Slashdot Mirror


Wired on Hollywood's Elite Message Boards

superflippy writes " Wired journalist Ben Mezrich gets the scoop on the online forums that film producers and other Hollywood heavyweights use to "track" the buzz on spec scripts, actors, writers, etc. "The tracking boards are the herd mentality gone digital," says one tracker. This helps explain how dreck like Kangaroo Jack makes it to theaters."

57 of 240 comments (clear)

  1. AC flames kill movie projects! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    One detractor? A single, semi-anonymous comment can sink a script?

    Imagine what a goatse redirect would do!

    1. Re:AC flames kill movie projects! by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      "One detractor? A single, semi-anonymous comment can sink a script?
      Imagine what a goatse redirect would do!"


      Remind George Lucas that he's got room to make 3 more movies?

    2. Re:AC flames kill movie projects! by thynk · · Score: 3, Funny

      They critize the movie script before they even read it? My lord - it's /. for hollywood!

      --

      Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.
  2. What?!? by Glock27 · · Score: 2, Funny
    You mean there's something to watch besides the cable news networks?

    Nah...back to Fox. ;-)

    --
    Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
    Score: -1 100% Flamebait
  3. Explains? by ryants · · Score: 2, Funny
    This helps explain how dreck like Kangaroo Jack makes it to theaters.
    Er, no it doesn't.

    But since the linked article had eye candy, you get a pass.

    --

    Ryan T. Sammartino
    "Ancora imparo"

    1. Re:Explains? by Ptolemarch · · Score: 3, Informative

      This helps explain how dreck like Kangaroo Jack makes it to theaters.

      Er, no it doesn't.

      But since the linked article had eye candy, you get a pass.

      It certainly does explain how Kangaroo Jack makes it to theaters.

      On the second page:

      "Likewise, maybe as a favor to an agent, I could post something like, 'I love this, my boss loves it.' That will create buzz, and quite possibly people will start bidding preemptively because they're afraid of losing the project."

      Movie titles flash before my eyes: Bubble Boy. Kangaroo Jack. Dude, Where's My Car?

    2. Re:Explains? by dvdeug · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Dude, Where's My Car?

      The simple fact is, Dude, Where's My Car may have been stupid, but it was fun. And enough people agreed with me that it made enough money to justify a sequel. It's easy to mock movies, but if they sell, they have succeeded in their goal, no matter how stupid and worthless you may think it is.

  4. Hollywood Execs are a bunch of Trolls by sulli · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Clearly these execs are just overgrown kids with too much time on their hands wanting to mess with each other. In normal parlance, they're Trolls.

    As everyone knows, a certain well-known site has a similar problem. Yet with the magic of Zoo, trolls can be banished with just a few mouse clicks! And as we all know, now slashdot is perfectly free of such ill-behaved creatures.

    So the obvious answer is for Hollywood to use slash! Blacklist the Trolls, and we'll get better movies.

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
    1. Re:Hollywood Execs are a bunch of Trolls by RLiegh · · Score: 5, Funny

      So, if I see a link on one of those boards to a film called "two hands and a stretched anus", does that mean I should NOT click on it? ;^)

    2. Re:Hollywood Execs are a bunch of Trolls by Alan+Holman · · Score: 2, Funny

      Blacklisting people hurts their feelings, so don't blacklist anyone, especially me, please!

  5. So true... by MrCaseyB · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I read this guys book "Bringing Down The House" I enjoyed every page of it. I read this article he has written about hollywood fuckwits, and it all seems farely believable.

    Having to work around writers and executive producers and other people in the industry is a drain. You will never find a group of folks more full of shit. I completely agree with the article in that all the movers and shakers in the industry run on fear, constantly looking around to see what everyone else is doing.

    1. Re:So true... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Blackjack card counters are fools. So are any "professional" gamblers. With a similar investment of effort, a person could instead succeed at investments, or real estate, or any other enterprise. Cheating casinos is way too much effort for too little return.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:So true... by MisterFancypants · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Blackjack card counters are fools. So are any "professional" gamblers. With a similar investment of effort, a person could instead succeed at investments, or real estate, or any other enterprise. Cheating casinos is way too much effort for too little return.

