posted on July 25, 2004 09:29:55 PM new
Disclaimer for 12pole and other imbeciles -- Reamond did not write this article.
Michael Moore took the unusual step of hosting a Sunday morning conference call to trumpet the $100 million milestone crossed by "Fahrenheit 9/11."
As the dozen or so journos checked in to the call, he helpfully suggested, "While we're waiting, can everyone please sing their favorite Linda Ronstadt (news) song?"
While "Fahrenheit" is the first doc ever to cross this threshold, Moore also used the occasion to thump the underperforming slate at Walt Disney Co., which blocked subsidiary Miramax from distributing the scathing critique of President Bush (news - web sites).
Asked if he was surprised by the doc's box office results, Moore responded, "If you had told me when we were going through all the pre-distribution problems with Disney that this film would gross more than any other Disney film this year, I don't even know how to respond to that."
Noting Disney chief Michael Eisner gave the pic a favorable review during an Aspen business conference last week -- "I thought it was like going to a rock concert. I loved it, but not in a political (sense)," Eisner said -- Moore added, "I'm glad Mr. Eisner has said he liked the film, but I would think that his stockholders might wonder what his fiduciary responsibilities are to them at this point."
Disney reps had no immediate response to Moore's comments.
Ultimately, Miramax toppers Bob and Harvey Weinstein personally acquired "Fahrenheit" rights from Disney and set up single-purpose company Fellowship Adventure Group with Moore. Lions Gate and IFC Films are distributing the pic in the U.S.
Produced for just $6 million and a P&A cost estimated at less than $15 million, "Fahrenheit" is likely to be one of the most profitable films of the year. But the convoluted deal structure behind "Fahrenheit" makes it a complicated question who will get that money.
Moore acknowledged he is a profit participant, but declined to say how big his cut will be, quipping at one point, "I don't read the contracts." (He later went out of his way to make it clear that he was only kidding about that.)
As owners of the film, the Weinsteins ordinarily would stand to reap the lion's share of profits. But sources close to the deal say the buyback from Disney stipulates that nearly 60% of the film's net profits will go back to the Mouse House, which has pledged to donate any "Fahrenheit" profit to charity.
Distribs Lions Gate and IFC are working for a percentage of the box office gross, thought to be in the neighborhood of 15%.
Moore also backed away slightly from his earlier intention to release "Fahrenheit" on DVD in time for the election. Sony's homevid unit is close to a distrib deal ( Daily Variety, July 7), but Moore said Sunday that Lions Gate and IFC now say they envision playing the movie "through the end of the year and possibly into the next year," suggesting a DVD won't be released until after the pic finishes its theatrical run.
"I don't honestly know what's going to happen," Moore said.
That new scenario would keep "Fahrenheit" in theaters into awards season; the film is likely to be a contender for the documentary Oscar (or, as some optimistic partisans have suggested, best picture). The Weinsteins then could choose to release the DVD timed to the pic's awards campaign.
While delaying the release of the "Fahrenheit" DVD could hurt the timeliness of the doc, especially if Bush loses the election, it also would sidestep Federal Election Commission (news - web sites) regulations that would hamper the marketing of a DVD. Though the FEC has yet to rule definitively on the issue, campaign finance rules likely prohibit mentioning or showing Bush in any broadcast ads for "Fahrenheit" in advance of the election. Restrictions are lifted after the Nov. 2 vote.
Moore will be traveling to the Democratic National Convention in Boston this week to receive an award from the Congressional Black Caucus and speak at a rally.
Several polls have consistently found that it is overwhelmingly Democrats who are flocking to cinemas for "Fahrenheit." Of the possible political impact of the film, Moore said, "Part of the problem Democrats have had in the past is energizing their base. I believe this film will bring hundreds of thousands of people to the polls who don't vote and wouldn't vote in this election."
posted on July 26, 2004 06:30:01 AM new
Why afraid to give the source and author reamond? You must really hate the fact you got outed as someone who steals others words as thier owm...
only imbeciles are the ones who actually believe that film....
And of course a moron like reamond...
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
Homosexuality is a choice that can be corrected...
[ edited by Twelvepole on Jul 26, 2004 06:36 AM ]
posted on July 26, 2004 07:28:23 AM new
$100 million is just incredible. At $10.00 a head that would be 10 million who saw the movie. More like 15 million counting the cheap showings. I wonder what percentage were republicans?
posted on July 26, 2004 01:50:15 PM new
$20 million to make including P & A, $100 million screen receipts, DVD yet to be released, TV rights yet to be negotiated, and nothing but pure profit for Michael Moore.
People will be standing in line to finance his next project.
I never would have dreamed that a documentary would do $100 million on the big screen.
That's like people paying $100 million to see 60 Minutes at the theatre!!
posted on July 26, 2004 02:26:37 PM new
Lets see, didn't Mel Gibson finance The Passion, you know that movie you kept putting down.... and it did very well at the box office. I believe his was very low budget also...
posted on July 26, 2004 03:16:10 PM newLets see, didn't Mel Gibson finance The Passion, you know that movie you kept putting down.... and it did very well at the box office. I believe his was very low budget also...
Gibson spent an estimated $80 million on P & A alone. Add that to all the other expenses for his fictional movie and who do you think made the better profit ?
posted on July 26, 2004 03:21:45 PM new
I don't Reamond, I don't know the figures of what the Passion did at the box office.
LOL, again you'll continue with Gibsons movie being fiction, yet Moores is all fact, AND is going into DVD soon, so it will 'sway' voters to vote for Kerry instead of Bush.. Now I remember you saying something along the lines that the Passion was trying to sway people into Christianity (you know the myth-Christianity) So, whats the difference here?
