Avatree

Again. Audiences are not critics.

Why would the audience reaction be poor? The film has been ouy for a couple of weeks here and everyone loves it. Audiences are not critics you know...

Alright. 500 likes each way

Anyone willing to take a bet with me that Tele will like this if he watches it? I'll give you a Like as payment.

what was funny about it then?

thanks for the confirmation. 84 minutes is standard for a family film so I dont know what some people are complaining about

Yeah, box office tracking would be less precise, but BO tracking isn't 100% accurate in the first place (there are rereleases, double features, etc. all the time that earn money but don't get tracked), and ticket sales are only one part of a film's moneymaking lifespan. It may take a while to get off the ground, but it's become a big success in a short space of time over here, I'm sure the same would happen in the US. These schemes are growing every day.

Despicable Me 2 outgrossed all Pixar movies OS and WW except toy story 3, so yeah, that is kind of a given.

War of the Worlds - 297M The Last Samurai - 148M Minority Report - 185M Vanilla Sky - 143M all this side of 2000.

The movie kept reminding me of Shrek 2, with Jennifer Saunders playing a somewhat similar role, and among various other gags and shots.

You only need to watch 2 films per month in order to justify the subscription fee, so I suspect a great many subscribers do indeed only watch a few movies, as it still saves them a decent amount of money.

Anyone who sees MINIONS this weekend, I'd be interested in knowing if you get the minions-specific PAN trailer.

that's not grumpytele, that's normalhumanbeingtele.

it doesn't work like that, read my previous post. regardless of how many tickets you get, the cinema will still pay the same flat fee to the studios. For some users this means the cinema is paying the studio much more than the customer is paying the cinema, but in the bigger picture it works out well for the cinema as the majority of subscribers don't see 20 movies a month. if the £3 figure is correct, then at current prices, the customer would need to see 6 films per month in order for them to actually make the cinema lose money. however, the way the scheme works in terms of studio costs isn't public information so I may be wrong.

I had to turn away from some of the action scenes in Taken 3 as they are shot so badly, it makes your eyes hurt. (may sound stupid but thousands of others also said the same thing)

What do you mean who pays for it? The cinema pays for it...

Wow, 15 euros for a week? The price here is more like 15 euros for a month. And yes, each time you get a ticket, money is given to the studio. I believe it's £3/ticket here but not 100% sure.

The crazy thing about it is the price. It sounds like it'd be expensive but here, it is significantly less than the price of 2 tickets per month. Maybe when it takes off in the States, it will be pricier, but it is SO damn cheap here. It's really fantastic, I hope you guys get it sooner rather than later. with the success of Netflix & other subscription movie services, I'm sure it won't be too long

I thought better of you, spag...

America should learn to have cinema subscriptions like we have here in the UK, then you don't have to worry about 'getting your moneys worth' and you feel free to watch a wider variety of movies than you would if you paid for your tickets.

commando is actually watchable though, that's the difference. Taken is trash.

I bet if Titanic was released now the internet would spoil the ending.

This is wrong on so many levels.

I am one year old and I just saw Starship Troopers, what an amazing movie.

YOU QUOTED IT WRONG OMG