The Post

[Yamcha]

>$50 million budget
>has Tom Hanks
>only makes $2 milllion at the box office
what went wrong?

[Thin Lizzy]

Dying business model. It occasionally still works for some giant mega movie like the new Star Wars but for this type of film it’s over.

[Straw Man]

Another day. Another reminder of just how uninformed the right wing posters on this board really are.

You two geniuses might want to wait until after the movie is widely released on JANUARY 12th before you deem it a failure.

[Yamcha]

Another day. Another reminder of just how uninformed the right wing posters on this board really are.

You two geniuses might want to wait until after the movie is widely released on JANUARY 12th before you deem it a failure.

Lol. If it's playing in Lubbock TX, which it is, then it has had a fairly wide release.

[Straw Man]

Lol. If it's playing in Lubbock TX, which it is, then it has had a fairly wide release.

How many theaters in the country have it?

Wide release is not scheduled until January 12th

https://www.google.com/amp/variety.com/2017/film/news/box-office-steven-spielberg-the-post-opening-1202648572/amp/

[Yamcha]

How many theaters in the country have it?

Wide release is not scheduled until January 12th

https://www.google.com/amp/variety.com/2017/film/news/box-office-steven-spielberg-the-post-opening-1202648572/amp/

idk. but nice post from before X-mas

[Straw Man]

idk. but nice post from before X-mas

You mean the article from December 24 that gives the details of the limited opening and says it will go into wide release on January 12th?

Thanks

[Thin Lizzy]

Another day. Another reminder of just how uninformed the right wing posters on this board really are.

You two geniuses might want to wait until after the movie is widely released on JANUARY 12th before you deem it a failure.

Look at the dates of the movies, shithead. The studios are spending more and more to make less and less, shithead. It’s obviously an industry in a state of secular decline shithead.

[Irongrip400]

You mean the article from December 24 that gives the details of the limited opening and says it will go into wide release on January 12th?

Thanks

I guess we should wait and see the results around the 19th or so. I imagine it tanks to be honest though.

[Straw Man]

Look at the dates of the movies, shithead. The studios are spending more and more to make less and less, shithead. It’s obviously an industry in a state of secular decline shithead.

who gives a shit

talking about the box office results of a movie that hasn't even been released nationwide is fucking stupid

par for the course for right wing morons so carry on

[Pray_4_War]

90% of Hollywood movies are nothing but leftist piles of shit.  I hope the whole industry goes tits up.  Time to start over.

[Straw Man]

I guess we should wait and see the results around the 19th or so. I imagine it tanks to be honest though.

Yeah, a Spielberg movie starring Tom Hanks is most likely to be a dud

I'm sure all the movie executives who read this board will be shocked to discover they can only make money from domestic US ticket sales

Thank Jeebus the right wing brain trust on this board was here to help them figure out their business model

[Coach is Back!]

Yeah, a Spielberg movie starring Tom Hanks is most likely to be a dud

I'm sure all the movie executives who read this board will be shocked to discover they can only make money from domestic US ticket sales

Thank Jeebus the right wing brain trust on this board was here to help them figure out their business model

Yes, because I'm sure a movie with Meryl Streep and Tom Hanks about a newspaper owned by Jeff Bezos is going to have a nice positive conservative spin on it. 

[chaos]

Never heard of it.

[Coach is Back!]

Fucking awesome....

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/photos-knew-street-art-welcomes-hollywood-elites-golden-globes/

[chaos]

I saw that, hilarious.

[QuietYou]

>$50 million budget
>has Tom Hanks
>only makes $2 milllion at the box office
what went wrong?

Most films lose money. If the plot and the writing sucks usually an actor who hasn't been relevant in the past 10 years can't save it. The last time Tom Hanks was making movies relevant to the public, most of the teenagers now that take up most of the demographic of ticket buyers, were still shitting in their underwear.

[Yamcha]

Most films lose money. If the plot and the writing sucks usually an actor who hasn't been relevant in the past 10 years can't save it. The last time Tom Hanks was making movies relevant to the public, most of the teenagers now that take up most of the demographic of ticket buyers, were still shitting in their underwear.

"There's a Snake in my Boot!"

[Straw Man]

Yes, because I'm sure a movie with Meryl Streep and Tom Hanks about a newspaper owned by Jeff Bezos is going to have a nice positive conservative spin on it. 

God you're a fucking dunce

Bezos didn't own the paper at the time of the story and not sure how a story about the US government LYING about Vietnam is either conservative or liberal

It's just about the government lying

Isn't lying one of those sins you religious types care about

[Straw Man]

Most films lose money. If the plot and the writing sucks usually an actor who hasn't been relevant in the past 10 years can't save it. The last time Tom Hanks was making movies relevant to the public, most of the teenagers now that take up most of the demographic of ticket buyers, were still shitting in their underwear.

I just looked up his last two films (I that I could remember)

Sully had worldwide total of $238.5 million, against a production budget of $60

Bridge of Spies had worldwide total of $165.6 million, against a budget of $40 million

That's a pretty good return in investment, even for the average GetBig multi-billionaire

I doubt many teenagers went to these movies

[QuietYou]

I just looked up his last two films (I that I could remember)

Sully had worldwide total of $238.5 million, against a production budget of $60

Bridge of Spies had worldwide total of $165.6 million, against a budget of $40 million

That's a pretty good return in investment, even for the average GetBig multi-billionaire

I doubt many teenagers went to these movies

The writing and plots didn't suck though. He's a great actor. But you're weighing an actors influence too heavily on determining whether a movie will be successful or not. This movie is a perfect example of why names don't always do it. There is a reason the top earners change often from series to series, years to years. No actor really stays on the top of the earnings list for their whole career. It changes quite often. The directors, writing etc are responsible for alot of the success.

[Irongrip400]

I just looked up his last two films (I that I could remember)

Sully had worldwide total of $238.5 million, against a production budget of $60

Bridge of Spies had worldwide total of $165.6 million, against a budget of $40 million

That's a pretty good return in investment, even for the average GetBig multi-billionaire

I doubt many teenagers went to these movies

He did some movie with the girl from Harry Potter recently. I never heard anything about it. Not sure how that one did. I like Tom Hanks, I'm just saying I think this one has box office poison written on it. Like I said, let's wait to see how it does, and check our perspective theories around the 19th. Not trolling, I don't know why you resort to name calling in a thread. It's just the Internet bro.

[Irongrip400]

Bump for box office receipts.

[Dos Equis]

Bump for box office receipts.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=untitledstevenspielberg.htm

[Agnostic007]

Bump for box office receipts.

135 million total and 2 Oscar nominations. Haven't seen it myself, probably wont.