Jump to content
CoolioD1

Once Upon a Time in... Hollywood | July 26 2019 | Digital Foot Technology | RIP Cinerama Dome

Recommended Posts

On 7/31/2019 at 10:30 PM, JB33 said:

Anyway, different strokes. Also, I'm convinced the scene was a daydream, not a memory. Am I totally off??

I thought so, too, while watching it. But after reviewing the timeline, I'm kinda convinced it was a flashback, but probably not a 100% "factual" one. The film takes place in the summer of '69, while The Green Hornet was cancelled during the summer of '67.  It's still entirely possible that it's a fantasy/flashback from the perspective of an unreliable narrator, which is how I look at it. Cliff Booth did meet up with Bruce Lee, and they had a confrontation of some sort, but the details may have been greatly embellished by Booth!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

8/10, slow start, bonkers ending that I should've realized was coming but didn't.

 

Grading on a Tarantino curve as well. 

 

Pitt and Leo were amazing and Pitt should get a best supporting actor Oscar nomination imo.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, John Harris said:

I thought so, too, while watching it. But after reviewing the timeline, I'm kinda convinced it was a flashback, but probably not a 100% "factual" one. The film takes place in the summer of '69, while The Green Hornet was cancelled during the summer of '67.  It's still entirely possible that it's a fantasy/flashback from the perspective of an unreliable narrator, which is how I look at it. Cliff Booth did meet up with Bruce Lee, and they had a confrontation of some sort, but the details may have been greatly embellished by Booth!

Yeah, that's exactly what it seemed like, which is why the scene is harmless. It's Cliff toying with the memory in his head. This is now how QT is actually portraying Lee.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JB33 said:

Yeah, that's exactly what it seemed like, which is why the scene is harmless. It's Cliff toying with the memory in his head. This is now how QT is actually portraying Lee.

Agreed. The scene seems like both a daydream and a memory at the same time. Even so, it's not how Tarantino sees Lee, but how Cliff Booth sees him. Huge difference there. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JB33 said:

Yeah, that's exactly what it seemed like, which is why the scene is harmless. It's Cliff toying with the memory in his head. This is now how QT is actually portraying Lee.

 

That was my first reaction (some delusional magical reason why he loose job + is some martial artist genius), but according to this:

 

https://www.indiewire.com/2019/08/brad-pitt-rejected-extended-bruce-lee-fight-once-upon-a-time-in-hollywood-1202163376/

 

Not sure that was the case, in the script Pitt character win the battle 2 to 3 using a dirty cheap shot move to achieve it, something it would probably not do if it was a fantasy vision.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Barnack said:

 

That was my first reaction (some delusional magical reason why he loose job + is some martial artist genius), but according to this:

 

https://www.indiewire.com/2019/08/brad-pitt-rejected-extended-bruce-lee-fight-once-upon-a-time-in-hollywood-1202163376/

 

Not sure that was the case, in the script Pitt character win the battle 2 to 3 using a dirty cheap shot move to achieve it, something it would probably not do if it was a fantasy vision.

Interesting. Gotta love the level of respect everyone has for Bruce Lee. Seems like an effective compromise was reached. I love Bruce Lee and my opinion of him hasn't been manipulated. It was all purely fiction and I believe QT was counting on the audience having that perspective.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/1/2019 at 10:22 PM, Frozen said:

I have not seen any other QT films. Is his foot fetish as obvious in his other films as it was in this one?

Honestly I really didn't notice in this movie because back then so many people were barefoot & I remember all of us driving around with our feet out the window in the summer but yes my daughter noticed it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to address the 30% first-dollar gross participation of QT, Leo and Brad - according to this article

https://slate.com/culture/2006/01/how-the-studios-compensate-the-most-powerful-movie-stars.html?via=gdpr-consent

it really isn't first-dollar gross but adjusted-gross. So, if the movie makes $400m split in 130-270, revenue is then 130*0,55+270*0,40 ~ $180m. And I think the 30% comes from this (also from other streams later - VOD, physical, streaming), so studio earns ~ $126m, plenty to cover $90m budget and uses VOD/physical/streaming to cover marketing.

 

So IF this earns $400m, we could call it medium success

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JimiQ said:

it really isn't first-dollar gross but adjusted-gross. So, if the movie makes $400m split in 130-270, revenue is then 130*0,55+270*0,40 ~ $180m.

That would be gross, the movie does not make $400M, the movie is making like you said  130*0,55+270*0,40 

 

Adjusted gross receipt is a bit different than that, it is not the actual gross anymore but some OTT removed and often just a certain % of home ent sales.

 

OFF-THE-TOPS (OTTs) - Conversion costs, checking costs, collection costs, residuals, trade dues, licenses, and taxes. These are sometimes referred to as "1-7's," based on the numbering of deductions in studio gross profit exhibits.

 

ADJUSTED GROSS RECEIPTS (AGR) - GROSS RECEIPTS less OTT's. Gross participants, with very rare exceptions, receive a percentage of adjusted gross receipts. Sometimes referred to as Gross Proceeds (“GP”).

 

In a contract Adjusted gross receipt can look like that

 

100% Gross receipt (that would be your 180m dollar figure and all the VOD, TV, DVD, revenues), minus

 

Trade due (like what they paid to the MPAA)

Theater checking cost

Collecting cost

Residuals

Remittance charges

Taxes

Duties, custom  import charge

 

Often the Adjusted gross will diminish the home video gross receipts to say 35% (or historically 20%), since VHS are long gone people probably get 100% or near 100% too.

