Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

According to estimates from Box Office Mojo, Disney's sequel Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest has broken the opening day and highest-grossing day box office records of 2005's Star Wars: Episode III Revenge of the Sith ($50 million), earning an estimated $55.5 million on its first Friday.


When i first saw trailers for the first POTC i woulda never imagined it was gonna be this freaking huge. Guess theres way more closet pirates out there than disney ever could have imagined. Guess this will give spider man 3 a new goal to beat. Actually is spiderman 3 or potc 3 coming out first?

Saw it coming a mile away, personally. Guess you can chalk it up to Depp/Bloom fangirls and their collective allowances. Better this than that godawful "Superman" movie, which seems to have come and gone.

Wow, that's a little surprising. I know the 1st is huge among people here but I didn't know people would be so wept away with it. I enjoyed the first one but got sick of the notion of the 2nd because of the way people were going on about it. However, after seeing the trailer a while ago I must say it's renewed some sort of urge to go see this one.

Originally posted by C-Dic
Saw it coming a mile away, personally. Guess you can chalk it up to Depp/Bloom fangirls and their collective allowances. Better this than that godawful "Superman" movie, which seems to have come and gone.

i figured the second one would be huge, i was more caught off gaurd by the first, but after it i figured 2 would be the biggest movie of this summer.

Everyone, let's act surprised.

Not suprised, the showing I saw was sold out.

I too, saw this coming. Although what grabbed my attention was Davey Jones.

I'll be seeing it this evening.

I went to go see it the other night and it was sold out..

well this was about a given since it broke the opening day record, it broke the opening weekend record as well. (although starwars had the biggest day, and spiderman the weekend so i guess it wasnt totaly a given)

Pirates Breaks Opening Weekend Record!
Source: Box Office Mojo
July 9, 2006


The ComingSoon.net Box Office Report has been updated with studio estimates for the weekend. Be sure to check back on Monday for the final figures based on actual box office.

Walt Disney Pictures' highly-anticipated Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, starring Johnny Depp, Orlando Bloom, Keira Knightley and Bill Nighy, broke Spider-Man's ($114.8 million) four-year-old opening weekend record with a massive $132 million from 4,133 theaters, the fourth-widest release ever. The movie made $55.5 million on Friday (the biggest single day and opening day in box office history, surpassing Star Wars: Episode III Revenge of the Sith ($50 million)), $44.7 million on Saturday (the fifth-biggest single day) and $31.8 million on Sunday, for an average of $31,944 per theater for the weekend. If estimates hold, this means that "Dead Man's Chest" crossed the $100 million mark in two days, which has never been done before - the previous fastest time was three days. Produced by Jerry Bruckheimer and directed by Gore Verbinski, the movie cost about $225 million to make. The third installment, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, hits theaters on May 25, 2007.

I probably won't see this one until DVD, anyway. I tried to watch the first one on three seperate occasions, and it just bored me to tears.

I just got back from the 1:30.

It was awesome. Great improvement from the first. Davey Jones > Gollum.

This movie can be compared with 'Empire Strikes Back' easily.


This is all in my opinion.

yea ive heard those comparisons with Sparrow as Solo, elizabeth as Leia and Will as Luke. hell even the pearl as the falcon. I guess the grand sum of his rag tag crew can be Chewy?

Originally posted by forumcrew
yea ive heard those comparisons with Sparrow as Solo, elizabeth as Leia and Will as Luke. hell even the pearl as the falcon. I guess the grand sum of his rag tag crew can be Chewy?

I'd make a list, but I don't want to spoil it.

Go see for yourself.

Originally posted by forumcrew
yea ive heard those comparisons with Sparrow as Solo, elizabeth as Leia and Will as Luke. hell even the pearl as the falcon. I guess the grand sum of his rag tag crew can be Chewy?

The two greedy guys (you know, the friends where one always loses his eye) provide a comic relief interaction comparable to R2D2 and C3PO as well.

Although, I don't think this movie was anywhere in the league of SW:TESB

Originally posted by Dusty
I'd make a list, but I don't want to spoil it.

Go see for yourself.

yea i saw the movie last week i know some of the others but they would be spoiler like.

and ya this isnt on the same level as TESB at all but it does follow a similar formula, but i doubt they really tried to model it like star wars.

I just came from the theater. and its showings are still selling out.

Damn!

