of receipts sold. Movies 5 years ago were quite a bit cheaper than they are today, thus the same movie seen 5 years ago by the same number of people - when compared to today - will obviously be a different dollar amount.
I totally agree and never understood why they don't do that. I would love to compare the number of people that went to see the movie, rather than what they paid.
Originally posted by: fivespeed5
Originally posted by: Dedpuhl
But don't forget: piracy is hurting the movie industry...
nice
I didn't contribute one cent to that $1 billion... no way am I spending 3 hours in a theater sittin' on my a$$. I'll rent it at Hollywood Video when it comes out.... with a rent 1 get 1 free coupon.
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Originally posted by: K1052
Sucks for Miramax.
How so?
They originally took on the project. When they saw how complex and expensive it was going to be it was dropped. Miramax would only have wanted to make one movie anyway. Eventually New Line decided to take on the film. Interestingly, this was New Line's last shot before the company would be forced to close due to a series of failures.
Originally posted by: austin316
Originally posted by: Czar
what an investment!!
turning $300 millions into $2.8 billions
LOTR:FOTR Cost = $149 million (Production and advertising)
LOTR:TT Cost = $139 million (Production and advertising)
LOTR:ROTK Cost = $144 million (Production and advertising)
Total = $432 million
7X increase. Jeez, nice job.
Originally posted by: MillionaireNextDoor
Originally posted by: austin316
Originally posted by: Czar
what an investment!!
turning $300 millions into $2.8 billions
LOTR:FOTR Cost = $149 million (Production and advertising)
LOTR:TT Cost = $139 million (Production and advertising)
LOTR:ROTK Cost = $144 million (Production and advertising)
Total = $432 million
7X increase. Jeez, nice job.
Nice! I should invest in "Passion". Ah well too late now..
-MiND