      Um, try reading his book, or his older Wired article. I'm sure the people he covered in his book are crying about you calling them fools -- all the way to the bank, since many of them made millions of dollars.

    3. Re:So true... by mandolin · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Blackjack card counters are fools

      Carmack is many things, but not a fool. Perhaps you have made a misjudgment?

  6. That could exmplain it by Octagon+Most · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They certainly don't need to be doing research of any kind for the type of trash they are putting out these days. More like job justification for some "researchers" to troll message boards all day. But if their consumer preference model is based on the denizens of online message boards, that explains a lot.

  7. "If the buzz is any indicator..." by da3dAlus · · Score: 5, Funny

    "that movie's gonna make some huge bank."
    "What buzz?"
    "The Internet buzz."
    "What the fuck is the Internet?!"

    --

    Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion.
    1. Re:"If the buzz is any indicator..." by MrCaseyB · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can appreciate your quote of Jay and Silent Bob strikes back, a guilty pleasure that movie was. Pure crap, but funny as hell.

      On the other hand, your sig contained one of my favorite lines from Donnie Darko. What a spectacular movie Donnie Darko was.

      Funny how these same hollywood dumb asses that spend their time trolling elite message boards, pumped millions in production and advertising to push a piece of crap like Jay and Silent Bob, but did very very little to promote a gem like Donnie Darko.

      Subsequently, Jay and Silent Bob made a fortune at the box office, donnie darko did not do well at all.

    2. Re:"If the buzz is any indicator..." by Tokerat · · Score: 3, Insightful


      The whole point of Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back was that is WAS a shitty movie. They know this, it was on purpose.

      "Any movie with Jay and Silent Bob will lick balls"

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
  8. Re:herd mentality by ArsonSmith · · Score: 3, Funny

    I wanna be diffrent just like everyone else.

    --
    Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
  9. Re:herd mentality by beerman2k · · Score: 5, Funny
    That's why I only watch indy movies. I like to steer clear of herd mentality. I don't put much stock in mainstream stuff anyway, since lately it's all bull.

    You pretentious little fuck.

  10. I don't believe this... by Wirr · · Score: 4, Funny
    nobody can be that stupid.
    reading a board is one thing, basing your decesions on it another.
    Then again, there is this anecdote from Terry Pratchett. He met a Hollywood executive who wanted to make a movie out of his book "Mort" (that is about Death taking on an apprentice). Here's what happened in the word of Pratchett himself:


    "A production company was put together and there was US and Scandinavian and European involvement, and I wrote a couple of script drafts which went down well and everything was looking fine and then the US people said "Hey, we've been doing market research in Power Cable, Nebraska, and other centres of culture, and the Death/skeleton bit doesn't work for us, it's a bit of a downer, we have a prarm with it, so lose the skeleton". The rest of the consortium said, did you read the script? The Americans said: sure, we LOVE it, it's GREAT, it's HIGH CONCEPT. Just lose the Death angle, guys.

    Whereupon, I'm happy to say, they were told to keep on with the medication and come back in a hundred years."

    1. Re:I don't believe this... by JordanH · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Joel Hodgson's (of MST3K fame) relates a similar story in his brief biography:
      Tartikoff's office contacted Joel, and offered a starring role in a new NBC sitcom. They sent him the script for the pilot, and after reading it, Hodgson turned the part down, telling Tartikoff's people it just wasn't funny. Perhaps predictably, the executives mistook Hodgson's complaints, assuming they were just a bargaining ploy. Their response was to offer the role to Joel again, at triple the amount of money they'd first offered.

      That was the proverbial last straw. Hodgson was appalled that the executives could not grasp the notion that he would turn a project down purely on its merit and that no amount of money was going to get him to change that stance. Of course, he refused the offer, and in a few months he was back in Minneapolis, declaring he was quitting comedy.

      (Incidentally, the series, called High School USA, which Hodgson astutely pegged as "a Fast Times at Ridgemont High rip-off," was one of Tartikoff's most notable failures. Three episodes aired before it was yanked from NBC's fall schedule.)