Wow pirates has really outdone itself

i havn't seen either of them, but after the press hype that followed the first one i was pretty sure the second would be a hit, irrelevant of how good it actually is. i do like depp however, so i'll check them out at some point.

am i the only one that thinks orlando bloom has only one facial expression, i always though Nic Cage had the most limited range of emotions...maybe Keanu Reeves (sp?)

Originally posted by tabby999
am i the only one that thinks orlando bloom has only one facial expression, i always though Nic Cage had the most limited range of emotions...maybe Keanu Reeves (sp?)

I think that title belongs to Curtis Jackson (50 Cent), lol.

Anyway, still I didn't expect it to surpass Spider-Man's record considering many predicted something between 110-116 million.

Wonder what kind of legs this movie will have. lol





Kinda sucks about Superman though.

The first film had very strong stability after its initial release which is where the bulk of its profits originated from.

Indeed it does, I was hoping it would retain significant force but ultimately the release date could have been better articulated.

Superman can still have a sucessful DVD release though, so here is hoping.

Although it takes much more than that for a film of these production proportions. On the flip side, it seems Bryan Singer/Warner remain very optimistic a sequel will be produced.

That's a SH**LOAD of money for any movie! Imagine how much the third one will make, what with the second having a cliffhanger ending and all. I saw it twice in the theater this weekend, and I had to show up an hour and a half early to get tickets because every showing was sold out.

ugh...I hate all the attention this movie is getting..I'm so sick of it...the first one was only good the first couple of times..then it just got annoying..I don't think I'll see the second one

Originally posted by AstroFan
Superman can still have a sucessful DVD release though, so here is hoping.

oh well, it doesn't really matter that it didn't do that well, its just because pirates came out the week after..and so many fangirls went to see it. But as long as you liked Superman thats all that really matters right? I like it more that Pirates.

Great! A Titanic overhype film with hot looking pirates. Oh, the times we're living.

This will only means more Jerry Bruckheimer's movies for the future.

Originally posted by .Dance_Inside.
oh well, it doesn't really matter that it didn't do that well, its just because pirates came out the week after..and so many fangirls went to see it. But as long as you liked Superman thats all that really matters right? I like it more that Pirates.



Its not all fangirls, I didnt even notice any when I went.

awesome.glad to hear it broke the opening day record of that crappy sith movie. I sure hope sm3 doesnt break the record.that would suck.

Originally posted by Murray
That's a SH**LOAD of money for any movie! Imagine how much the third one will make

3rd one is coming out memorial day weekend to which is a huge movie weekend. Also the 2 sequels cost about 450 mill to make combined.

Pirates Record Grows to $135.6 Million
Source: Exhibitor Relations
July 10, 2006


The actual weekend box office figures show that Walt Disney Pictures' Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, starring Johnny Depp, Orlando Bloom, Keira Knightley and Bill Nighy, opened even bigger at $135.6 million for the weekend. Estimates had the number at $132 million.

The sequel, produced by Jerry Bruckheimer and directed by Gore Verbinski, easily broke Spider-Man's $114.8 million opening weekend record from 2002. It also set the biggest single day and opening day in box office history on Friday with $55.8 million.

"Dead Man's Chest" indeed crossed the $100 million mark in two days, which has never been done before - the previous fastest time was three days.

The movie cost about $225 million to make. The third installment, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, hits theaters on May 25, 2007.

ugh that makes me sick. It definetly was thousands of fangirls going out to see "that new movie with johny depp and orlando bloom." It's sad sequels will be decided by these chicks

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Great! A Titanic overhype film with hot looking pirates. Oh, the times we're living.

This will only means more Jerry Bruckheimer's movies for the future.

Very sad indeed,

Originally posted by 113
ugh that makes me sick. It definetly was thousands of fangirls going out to see "that new movie with johny depp and orlando bloom." It's sad sequels will be decided by these chicks

you realise at $8 a ticket that like 17 million people saw this movie this weekend. Fangirls alone arnt gonna make this happen.

Originally posted by forumcrew
you realise at $8 a ticket that like 17 million people saw this movie this weekend. Fangirls alone arnt gonna make this happen.

Fangirls+children=Big weekend

Remember girls bring their boyfriends and children bring their parents.

Originally posted by TheFilmProphet
Fangirls+children=Big weekend



Big, but not biggest ever. It may sound crazy, but maybe people actually like the movie.

Originally posted by AstroFan
Big, but not biggest ever. It may sound crazy, but maybe people actually like the movie.

