4 posts tagged “poor”
Even the citizens of Namibia have dreaded this day, but it seems to finally be upon us: people are spending less on the price-gouged foodstuffs available at their local cineplex, no longer compelled by the excitement of a new Zack Efron vehicle to throw their diabetes-inspired caution to the wind and splurging on Goobers and cheese pretzels. Says THR:
Two operators of film theaters on Monday reported weaker U.S. revenue as dwindling concession spending added to smaller admissions figures in the third quarter despite record-breaking results from Warner Bros.' "The Dark Knight."
...However, the numbers announced by Carmike Cinemas after the market close paints a different picture. The company reported a $24,000 profit, down from the $2.1 million recorded in the year-ago period as revenue dropped 7.4% to $122.9 million. Admissions revenue fell 6.9% to $81.1 million, and concession revenue decreased 8.3% to $41.8 million, exacerbating the situation.
I've been crying all morning.
[thr]
Sometimes (read: always) I wish I lived in an area where there was more happening instead of basically nothing--meaning, I wish I lived in a city, so I could just hop a train somewhere cool. I mean, yeah, being in Jersey, I can basically do that anyway, but that's not my point. My point is, I want what I don't have, not what I could have if I tried a little harder. Anyway, things:
Over at the Editing Room, they've got the abridged script for the Dark Knight, and it's not bad, but it's got a bristling comments section going for it. I was lured in and contributed some of my office-addled insights, like this gem:
Lastly, as this thread seems to be devolving, there is a difference between rating a movie, and rating the experience of watching it. I the TDK is pretty darn entertaining as a movie, in the theater, that I sat there and watched (twice). As soon as I left the theater the first time, I was able to point out flaws, but when I went back to watch, I could care less about the flaws, because I was having a good time, because that’s what the movie is: a good time. It gets a lot of gas for dealing with psychological issues, and for being almost unrelentingly somber, and I think that’s why it gets a pass with so many people: it’s okay that it’s imperfect because it seems to mean well. It treats the comic with respect and blahblah…
So, yeah. In Rod’s review/script for GVS’s Psycho remake, he points out that there is a lot that isn’t entirely awesome about the movie because it wasn’t so awesome in the original. But Psycho transcend’s the criticism beause it upped the ante at the time and people have been ripping it off ever since. That is the case here, sort of, at least according to the media, so that’s TDK’s burden and is why it’s probably so easy to get excited about, and so easy to hate as well. RANT!
OMG I'm so fucking insightful!
The Hollywood Reporter also has a story about the Dark Knight (because it's fun to talk about), and along with it, they've got a sampling of the hefty bundles of millions it's gotten for everyone's favorite charity case, Warner Brothers:
$871.5 million
Worldwide boxoffice cume$489.4 million
Domestic boxoffice cume
(second highest ever)$158.4 million
Opening weekend (best ever)$49.8 million
Worldwide Imax gross (highest ever)34%
Percentage of Imax viewers seeing the film for at least the second time18
Days to reach the $400 million domestic benchmark (fastest ever)
Sources: Nielsen EDI, Imax Corp. and THR research; figures as of Sunday night
I'm so happy for them! Next and last, Aaron Sorkin, the mushroom-enthusiast and West Wing show creator, is putting his considerable, mind-bending talents toward the feat of writing a Facebook movie. Sigh. Look, what I'm posting are reasons to drink this weekend. Says THR:
Facebook was founded by Mark Zuckerberg while studying at Harvard along with pals Dustin Moskovitz and Chris Hughes. At first, membership was restricted to Harvard students, then expanded to all Ivy League schools before going on to open up for all universities and high schools in Canada and the U.S. The site now has more than 100 million users worldwide.
Despite offers in the billions of dollars, Zuckerberg has steadfastly remained independent.
Endeavor-repped Sorkin last wrote "Charlie Wilson's War," while Rudin has "Revolutionary Road," starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet, and the film adaptation of the Broadway play "Doubt" coming out this fall.
"I feel about this introduction the way I felt about 'Sophie's Choice': It could have been funnier," Sorkin finished.
Whatever, Aaron. Lastly lastly, your boy Mike Phelps is gonna host SNL. Later daaaaays!!!
Over at Peter Bart's Variety blog, home of the cognizent Variety-bot, word comes around about the 'recession' and the effect it's having on hollywood douchebags' abilities to take home huge paydays. Apparently, agents are having a hard time negotiating, worse than, like, ever or something.
Agents tell me they’ve never had a tougher time negotiating paydays for their top stars. Upfront salaries are shrinking along with percentage slices on the back end.
I probably could've said that myself without quoting the article, but quotes are entertaining and take up space. The article immediately becomes a Look-how-broke-you-are rundown of the Forbes list of the most powerful celebrities. Living the legal life never looked so foolish:
I knew 50 Cent (Curtis Jackson) had a good year at $150 million, but did Pharrell Williams really pull in $20 million? Miley Cyrus scored big this year ($25 million), but did Daniel Radcliffe also haul in $25 million for Pottering around and yanking off his shorts in Equus?
I thought actresses like Keira Knightley and Gwyneth Paltrow devoted too much time to art movies to become big-time earners, but Paltrow pulled in $25 million according to Forbes; Knightley, $32 million.In the actor category, Bruce Willis got his act together well enough to make $41 million this year, which still paled next to Will Smith’s $80 million. Even Howie Mandel dealt himself in for $14 million.
First of all, fabulous wordplay with the 'Bruce Willis' and the 'act together.' Secondly: Howie Mandel?! Jesus Christ. I mean, a lot of this work is soul-stealing (like Howie) so I guess he's earned it, and some of it probs rewarding (like whatever Keira Knightley was doing) so I'm happy for some of these guys, but, jeez. Whatever, I'm gonna go think about the Olympics and force myself not to break my no-drinking-on-work-nights rule.
Source Variety.
The New York Times has an article about how, in Manhattan, it's becoming more difficult for sellers to get rid of their fancy-pants one bedroom apartments, alluding to the lackluster economy and such. The idea is that apartments with two or more rooms are easier to move than the places that would normally go to rich single, or affluent married, manhattanites. It's supposed to be maybe poignant and a sign-o-the-times more than just informative (what's the percentage of people who read the times, especially online, who can relate to this struggle, or to whom it is truly pertinent) but it has glazed my eyes over, because I am dumb poor. I click on the article thinking, 'oh, my, maybe the fates have brought Young New York to its knees and I can now afford to go there for more than a day at time!' But no.
And by one estimate one-bedrooms have been taking nearly three weeks longer to sell than bigger, or smaller, apartments.
Damn, shit is real out there!
(emphasis mine)