      Hollywood types just don't get it.

  11. be a contrarian by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sounds like you could pick up some very interesting projects by being a contrarian; ie, getting the stuff that's getting poo-pooed on the boards and actually READING it; then picking it up for less than the project would've gotten if it were universally lauded.

    1. Re:be a contrarian by timster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, but then you would annoy the clique and get banished from the board.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
  12. Believe it. by rdewald · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Remember, these people formerly made all of their business decisions at parties and in hot tubs. Mostly this is a crowd that confuses their ability to make money with being truly significant. They all operate under the same set of deluded assumptions about themselves, they're drawn to this type of community for the insulation from reality it provides.

    This doesn't make them bad people, some of them are exceedingly decent human beings in terms of their personal habits, but the "creative" community in Hollywood is really dominated anti-creative forces and incredibly self-absorbed people. It's truly amazing we ever get any good movies at all.

    --
    The best way to do is to be.
  13. Anyone hack the site yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It might be interesting to have a fly-on-the-wall view of this site. Anyone found a way in yet?

  14. Buying a script != shooting a film by bj8rn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just because a company has bought a hyped-up idea, it doesn't nessecarily mean that they will shoot a film of it. I remember a guy who worked as a trainee in Hollywood talking in a newspaper about what he did there. He was one of those hapless people who had to read the freshly-written scripts and then give an evaluation of how good they were. This guy said that only a small number of scripts actually make it to production, the others are trash. He also said, though, that these rules don't count for big stars - if a script is good enough for Arnoid, it's good enough for his fans, too... This was about three years ago, so things may have changed over the time.

    (Or maybe I just underestimate the stupidity of people)

    --
    Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
    1. Re:Buying a script != shooting a film by Llywelyn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      " (Or maybe I just underestimate the stupidity of people)"

      Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

      (yes, taken blatantly from a bumper sticker).

      --
      Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
  15. Kangaroo Jack by Dr_LHA · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This helps explain how dreck like Kangaroo Jack makes it to theaters.

    That said Kangaroo Jack made money. It grossed $65 million in the USA alone, which matches its budget. Add in foreign releases and DVD/VHS sales/rental and you have a profitable movie. So what was wrong with it again? Oh yes - it was crap - but you know hollywood is a business.

    1. Re:Kangaroo Jack by kwiqsilver · · Score: 2, Insightful

      True. Have you noticed "fun for the whole family" now means "anyone over 10 will hate this"?

  16. Re:herd mentality by drunk_as_in_beer · · Score: 2, Funny

    That's why I only watch indy movies. I like to steer clear of herd mentality. I don't put much stock in mainstream stuff anyway, since lately it's all bull.

    I don't watch movies at all, it's a waste of my fucking time.

    And no, I don't consider "porno movies" actual movies so they don't count, but those don't waste much time as I just watch short clips.

    --
    --Drunk as in Beer
  17. Kangaroo Jack by kwiqsilver · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That comment about Kangaroo Jack wasn't fair.
    Don't blame the internet or even hollywood. Blame the people who went to see it. That movie was a success (as much as it might scare some of us), because for one reason or another lots of people bought tickets.
    There have always been people making crap movies (and tv shows) and people who have what most of us would consider poor taste going out to watch them.
    Hollywood isn't bringing down movie quality by only making crap like "The Core". Viewers are bringing down movie quality by watching crap like "The Core". Entertainment is an industry, they produce what sells.

  18. missunerstood problem by twitter · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The problem is NOT that Kangaroo Jack "makes it to theaters". The problem is that someone has the power to shove it onto everyone's screens while other quirky stuff never gets filmed and the vast majority of things that do get filmed never see a screen. The article's author gives us, "The truth is, I don't belong here. I am not a Hollywood player." The real truth is that there should be no such thing as a Holywood player. Theater owners should be independents who are able to pick and choose films suited to their own audience. In reality, some dorks in LA make a playlist.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  19. The hell? by Dirtside · · Score: 2, Insightful
    This helps explain how dreck like Kangaroo Jack makes it to theaters
    Bullshit. Dreck has been splattered across movie screens for as long as there's been movie screens. Retarded executives surrounded by yes-men are why dreck like Kangaroo Jack makes it to theaters.
    --
    "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    1. Re:The hell? by glwtta · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Retarded executives surrounded by yes-men are why dreck like Kangaroo Jack makes it to theaters.

