Film Of The Century!

Originally posted by Stormy_Day
what about overseas records?

$283 M extra worldwide, but with that you have to take into consideration the population, the fact that Arnold is a cult figure overseas, and the amount of merchandising that franchise has produced there. Japan's population alone is 127 M, 1/2 the U.S. Then take into account Germany, South Africa, South America, etc etc etc.

The "U.S." numbers are what matter to film makers, that's where their core audience, and the critics lay. "Harry Potter" does 3 times better in the U.K. than the U.S., just because of the author and characters origins.

"T:3" was still a disappointment, overall.

Then the movie made almost a 150 mil profit 😬

And if the studio thought that was a failer then they wouldnt be making T4

Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
When it costs $240 M to make/promote, and makes $150 M in theatres, it bombed.

Unless, of course, if you consider losing almost $100 M a success.......

It cost $175 million to make and a sequel is being made so if it wasn't successful would it have a T4? Just like Stormy said 😕

Originally posted by TheFilmProphet
It cost $175 million to make and a sequel is being made so if it wasn't successful would it have a T4? Just like Stormy said 😕

Last I heard, they were contemplating making a Battlefield Earth 2. I don't recall that heap of garbage doing too well.

What does that have to do with I'm talking about? 😕

Originally posted by TheFilmProphet
It cost $175 million to make and a sequel is being made so if it wasn't successful would it have a T4? Just like Stormy said 😕

"T:3" cost $240 to make/promote, it made $150 M in the United States, which is the only revenue that matters. You acknowledged that in the Shrek thread, after I mentioned it here, so you'd agree apparently. The movie took a huge hit in the U.S.

The "Terminator" movie franchise alone is only getting worse. When the next sequel drops, if it does, although it's totally unnecessary, it will be about 5 or 6 years from now, and Arnold won't be in it.

Hollywood tends to ignore the fact that a sequel grossed poorly, just because they know they can always bank on the American pop culture crazed foreigners support, especially with iconic movie franchises.

Big budget movies, whos sequels door poorly, shouldn't bring on evern MORE sequels. They should cut their losses, and call it a day. Especially after the Matrix sequels flopping so horribly.

"T:4" is a bad idea, if you ask me.

Originally posted by Primitive Screwhead #1
Last I heard, they were contemplating making a Battlefield Earth 2. I don't recall that heap of garbage doing too well.

Just providing evidence that a movie doesn't have to be successful in order to justify a sequel, Film Prophet. Granted, those movies are more the exception and not the rule. Hope that helps clarify my post.

I was talking about about the production budget which was $175 so it came close enough apparently. Marketing costs is seperate to me however I do agree T4 is uneccessary without Arnold.

SPIDERMAN 2 !!! 😄 😄 😄

Spider-Man 2 is the greatest film of the year I can't wait for Spider-Man 3 😄

The year isn't even 1/2 way over, and why people/critics make such ignorant statements, totally jumping the shark, is beyond me.

You want to know why I just said Spider-Man 2 is the film of the year?
Ask yourself is there any other film that will most likely be better than Spider-Man 2 this year? 😉

No 😐 maybe....the Village storywise not actionwise 😬

Originally posted by TheFilmProphet
You want to know why I just said Spider-Man 2 is the film of the year?
Ask yourself is there any other film that will most likely be better than Spider-Man 2 this year? 😉

That's a very subjective question you're posing, for one. "Spiderman" is a very safe movie. It's rated PG-13, so everyone and their kids can go see it and enjoy it, what have you. I loved it too, but I don't make comments like that until the year is over, even while you may be a little partial/biased.

Period.

Besides, alot of people would argue with you, me excluded, and bring up "The Prisoner of Azkaban". I've seen a few movies that I felt were better than "Spiderman", personally, and I have seen 26 movies in the theatres this year, namely:

Butterfly Effect, The
Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind
Man On Fire
Monster
Passion Of The Christ, The
Shrek 2

I don't know about that one I mean think about it the director did movies like The Sixth Sense yes its true but he also made films like Unbreakable which was a horrible movie. Anyway Spider-Man comes from the amazing mind of Stan Lee so its pretty hard to beat. 😉

I actually would give movie of the year to Shrek 2 over SM2 at this point. I haven't seen Passion yet...

Yeah man,you`d be surprised I thought X2 was the best movie of last year,and I saw Big Fish in December,and changed my mind 😄

Shrek 2 over Spider-Man 2? What are you 8 years old 😆

Everyones entitled to their opinion Prophet

Alright ok I'll leave you alone but I'm still confused why you would vote that over Spidey 😉