Barnack

Hum curious how it will play out, if the footage in the movie look a lot like the real footage maybe they will love the movie and use it as a sign that it would have been easy to fake them.

it is, but a logical one for the 2010s it was really a giant sellers specially on digital platform that I imagine are more likely to rate the book online, it now look like this: The sequels sold 445k copy it's first of sales, very similar to the number of tickets the first movie sold for it's Thursday previews ($4.9MM previews). https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/books/2013/10/31/book-buzz/3324793/ 1 The Fault in Our Stars by John Green (Goodreads Author) 4.24 avg rating — 2,858,604 ratings score: 190,836, and 1,930 people voted   Want to Read Rate this book 1 of 5 stars2 of 5 stars3 of 5 stars4 of 5 stars5 of 5 stars 2 Divergent (Divergent, #1) by Veronica Roth (Goodreads Author) 4.22 avg rating — 2,477,394 ratings score: 140,334, and 1,432 people voted   Want to Read Rate this book 1 of 5 stars2 of 5 stars3 of 5 stars4 of 5 stars5 of 5 stars 3 Mockingjay (The Hunger Games, #3) by Suzanne Collins 4.03 avg rating — 2,001,835 ratings score: 132,890, and 1,361 people voted   Want to Read Rate this book 1 of 5 stars2 of 5 stars3 of 5 stars4 of 5 stars5 of 5 stars 4 Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn (Goodreads Author) 4.05 avg rating — 1,834,430 ratings score: 113,509, and 1,156 people voted   Want to Read Rate this book 1 of 5 stars2 of 5 stars3 of 5 stars4 of 5 stars5 of 5 stars 5 The Martian by Andy Weir (Goodreads Author) 4.40 avg rating — 619,227 ratings score: 106,066, and 1,080 people voted   All movies with impressive weekend, one surprise is Girl on a Train at a rather low #22, despite a giant 1.552m ratings, much bigger than everything else out of the top 4. It also show some possible weakness versus some pass golden era of 2000-2010 for franchise book popularity ?, that score of 140k would have kept it out of the top 20 in the past decade, with all of the Potters release in that era, first 2 HG, Twilight, The Help, Dragon Tattoo, Da Vinci Code, Kite Runners, etc... above 200k, even above 400k for some of those. The Games of Thrones classment are a bit of a let done, but could be the sample size of the type of people hanging out on a website like that.

I think right now someone a la Christian Picciolini or Joey Diaz would be easier to handle for people in a movie that someone with the smallest sexual offense in is past. Not sure if it is society going to hard about sex-offender or a certain embellishment of organized crime or easier to show that you changed when you were a violent gangster, not being a violent gangster or neo-nazy anymore and being a family men is a very visible change, not being a creep predator is not something that is visible, it is not like they would be doing it in the open if it was still going on.

My first impression was not taking China part of the weekend BO and the usual legs in that market in full consideration, using a rough misleading rules of thumbs instead.

The ranking seem to be by "score" a metric that seem to multiply the numbers of voters, not by the average score itself. Pushing popular title to the top.

It does need mean either. If a dvd have gross sales of 50m in the stores, the studio will received a cut of that and the store will keep a share, exactly like a movie making a 100m at the box office does not mean 100m of revenues for the studios. Say the store keep in average 20% of the sales price, 50m in sales would be 40m to the studios.

A bit of a strange article all together. http://ir.timewarner.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=70972&p=irol-reportsannual In 2016: Fans spent $4.5 billion on DC-related consumer products. Video games is a 1.5 billion a year business for WB a lot driven by is DC IP title. If WB does not need once 3-4 movies were success, it didn't needed it before those either.

50m in sales does not mean 50m in revenues to the studio. No, never said I agree with that sentiment, but Liongates already had more than 6,000 title with a 1 billion a year gross revenues around 2006 , even if the franchise Saw was 200m of those, they were still a 80% non-Saw revenues studio.

That was Fox statement: "Our studio was not aware of Mr. Striegel's background when he was hired," said a 20th Century Fox spokesperson in a statement to The Hollywood Reporter. "Several weeks ago, when the studio learned the details, his one scene in the film was removed within 24 hours. We were not aware of his background during the casting process due to legal limitations that impede studios from running background checks on actors." How did it got to the press in the first place, I am unsure, it was from the LA Tymes that broke it: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-the-predator-shane-black-steven-wilder-striegel-20180906-story.html How did they heard any of it ? Who contacted them ? Is it the director to explain itself, fearing it would broke out ? The studio ? I guess once the movie release and a cast member do not show up, people would have started to look for reason's and would have find it (considering it was on is wikipedia page).