      Um, no. Retarded movie-goers who still go to see it are why that drek makes it to theaters. And hey, it's cheap to make.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
  20. I've got an idea... by lowe0 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Perhaps we can send them some of our trolls.

    I wonder what they'd do with the Stephen King or Natalie Portman ones....

    (And before anyone suggests we send them the goatse trolls, that's a different kind of movie studio.)

  21. Re:herd mentality by Bicoid · · Score: 2, Funny
    That's why I only watch indy movies.


    I don't only watch Indy movies, but I do have to agree that they are quite good. There are few movies as timeless as Raiders of the Lost Ark, that's for sure.
    --
    If not all sentients are human, couldn't it be possible that not all humans are sentient either?
  22. Re:herd mentality by dimension6 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Actually, the next Indy movie is set to cost $130,000,000 up front (Indiana Jones 4, starring Ford and Connery, directed by Lucas and Spielberg). You're telling me that's not a mainstream movie??

  23. This just in... by Stickster · · Score: 2, Funny

    Premiere Magazine has been reporting for years about how H'wood chooses and sinks projects. Now they do it at the speed of broadband. Thank god Wired was on the scene to break the story that someone in a big office now has a teenager.

    A knock on the door of the KID's room, heavy, authoritative. The EXEC enters loudly.

    EXEC
    Young lady, you need to explain the bill for
    your cell pho-- What's that?

    KID
    (glued to screen, typing)
    I'm on a talkback board.

    EXEC
    I think you talk back plenty already.

    KID
    Dad! No, it's like when you want to discuss
    stuff with people. You know, like movies or
    stuff.

    EXEC
    Is this that Internet thing I keep hearing
    about? Wow!
    (beat)
    You know, that gives me an idea...

  24. Now we know how by notext · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This came to be a good idea.

  25. And I thought +5 Trolls were a bug by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Guess not in LA.

    Personally, I thought it was a great article that really shows just how rapidly the internet has changed the way we think/act/say/do in a converstational or consensual manner.

    In fact I think it's fairly obvious that we can expect to see even more of this mode of consensual decision making as communication devices continue to permeate our culture.
    For example: I have a G4 tiBook, it has rendezvous which in turn is supported by an app called Hydra that allows multiple users to edit a single document real-time. And that is a fairly obvious and straight forward model. I believe that within 2-3 years the notion of 1 user/computer will be old hat and many tasks will be done as part of a consensus.

    Imagine a team of genetic research scientists in the year 2007. They run Linux workstations and perform calculations to create a designer genome for the creation of a bacteria to use as an eco-friendly solvent. While they work, their CPU/HD and memory are all shared via the net and they are able to operate asynchronously on the same problem via this distributed architecture. Of course any distributed architecture amongst real-time users would require chat. So this small team could also allow in research fellows and peers to help guide and assist them in their work. And now we see an environment just like the one written up. But here, a chat user could influence the course of R&D, by trolling accordingly, they could cause the scientists to follow their friends research while shunning other research by those they do not favor personally.
    And as such, would likely follow a similar killing floor for college research papers to be applied and praised or ignored out right WITHOUT even being read.

    As you can see today hyper-communication causes people to act without doing any research and as technology progresses it won't get better. In fact far worse in the respect of it's cultural permeation and impact but hopefully better if tools made available to quantify and qualify data may be equally as ubiquitous in the coming age.

  26. Par for the course. by CleverNickName · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Having to work around writers and executive producers and other people in the industry is a drain. You will never find a group of folks more full of shit. I completely agree with the article in that all the movers and shakers in the industry run on fear, constantly looking around to see what everyone else is doing.