Maybe, but like I said girls bring their boyfriends and children bring their parents.

Plus a little high production marketing never hurts, sometimes fails and sometimes succeeds exceedingly.

Originally posted by TheFilmProphet
Fangirls+children=Big weekend

Remember girls bring their boyfriends and children bring their parents.

indeed. the smart move to make when marketing a film is to make it appeal to 14 - 25 yr old girls/women. if they want to go, they'll drag along their boyfriend or atleast one friend, whereas if you market a movie to the same age spectrum with guys, a chick will just tell them to see it on their own, they'd never go see that stupid movie.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Great! A Titanic overhype film with hot looking pirates. Oh, the times we're living.

This will only means more Jerry Bruckheimer's movies for the future.

and thats not a bad thing, Team America World Police was a Bruckheimer piss take and we could all use a few more TA's around

Originally posted by C-Dic
I probably won't see this one until DVD, anyway. I tried to watch the first one on three seperate occasions, and it just bored me to tears.

Me too. Everyone was telling what a great movie it was and I rented it when it hit Dvd and fell asleep about half way in. The only scene I really cared for was the brief segment where the Pirates where walking under the water. Other than that, it was overated.

well even more records go down to POTC.

Pirates Breaks the Tuesday Box Office Record
Source: ShowBIZ Data
July 12, 2006


Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest has broken yet another record - biggest Tuesday at the box office ever with $15.6 million. The Omen remake set the previous record at $12.6 million last month. "Dead Man's Chest" also set the record for a nonholiday Monday two days ago with $18.1 million. The previous high was the $14.4 million earned by Star Wars: Episode III Revenge of the Sith.

If you're looking at days of the week, Friday also belongs to the "Pirates" sequel with $55.83 million. That figure marked the biggest single day and opening day ever. The movie set a new opening weekend record with $135.6 million its first three days. It reached the $100 million mark in just two days, another record.

"Dead Man's Chest" has earned $169.39 million in five days. "Revenge of the Sith "was at $172.8 million after the same amount of days, but it looks like "Pirates" will be ahead by the sixth day.

yeah this movie wasn't even good.

I wasnt wild about it either, I actually liked the first one better

me too

Originally posted by C-Dic
Saw it coming a mile away, personally. Guess you can chalk it up to Depp/Bloom fangirls and their collective allowances. Better this than that godawful "Superman" movie, which seems to have come and gone.

Returns was bad. I'll give it that. The thing that REALLY bugged me was the fact that Warner didn't have the balls to say "and the American way".

I enjoyed Pirates 2 about as much as I did the first film.
Originally posted by AstroFan
Superman can still have a sucessful DVD release though, so here is hoping.
It probably will. Even the worst of movies see a good DVD run.

I loved it!

Oh great. Now Bruckheimer & Co will say "Shucks! Look at all the people who liked this movie! Let's make Pirates 4! Heck, why stop -- let's make Pirates 5, 6, 7 and 8!!" And run it into the ground.

Don't get me wrong, I loved the original Pirates; but the second mostly just left a bad taste in my mouth. And knowing Disney, they'll be cashing in on this one several more times to come. I say, whatever happened to artistic integrity -- what?

What do you expect nowdays.

In my city, each cinema has Pirates on about every 15-20 minutes. What would happen if movies back in the day had that many screenings?

ummm...the same thing!

Yahhhhhh.....

Originally posted by chez
Oh great. Now Bruckheimer & Co will say "Shucks! Look at all the people who liked this movie! Let's make Pirates 4! Heck, why stop -- let's make Pirates 5, 6, 7 and 8!!" And run it into the ground.

Don't get me wrong, I loved the original Pirates; but the second mostly just left a bad taste in my mouth. And knowing Disney, they'll be cashing in on this one several more times to come. I say, whatever happened to artistic integrity -- what?


I dont get the big deal over sequels, and how it ruins the franchise or hurts the original. SO what if they make 6 POTC movies? What if 3 or 4 are good, who cares if 2 arent, dont watch them, it doesnt hurt you.

Originally posted by AstroFan
I dont get the big deal over sequels, and how it ruins the franchise or hurts the original. SO what if they make 6 POTC movies? What if 3 or 4 are good, who cares if 2 arent, dont watch them, it doesnt hurt you.

True. Still frustrating though. I guess I just need counseling.

POTC 2 was a let down(still enjoyed it), but Jack Sparrow was worth the two trips alone.

