|
Community Links |
Social Groups |
Pictures & Albums |
Members List |
Search Forums |
Advanced Search |
Go to Page... |
|
Thread Tools |
09-28-2009, 09:25 AM | #511 |
Joe Ranger
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Parma, OH
Posts: 234
|
|
09-28-2009, 10:06 AM | #512 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2008
Location: On break
Posts: 4,659
|
Agreed but that does not mean its not a box office success as some would like us to believe.
|
09-28-2009, 10:19 AM | #513 |
Crimson Guard
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 2,157
|
In terms of being a financial success, the movie must usually take in roughly double what it cost to make it. Since the cost usually is a hard figure to pin down (I thought it was estimated to be about $150 mil) and the studios can push the number one way or another by adding advertising and other costs, it's hard to tell. One thing which would lend support to it being a financial success is that (supposedly) a sequel is going to happen / has been green-lit. I don't think Paramount cares about whether or not the toys sell (unless they have a stake in it). Neither would Spyglass. However, HASBRO does, and I am sure that they tried to work with Paramount and Spyglass (and whomever else) to make sure that characters, character designs, vehicle designs were something that they could market. Look at The Dark Knight. Outrageously successful movie but monetarily and critically. Were the toys flying off of the shelves? Were the toys all that great?
Was ROC a critical success? Well that debatable and I am sure both sides can make rational cases for their standpoint. I found it to be good, but not great. Mainly because a) it wasn't the GI Joe I grew up with (which is fine), b) the plot (and acting) was thin at times, and c) it was too sci-fi with some of the weapons etc. All things considered, it was a fun summer-type movie on par with say Wolverine - which was equally as bad (and good) at times. Just MHO of course. |
09-28-2009, 11:18 AM | #514 |
Roboskull Pilot
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North West England
Posts: 5,181
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beckley
It's a failure in my eyes. If I see one more thread about ROC Box office figures I'm gonna puke nanomites all over my computer. Doesn't matter if ROC makes $300 Million or $3 Dollars, it sucked IMO. I'm supposed to like it because it made money? Hanna Montana makes millions, that mean I should go to her concerts and buy her albums? Besides, you could find plenty of haters before the film opened saying this "bad film will tank at the box office", so they obviously equate takings with success (or lack of it) when it suited them.
__________________
-----------------There's no shame in being a pariah----------------- |
09-28-2009, 11:26 AM | #515 |
JOES BEFORE HOES
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Westland, MI
Posts: 5,939
|
Quote:
Quote:
maybe i missed some correction, but last i heard, it cost $170 plus million to produce and another $100 and some million to market... |
09-28-2009, 12:51 PM | #516 |
Spartan F5 Viper
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sparta
Posts: 17,125
|
Still does not matter to the line or the future of joe figures. If it does not move these toys and soon it is going to have major reprocussions for all of us in regards to what Hasbro's plans with the future. It truley sucks Hasbro relied on Paramount to pull this thing off to make this stuff survive and Hasbo put all of their eggs in the ROC basket and hoped Paramount's viewer research showed it would sell the hell outta toys and successful...well look what they got....nota...for me to drive 200 miles round trip on a joe hunt to at least 25-30 stores between Target/ TRU and Walmart and see enough wave 1,2,3 and not a single new figures for the last 2 months errr...Houston we have a big problem!
And in that regard it could get an emmy for best Acting, Best Cameo, Best CGI, best story writing and best director, sell a lot of DVDs but no toys? End of teh line I say (had to be said so there)!
__________________
... |
09-28-2009, 01:12 PM | #517 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2008
Location: On break
Posts: 4,659
|
Quote:
The fact is lets deal with numbers we know are true. The argument for any film has always been budget versus revenue. ROC fans are the only people I have ever seen try to argue marketing costs. So lets leave that out of the equation until we know from Paramount how much it took to advertise and how much they have made selling toys and what-knot. We know the film cost 175 million dollars to make. from pre to post production. So if we go with that number alone...175 million and the film has taken in 295 million worldwide........Uhm, how is that not a success? |
09-28-2009, 01:21 PM | #518 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2008
Location: On break
Posts: 4,659
|
Quote:
In terms of being a financial success, the movie must usually take in roughly double what it cost to make it. Since the cost usually is a hard figure to pin down (I thought it was estimated to be about $150 mil) and the studios can push the number one way or another by adding advertising and other costs, it's hard to tell. One thing which would lend support to it being a financial success is that (supposedly) a sequel is going to happen / has been green-lit. I don't think Paramount cares about whether or not the toys sell (unless they have a stake in it). Neither would Spyglass. However, HASBRO does, and I am sure that they tried to work with Paramount and Spyglass (and whomever else) to make sure that characters, character designs, vehicle designs were something that they could market. Look at The Dark Knight. Outrageously successful movie but monetarily and critically. Were the toys flying off of the shelves? Were the toys all that great?
Was ROC a critical success? Well that debatable and I am sure both sides can make rational cases for their standpoint. I found it to be good, but not great. Mainly because a) it wasn't the GI Joe I grew up with (which is fine), b) the plot (and acting) was thin at times, and c) it was too sci-fi with some of the weapons etc. All things considered, it was a fun summer-type movie on par with say Wolverine - which was equally as bad (and good) at times. Just MHO of course. Now as far as the formula for making twice its money that is an old Hollywood way of doing things. They used to cook the books to produce a film that according to them did not make a profit. So I am not even going to argue that........... When New Line said that the Lord of the Rings did not make a profit......come on.......... can you really take them serious? I cannot! As far as ROC being a critical success............ nobody can argue that it was. IMDB, ROTTEN, and Box Office Mojo all agree that the scores are at best average. |
09-28-2009, 01:24 PM | #519 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2008
Location: On break
Posts: 4,659
|
Emmy? Really? How can we take you serious after that statement!
|
09-28-2009, 02:14 PM | #520 |
Spartan F5 Viper
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sparta
Posts: 17,125
|
Ye I can take myself seriosuly but your applying way to much seriousness to all of this anyway. It was sarcasm? Being Facetious? I was making a stretch to say if it remotley came close or had a millionth of a chance to even be An Emmy/Oscar or any other award contender other than Bad Tomato LOL it would still be a failure to meet it's main trigger....to sell massive amounts of toys like Star Wars...which it has failed to do so.
__________________
... |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
For the people who did like the new G.I. Joe: RoC movie sign here! | Sweetstick99 | G.I. Joe Live Action Movie | 472 | 07-05-2021 11:34 AM |
For the people who hated the new G.I. Joe: RoC movie sign here! | xhairs | G.I. Joe Live Action Movie | 711 | 04-01-2020 01:38 AM |
The debate on AOTS! | Flint5150 | G.I. Joe Live Action Movie | 0 | 08-14-2009 09:50 AM |
New Movie Figure Images on People.com | FallenPrey | G.I. Joe News and Rumors | 113 | 02-13-2009 12:19 AM |
People w/High Expectations of The Movie......... | Sysiss | G.I. Joe Live Action Movie | 47 | 01-21-2008 02:30 AM |
|
|