    We're discussing this at Fark. Here's what I had to say there:

    Ben's experience matches up EXACTLY with what I've known to be standard industry practice for as long as I can remember.

    We used to joke that there was one guy, who'd get drunk at a restaurant and spout out movie ideas (it changes as things go in and out of style -- in the 80s it was Spago, in the 90s I think it was the Viper Room. I have no idea what it is now, as I attempt to claw my way back up to the "b" list.) The joke went that there were execs from all the major studios, and they'd only hear flashes of the conversation, like ". . . asteroid . . . earth . . . big summer movie . . ." and we get two or three movies that are exactly the same.

    The worst thing about this article is that Hollywood will see it, and they'll add Ben to the "we hate him because he doesn't play by our rules" list, and Bringing Down The House will never get made.

    Which REALLY sucks, because I was hoping to score a part in it.

    A friend of mine (who is now an indie director) worked on "Batman and Robin."

    The horror stories he told me about the insane wasting of money on actor crap would make you explode.

    The budget for actor garbage -- workout rooms, personal chefs, personal assistants, personal drivers, groomers, and all that useless shiat -- was THREE MILLION DOLLARS.

    We made Neverland for less than 50 grand, and even THAT was a ton of money to me. (I'm not an investor, just an actor, in that picture.)

    Jane White Is Sick And Twisted, which is coming out on DVD in just a couple of weeks, was similar in budget . . . and I'd wager that both of these movies are more entertaining, and more watchable than Batman and Robin.

    Yeah, Hollywood is fucked. Royally. The big media conglomerates (you can't even call them 'studios' any longer) have co-opted "independent" as a marketing device . . . but there are some real indie studios out there, with people who love the material, love the process of bringing it to life, and create great work. It's just hard to find right now, is all.

    As for Ben's movie? I'd DIE to play Kevin, but a part that big will go to someone who is currently "established," who can "open" a movie. (By "open," I mean that they can get people into the theatre based on their name alone.)

    Kevin's character is asian in Real Life, IIRC, but they'll change that for the movie, and you'll see someone like Matt Damon (if Hollywood is smart, which they're not so we'll probably see someone who's a lousy actor, but on a "hot" series right now. I leave it to you to fill in the blanks on that one) in that role. Which he probably won't take, because it's too similar to "Rounders," which leaves it wide open for me!

    . . . to lose out to some guy who's hot right now.

    But Dealer #5 is all mine, baby! ;)

  27. Fear and AI by twitter · · Score: 3, Interesting
    In the trailers for the movie, AI, Steven Spielberg talks about how he and Kubric communicated to each other through fax machines kept in locked closets. Says a lot about the sad twisted state of mind these folks have, "Oh my God, someone is going to STEAL my idea!", they think to themselves as if they have the one or two true insights in the universe. The universe is not so poor, but people who talk to each other through fax machines might be. And these are the people who would shape the future of general computing with DRM.

    Everyone's out to get you mother fucker!

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  28. imagine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Slashdot readers have a chance now to read a message board filled with even bigger assholes than they are!

    Amazing!

  29. Surprisngly inept by Apotsy · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I'm not surprised they do this, but I am surprised at how foolishly they go about it.
    • They allow one company to control all the boards.
    • They know people manipulate the boards, but trust them anyway.
    • From the sound of it, they use them as their sole source of information in many cases.
    Not smart. Not smart at all.
    1. Re:Surprisngly inept by edo-01 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I'm not surprised they do this, but I am surprised at how foolishly they go about it. They allow one company to control all the boards. They know people manipulate the boards, but trust them anyway. From the sound of it, they use them as their sole source of information in many cases.

      Not smart. Not smart at all.

      I'd submit that this was always going to happen. Give a group of terrified, insecure, vain people like these access to the internet of course they are going to congregate into a closed environment. One that's intrinsically self-affirming where there are no dissenting opinions, and they can always be assured of making the "right" desicion. It's a matter of lore that the job of "studio exec" carries with it the professional life-expectancy of a Spinal Tap drummer. What these people want most after the blowjobs, drugs and money is to be constantly told they are great & doing the right thing.

