Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - Part 9

[Super Kal]

the box office should not determine whether a movie is good or not... Green Lantern did terribly, but i thoroughly enjoyed the film. Jet Li's Unleashed never even saw a US theatrical release, and yet it is one of my favorite films to this day, so beauty does not always come from money... it comes from the preferences of those who watch it

whether Hobbit does good or not, I'm going to love these films because its based in the Tolkien universe, and if they got the rights to do Silmarillion and kept it true to the book, i would love it just as much

 

[DarthSkywalker]

the box office should not determine whether a movie is good or not... Green Lantern did terribly, but i thoroughly enjoyed the film. Jet Li's Unleashed never even saw a US theatrical release, and yet it is one of my favorite films to this day, so beauty does not always come from money... it comes from the preferences of those who watch it

whether Hobbit does good or not, I'm going to love these films because its based in the Tolkien universe, and if they got the rights to do Silmarillion and kept it true to the book, i would love it just as much

And most think it is terrible. But that is beside the point. The question was the financial viability of making such a film.

Also your last paragraph is one of my biggest problems when it comes to criticisms of these films. Plenty have already made up their made simply based on the source material. Whether to film succeeds or not from a quality point of view is irrelevant. Tolkien equals good.

 

[ThePhantasm]

That is his business. He and his family can do what they want. Why try to vilify him?

Agreed. And even if people think he takes it too far, how can people blame him for wishing to protect his father's work and legacy?

 

[elsewhere]

Uh, are you talking about Cormac McCarthy's The Road? Because it only made 27mil on a 25mil budget. In other words it bombed, hard. Did you even check before making that statement?

I said it made bank.

Where are you getting this "bombed, hard" from?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I said it made bank.

Where are you getting this "bombed, hard" from?

Uh, where are you getting that it made bank from? 27mil for a 25mil movie isn't bank. It is absolutely horrible.

 

[elsewhere]

Uh, where are you getting that it made bank from? 27mil for a 25mil movie isn't bank. It is absolutely horrible.

Bank = profit

It made a profit, no?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Bank = profit

It made a profit, no?

No it didn't. Roughly half of the film's gross goes to the theaters. To simply break even you need to at least double your budget. But not really, because you usually have to make at least 2.5x the budget to cover marketing as well.

In other words, it lost money.

 

["_____"]

I'm curious to see what the final numbers will be... i'd like to see it get to maybe 700 world wide... just saw it for the third time... it was interesting watching it in 24 fps after seeing it twice in 48fps

 

[DarthSkywalker]

[QUOTE="_____";24899397]I'm curious to see what the final numbers will be... i'd like to see it get to maybe 700 world wide... just saw it for the third time... it was interesting watching it in 24 fps after seeing it twice in 48fps[/QUOTE]

It should get to 700mil worldwide no problem. With the 3D surcharge, 800mil is a solid guarantee.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Bank = profit

It made a profit, no?

No. It bombed.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

No. It bombed.

Why are you so much better then me at this?

 

[ThePhantasm]

Why are you so much better then me at this?

Sorry, I forgot to refresh the page before commenting...

I think your comment pretty much explained it.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Sorry, I forgot to refresh the page before commenting...

I think your comment pretty much explained it.

Nah, I am long winded. Like your bluntness.

But to get back to the Hobbit. After seeing the first film again I really started thinking about the second film, and I started to wonder where it would go. I am starting to wonder where exactly Gandalf's adventures will be integrated. Will it split Mirkwood in half, will they kick into gear right after the company leaves Mirkwood, splitting Mirkwood and Laketown?

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

No it didn't. Roughly half of the film's gross goes to the theaters. To simply break even you need to at least double your budget. But not really, because you usually have to make at least 2.5x the budget to cover marketing as well.

Not only marketing, but film rental fees to theaters, (which is usually half the money a movie grosses as the theaters keep half for maintenance) along with other contractual agreements.

 

[Liam_H]

Hobbit should finish around $950 million to $1 billion WW.

 

[Brother Jack]

The Road was a very good movie though, as well as a good adaptation of an absolute masterpiece of a novel. It was very poorly marketed by the Weinsteins.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Nah, I am long winded. Like your bluntness.

