Fahrenheit 9/11 tops weekend box office
POSTED BY: Succatash
UPDATED: Friday, January 27, 2006 02:22
VIEWED: 11141
PAGE 4 of 5
Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
But IMHO, not worth my $9.00.
Damn, here's where I'm out of touch. I still think of a movie ticket as costing $6.50.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JCKnife:
Just for a sense of perspective: $21.8 million puts it at #222 on the list of all-time opening weekends, slightly worse than "Inspector Gadget" did on its premiere weekend.
Here's some more perspective for you:
$21.8 million dollars...for a DOCUMENTARY. [Bites tongue so doen't end the sentence with the word "fool".)
"Take me, sir. Take me hard."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JCKnife:Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
But IMHO, not worth my $9.00.
Damn, here's where I'm out of touch. I still think of a movie ticket as costing $6.50.
Depends, $9.00 is fairly avg in metropolitan areas now; and you'd be lucky to find a reduced price matinee showing for $6.50. In bigger cities, the prices can top at $12.00.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Tallgrrl:
Here's some more perspective for you:
$21.8 million dollars...for a DOCUMENTARY.
That this film is a documentary is also open to debate.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Tallgrrl:Quote:
Originally posted by JCKnife:
Just for a sense of perspective: $21.8 million puts it at #222 on the list of all-time opening weekends, slightly worse than "Inspector Gadget" did on its premiere weekend.
Here's some more perspective for you:
$21.8 million dollars...for a DOCUMENTARY. [Bites tongue so doen't end the sentence with the word "fool".)
"Take me, sir. Take me hard."
DOCUMENTARY b/c it was self-entered into that category. That and there isn't a complete mis-representation of the facts and a big fat baffoon category.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:jasonzzz
Depends, $9.00 is fairly avg in metropolitan areas now; and you'd be lucky to find a reduced price matinee showing for $6.50. In bigger cities, the prices can top at $12.00.
Yeah. I was amazed that the matinee price at the theater I went to was $7.50! wtf? Fortunately, we still have an old theater in town that shows black and white double features for $4. But going to see a new movie gouges. I can't imagine what it would be like for a family with more than three kids.
On a side note, I'm fascinated by charts that show box office totals updated for inflation. For those interested:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted/
I shaved off my beard for you, devil woman!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah, an outing to *just* the theatre for a family of 4 can *easily* go to about $80.00 nowadays. These days, unless if it is really a compelling movie worthy of the huge screen. We just elect to catch it 4 or 6 months later on DVD rental for $1.99 and along with our own hotair popper.
Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:Quote:jasonzzz
Depends, $9.00 is fairly avg in metropolitan areas now; and you'd be lucky to find a reduced price matinee showing for $6.50. In bigger cities, the prices can top at $12.00.
Yeah. I was amazed that the matinee price at the theater I went to was $7.50! wtf? Fortunately, we still have an old theater in town that shows black and white double features for $4. But going to see a new movie gouges. I can't imagine what it would be like for a family with more than three kids.
On a side note, I'm fascinated by charts that show box office totals updated for inflation. For those interested:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted/
I shaved off my beard for you, devil woman!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:Quote:
Originally posted by Tallgrrl:Quote:
Originally posted by JCKnife:
Just for a sense of perspective: $21.8 million puts it at #222 on the list of all-time opening weekends, slightly worse than "Inspector Gadget" did on its premiere weekend.
Here's some more perspective for you:
$21.8 million dollars...for a DOCUMENTARY. [Bites tongue so doen't end the sentence with the word "fool".)
"Take me, sir. Take me hard."
DOCUMENTARY b/c it was self-entered into that category. That and there isn't a complete mis-representation of the facts and a big fat baffoon category.
"...after separating out what is clearly presented as Mr. Moore's opinion from what is stated as fact, it seems safe to say that central assertions of fact in "Fahrenheit 9/11" are supported by the public record (indeed, many of them will be familiar to those who have closely followed Mr. Bush's political career)."
--Phillip Shenon NY Times
I rest my case.
The earth is round.
Like it or not, agree with opinions or not. You may not like them, you might not be happy with the way they're laid out, but facts are facts, baby. And the facts are ugly and disappointing.
Americans, regardless of political lean, are opening their eyes, looking around and saying: "WTF?! We...got...played."
"Take me sir. Take me hard."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ahem,
just what exactly *are* these facts?
Most everything in the film is taking these "facts" and either skewing, distorting, and/or misrepresenting them. I have a good example below that takes up a good portion of the film. What about that?
Maybe you have a few good examples of the "facts" and how they are rightly represented.
That GWB is a baffoon? Who doesn't know this? That GWB is no great orator? What about that?
That there are ties between the US and the family bin Laden? that GWB's own family has ties with their family? These things came out within 2 months after the 9/11 events.
It's laying out these "facts" and then with the assumption that there is something nefarious about the relationship, then posing questions like "Does GWB have biz ties with the bin Laden family?" It's call "begging the question", it's a form of logical and literary fallacy. And it's used as a deceptive tactic by using "facts" to lead the reader by a false assumption into a false conclusion. MM uses the same type of device over and over and over again thru out his career film. He uses valid "facts" and imageries, then cut-n-paste, sequence them, voice over them, and falsely lead you into one irrelevant conclusion after another.
Yes, the earth is round. But but if one were to portray it with Atlas carrying it ( or 4 gargantuan turtles floating in space) on his back and then with a music video of angels dancing all around it - trying to make me think that there are all of these other things going on. Then the message is wrong.
I have often heard the same arguments used to bash (rightly so) the new (well, not so new) "reality" programming trend on TV. Well, what is this? taking unscripted material and editing it with your own agenda, to fit your own opinions and make up your own story to lead the audience into thinking that there is something of value there. Who can argue that? The facts are facts, those people did say those things, they did do those things, but they are all chopped up and re-sequenced. It's the same techniques and tactics to make the same garbage. What's difference is there is already a set of base feelings that MM is manipulating. Don't be duped. It's fine to know the facts underlaying it, but don't credit MM with all of the bullshit carny tricks used to manipulate the brainless masses. I think you folks are smarter than that.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
