Lightwizard wrote:Not going to see a film because "it's getting too much publicity" is a peculiar reaction to me. This is some sort of weird backlash?
Why does it come across as weird? I think it happens a lot. I refused to see the 1st Star Wars movie for almost 3 years until the hype finally died down. Maybe it's my own aversion to crowds but I seldom go to see movies that generate crowds. Why bother fighting for a seat next to some clown that's going to talk through the movie and end up dumping their coke into your lap? Blech! No thanks.
I haven't seen it yet and probably won't until it gets onto my Netflicks list at some point down the road. I don't see why it would be any more or less objectionable than the lesbianism in the background in "Songcatcher" was.
If people are talking through every movie you go to and spilling cokes in your lap, I would be adverse to go out to a theater. Hope that isn't a commentary on the area you live in. "Brokeback" isn't quite big enough to cause lines unless you might be in a metropolitan area on a Friday or Saturday night at one of the limited theaters the film was originally shown at. The theater in Fashion Island showing the film is near the gallery but I don't have time to go and check for those who are attending who talk through movies or spilling cokes on someone's lap.
The so-called hype is from 90% favorable reviews, the reluctance of the right wing religious zealots to keep their mouths shut and all the awards it has so far accumulated. Wake up and smell the coffee.
Nobody goes to (insert popular restaurant/bar) it's too crowded.
Yogi Berra
I can understand delaying going to a film because it might be crowded.
I don't understand not going to a film because it's getting good reviews and publicity.
But I don't have to understand. <shrug>
The Oscar nominations and the Oprah appearance by the cast seems to have propelled to film back into second place yesterday and awaiting today's figures which might place it a No.1!
1. Big Momma's House 2 $1,068,964
2. Brokeback Mountain $790,000
3. Underworld: Evolution $766,139
4. Nanny McPhee $539,125
5. Annapolis $455,
Who said they were going to see "Underworld: Evolution?" A new film being beat out on a weekday by one that has been out for nearly two months is remarkable. Not remarkable for "Underworld," of course.
2nd weekday in a row. No. 2:
WEDNESDAY BOX OFFICE
1. Big Momma's House 2 $964,019
2. Brokeback Mountain $830,000
3. Underworld: Evolution $715,673
4. Nanny McPhee $518,625
5. Annapolis $415,363
Lightwizard wrote:
Who said they were going to see "Underworld: Evolution?"
Underworld was a very entertaining movie and I may even view it again.
Well, good for you -- it hasn't come close to its cost and is easily a candidate for this year's Razzies and on the ten worst lists of bad films:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/underworld_evolution/
I made clear before, I don't see movies based on what other people think. You probably didn't like The Dorm That Dripped Blood either.
No, I can't say as how I have seen Figures. Was it a good film?
A Plate of Crow for Bill O'Snidely:
Montanans turn out in droves for ?'Brokeback Mountain'
By Joe Nickell - Missoulian - 02/04/06
Movie grossed more than $33,000 at the Wilma Theatre in Missoula during its first four weekends
MISSOULA (LEE) ?- In late December, conservative pundit Bill O'Reilly predicted that the film "Brokeback Mountain" would never play in Montana. "They're not going to go see the gay cowboys in Montana," O'Reilly said during a Dec. 20 broadcast of his Fox News television program. "I'm sorry. They're not going to do it."
O'Reilly apparently forgot that stereotypes and off-the-cuff prognostications, no matter how confidently voiced, have an uncanny way of falling apart under the cold light of reality. The fact is, "Brokeback Mountain" isn't just playing in Montana; it's playing well, and widely.
In fact, it's even breaking down some stereotypes that we Montanans tend to harbor about our own state.
Here in Missoula, the film has been a smash hit since it opened at the 1,100-seat Wilma Theatre on Jan. 6. "It's been super every night since we started showing it," said Bill Emerson, who manages the 85-year-old theater.
Data collected by Focus Features, which produced the film, show that "Brokeback" grossed more than $33,000 at the Wilma during its first four weekends alone.
"Those numbers are amazing to me," said Ryan Pliner, distribution coordinator for Focus Features. "Anybody who's questioning how this movie is playing (outside of big coastal cities) should look at something like this."
The last time this town demonstrated such abundant enthusiasm for a film was when "March of the Penguins" opened at the Wilma. That film ended up screening at the theater for more than six months. Only "Fahrenheit 9/11" managed to sell more tickets at the theater from the get-go, according to Emerson.
Needless to say, the Bill O'Reillys of the world forgot about places like Missoula.
But "Brokeback" isn't just doing well in this, traditionally the most liberal part of the state. In Kalispell, the film drew 576 willing ticket-buyers over its first weekend. It was the No. 1 draw during opening weekends in Helena and Whitefish, beating out "Big Momma's House 2," "Nanny McPhee" and "Underworld" the three top box-office draws nationwide.
And guess where the film enjoyed its best opening weekend in Montana? Hint: It wasn't liberal Missoula.
Try Billings.
In its opening three-day weekend, "Brokeback Mountain" grossed $8,272 in Billings. That's 15 percent better than the film did during its opening weekend at the Wilma, where it grossed $7,187.
Granted, Billings is a bigger city than Missoula. But if you look at per capita spending on the film, Billings residents spent 9 cents per person on the film during its opening weekend (based on 2004 population estimates). That's just 2 cents shy of what Missoula residents spent per capita on the film hardly a big margin, given the political gulf that many imagine exists between the two towns.
So how to explain the film's widespread success in this state?
James Lopach, a University of Montana professor of political science, thinks there's an obvious explanation even if it's one that pundits like Bill O'Reilly missed.
"Electing to go to a movie is not a political decision," says Lopach.
Yes, that's all fine and well Lightwizard; however it does not tell me what you thought of the film...and did you mean Round Figures with Jackie Cooper, or Figures In A Landscape with Robert Shaw and Tariq Yunus?
Good as I wouldn't want Roxxxane to think her thread is being hijacked. It's about "Brokeback Mountain."
(Although I realize there are essentially three "Brokeback Mountain" threads featured at the present time -- just more hype...jeeezzz).