Originally posted by AstroFan
Jack Sparrow was worth the two trips alone.

Yep, there is that.

I enjoyed POTC 2 immensely. It was definitely the best movie I've seen all year.

"Ninety-nine souullsss-AH!"



Davey Jones was legendary.

I overreacted when saying how bad POTC 2 is, it's just pretty disappointing. Same with Superman Returns.

They're both somewhat decent.

Originally posted by Dusty
"Ninety-nine souullsss-AH!"



Davey Jones was legendary.






The ending is still awesome to me.

The ending was quite a shocker, and a well-played cliffhanger.

I thought Barbosa was just as entertaining as Jack Sparrow, so to see him coming back is awesome for me.

Originally posted by AstroFan
I thought Barbosa was just as entertaining as Jack Sparrow, so to see him coming back is awesome for me.

Amen to that.

Pirates Hits the $1 Billion Mark

Source: Variety
September 7, 2006


Walt Disney Pictures' Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest should join Titanic and The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King Thursday as the only movies ever released to top $1 billion in worldwide grosses.

The "Pirates" sequel has been out of the domestic top 10 for the past two weekends, but still managed to bring in $4.9 million during the Labor Day weekend to lift the North American total past $414 million -- the sixth-highest on the all-time list.

It is mainly recent foreign business that's pushed "Dead Man's Chest" over the 10-figure mark. The film has remained dominant internationally with a nine-weekend winning streak and, as of Tuesday, had earned around $583 million overseas.

The top foreign markets have been the U.K. at $94 million and Japan with $78 million. "Chest" should add another significant chunk of business from Italy, where the final opening is set for Sept. 15.

There's no chance for "Dead Man's Chest" to catch Titanic, which stands at $1.83 billion, and it would need another $130 million to overtake "The Return of the King" at $1.13 billion.

The third installment, Pirates of the Caribbean: At Worlds End, hits theaters on May 25, 2007.




forumcrew don't post links to other sites forums. That is consider spam.

I'm just waiting for AC to come here and tell me Snakes On A Plane is marketing ploy to get your money.

It's The Magical Money Hungry World of Disney!

*waits*

Why would I have to tell you that? That's what it is.

Never did I say that marketing isn't necessary in movies, and that movies I like aren't marketed. I said this many times in my post, which you obviously skipped over.

There's a difference between these two things:

1) Catching onto what was a sleeper hit, way after its DVD release, then deciding to go and see the sequel long before they even had a script written.

and 2) Going to see a movie, quite literally, about Snakes on a Plane, based on nothing more than pure internet marketing.

You can continue to ignore this if you wish, but it was, is and always will be the base of my argument.

Snakes on a Plane was born out of marketing a shit idea and getting people to pay for it, which you fell into. I saw Pirates on DVD by pure chance, way after the release liked it and decided I would see the following if they made one.

If you like Snakes on a Plane, that's fine, but don't be so oblivious enough as to tell me I'm as much a victim of marketing because I paid to see a sequel based on me liking the first film, when you paid to see Snakes on a Plane based on media and internet hype.

It's very, very funny that you retort with the "Magical world of Disney!" retorts, no seriously, it is. You should have seen my sides. It's just got nothing to do with this debate.

If I had seen the first one due to massive hype (which it didn't have, really, even here) then you would have an argument. I didn't, so you don't.

-AC

That reminds me, I still need to go see Snakes on a Plane.

Quite a telling statement, BackFire.

-AC

Indeed it is.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri


If I had seen the first one due to massive hype (which it didn't have, really, even here) then you would have an argument. I didn't, so you don't.

-AC

Yeah, but you still saw the sequel which was TWICE as hyped as the first one. Thus, Disney's marketing ploy overpower you. As you can see your contribution really paid off for Disney. But the best of all this is that you enjoy the film. Just like I enjoyed SOaP. In the end we both got what we wanted....entertainmen. Thanks for stopping by

Ive had it with these mother****in pirates on this mother****in ship.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Yeah, but you still saw the sequel which was TWICE as hyped as the first one. Thus, Disney's marketing ploy overpower you. As you can see your contribution really paid off for Disney. But the best of all this is that you enjoy the film. Just like I enjoyed SOaP. In the end we both got what we wanted....entertainmen. Thanks for stopping by

Don't make the logic leap if you can't land on both feet.

