Jump to content

MovieGuyKyle17

Weekend Actuals page 66 TA: 55.6m BS: 25.5m ; SW EP1 $293!

Recommended Posts

I understand that, but these two films that Kitsch did are necessarily bad films quality wise, they are just duds compared to the budget. He can still have a career, but it might take him a while to do it, like it took Pitt.

Oh for sure. I just used Colin Farrel as an example.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



I think something we're all forgetting is that all these actors we're bringing up as examples are way better than Kitsch.

I don't think Kitsch is necessarily bad. The right role can do wonders for him.Even Adrien Brody won an Oscar.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both Matt Damon and Brad Pitt are poor comparisons because both were break out stars that catapulted them into worldwide fame. Taylor Kitsch never had that. These projects were probably supposed to do that.However, I agree that Taylor can definitely still have a career. It is just that he won't be trusted with $200m blockbusters for a while until he proves he can be successful in much smaller projects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



I don't think Kitsch is necessarily bad. The right role can do wonders for him.Even Adrien Brody won an Oscar.

Totally agree. Adrien Brody was fantastic as that pianist that survived the Holocaust.
Link to comment
Share on other sites



You know who else's career was dead before Ocean's Eleven? Matt Damon:12/25/00 All the Pretty Horses Mira. $15,540,353 1,593 $1,304,971 1,483 3012/22/00 Finding Forrester(Cameo) Sony $51,804,714 2,002 $701,207 200 -11/3/00 The Legend of Bagger Vance DW $30,919,168 2,162 $11,516,712 2,061 266/16/00 Titan A.E.(Voice) Fox $22,753,426 2,775 $9,376,845 2,734 -12/25/99 The Talented Mr. Ripley Par. $81,298,265 2,369 $12,738,237 2,307 1111/12/99 Dogma Lions $30,652,890 1,292 $8,669,945 1,269 279/11/98 Rounders Mira. $22,912,409 2,191 $8,459,126 2,176 28All it takes is one hit to bring you back. This burial of Kitsch is way too premature.

None of those were high profile mega flops and at least one or two were actually good.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of those were high profile mega flops and at least one or two were actually good.

I'm not talking about quality, yes they were good. But you're talking strictly about box office drawing and how bad these actors did as draws before a certain period of time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites



When you have a break out hit and show true potential beyond good looks Hollywood will give you alot more chances.But how many actors, with no previous hits, star in back to back bombs that cost the studios hundreds of millions of dollars and bounce back successfully.Hollywood for some reason was trying to make Kitsch the next mega star. I have no idea why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Its not even about being a draw. No one knows who TK is! At least Damon got some exposure from 'controversial' movies like Ripley. I disagree that the quality of the movie doesn't matter. If the movie flops but is good at least you get credibility and maybe another chance, but if it flops and is bad, like both JC and BS were, then you get no credibility.

Edited by Rovex
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Brad Pitt is not even a big box office draw now to begin with, more of a celebrity due to his looks and relationship with Jolie than an actual huge BO name .

He hasn't done a tent pole release in a while.Lets wait until World War Z to judge his star power.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not even about being a draw. No one knows who TK is! At least Damon got some exposure from 'controversial' movies like Ripley

Goodwill Hunting was the ticket for him and Affleck.
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Sun drop will be soft .. I think 56-57M.

Exactly where I expected, though I thought Sat increase would be more and factored in a softer drop for Sun.The Sun drop still seems high to me, might end up with 57M when we get actuals.
Link to comment
Share on other sites





But one still has to ask re: Kitsch why was he put in John Carter( a 250m film) as the lead actor to begin with? Battleship I can see because Liam Neeson was in it as well. But in John Carter all eyes were on him. I have to wonder what the studio was thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



But one still has to ask re: Kitsch why was he put in John Carter( a 250m film) as the lead actor to begin with? Battleship I can see because Liam Neeson was in it as well. But in John Carter all eyes were on him. I have to wonder what the studio was thinking.

They were letting Stanton do whatever he wanted.
Link to comment
Share on other sites





They were letting Stanton do whatever he wanted.

So what was Stanton thinking? That he was James Cameron and John Carter was the next Avatar? (i.e. didn't need a star)
Link to comment
Share on other sites







  • 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.