 

That the leaked deal between Sony and Toho co. getting gross point on Godzilla:

https://wikileaks.org/sony/docs/03_03/Legal_Dept/Corporate Legal/BrownHanna share/Agreements/Toho Co., Ltd/TriStar Pictures, Inc.-Toho Co.,_Option-Purchase Agreement for Godzilla.pdf

 

They get a kick-in once initial actual break even is achieved (and how break even point will be calculated), that explain all in detail how the calculation will be made.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Barnack said:

That would be gross, the movie does not make $400M, the movie is making like you said  130*0,55+270*0,40 

 

Adjusted gross receipt is a bit different than that, it is not the actual gross anymore but some OTT removed and often just a certain % of home ent sales.

 

OFF-THE-TOPS (OTTs) - Conversion costs, checking costs, collection costs, residuals, trade dues, licenses, and taxes. These are sometimes referred to as "1-7's," based on the numbering of deductions in studio gross profit exhibits.

 

ADJUSTED GROSS RECEIPTS (AGR) - GROSS RECEIPTS less OTT's. Gross participants, with very rare exceptions, receive a percentage of adjusted gross receipts. Sometimes referred to as Gross Proceeds (“GP”).

 

In a contract Adjusted gross receipt can look like that

 

100% Gross receipt (that would be your 180m dollar figure and all the VOD, TV, DVD, revenues), minus

 

Trade due (like what they paid to the MPAA)

Theater checking cost

Collecting cost

Residuals

Remittance charges

Taxes

Duties, custom  import charge

 

Often the Adjusted gross will diminish the home video gross receipts to say 35% (or historically 20%), since VHS are long gone people probably get 100% or near 100% too.

 

That the leaked deal between Sony and Toho co. getting gross point on Godzilla:

https://wikileaks.org/sony/docs/03_03/Legal_Dept/Corporate Legal/BrownHanna share/Agreements/Toho Co., Ltd/TriStar Pictures, Inc.-Toho Co.,_Option-Purchase Agreement for Godzilla.pdf

 

They get a kick-in once initial actual break even is achieved (and how break even point will be calculated), that explain all in detail how the calculation will be made.

 

So we can safely say sony doesn’t lose money on this

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, JimiQ said:

So we can safely say sony doesn’t lose money on this

The rumors goes from, Tarantino alone getting 25% first dollar gross, to a more reasonable everyone together in a pool getting about 30% first dollar gross, to no first dollar at all according to Sony studio head Rothman himself, it has yet to open to most markets, so who knows

 

But saying like this, if it has the regular legs it seem to be getting and end up around 125m domestic, do a rather mediocre for Tarantino or DiCaprio oversea ratio of say 40/60 (really Americana project, exchange rate rough, no China release, etc...), end up doing 312.5M and Sony loose money it was quite the dangerous and arguably bad deal imo (how much did they saw for this, it went has well has it could), but that what some trade do seem to imply has a possibility.

 

 

Edited by Barnack
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Barnack said:

The rumors goes from, Tarantino alone getting 25% first dollar gross, to a more reasonable everyone together in a pool getting about 30% first dollar gross, to no first dollar at all according to Sony studio head Rothman himself, it has yet to open to most markets, so who knows

 

But saying like this, if it has the regular legs it seem to be getting and end up around 125m domestic, do a rather mediocre for Tarantino or DiCaprio oversea ratio of say 40/60 (really Americana project, exchange rate rough, no China release, etc...), end up doing 312.5M and Sony loose money it was quite the dangerous and arguably bad deal imo (how much did they saw for this, it went has well has it could), but that what some trade do seem to imply has a possibility.

 

 

The first rumour can't be true because the studio would be getting bent over. I could see the second one though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quentin Taratino wouldn't use the fact he is the most iconic director of the last 25 years shooting films with the biggest movie stars to ask his agent to negociate insane bonus points to be filthy fucking rich and living in 15m$ mansions in the Hills.

What a horrible propostion to ponder.

I remember a time when it was about the

Art

Those were the days ... cherish them forever.

To think he is maybe neighbors with Bob, Kevin or Victoria, aka the manufacturers ... the Horrror ... the absolute  Horror ...

Edited by The Futurist
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

Quentin Taratino wouldn't use the fact he is the most iconic director of the last 25 years shooting films with the biggest movie stars to ask his agent to negociate insane bonus points to be filthy fucking rich and living in 15m$ mansions in the Hills.

 What a horrible propostion to ponder.

 

 

Pretty sure he was already quite filthy rich with millions in properties:

https://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/quenten-tarantinos-house/view/google/

 

What are you going about ?

Who are you talking about ?

What are you responding too (is anyone insinuating Tarantino didn't dealt for himself a giant compensation for this ?)

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Barnack said:

 

 

Pretty sure he was already quite filthy rich with millions in properties:

https://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/quenten-tarantinos-house/view/google/

 

What are you going about ?

Who are you talking about ?

What are you responding too (is anyone insinuating Tarantino didn't dealt for himself a giant compensation for this ?)

He has a raging vendetta against the upper class.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This held well in its 2nd weekend and is projected to hold close to 60% this weekend. Kind of expected, but at the same time I love how well it's doing. What's everyone's thoughts on final domestic tally?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/5/2019 at 11:07 PM, JimiQ said:

So we can safely say sony doesn’t lose money on this

Yep, Sony's got a good thing going with him. He'll give them a good mid-level hit every handful of years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.