Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Grosses for Fahrenheit 9/11 - 350 Million+ US, 600 Million+ Overseas

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Ground Level » Grosses for Fahrenheit 9/11 - 350 Million+ US, 600 Million+ Overseas (Page 4)

This topic comprises 11 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11

Author

Topic: Grosses for Fahrenheit 9/11 - 350 Million+ US, 600 Million+ Overseas

Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene

Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 06-05-2004 12:33 AM

Well it's good to be back. [Big Grin]

I sold my house out in bountiful and moved back to salt lake city into a nice apartment that has little to no upkeep, which is a little better on me overall.

I am about to go back to work in the morning after a long break, so here's wishing me luck. [thumbsup]

Caio

Dave

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 06-05-2004 02:23 AM

Kashduisuihre Dkaspjdsiojtoer is wrong. It'll make over 6 billion in Rhode Island alone. Worldwide? It will make more than 88 times the amount of money that exists for all nations and peoples combined. Aliens will come to see it from outer space, boosting its grosses even more.

| IP: Logged

Kamakshipalya Dhananjay
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 190
From: Bangalore, India
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 06-05-2004 07:07 AM

I wonder why the marketers seem to have a low aim this time for this film ?

A 1000 theatres is just too small anyway and I cannot really get myself to assume this 'small release' merits our concern as much as it would had it been a '3000+' release. Whats wrong with these people ? Why dont they get it out on more screens and as Moore says, get people to raise 'some hell' ?

I think the marketers should get people like Amy Goodman and Chomsky to watch this film and take their comments to the public.

| IP: Logged

Richard Greco
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1180
From: Plant City, FL
Registered: Nov 2003

posted 06-05-2004 09:19 AM

Moore is a fool KD. He takes peoples comments and totally blows them out of context. I for one think this movie should not be shown here in the states. He is an amazing editor. Nothing that he says is true. He just edits it to seem that way. I'm going to see this just to laugh my ass of at it.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 06-05-2004 01:48 PM

I've always found that gross discussions are really gross and pretty lame.

Mark.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 06-05-2004 07:02 PM

KD - No political documentary ever has or will open on 3000 screens because there isn't enough business to support it. This movie, being very high profile, might do brisk business on such a wide release for about one day, then it would be bye-bye.

What should happen, is Roland Emmerich should make a 9/11 movie showing the events actually happening, and really bringing home the suffering that people went through. People love to see people suffering! ("Passion" should be proof of this.) You wanna talk about high grosses! Let Michael Bay loose on the subject and crank'er up! (And don't forget to include two people falling in love during the disaster.)

[Roll Eyes]

| IP: Logged

Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 06-06-2004 01:30 AM

Michael Moore's new film won't make all that much more money than the last film he made.

Not everyone hates George Bush.
Not everyone beleives in this 9/11 conspiracy
and not everyone goes to the movies.

It will do all right but no more than $25 million in the US.

| IP: Logged

Tim Lockridge
Film Handler

Posts: 20
From: Indiana, USA
Registered: Jul 2002

posted 06-06-2004 09:00 AM

quote: Richard Greco
Moore is a fool KD. He takes peoples comments and totally blows them out of context. I for one think this movie should not be shown here in the states. He is an amazing editor. Nothing that he says is true. He just edits it to seem that way. I'm going to see this just to laugh my ass of at it.

Now, I'll be the first to agree that Moore uses creative editing more often than not. However, to assert that "Nothing that he says is true" is just as offbase as his editing.

| IP: Logged

Thomas Procyk
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1842
From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 06-06-2004 10:02 AM

Editing is part of the art form to convey the story or message being told in the film, for which I sure as hell hope it's creative! You could say the editing in The Passion is creative, but Christ still got beaten either way.

And don't use positive words for derogatory remarks. It's childish. Just like saying something is "interesting" when it sucks.

Michael Moore reminds me of Howard Beale in a way. Things are bad, and he doesn't need to tell us things are bad and whoever doesn't see that things are bad are just one of those people who want to be left alone with their MTV and their electric toaster and cordless phone and their internet and they sit every night clutching their remote controls screaming, "Please! Please! Just leave us alone in our living rooms..."

But I'm not going to leave you alone. I want you to get MAD!!! I'm a human being goddamit! My life has value! [Big Grin]

Everyone needs to see this movie, and everyone needs to see The Corporation, too. Maybe then people will realize [[political comments restrained]]

=TMP=

| IP: Logged

Michael Schaffer
"Where is the
Boardwalk Hotel?"

Posts: 4143
From: Boston, MA
Registered: Apr 2002

posted 06-06-2004 03:34 PM

quote: Tim Lockridge was the last to post
Moore is a fool KD. He takes peoples comments and totally blows them out of context. I for one think this movie should not be shown here in the states.

That already is dangerously close to a political discussion (which The Brad doesn`t like). But I just wanted to point out that that wouldn`t make him a fool, but a clever manipulator. A fool would be someone who, for instance lives in one of the still few countries where he enjoys personal freedom but calls for censorship to be reintroduced. BTW, "here in the states", you have to spell that with a capital S since it`s a name

| IP: Logged

Pravin Ratnam
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 844
From: Atlanta, GA,USA
Registered: Sep 2002

posted 06-06-2004 04:12 PM

quote: Gerard S. Cohen
The use of "KD" as abbreviation for "Kamakshipalya Dhananjay"
has me wondering whether it's from laziness or confusion with the meanings of "KD" in

, in one of the Indian states (Andhra Pradesh) at least, KD is used as a term to denote someone who is kind of a scammer and mild thug.

quote: Dave Williams
1. Disney INTENTIONALLY went public with thier distaste for political fare in an election year, so as to guage and build interest in the future project, not for thier own interests, but for the interests of thier business partners, the wiensteins.