How can you be so ignorant even after I've explained things to you many times? I decided to see the sequel long before it was even written. I liked the first one so much that I knew I'd see the second one anyway.

It had loads of hype because lots of people thought the same. I didn't see it because of the hype. It having loads of hype wasn't my fault. Disney made a really good first movie and as a result, loads of people went to see the second one.

You cockily asked me to come back, I did, I subsequently blew your ignorant (willfully) argument out of the water and you still try to twist words.

-AC

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I'm just waiting for AC to come here and tell me Snakes On A Plane is marketing ploy to get your money.

I cant see how its not. Yeah we've all seen the jokes and funny pics and shit off the net, but when it actually came crunch time and they released the trailer, its just a shit flick. It showed crappy CGI, crappy story and crappy acting. "Get these mothaf*ckin' snakes off this mothaf*ckin' plane" is the only quote that movie will be remembered for, and it wouldnt have even been in there had they not seen how shit the movie originally looked and thought 'Well, nobody will watch it, we need something to get attention...I know! We'll give Sam J a cheesy line and overmarket that!'

People will go and see it because they think 'May as well see what the fuss is...', and laugh at the cheesiness, not the actual humour in it.

Come off it, comparing Pirates of the Caribeean to Snakes on a Plane is ridiculous, POTC has a bunch of good actors, a good story, good special effects, good humour and appeals to a broad audience. SoaP has one good actor (would you even see the movie had SJ not been cast?), shit effects, shit story (snakes run loose on a plane and kill people....?) and shit humour.

If they made a movie called Watching Grass Grow, and cast Chuck Norris as the main character, and had him say one cheesy memorable line, people would still flock to it, not because its a good movie, but because its got good ol' Chuck Norris, and the internet just loves him.

He's driven himself into the rut of upholding the argument of:

"AC believes Snakes on a Plane is a marketing ploy, but Pirates is marketed so he can't say anything.".

Despite that not having anything to do with anything I've said. I've explained it multiple times and he probably still won't recognise the factual difference.

-AC

I see your point AC and I agree

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
I enjoyed POTC 2 immensely. It was definitely the best movie I've seen all year.

Never got around to seeing it,well have to wait till its out on video but thats how I felt about the first one.This one I have heard a lot of bad reviews on it and it doesnt look good from the previews so I'll just wait till its out on video and rent it for free.

No, AC if I recall what you said....it was something about you not wanting to see SOaP because it was a marketing ploy and everyone who went to see it was "sucker" into seen the movie. All I did was to point out that you went to see POTC 2 which is an even BIGGER marketing ploy than SOaP. So if we use your logic of people being "sucker" into a marketing ploy then by all means you're an bigger "sucker" for going to see the even BIGGER marketing ploy from Disney. I'm not twisting your words. You're twisting your own self with those assumptions.

Congratulations to pirates it made $1,004,M so far but it wont beat ROTK

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
No, AC if I recall what you said....it was something about you not wanting to see SOaP because it was a marketing ploy and everyone who went to see it was "sucker" into seen the movie. All I did was to point out that you went to see POTC 2 which is an even BIGGER marketing ploy than SOaP.

How on Earth is Pirates a bigger marketing ploy? You tell me that with any kind of realism and I will mail you a medal.

Bearing in mind that the first Pirates was considered a sleeper hit, just another movie coming out with Johnny Depp in it, and reached massive success AFTER people had seen it, thus generating hype off opinion also.

Snakes on a Plane didn't. It was pure internet hype, pure media hype.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
So if we use your logic of people being "sucker" into a marketing ploy then by all means you're an bigger "sucker" for going to see the even BIGGER marketing ploy from Disney. I'm not twisting your words. You're twisting your own self with those assumptions.

You're backpedalling.

A) It's not a bigger marketing ploy.

B) You would have to be referring to Pirates 2, as I didn't go to see the first. As said previously, I didn't get suckered into seeing Pirates 2 via media hype. I saw the first, ages after it came out on DVD and decided that I'd see the sequel when and if they made one.

You went to see Snakes based on nothing but pure, unadulterated hype. Stop ignoring this fact.

Ok, maybe you're not a "sucker", maybe you went to see Snakes of your own accord, cool. I can accept that.

Yet, to deny that it's any more of a marketing ploy just because other movies are marketed is just stupid.

