This is topic Master Of Disguise in forum Ground Level at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=000639
Posted by Franklin Armstrong (Member # 1448) on 10-09-2002, 07:01 PM:
Anyone know why i am getting this movie again we lost it about 1 and a half months ago ? is it a re release?
Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 10-09-2002, 07:43 PM:
Yes, it is a re-release ... they're trying to bump it up over $40,000,000.
Posted by Mike Williams (Member # 1140) on 10-09-2002, 09:28 PM:
You meant $40,000 right? 
Posted by Franklin Armstrong (Member # 1448) on 10-09-2002, 09:29 PM:
well thanks for the bad news
Posted by Paul Goulet (Member # 297) on 10-09-2002, 09:55 PM:
I think he meant $40.00 !!!
Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 10-09-2002, 10:16 PM:
Please you have got to be kidding me
Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 10-09-2002, 11:51 PM:
No joke, Sean, my theatre got it as well. Granted its doubled up with something else, but still....In my mind this makes no sense. Over $40 million? Maybe, but we dropped Trapped this week, you'd think Sony would have prefferred to keep that in first run rather than bring Master of Disguise back. The only other explanation I can think of is perhaps this is in response to Tuck Everlasting. There aren't a lot of kids movies out right now and maybe Sony is hopping to grab some overflow if Tuck is a hit. That's a stretch though.
Posted by Franklin Armstrong (Member # 1448) on 10-10-2002, 12:37 AM:
at my theater we are droping ----- signs , ballistic , spy kids2 , trapped , stealing harvard, master of disguise and xxx are going to be together also getting trasnsporter , rules of attraction ,and brown sugar
Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 10-10-2002, 04:31 AM:
quote:
"Well, through Sunday, October 6, Master of Disguise has grossed $39,516,694."
That's an awful lot of money Sony is hoping to make off of that movie to hit the $40,000,000 goal. With any other movie, sure, but Master of Disguise???
Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 10-10-2002, 09:30 AM:
I heard something that a movies gross has something to do with the video market and how much the rental houses have to pay for copies, or whatever money they have to give a studio.So, if a title is close to crossing a boundry like $40M, then the deal is better for the rental company.
Master of Disguise for us is playing the first matinee only and we also had a re-release of Bad Company a little while ago and this is where this info came from.
Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 10-10-2002, 03:47 PM:
Don't you just love how we have to jump through hoops for the films companies over shit like this. I really hope that they don't reach their $40 Million goal this week and have to hold it over. I am willing to bet money that if they don't hit their goal, we will be forced not only to keep the film, but run it for a full set of daily shows with the usual threat of pulling their next major film release off of our bookings.
Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 10-10-2002, 06:18 PM:
Booking is an extremely complicated thing. Sony is an extremely good customer to have ... look at the phenominal year they're having. After providing us with many good movies this summer (Spider-Man, Mr. Deeds, Men In Black 2, Stuart Little 2), we should gladly do this little favor for them.
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 10-10-2002, 06:32 PM:
What if it doesn't pass the $40,000,000 mark this week?
Does that mean you get to put on your marquees HELD OVER second
exciting week. 
Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 10-11-2002, 11:15 AM:
I agree that booking is a complicated monster. However, we are suppose to be in the business of making money the same as the film companies and I would rather use the screen on a movie that someone is actually going to go see. Instead we have to be the film companies bitch in order to keep them happy. This is not a good system. It would even be nice to be able to play the occasional art house film.
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 10-11-2002, 12:22 PM:
I don't get this....how does the distributor tell you what you are going to play? And if you are playing something that you would not book on your own, but are doing it for some kind of publicity for the studio, certainly you don't PAY to do them a favor like this, do you? I would four wall the theatre if they want to use my screen as a publicity gimmick, ESPECIALLY if it is to help the video rental store down the block who is my fierce competition. "You want me to play MASTER OF DISGUISE, great....give me the next upcomning Sony blockbuster for 50/50 instead of 90/10.
Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 10-11-2002, 03:10 PM:
Well, it is worth noting that this is probably being re-booked with a generous house allowance. Not sure if I'm using the right terms here, but Sony might be paying theatres an initial flat fee to play the picture. This wouldn't make a lot of ssnse at first since likely Sony will lose money on every print, but since the house allowance won't effect the movies gross, it fits in with the video rental theory.
Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 10-11-2002, 04:36 PM:
Frank - It's not a matter of the studios forcing anyone to do anything. It's a matter of an exhibitor doing a studio a favor. Who doesn't have something right now that you can't at least drop the first matinee show on ... cause you know that print of Ballistic just HAS to hold clean this week.
Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 10-11-2002, 04:44 PM:
You can thank Miramax for The Master of Disguise coming back. Miramax wisely decided on a limited release for Pokemon 4Ever. A lot of theaters that would have played Pokemon got MofD instead.Mike S: You forgot another great Sony release of this summer . . . xXx
Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 10-13-2002, 04:22 AM:
my theater has one show of master of disguise friday
through sunday. so far, 2/3 of the way through its
run here exactly 0 people have paid to see it. one
person, me, has sat through it for free. and boy do
i feel ripped off. i can't think of a worse movie
all year, and i see about 500 films a year.carl
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 10-14-2002, 03:28 PM:
This last weekend the totals for "Master of Disguise".
They added 626 screens for a total of 846 screens.
They added $217,517 for a total of $39,751,057. Looks like
you guys need to get the old marquee letters out.
HELD OVER FOR SECOND EXCITING WEEK. The per screen average was $257.00
The production budget for this picture was reported at 16 Million.
The estimated marketing cost for this picture was reported at 32 Million dollars.
Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 10-14-2002, 06:03 PM:
And I'n the UK we haven't had the first release of 'Master of Disguise' yet! Unless it's gone straight to video like 'Kung Pow :Enter The Fist'.
Posted by Paul Rich (Member # 243) on 10-14-2002, 10:53 PM:
We got it Friday (after having dropped it the previous week, what a waste) and we're losing it again this Thursday. May it be the final time.
Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 10-15-2002, 01:39 PM:
Yea we are actually dropping it after this week also. We have had a total of 4 people show up for it. Considering how close they are to 40 Million, don't be surprise if they break that on Thursday when some theater suspiciously close to Sony's corprate offices mysteriously sells out every show on Thursday. That way they can charge their premium for the video release.
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 10-21-2002, 08:30 PM:
This last weekend the totals for "Master of Disguise"
They lost 742 theatres for a total of 104 screens. (-83%)
They added $36,973 for a total of $39,867,996.00The per screen average was $355
This thing is never going to hit 40 million.
Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 10-21-2002, 09:08 PM:
Ah yes it will - national subrun date 10/25. This thing will probably chalk up $500,000 at least subrun, if not closer to $1,000,000.
Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 10-23-2002, 11:42 AM:
That is something I never really quite understood. Why, if studios are so keen on reaching such a close mark in regards to box office money, do they re-release their crappy movies BACK to first-runs instead of just moving on to sub-runs where they would probably make more money? I would more strongly consider seeing "Master Of Disguise" for $2.50 than $8.00.Even with really big movies like "Spiderman" they should just move on to sub-run. There comes a point where even the biggest blockbuster (with some exceptions, of course) is not worth the money per ticket that the first-runs charge. Either that, or don't pull them from the first-runs in the first place.
Rant over.
=TMP=
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 10-23-2002, 11:55 AM:
Slightly O/T, but there was an interesting booking scenario here with Spiderman recently. The MIB2/Spiderman double-feature was playing at first-run Cinemark 17, while Spiderman played simultaneously at Cinemark Movies 12, a $1.50 theater on the opposite side of the same mall.
Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 10-28-2002, 10:28 PM:
Through Sunday, October 27, 2002:$40,032,054
Pulled in $159,727 from 226 venues this weekend ($707/venue).