Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

AICN-Downunder: Ghost Rider; Step in Time; Big Turkey; Silence; Amityville; Sin City

Off the topic: if AMERICAN DAD drags down FAMILY GUY with it, I by FrankDrebin	Apr 17th, 2005 12:37:33 AM
resume talkback
I don't know if this is true...but it sounds cool... by Drworm2002	Apr 17th, 2005 12:42:25 AM
read this -- http://moviespoilers.net/batma n.html
Seth MacFarlane = One Trick Pony by jimmy_009	Apr 17th, 2005 12:50:15 AM
And Family Guy isn't that original to begin with.
Cost of prints. by Shan	Apr 17th, 2005 02:09:39 AM
My guess is that the company producing any given film have to weigh up whether it will be worth it or not to produce extra prints for simultaneous and near simultaneous release worldwide or make less and then ship them to other territories. After all, making cinema prints are expensive and you'd want to consider, is this film a sure thing?----------------------- Spare a thought for Japan, who tend to get films last or close to it, even with films set in their own country (The Last Samurai, The Grudge) or based on films originally made there (The Ring, Shall We Dance), quite often after they've come out on video and DVD in most of the rest of the world, they're just getting those films in the cinema.----------------------- ---- P.S Your points you make are good but lay off with calling us convicts all right? That got old like 100 years ago at least.
"...And Family Guy isn't that original to begin with. ..." by Drworm2002	Apr 17th, 2005 02:36:21 AM