-AC

I don't need a medal. And your point A) it's utterly ignorant of the fact that this film made so much money out of a marketing ploy. In my neck of the woods this film had more advertising and had more tv spots than SOaP ever had. The fact this film made this gross amount of money is a factor of the marketing ploy of Disney. Something you're just ignoring on purpose. But rather than point out this gigantic fact you chose to pick on a B-movie and call it a marketing ploy. Which I haven't deny..but you yet chose to concetrate all your energy on the B-movie rather than the big movie studio.



On a side note...what's with bringing the internet advertising point? Don't tell me SOaP was the only one promoting itself on the net. I saw far more banners and pop ups for POTC 2 than SOaP.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
In my neck of the woods this film had more advertising and had more tv spots than SOaP ever had. The fact this film made this gross amount of money is a factor of the marketing ploy of Disney.

True, but people would go to POTC2 knowing the actual content would be hopefully on par with the first. Whereas SOAP is always going to be a B grade movie, regardless of earnings.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I don't need a medal. And your point A) it's utterly ignorant of the fact that this film made so much money out of a marketing ploy. In my neck of the woods this film had more advertising and had more tv spots than SOaP ever had.

Because Snakes on a Plane's specific marketing ploy didn't have much to do with THEM promoting it. They slyly suckered people into doing to promotion for them. It was an undeniable marketing ploy which the film relied on for its success. That one Samuel L. Jackson line etc.

For your information, I don't live in your neck of the woods. We do, however, share the internet regardless. Snakes on a Plane is internet famous and generated hype in a very sly, but undeniably specific way.

Pirates 2 had the usual movie marketing, more so maybe because the first became a mega smash AFTER it garnered massive critical acclaim. Snakes on a Plane didn't.

In closing, I'm not denying that both are marketed, of course. I'm simply saying that you are making a flawed argument. Snakes on a Plane has a much clearer, much more specific marketing ploy and appeal running through it and working for it than Pirates 2 does. It was a net-famous meme, and a lot more people pay attention to the net than they do TV and billboards.

People were making their own soundtracks, posters, imitation movies. Off the back of what? A title, a quote and an actor. Exactly as the makers planned.

Disney made Pirates, is caused a riot after people started going to see it, they mentioned a sequel and everyone was up for it. There's a massive difference between the two, and you're simply ignoring it because it's devestating to your debate. I post time and time again, and you ignore my points and retort with; "They were both marketed.". The issue isn't about movies being marketed, the issue is quite simply; Comparing the two, you can see that one is a sequel with an entire satisfied, established fanbase, whilst one is a random idea that garnered attention due to it becoming an internet meme.

If they made a movie about the "O RLY?" owls, those same Snakes fans would likely go see it.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
The fact this film made this gross amount of money is a factor of the marketing ploy of Disney. Something you're just ignoring on purpose. But rather than point out this gigantic fact you chose to pick on a B-movie and call it a marketing ploy. Which I haven't deny..but you yet chose to concetrate all your energy on the B-movie rather than the big movie studio.

What are you aiming to achieve here, WD? I know Pirates 2 was marketed, what's your point?

You are the one purposefully ignoring my points. You are saying that I should pick on Pirates 2 for being marketed just because I'm saying Snakes was a marketing ploy more than a movie? No, you're wrong.

Pirates 2 was a movie that took a massive amount of cash and had a fair share of marketing, I agree. Why? Because it had an entire fanbase from a movie that was considered a sleeper hit even by Johnny Depp. It was a script that they thought would be good, like The Matrix, and it worked out beyond their wildest hopes. It wasn't an instant classic with people salivating for it.

Snakes on a Plane didn't have this, and it has made most of it's money off it's marketing ploys, obvious ones at that. It has no previous fanbase, Pirates did. You're arguing the stupid point that they were both marketed so I should pick on them both. That's not what I'm saying.

Snakes on a Plane has a much clearer and specific marketing ploy that it relied on. That being; Create a huge hype, for better or worse, and cause people to go see it out of A) Genuinely thinking it was great, and B) "Irony" that isn't actually there.

Causing many up-their-own-anus internet fans to come back exaggerating how good the movie is, in some hope of "Look at me, I'm the man. I saw Snakes and thought it was mad even though you're not really supposed to think it's good.".

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
On a side note...what's with bringing the internet advertising point? Don't tell me SOaP was the only one promoting itself on the net. I saw far more banners and pop ups for POTC 2 than SOaP.

Let's not try to act like Snakes received less internet attention than Pirates 2.