But to get back to the Hobbit. After seeing the first film again I really started thinking about the second film, and I started to wonder where it would go. I am starting to wonder where exactly Gandalf's adventures will be integrated. Will it split Mirkwood in half, will they kick into gear right after the company leaves Mirkwood, splitting Mirkwood and Laketown?

The second film has a very good chance at being the best of the trilogy. It contains the most exciting part of the books, such as Beorn, the forest road, the Spiders, the Woodelves and Bilbo's ingenious rescue and escape, Laketown, and of course, Smaug the terrible himself. What I am really worried about is the third film. Really worried. I think that is the film where Jackson's supplemental material will have to shine the most and I hope they are up to snuff. So far the material Jackson and Philipa didn't directly adopt from Tolkien's prose have been mostly miss (IMO).

 

[Super Kal]

Also your last paragraph is one of my biggest problems when it comes to criticisms of these films. Plenty have already made up their made simply based on the source material. Whether to film succeeds or not from a quality point of view is irrelevant. Tolkien equals good.

and where exactly was i criticizing the movie?... when i saw it, i left a post in this thread telling people that i loved the film...
and your problems are your own. they're not mine. I want to see The Silmarillion become a film. i would thoroughly enjoy that film.

 

[ThePhantasm]

You know criticism isn't always negative right? It simply means judging something, including merits and problems.

 

[C. Lee]

and where exactly was i criticizing the movie?... when i saw it, i left a post in this thread telling people that i loved the film...
and your problems are your own. they're not mine. I want to see The Silmarillion become a film. i would thoroughly enjoy that film.

He means....he dismissed anything good you have to say about the movie, because you said this - whether Hobbit does good or not, I'm going to love these films because its based in the Tolkien universe - You went in hoping to like the movie, and you did....you didn't get upset over the things that he disliked about it, and by not disliking the same things, your opinion is wrong.

 

["_____"]

It should get to 700mil worldwide no problem. With the 3D surcharge, 800mil is a solid guarantee.

I'd be happy with 800 mil

 

[DarthSkywalker]

and where exactly was i criticizing the movie?... when i saw it, i left a post in this thread telling people that i loved the film...
and your problems are your own. they're not mine. I want to see The Silmarillion become a film. i would thoroughly enjoy that film.

And why must you insult the right holders because of this?

You know criticism isn't always negative right? It simply means judging something, including merits and problems.

He means....he dismissed anything good you have to say about the movie, because you said this - whether Hobbit does good or not, I'm going to love these films because its based in the Tolkien universe - You went in hoping to like the movie, and you did....you didn't get upset over the things that he disliked about it, and by not disliking the same things, your opinion is wrong.

Thank you for completely misrepresenting my point. If you go in with a determination to like something, it is no different then going in with hate. There is always bias, but if you are not willing to see past your own in the least, how does one take your criticism seriously?

The problem is that here you are allowed to make baseless arguments as long as you are positive.

"I loved the Hobbit."

"Why?"

"The motorbike scene was great."

"There were no motorbikes in the Hobbit."

"Stop hating!"

 

[Super Kal]

And why must you insult the right holders because of this?

it's not my fault if they're deaf and dumb to the exposure and profit they're making off of these films... and unlike you, i enjoyed all of these films thoroughly.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

it's not my fault if they're deaf and dumb to the exposure and profit they're making off of these films... and unlike you, i enjoyed all of these films thoroughly.

I thought money wasn't the point?

Whether I like something or not, I don't understand the need to disrespect a rights holder just because they are rights holders. Never hated that Lucas owned Star Wars or for asserting his rights. I may want something else, but my beef with Lucas has always been creative.

 

[C. Lee]

Thank you for completely misrepresenting my point.

I didn't misrepresent it at all.

You have complained about certain things in the movie. I didn't say you were wrong, or misunderstood the director's intent, or didn't understand proper film making.

I and others have said we liked the movie....and you come in and tell us why we are wrong, why we misunderstood things, and how we don't understand how a proper film is made.

In other words....you express your OPINION and explain why it is right...and we express our OPINION and you tell us why it is wrong.