Dave, please tell me you were just joking. That is some spin even Moore and his counterparts on the right wing would be would be proud of. You seriously think Eisner is thinking of long term strategy when it comes to political documentary. Hell, that guy doesn't think long term strategy on a lot of issues, let alone something as far fetched as this. This is guy who pissed off Pixar. I doubt he would come up with a charade like this to appease the Weinsteins.
Oh Dave, and I wasn't getting nearly as political as I could. I had to disclose where I stood just to prove a point in my reply-that people criticizing KD's projections were not merely right wingers.

| IP: Logged

Jeremy Fuentes
Mmmm, Dr. Pepper!

Posts: 1168
From: Corpus Christi, TX United States
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 06-06-2004 04:44 PM

quote:
Kashduisuihre Dkaspjdsiojtoer is wrong. It'll make over 6 billion in Rhode Island alone. Worldwide? It will make more than 88 times the amount of money that exists for all nations and peoples combined. Aliens will come to see it from outer space, boosting its grosses even more.

This is the only comment in this whole thread that I fully agree with. [thumbsup]

| IP: Logged

Richard Fowler
Film God

Posts: 2392
From: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Registered: Jun 2001

posted 06-06-2004 06:57 PM

Hmmm somebody is spending too much time in the strawberry patch instead of brushing up on civics and political science [Big Grin]

I saw Moore's "Bowling" in an art cinema in Sao Paulo Brazil and the local patrons reacted in a balanced manner...they where smart enough to figure the good from the bad. The gross of six billion is adjusted for our weak dollar...that is a billion less than Shrek III will make when it is released [uhoh]

| IP: Logged

Kamakshipalya Dhananjay
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 190
From: Bangalore, India
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 06-07-2004 12:43 AM

Well, I just didn't realise that the distribs for this film were trying to get the movie in as many screens as possible until I read that Variety news article on what efforts are going into the release of this film. Pretty impressive.

Link :
Moore doc faces plex hex

So, the target of 1000 screens therefore, is not something I would complain about now. However, as that article discusses, the availability of screens is fundamentally tied to the perception of how much money is there to be made on a film and therefore, the possibility of 'Fahrenheit' generating greater hype in the days to come will, I believe, help the wider release of this film in more than a 1000 theatres.

If we recall what did happen with PASSION, the screen count for that one too was speculated to be under 1000 screens when the announcement was made of the release date. And before it hit the theatres, that movie found itself with a 3000+ theatres. I think 'Fahrenheit' too will be able to manage a 3000+ theatres by June-25. There are no big releases on that date and it also looks likely that Moore's earlier announced July-2 release must have been nixed only with the expectation that they could get as wide a release they want if they come earlier than 'Spider-Man 2'.

Any agreement - when 'Fahrenheit' hits theatres on June-25, the distribs would have managed a 3000+ theatres ?

That I used to track the popularity of 'PASSION' in some places on the net, I only have to say now that 'Fahrenheit' is far, far ahead of 'PASSION' on the parameters I employed to guage its popularity on the internet.

BTW, though the trailers have just been out on the net, the posters that are previewed on some sites are not that appealing. Care to coin a slogan for this movie ?

Here's mine - "NOT ANOTHER FAIRYTALE"

| IP: Logged

Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene

Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 06-07-2004 01:43 AM

quote: Pravin Ratnam
Dave, please tell me you were just joking. That is some spin even Moore and his counterparts on the right wing would be would be proud of. You seriously think Eisner is thinking of long term strategy when it comes to political documentary. Hell, that guy doesn't think long term strategy on a lot of issues, let alone something as far fetched as this. This is guy who pissed off Pixar. I doubt he would come up with a charade like this to appease the Weinsteins.
Oh Dave, and I wasn't getting nearly as political as I could. I had to disclose where I stood just to prove a point in my reply-that people criticizing KD's projections were not merely right wingers

I should've stayed in bed! [Eek!]

This is long term strategy. Do you think that disney would hold a press conference to discuss thier decision to not distribute the film if they didn't have a vested interest in it? They don't hold press confrences for the other 300 films a year they turn down.

This was a scheme cooked up by the weinsteins, carried out by eisner, all to get this film to do some business. Eisner already blew the pixar deal, last thing he needed was to loses the weinsteins, who seem to provide half the income for the overall infrastructure.

It is more rational to believe that this is a conspiracy than to believe that eisner felt compelled to hold a press conference on the issue. It was nothing more than a ploy to get attention to the film. IT is done all the time in the biz.

As for getting political, you can't. Not here. I can tell people all damn day that I am a liberal conservative indepentant progressive democrat member of the republican party, but that doesn't mean jack squat on my opinions. you either take them for what they are or not. To attest my opinions on anything based on who I vote for? Now that's just damned wrong.

I for one do not care WHAT political affiliations ANYONE here has. They are my friends, my family, my support line to the rest of the world most of the time.

I mean really? Do we stop talking to our siblings because they voted for the other guy? Politics, sports, bloodletting, its all the same, and here it just doesn't matter one bit when discussing stupid crap like we are in this thread, and now I don't even know what the hell it was I was thinking when I got out of bed today. [puke]

LOve you all, [evil]

Ciao

Dave

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 11 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.