That's...yeah, that's a bit out there even for you.

-AC

AC you wrote all that essay just to admit this:



Which we agreed back in the SOaP thread. The issue here is that you clearly label people who saw the flick as "suckers" and then even went as far as saying that the only reason people like this movie was because of the hype. Which is totally absurd! People were entertained by this movie just like you were entertained by POTC2. To prove your silly logic I used that same logic on you. You just didn't like it. That's why you still arguing.



That's the problem you just won't admit. The people enjoyed the film. You have this idea that they just saying that to make it look like a good film. No ONE said it was a good film. Instead they all said it was a very entertaining film. Marketing SOaP?....Hello how about marketing POTC2? The video games? T-shirts? Posters? All that stuff....You're talking about hype for a film. The amount of money made by POTC 2 proves that movie had an even HYPE than SOaP. This same hype even drove you to say the film was good. When in fact...it wasn't! See how ironic you've become?

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Which we agreed back in the SOaP thread. The issue here is that you clearly label people who saw the flick as "suckers" and then even went as far as saying that the only reason people like this movie was because of the hype. Which is totally absurd! People were entertained by this movie just like you were entertained by POTC2. To prove your silly logic I used that same logic on you. You just didn't like it. That's why you still arguing.

Well...it's a fact that until the movie was released, everybody liked it because of the hype. There was no movie to go by, was there? No, good.

You're using logic against a point I'm not making.

I retracted my statement previous. These people probably AREN'T all suckers, some of them probably are going of their own accord and enjoy it simply because they enjoyed it, that's fair enough.

The FACT of the matter, the crux of my argument, the part you keep ignoring is this: Just because Pirates 2 was marketed, doesn't mean that Snakes on a Plane isn't primarily a marketing ploy OR has an obvious one that was specifically put out to generate pre-movie hysteria.

I don't know whether you generally can't grasp that specific point, or whether you're just ignoring it, but that was always my argument. Don't talk to me of ignorance when everybody else here has got it except you. I'm still arguing because you're ignoring my points, and this is obvious because every time you summerise what you believe my point is; you get it dreadfully wrong.

How? I have no idea. No human should be getting it wrong after this much explanation. It's simply willful ignorance.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
That's the problem you just won't admit. The people enjoyed the film. You have this idea that they just saying that to make it look like a good film. No ONE said it was a good film. Instead they all said it was a very entertaining film. Marketing SOaP?....Hello how about marketing POTC2? The video games? T-shirts? Posters? All that stuff....You're talking about hype for a film. The amount of money made by POTC 2 proves that movie had an even HYPE than SOaP. This same hype even drove you to say the film was good. When in fact...it wasn't! See how ironic you've become?

Why the hell are you still chiming on about the movie being marketed? You're not a stupid man, are you? No. So why are you attempting to look like one?

Forget marketing, the general idea, forget it. Ok? This is the umpteenth time I've said it now. They were both marketed, all movies are marketed, right? Right. Forget that.

My point was: Snakes on a Plane generated interest and generated hype by using specific, obvious marketing gimmicks and ploys that played to many different levels and thus encouraged certain people to see the movie regardless of it looking shit or not. For a single quote, in many cases. Pirates didn't have that. It had an entire fanbase built from it's previous installment (which had considerably less marketing).

Why are you now telling me that the hype drove me to say the movie was good? I saw The Matrix Revolutions among the midst of the hype, the final installment of what was my favourite movie series ever, and I came out hating it, still do. I'm not a victim of hype if a movie is shit.

You're being really hypocritical and extremely childish now. Resorting to the foolish tactic of ignoring my points and telling me why I thought a movie was good.

You saw Snakes on a Plane and enjoyed it regardless of hype, allegedly. I will never know if that's true, but I took your word for it. So don't go assuming the same about me. I've said it a thousand times, I saw Pirates 2 because I loved the first one, which I saw by chance. I made the decision to go and see the sequel long before there was even word of a sequel.

Nothing you've said adds up to countering my argument, and now you're the one who's continuing for the sake of it.

-AC

Yet, another essay post to make a simple response:



Thank you! Finally, you've come to your senses. Now, I can admit that people who went to see POTC 2 because they're fans and not "suckers". We can finally put the suckers factor to rest.

When you try to belittle my post with your claim of childish and hypocritical arguments won't get you nowhere AC. Sometimes you have to admit that you made a mistake by making that gross analyze of the people who went to see SOaP.