According to Gibson and many others, the Passion wasn't fictional.
posted on July 26, 2004 03:36:59 PM new
Personally, I don't think that many right wingers would pay to see how they have been betrayed by their "leader". Some people have a difficult time realizing when they made a mistake.
As far as The Passion is concerned. I do recall that in some communities, churches rented the whole theater, probably so their thumpers could blubber in privacy. Many people that I have talked to about the Passion said that it was one of the most violent movies they have ever seen. I wonder if Mel Gibson made a movie about gang life in urban areas, they would call it trash.
Now on the other hand, if a gay organization had it's event called Gay Days, as they did at Dollywood, the thumpers who saw them there become outraged by their presence.
I didn't see The Passion or any of the Harry Potter movies. I don't get into fantasy movies.
True Americans do not exclude anybody. They recognize that everyone should have the same rights. Bigotry, intolerance and hatred are cancers of the mind.
posted on July 26, 2004 03:45:03 PM new
Well, goes both ways, I don't think I'll see Moores film as I don't go to movies to see fantasy either
As for the churches buying out theaters, hey its their money. I didn't hear about any entertainers, in the middle of their act, promoting Mel Gibson or his movie....
posted on July 26, 2004 03:54:11 PM new
You are exactly right on the church spending it's money to rent a movie theater.
Just as when the 5,000 gay men and women paid the admission price to enter Dollywood. There were bus loads of them from all over the east coast of the US. With a real quick search on the net you would find that the thumpers were displeased with the gay patrons there. But you won't find and backlash from gay groups concerned that churches rented movie theaters.
I wonder why that is.
True Americans do not exclude anybody. They recognize that everyone should have the same rights. Bigotry, intolerance and hatred are cancers of the mind.
posted on July 26, 2004 04:12:46 PM new
I'm glad to see Moore making such an impact. It is funny how neo-cons like to make Moore out to be a bad guy because he makes millions of dollars. As if it is shameful to be a wealthy Democrat. Funny how that works. They act like he didn't work for it and didn't earn it. Michael Moore came from a factory working family in Michigan who had some creative genius in his style of delivery. He was an average joe with an idea and he happened to succeed with it. Hardly a blip on the movie screen when he began his movie career with Roger and Me, and now look at him.
Neo-cons hate him because he can tell his story without much narration. They are afraid to see George Bush speak what they are afraid to hear from their slave master. Sure, you can argue any point from any side, but it is hard to argue what is said straight from the horses mouth (in this case... George W. Bush) when you see with your own eyes. I would love to hear a neo-con dispute much of the video footage of Bush making an a$# of himself.
posted on July 26, 2004 04:30:45 PM new
Thats what this country is about; capitalism. He's raking it in. Thats what we all try to do, and he did. Nothing wrong with making lots of money. BTW he's not the only Democrat that is very wealthy
posted on July 26, 2004 04:33:11 PM new I don't Reamond, I don't know the figures of what the Passion did at the box office.
From the IMDB:
Passion of the Christ
Budget: $30,000,000
Opening Weekend: $83,848,082(USA)(29 February 2004)(3,043 Screens)
Gross: $370,203,632 (USA)(4 July 2004)
Fahrenheit 9/11
Budget: $6,000,000
Opening Weekend: $23,920,637 (USA)(27 June 2004)(868 Screens)
Gross: $61,118,488 (USA)(4 July 2004)
If one is a Christian, then "Passion" is historical fiction. If one is not a Christian , then it is plain fiction. Even if you consider the story to be true, the film is still fiction based on historical events.
____________________
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
posted on July 26, 2004 05:01:02 PM new
If one is a Christian, then "Passion" is historical fiction. If one is not a Christian , then it is plain fiction. Even if you consider the story to be true, the film is still fiction based on historical events
But if I am a Christian, and I do believe the Crucifixion and Resurrection happened then to me its historical fact.
Ok forget that. What do you in your opinion consider F 9/11 to be? Historical Fiction, or plain fiction. (I put historical in there, as it apparantly is about events that have already occured)Or total facts
edited to add 'facts'
__________________________________
I'm NearTheSea, and I approve this post
[ edited by NearTheSea on Jul 26, 2004 05:02 PM ]
posted on July 26, 2004 05:11:02 PM new
"Historical fiction" is fiction based upon historical happenings. This movie, like any historical fiction novel contains made-up dialog, some characters that were created for the plot's sake, and character traits, feelings, and reactions for historical characters that, while they may be in keeping with the spirit of an historical personag, were made up by the writer as we don't have any way of knowing what really occured outside of larger historical issues.
So, like "Spartacus", "Quo Vadis", the "Ten Commandments", and all the other biblical films that came before it, "Passion of the Christ" is historical fiction even if you are a believer.
____________________
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
posted on July 27, 2004 08:33:09 AM new
Fahrenheit 9/11 seems not to be fiction after all.
All the conservatives call it fiction, but when pressed to be specific, their assertions fail.
Ron Reagan Jr., stated last night on a conservative show that the only thing that seems to lack merit in Fahrenheit 9/11 is Moore's contention that the bin Laden family flew out of the United States during the no-fly period.
Reagan then went on to say that nearly all of the movie is Bush, Rice, Cheney, Powell, and all the other Bushtards IN THEIR OWN WORDS.
So I guess in one sense, since the film is a documentary filled with Bushtards speaking their own words, then it could in be called fiction.
