Films/DVD Asylum

Posted by Audiophilander (A) on July 02, 2008 at 00:55:16

In Reply to: RE: But it cost $40+ million more to make. So by your formula it didn't do well. posted by sjb on July 01, 2008 at 18:03:02

Neither of us can answer that one; we can only speculate and contribute informed opinions. The labeling of something as a HIT or a MISS, a blockbuster or a bomb, etc., has many variables. In addition to the costs versus grosses, there is also repeat showing value, international sales figures, prospects for video rental & sales, and whether the film received critical acclaim or dismissal. The last factor isn't crucial because audience appreciation is unpredictable, but critical acclaim can't be ignored in assessing film's longevity and return on investment.

My "formula"[sic] isn't a crystal ball! I never stated unequivocally that I would predict an outcome; all I did was to venture an informed opinion given the facts. My observations are based upon the timing of each film's release in a crowded summer schedule with lots of attractive films competing for the same dollars in the midst of a recession, ...as if the unchartered multiplex 'waters' weren't treacherous enough for the studios.

Still, the bottom line ($$$) is the primary focus of this thread and it's going to take a couple of weeks to see where all the chips finally fall.

May I politely suggest that if you're trying to turn this thread a pissing contest, it will serve no useful purpose, except perhaps your eventual embarrassment.

Cheers,
AuPh