Now something else I've notice in your post:



Whether you hate it or not you still felt for the hype. Just because the film didn't meet your expectactions doesn't give you a free out jail "hype" card. But in reality there is nothing wrong with that. None at all. I'm not holding that agaisn't you. I had the same experience with Episode III...however, I never deny I was attracted by the film and the hype behind it.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Thank you! Finally, you've come to your senses. Now, I can admit that people who went to see POTC 2 because they're fans and not "suckers". We can finally put the suckers factor to rest.

I had to say it three times for you to read it, but fair enough. If you're going to pick and choose which parts you quote and reply to, I won't give you the respect of replying properly to yours.

So you were being willfully ignorant instead of accepting my very clear point?

Thought so.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
When you try to belittle my post with your claim of childish and hypocritical arguments won't get you nowhere AC. Sometimes you have to admit that you made a mistake by making that gross analyze of the people who went to see SOaP.

That first line makes no sense.

Second, I did twice, you caught on the third time I said it, whilst simultaneously ignoring my points and arguing for the sake.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Whether you hate it or not you still felt for the hype. Just because the film didn't meet your expectactions doesn't give you a free out jail "hype" card.

Cool yourself down there.

Who said it didn't meet my expectations? I didn't. I said I wasn't going mad for it, for the hype of it. I went to see it because a friend asked me to go, I had the cash, I wanted to see the movie regardless of the hype.

That's a stone cold fact. If it was because of hype, I'd not have made my decision before the film was even a concept.

You're pulling things out of thin air.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
But in reality there is nothing wrong with that. None at all. I'm not holding that agaisn't you. I had the same experience with Episode III...however, I never deny I was attracted by the film and the hype behind it.

So can you tell me why I must have experienced it the same way simply because you fail to avoid being affected by hype?

Oh, that's exactly why. I must be, because you were.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri


So you were being willfully ignorant instead of accepting my very clear point?

Not really, it was to apply your logic to the argument. No harm done.


Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

Who said it didn't meet my expectations? I didn't. I said I wasn't going mad for it, for the hype of it. I went to see it because a friend asked me to go, I had the cash, I wanted to see the movie regardless of the hype.

It's always a friend asking you to go. Well, I not here to interrogate you so I'll take your word for it.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That's a stone cold fact. If it was because of hype, I'd not have made my decision before the film was even a concept.

You're pulling things out of thin air.

So can you tell me why I must have experienced it the same way simply because you fail to avoid being affected by hype?

Oh, that's exactly why. I must be, because you were.

-AC

Never recall saying certain hypes motivate me to go see a flick. There been some cases the hype got me interested. But nowadays with the wonders of DVD and Cable tv. I no longer get caught up on hypes anymore. Occasionally there is a film or a documentary that might catch me and I give in. As I mentioned with Episode III.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Not really, it was to apply your logic to the argument. No harm done.

You spent this whole time countering a point I never made, and every single time I highlight this, you simply reiterate the same false point.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
It's always a friend asking you to go. Well, I not here to interrogate you so I'll take your word for it.

I would have gone anyway because I wanted to see it, I made that decision when I saw the first one, but at that point, a friend was going and I went along.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Never recall saying certain hypes motivate me to go see a flick. There been some cases the hype got me interested. But nowadays with the wonders of DVD and Cable tv. I no longer get caught up on hypes anymore. Occasionally there is a film or a documentary that might catch me and I give in. As I mentioned with Episode III.

You no longer get caught up in hypes, yet somehow you saw Snakes on a Plane in opening weekend based off...? Somehow you are able to say "I no longer get caught up on hypes...", yet you are allowed to tell me why I see movies?

Odd.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri


You no longer get caught up in hypes, yet somehow you saw Snakes on a Plane in opening weekend based off...? Somehow you are able to say "I no longer get caught up on hypes...", yet you are allowed to tell me why I see movies?

Odd.

-AC

I try to avoid them. SOaP was more curiosity than hype for me.

It's always more curiousity than hype, but I guess I'll have to take your word for it.

-AC

Sooo....would you eventually might watch SOaP somwhere in the future or just not interested?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm not a victim of hype if a movie is shit.

-AC

thats the biggest lie of all from you.your a huge victem of hype when a movie is shit.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I try to avoid them. SOaP was more curiosity than hype for me.

yea but then someones just gonna say without all the hype would you have really been as curious?