Avatree

You've sold me. Putting it in my Amazon cart now, maybe something to read over xmas. I've been longing to find a book to get me back into reading. Thanks

Wait. Dark fantasy, science fiction, horror and western? This sounds fucking rad. I love fantasy but I haven't picked up a book in a few years. .Dunno how to get back into reading, though that might sound a bit odd.

Shouldn't this be in On The Lot?

stephen king,yeah he's that bloke with the chair what eddie redmayne played aint he?

Half Shell was a better title.

I thought the point of the movie is how the sailors deal with survival after the attack, and the attack only happens right at the beginning?

better than interstellar

Yeah I'll agree that this is Pixar's least funny film, but that doesn't bother me. Not every film has to be a comedy.

HAYSTACK!

Agreed, if American Sniper hadn't had Cooper it might have been profitable but as it stands it's a total bomb.

Yeah I think the policy we have is a little strange, it's no more disturbing than someone going to the toilet.

We only refuse to let someone in once the film has started. But then 5 minutes would make sense if there's only 5 minutes of trailers.

But seriously: Sisters should be able to do very well, since SW is much more male-oriented.

POINT BREAK.

Yeah, lot of people arrive 10 mins after the start time because they know the first 20 mins will not be the movie.

fucking hate when customers are like this. If you turn up after the official start time then it is 100% your fault if the adverts are shorter than you think and you miss some of the film. And 45 minutes, what an idiot. Most cinemas play around 20 minutes of ads/trailers, sometimes less sometimes more. (at least here) I personally would not risk being later than 10 minutes. I am sympathetic to customers when we have less ads than usual - 95% of the time it's 20 minutes, so customers get used to that. Sometimes on opening weekend of big movies, we'll only run 10 minutes of ads, and then people turn up a few mins into the film. I do sympathise with them... but at the same time it's their fault and if they get angry then my sympathy will vanish quite quickly...

oh well, I am sure Rooney Mara will win Best Actress for PAN if supporting actress doesn't go her way

Fair enough. I can understand them wanting to push Blanchett as she's a bigger name, it's just really strange when you've watched the movie and the "supporting" actor is clearly the lead.

If the 50M~ number is including the original marketing then fair enough.

I don't really follow awards, oscars etc. so can someone explain something to me. Who chooses what role an actor is going to be eligible for? (as in lead actor vs. supporting actor) Because Rooney Mara keeps getting nominated for Supporting Actress in CAROL even though she is the protagonist in the film, the main character. And it's confusing.

jesus fucking christ.

It costs $50M to market an awards push?

Why can't call it a bomb? Why would it break even due to OS, when it opened in basically every market, to a measly 29M? It's a 200M+ budget film that will maybe gross 250M worldwide if it's lucky. It's a John Carter/Lone Ranger sized flop. The only thing it has going for it is that at least a majority of its money was made domestic, so the 250M gross will be more lucrative than some other 250M grosses.

What on earth are you talking about, Brave did 300M OS