AmericanPapist Comments
*smile*
i think they will make it, even if it loses millions, rather than encourage future boycotts by admitting obvious defeat. mass media has lots of money, and no morals.
I hate to be an "atheist's" advocate but why isn't an over 300 million gross for a film a good enough haul to make a sequel. Its seems pretty high to me.
This is just something that the article never gets around to explaining. Is it because the American market matters more than the overseas one? Anyone know?
fair question, peg, but among other things, hollywood (etc) figures in opporunity costs, so spending time on a film that "made" 300M is a loss compared to time that could have gone into making one to get 600M, etc. plus, actors and agents, etc., get nervous when future 'hassle-factors' start getting included in negotiations. as in, ron howard is rich as roosevelt, etc, but his professional reputation is forever stained with DVC. like i said, i think they'll make the last film, but spite, not profit, will the more important motive.
Peggy-- the studio admits that production cost $180 million; several folks have slipped up and admitted to $250 million before filming was done.
And they promoted the film all over heck.
And re-did a lot of things.
So...yeah, it may have broken even. Not a setup that makes it likely folks with throw more money in.
http://www.deadlinehollywooddail...-biggest-bombs/
ron howard is rich as roosevelt, etc, but his professional reputation is forever stained with DVC
Get real. Apart from a very limited bloc (i.e. you and your coffee klatsch), NO ONE CARES about Howard's link with Da Vinci Code. It was a plodding, pedestrian film rendered from a horrible potboiler, but if you're walking around thinking that the average popcorn consumer - or studio exec - pays it a moment's thought in their estimation of Howard's oeuvre, you're delusional.
Commenting by HaloScan