      In fact the emergance of this closed circle-jerk system may explain why the synopsis for a lot of recent hollywood films sound like a parody from the Simpsons starring "Troy McClure". I mean c'mon, a movie about a sassy kangaroo that steals a hundred grand of mob money?

      Thanks to the corporate bloat of the studios, taking on layer after layer of usesless management incapable of independant thought, films are being made these days from ideas that would have gotten you laughed out of a pitch meeting a decade ago. What's really depressing is that people are actually going to see them...

  30. Donnie Darko, and film's Hollywood SHOULD make by Nova+Express · · Score: 2, Informative

    > On the other hand, your sig contained one of my favorite lines from Donnie Darko. What a spectacular movie Donnie Darko was.

    Indeed. And your comment provides me the opportunity to post the URL to my just published, really long and detailed review of Donnie Darko. I've posted it before. Given the opportunity, I'll post it again. Hell, I've maxed out my karma, and if causes one intelligent person to seek out this singularly interesting film, it will be worth it...

    --
    Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)

    http://www.lawrenceperson.com/

  31. God damn by CausticWindow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's either "mainstream", "indy" or "foreign" with you guys.

    How 'bout rooting for some "good" films?

    --
    How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
    1. Re:God damn by jpkunst · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You know, it's a strange thing with Americans and 'foreign films'. I'm getting the impression that for some strange reason any film from outside the US is automatically supposed to be 'artistic', 'intellectual', or whatnot. With the (for me) strange effect that utter B-movie crap from my youth like Spetters, the only use of which is campy fun as far as I'm concerned, is suddenly being taken seriously.

      There really is nothing special about a film being 'foreign', guys ...

      JP

    2. Re:God damn by Moofie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      From an American POV (like mine) that "artistic, intellectual" thing makes more sense.

      See, we only get the "artistic, intellectual" foreign films imported into here. We produce utter crap (like "Showgirls" and "Dude, Where's My Car?") locally, and the market is saturated. So, when a movie gets imported from abroad (like Intacto, or Amelie, or even Spirited Away, all of which I loved) it's likely to fall into that "artistic, intellectual" category.

      That's one reason I like "foreign" films so much...they don't insult my intelligence...
      and I am pretty good at reading subtitles. : )

      Now, of course, Hong Kong cinema is on a totally different track. When I got a foreign film, with Jean Reno, that was also a kung-fu flick (Wasabi) my brain 'bout melted. Call me crazy, but I loved that flick.

      I don't pretend to be a film (excuse me.../feeelm/) connoisseur. In order to be one of those, I'd have had to like Magnolia, which I thought was a big reeking turd of a movie. But I do know what I like, and I feel my tastes are pretty broad. Fortunately, with a little hunting around, I can scratch my "smart people movies" itch without having to buy a whole lot of discs first.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  32. Slashdot, The Movie by StarTux · · Score: 3, Funny

    So Slashdot, the movie died on one of these boards?

    Can you imagine, Wil Wheaton playing CmdrTaco?

    StarTux

  33. This is why they keep making drek like "Kangaroo J by Mike+McCune · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "This helps explain how dreck like Kangaroo Jack makes it to theaters."

    Hollywood will keep making dreck as long as it makes money.

    BOX OFFICE SUMMARY FOR "KANGAROO JACK"

    Box Office Total: $65,708,774
    Box Office Opening: $16,580,209
    No. of Weeks at #1: 1
    No. of Weeks in Top 10: 5

    BOX OFFICE HISTORY
    Week Rank Wkd. Gross Theaters Per Theater Cumulative
    1 1 $16,580,209 2,818 $7,770 $21,895,483
    2 2 $11,548,247 2,848 $4,055 $35,112,415
    3 4 $9,048,362 2,848 $3,177 $45,886,113
    4 7 $6,105,250 2,848 $2,144 $53,035,263
    5 8 $3,953,199 2,535 $1,986 $58,954,899
    6 13 $1,988,368 1,742 $1,141 $61,901,888
    7 17 $1,363,485 1,545 $883 $63,609,564
    8 19 $772,413 1,110 $696 $64,691,137
    9 23 $352,060 615 $572 $65,478,341
    10 44 $108,774 216 $504 $65,708,774
    Box office cumulative figures also include daily grosses from Monday through Thursday (not shown).

