DAR Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 She s playing freaking Grace of Monaco this year. How more glamour can you get ? Grace Kelly arguably might be the most beautiful actress ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cairo Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 (edited) Grace Kelly arguably might be the most beautiful actress ever. She's definitely in the top ten. Gene Tierney was gorgeous, too. No wonder detective MacPherson fell in love with a dead woman just because of Laura's painting. Edited August 23, 2013 by Cairo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrPink Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 I'm sorry, but Audrey Hepburn was the GOAT. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 I'm hardly an ABDUCTION fan (honestly, completely forget it existed, before today), but it did do 82m WW on a 35m budget. Not great, but not horrible either. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rthmessiah Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 (edited) Sony's doing fine. Here are their 2013 releases so far: The Call - 51m WW, 13m budget (profitable theatrically) Evil Dead - 97m WW, 17m budget (profitable theatrically) After Earth - 243m WW, 130m budget (slight loss theatrically) TITE - 97m WW, 32m budget (profitable theatrically) White House Down - 131m WW, 150m budget (big loss theatrically) Grown Ups 2 - 172m WW (to date), 80m budget (profitable theatrically) Smurfs 2 - 205m WW (to date), 105m budget (will be profitable theatrically) Elysium - 98m WW (to date), 115m acquisition budget (will probably break even theatrically) Purely from Theatrical point of view most if not all of the above are under. The production budget doesn't include Marketing/Prints/ other expenses etc, for film and the GBO needs to have 40-50% average removed (money back to distributor). So TITE for example might have had a rental figure of say 40-50mil vs. production budget of 32m(supposedly) but then you add in the theatrical costs (marketing/AdPub/prints/Distribution fees etc). So TITE is not profitable theatrically (theatrical also include what is commonly called non-theatrical so things like Clubs/airlines/cruise ships/Military bases etc.) but when the other revenue streams get added in the film overall might turn out to be profitable. Even though I realise there's nothing else to work on other then what is the GBO and what is the supposed Production budget, you can't really determine theatrical profitability unless it’s something like 100mil prod budget and the film GBO is 400m well yeah you could say film would most likely be profitable. There are a lot of films that get released theatrically purely to help the other revenue streams. Edited August 23, 2013 by Rth 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blankments Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 Y'know, I kinda wish I made a TWE vs. TMI OW thread a few weeks ago. It looks to be actually pretty close now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 Purely from Theatrical point of view most if not all of the above are under. The production budget doesn't include Marketing/Prints/ other expenses etc, for film and the GBO needs to have 40-50% average removed (money back to distributor). Right... but it's basically impossible to know (or even to ballpark) marketing/P&A except for huge tentpoles, right? I guess I should append my post to say "not including marketing". But my point is that Sony will turn a profit on all of those in the long run (maybe not WHITE HOUSE DOWN). 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAR Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 I'm sorry, but Audrey Hepburn was the GOAT.She is up there. Natalie Wood is another Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Futurist Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 (edited) Old Hollywood actresses are overrated anyway. Pictures didn't have good quality ( at least not digital cristal clear and crisp precision of today's digital cameras) & make up was more paint than anything else, hence the suspicious perfect face features. Give me a Audrey hepburn's Paps shot in 5k at 7:30 in the morning and she could probably give Shaleine Woodley a run for her money. Edited August 23, 2013 by The Futurist 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Futurist Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 Wadup bitches ? I am happening, whether you like it or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rthmessiah Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 Right... but it's basically impossible to know (or even to ballpark) marketing/P&A except for huge tentpoles, right? I guess I should append my post to say "not including marketing". But my point is that Sony will turn a profit on all of those in the long run (maybe not WHITE HOUSE DOWN).yeah the distribution expenses Adpub/print etc is not a set % (in the industry these figures can be known, in some countries for example major studios share the costs of their films for that market, so in this example Sony might be able to find out what WB spent on a title) so yes hard to ballpark it and with all the other reveue streams added in (and cost deductions) profitable probably Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonytr87 Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 I've always thought that studios make a profit much easier than people on this forum realize. The general rule of thumb is it needs to gross more than double the production budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezen Baklattan Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 The numbers at Box Office Mojo just scratch the surface of the true financial numbers of a single film. It's impossible to determine profit or loss from anything just from that site with full certainty, as helpful as its information can be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rthmessiah Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 (edited) I've always thought that studios make a profit much easier than people on this forum realize. The general rule of thumb is it needs to gross more than double the production budget. Oh Christ no and the rest has to be multiple times over ,if a movie cost say 100m to make it its GBO was say 400m its more than likely made a loss theatrically, depending on total marketing/print cost, distribution fees etc etc, but then there's also things like product placement(can be worth millions to simply feature a brand of car/watch in movie) that go towards paying for the prod budget (like Smurfs 2 recently was reported to have covered all or most of the prod budget from product placement deals, so even with low BO it will definetly turn a profit, without the product placement it would have a huge loss theatrically).So theres a lot that goes towards what make film profitable or not just theatrically before you add in other revenue streams The numbers at Box Office Mojo just scratch the surface of the true financial numbers of a single film. It's impossible to determine profit or loss from anything just from that site with full certainty, as helpful as its information can be.Yep Edited August 23, 2013 by Rth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rthmessiah Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 thu looking likeTB 2.4,WTM 2,MI 1.8,Pla 1.4,Ely 1.2,KA2 900k 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sims Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 MI 1.8 LMAO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Nevada Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 I appreciate their beauty but to be perfectly honest.. Audrey Hepburn and Grace Kelly do nothing for me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 thu looking likeTB 2.4,WTM 2,MI 1.8,Pla 1.4,Ely 1.2,KA2 900kButler +0%WTM +4%MI -40% :lol:Planes +14%Elysium -6%KA2 -8% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Reynolds Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 so mortal instruments may make under 15m for 5 day...slow start...wom may kick in positively Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leyla Posted August 23, 2013 Share Posted August 23, 2013 As an actor he's okay. But my point was that he stars in flop after flop big budget, medium size, small budgets doesn't matter. He still gets starring roles. he has a very good wom for 'Saving Mr Banks' I hope it works out for him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