That already a bit far from most of it. But also in 2006 box office was usua a really small part of a studio income, for studio in general but specially for a Liongates type. Oscar Best picture winner Crash, Crank, Lord of War, Madea Goes to Jail, Madea Family Runion, they had revenues sources. If you look at the july-september quater of 2006, their motion picture revenues looked like this: Theatrical: 20.5m (versus 57.1m in distribution and marketing expense, they were loosing more than twice what they were making in theater) Home Video: 115.1m TV: 33.4 Intl: 17.1m Other: 0.5m Total: 186.6m Theatrical was only 11% of one of liongates business, Motion Picture. Looking at box office mojo to judge a studio is in general quite misleading but in the 2004-2009 dvd era it is especially misleading. Even more if one look at the domestic box office around that time it was in general under 10% of the revenues. They were also in the TV business (31.6m). 25% of their box office was around 2.35% of their business in that era.

More seriously society should at least let them choose Mechanical/Physical castration over removing the chance to work outside their own home or the other very limited OK place of employment.

That the mistake of projecting past decision with current hindsight, #metoo started in 2006 but became a big Hollywood talk in October 2017, principal photography of Predator ended june 2017. Blake had casting him in multipe movies without any issues. They did.

Criminal conviction tend to be public domain, with people having the rights and relatively easy access to that information, Steven Wilder was registered in a couple of place (if you use those offender search engine he pop-up), it was even on is wikipedia page since 2015. If an actor does not want to work with a sex offender they can get an account on those service and look up everyone, the employer cannot do it legally but the co-worker can.

THey had Tyler Perry stuff, distributing a lot of stuff not under their name and started to had a library, in 2006 Liongates the filmed enterteinmant annual revenues were about 800-900m for Liongates, I doubt it was almost all from Saw.

It has good chance, it has been a while since Kevin Hart went below 30m has a lead/co-lead on a comedy co-parter type. Has yet to happen I think. Ride along: 41m Get Hard: 33m Ride along 2: 34m Central intelligence: 35.5m Jumanji: 36m Tiffany Haddish seem a very logical co-star for him and probably in a prime right now, would imagine an OW similar to is Get Hard, Central Intelligence type.

Sound like crazy legs for an franchise horror entry with a C cinemascore. Sound impossible to me. IT got B+ and made 700m with a nearly 200m start in less markets. Feel like that make 460m the ceiling and chance are good legs would be worst for an high 300m result.

But he tweeted stuff at least.

That and the producer of Expendable handling of Terry Crews, do show how difficult it can be to speak out. Not too long ago it would been some attack in pagesix and other garbage publication. Sterling K Brown did.

That make it sound like the World Cup could have been a factor (if those ratio from the first Ant-Man are different), Europe and LA being probably quite the most crazy about that event.

That an unsurprising twist. (I thought he was going for something else completely with the trailers)

Everything do (the trailers, the music, the poster, the names) to way out of it. But they can lower your expectation and make you think the movie was better than it was and so on or overhype it and make it look underwhelming, it is not clear in which direction it will affect you when it does.

The little silly point yes, but the main one that they made 1400 millions in the last 12 month with movies, Saw is really a small part of their business.

The show is on TV not cable too. Even CAble TV is extremelly common for the under 30 in the US: https://www.statista.com/statistics/740115/frequency-watching-cable-tv-by-age/ In 2017, the 18-24 American Demo was still watching 12 hours of traditional tv a week in average, it dropped by a huge 50% since 2012, but it started from such an extremely high numbers, American and TVs was quite the crazy affair. Disney streaming could be nice for the show, but how about their how biggest business, traditional TV ? Helping people leaving it is making a big competition to themselve, they need to do it with a nice high price solutions.

For all is fault, Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom seem to be quite useless on Netflix, kind of movie that see it in theater or not at all imo and it was well shot by Bayona/Faura. It did feel like a movie and a big one. Suggesting movie going above 500m at the box office belong on Netflix....

You think people that go see a movie based on reviews to not come up with their own opinion once they have seen it ? Reviews are not for having an opinion about a movie.