    --

    In a world that is Free and Open, who needs Windows and Gates?

  34. Re:what kind of pay? by CleverNickName · · Score: 4, Informative

    How much were people paid? Did you meet guild rates and all that? What, more generally, did things cost?

    Well, SAG makes several contracts available for producers who wish to use SAG actors, but don't have a lot of money. They are all listed at the SAG Indie website (warning: it's flash hell) http://sagindie.com/flashFS.html

    For those two movies I mentioned, I worked for the SAG minimums, and took some profit-participation incentives. I did it because they were both great scripts, and I wanted to work with the people involved.

    I'm very conflicted about actor's salaries. On the one hand, if an actor is going to be "opening" a movie, he or she should share in the massive profits that movie will be bringing the studio. On the other hand, because of this phenomenon, we're looking at one actor getting a multi-million dollar salary, while all the other actors work for scale.

    In Sydney Lumet's book "Making Movies," he talks about those stupid actor bonuses, and how money that's spent on those things doesn't end up "on the screen," and the audience gets cheated because of it.

    I'm not sure what the crew and department heads got paid. I'm sure you could get an idea for that stuff by tracking down some indie film makers . . . they usually like to help out aspiring film makers.

  35. Film Tracker Website by Alien54 · · Score: 2, Informative
    It isn't like the Filmtracker Website is hard to find.

    With all of the effort that goes into writing cracks for things like Everquest, you would think that someone would be interested in finding a way in to cleverly promote things that make sense.

    But the whole vetting thing they do would be a pain to get around. A really closed community.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  36. a few minor points by bscott · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Firstly - it isn't just that Hollywood makes dreck, or that the public is at fault 'cos they pay to watch it. I reckon the truth is, your average Slashdot poster (and indeed, people in general) is unlikely to circulate with a very broad cross-section of humanity. And you know what? Not everybody likes science fiction, quirky stuff, or thoughtful, original premises. There are perfectly worthy people out there, who lead lives contributing positively to society, who just wanna kick back with a beer at the end of their day and watch "Jackass: The Motion Picture". To dislike and avoid movies like that is one thing, but to heap disdain on the whole idea of them at least borders on elitism.

    Secondly, whatever you think of the arguably-insane power structure of Hollywood (of which this article gives only a peek), that's where the money is for performing artists and other creative types. You can rail against the idiots, neurotics, assholes and paranoids that run the system all you like (and rightfully so, if you have that kind of spare time), but I have to admit they have a heck of a counter-argument - they got the money.

    Virtually all of my friends (wife included) are in showbiz in one form or another; only a few have achieved financial security outside of Hollywood, and they did so primarily by virtue of uncommon brilliance. And conversely, there are some genuinely brilliant people who ARE part of 'the system' and are not getting what they deserve, for reasons unrelated to anything under their control. But every now and then, someone good gets a break. So, it's not all bad.

    But it's mostly bad. Anyone who's actually visited Hollywood knows how grimy, slimy, and generally depressing most of the city is, and anyone who Knows People in the business and has had the opportunity to listen in on gossip understands what an incredibly high proportion of people there have drug/alcohol problems, failing marriages, or both... it's darkly funny, from a distance, but sadly I'm about to move there myself. I need a drink.

    --
    Perfectly Normal Industries
  37. Re:This is why they keep making drek like "Kangaro by Belgand · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Even worse they'll (apparently) make sequels! I'm told that Kangaroo Jack 2 will take place in Las Vegas where the kangaroo has now stolen more money for some undisclosed reason.

    I do think that part of the reason it did so well was because it was a rather dry time for movies appealing to idiots and children and thus raked in most of the money that is usually spent on keeping the whining shit factories quiet (but not at any of the films I attend... I recall during a "House of 1,000 Corpses" trailer in front of "Willard" one precocious young fuck asked what a corpse was, a friend of mine offered to make him very well acquainted with it).

    Really... most of the absolute crap is sold to children. Disney seems to have figured this out with the glut of shitty direct-to-video sequels to decades old films that weren't much more than terrible cash-cows for children to begin with (Disney movies tend to be very much like Bollywood musicals... vapid, cheery, and crowd-pleasing... but with slightly less criminal influence in the making). Still they do well and almost any parent these days has a mess of them. Children will tolerate almost anything it seems and parents are all too happy to pay for it if they don't have to watch them too closely. Sadly there are also films that are reasonably fit to offend few people other than the guy at CAPAlert. I'd suggest the (entertaining but forgettable) "Catch Me While You Can" particularly, although it seems that there isn't much being put out in this realm and not much was done in the past that isn't disgustingly saccharine.

    The other major market is artistic idiots. I've often heard from people watching terrible crap that they "just want something they don't have to think about". Any attempt to appeal to intelligence is lost on them as they merely want the lowest common denominator sit-com crap. They even make a point of wanting dumb romantic comedies that are predictable and dull since they require little to no thought, but are (presumably) entertaining. Oh, and don't make it too long. People hate getting value for their money or seeing any story that can't be crammed into the short time limit they're comfortable with. No chance for story, character development, or intelligent and thought-provoking dialogue, that'll take longer than 2 hours and might make someone unhappy!

  38. Who cares? We care. by gad_zuki! · · Score: 4, Interesting

    >. Entertainment is an industry, they produce what sells.

    I wouldn't say that, even though, objectively its correct, but let's face it - we are obsessed with Hollywood. We complain when a bad movie gets released. Doesn't that seem a little odd? Its just taking up space at the local 20-screen cinema, its not like we're forced to watch them at gunpoint.

    A movie critic is a respected international job. Why? The TV and the internet are constantly telling us who Julia Roberts is dating or what Heidi Clum wore last week in Paris.

    I've divested in Hollywood long ago. I catch the occasional movie and am stunned at how many commercials I have to watch, how much I have to pay, and the how "movie people" simply act like little children when they don't get that perfect movie they were hoping for.

    The best thing I did in a long time was buy a Tivo. I now have almost no connection to pop-America, have no idea who "hot" actors are, don't see commercials for crap like "Celebrity Justice," etc. Yeah, I sound like one of those, "I dont have a TV" people, but you know what, they make excellent points. You simply can't see the forest from the trees if you grew up watching TV like I did.

    It would be nice if Hollywood would just make art, but it collectively decided long ago that the celebrity star system serves it well and people don't seem to complain much. Heaven forbid we see actors, musicians, and TV-people as our peers and not saints we hope someday will sign our chest with a sharpie at Barnes and Noble.

    I love how concerns over real events that affect us, politics, the war, etc made the oscars look like the cheap industry backscratching it truly is. Who wore what? Who cares. Take your little statue and go home.

    The nice thing about the internet is that media people have suddenly become real. Reporters have blogs and *gasp* they're trying to make their way through life too, even though they can occasionally get a quote or two from someone holding a powerful office in government. The most common thing I heard when Wil Wheaton's blog hit critical mass was, "Oh, he's just like an ordinary person. We were so mean to him." Or "I'm a dude who wrote some software, enjoy" compared to "Mega-corp announces its newest proactive and innovative product for PC consumers, this revolutionary...."

    I think Hollywood's celebrity system is more or less destined to collapse due to the egalitarian aspects of cheap/free information. I'm not going to bother to provide supporting links: (im sure you've read these stories) TV time has been interrupted by internet time, the RIAA is losing sales and indie labels are experiencing a small boom, linux is in the enterprise and kicking ass, fans petition or even pay for quality TV episodes, access to lots of different news brings balance to national tunnel vision, etc.

    I really hope my kids grow up in a society in which the self-important PR and other celebrity BS are seen plainly as lies. I hope they don't go crazy over the latest fads because J-Lo was seen wearing something similiar at Spago. Or even how to explain to them why adults can pay 9 dollars to see something like "Kangaroo Jack." I hope my generation looks crazy to them, because we probably are.