SHIT....I ment to say something... by Drworm2002	Apr 17th, 2005 02:37:20 AM
...Family Guy my not be original...but it's funny as hell. One of my top ten TV shows of all time...hell, even top 5.
Gee, it's hard to argue against such a well thought out and arti by Latauro	Apr 17th, 2005 03:00:58 AM
I agree that Sin City was not a sure thing. The release date was pushed from May to August after it made a squillion dollars at the US box office. It became a success and then they delayed it. I do not condone the downloading of movies, and I'm very much against it, but a lot of people are doing it. Buena Vista are losing money. After last week's column, I got an email from the General Manager of a major distribution company here in Australia basically saying that nobody can understand why Buena Vista is doing what they're doing given how quickly movies make their way to DVD these days, coupled with that whole piracy thing. In his email, he said that they've been pushing forward their release dates to beat the UK and US DVD releases. The fact that you're all high and mighty because you don't care when the film is coming out might carry more weight if you yourself had to wait months and months more than everyone else. And if you want anyone to take you seriously, try to refrain from name calling. It's really quite pathetic.
That guy that was arrested for downloading... by moviemaniac-7	Apr 17th, 2005 03:27:33 AM
... Wasn't he arrested for 3 totally worthless movies? I don't remember the other two, but one of them was Alien Vs. Predator. The other two were equally crap, as I remember reading the article. He shall die of shame when he gets released.
Buena Vista can kiss my ass by hiperaktiv	Apr 17th, 2005 03:32:29 AM
Im sick of this continual BS by Hollywood studios in delaying for months at a time their movies to non-US english speaking countries like the UK, Australia, and NZ. Thailand got Sin City a few days after US but your telling me Australia has to wait til August? I guess I wont bother with this film at all cept maybe in a couple of years when its a weekly rental at my video store. Keep up the good work Latauro, and just ingore morons like TheReturnOfHP who have absolutely no ideas what theyre talking about.
The other 2 films ... by Shan	Apr 17th, 2005 04:26:03 AM
I'm quite certain one of those films was Anacondas: The Blood Orchid Thing and fairly sure the other was The Exorcist: Renny Harlin Cut. Whatever the 3 were, I do remember thinking that those films were some of the worst and most embarrassing to get busted for.
Avityville wasn't THAT bad Lat. by Monkey Butler	Apr 17th, 2005 05:30:26 AM
Reynalds's performance was pretty good, and the one scene with the daughter on the roof was a pretty genuine scare. Then again there wasn't a single other good scare in the whole thing, and the ending was absolute bullshit, and the very last shot was such a copy of the end of TCM (when Leatherface chops the roof off the car). So yeah, 2.5 star movie IMO>>>>>>>And it's good to actually see people commenting on the remake of Guess Who's Coming To Dinner?, because really, that's just fucked up. I read Ashton Kutcher trying to justify it. He couldn't.
You're right, Shan by moviemaniac-7	Apr 17th, 2005 06:42:03 AM
What an emberrassment!
Shut your pie hole TheReturnOfHP by Grando	Apr 17th, 2005 07:27:01 AM
When you have to wait 6 months for a film you want to see then you can start being an asshat about it.
true story my arse. As true as hollywood would have you believe by TheGinger Twit	Apr 17th, 2005 07:41:09 AM
Do some research... you'll see just how true it all is. I mean, yeah sure it all happened... and anyone who saw it all on the news after the event would agree - this is exactly what happened. but the truth comes from the whole story... not the half arsed this is what happened and why explanation of the perpetrators.
So Britney Spears is pregnant, looks like I'm gonna be a father! by brokentusk	Apr 17th, 2005 08:18:43 AM
I wish. Yeah I live in South Africa and we're only getting SIN CITY in fucking September! I contacted the distributor and she said that it's up to the studio when to release films overseas and they could be delayed for various reasons (she gave me a list). It's still bullshit though. I'm gonna complain I tell you!
The Crappityville Horror (only a notch or so above "crappy") by Latauro	Apr 17th, 2005 09:48:46 AM
Reynold's performance was the best thing about Amityville and the roof scene wasn't too bad, but there was no ending. Just end credits. Anyway, I've seen far worse, so I'll lay off now. Believe it or not, I'm watching Van Wilder as I type this, which seems to be another not-so-good filim only redeemed by Reynolds. And Kal Penn. And "Guess Who" is awful beyond belief.
So is accuracy by Latauro	Apr 17th, 2005 05:20:28 PM
I find it curious that you can apparently assure me that all international release dates haven't moved given that, up until a couple of weeks ago, Sin City was due for release in May. Where is your information from? Also, I don't know who you're quoting, but I never said the move was because some executive was "fucking stupid". What I've been saying is that I have absolutely no idea what their reasons are. I'm here scratching my head. I agree that downloading this film -- or any film -- is nothing to brag about. In fact, I actively discourage people from doing it. I suppose the wait-until-August would be easier if... well, look our box office for this week. Oy vey.
In the pudding by Latauro	Apr 17th, 2005 07:36:41 PM
Where am I getting the May release date from? Everywhere. Up until a couple of weeks ago, all the cinema chains in Australia had it listed as May (one still does). Here are some links: http://www.moviemarshal.com/re leasedates05.html; http://movies.ninemsn.com.au/m ovie.aspx?id=47089; http://www.incinemas.com.au/mo vies/moviepage.asp?MovieID=243 ; http://www.captaincouchpotato. com.au/movies.html; http://www.tvaus.com/viewtopic .php?t=5770; and finally, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt04 01792/releaseinfo And for the record, I've only ever posted on this website under the name "Latauro". Although occasionally I log onto militia sites under "Garth Franklin".
Return of the HP = plant by El_Barstardo	Apr 17th, 2005 08:15:52 PM
Forget downloading - why would I go and see Sin City in the cinema when I can LEGALY buy the DVD from Amazon (which will be out by the time the fucking film gets around here) and have all of my family and freinds watch that? They lost a boatload of cash on Hellboy because the same thing happened. Yeah, sure worldwide releases are 'risky', but buisness is a risk. If they are going to play it safe with 'delayed' releases, then they miss out, simple as that. Forget the downloading aspect - by the time Sin City gets down here the internet buzz will be long gone and so will my desire to see the film most likely (as happened with Sky Captain). You have to strike while the Iron is Hot.
"I just assumed that the poster who said it (also the author of by raw_bean	Apr 17th, 2005 08:18:04 PM
Errm, who is it you think you're currently talking to, TheReturnOfHP?
What is the confusion here? by TheAllSeeingEye	Apr 17th, 2005 09:10:42 PM
Listen, movie prints cost an awful lot of money and it
Or think of it this way.. by TheAllSeeingEye	Apr 17th, 2005 09:24:47 PM
Imagine Australia is a gaping big black hole and you're stood over it with a pile of your own money next to you. Would you throw shitloads of cash into that hole in the hope that it'll spit it back out PLUS more again? No? I didn't think so. Oh and Laturo..are you trying to suggest you are 'Garth Franklin' of darkhorizons.com? If you are do me a favour will you? Get rid of those fucking annoying green ad links will you. Christ.
In NZ by hamo455	Apr 18th, 2005 12:13:57 AM
Every site still tells me May 12th, but the email I got from the Embassy told me pushed til August. They played the trailer today at Reading cinemas, so I'm hopeful it'll still be May here, I'm just not holding my breath. I made a point of still going to see Hellboy when it finally released here, even though I'd seen it 8 times on my honeymoon cruise for free, because a) I wanted to see it on the big screen as intended and b) I wanted it to make some money so we got a sequel - just doing my bit. Unfortunately, as keyed up as I was for Sky Captain, by the time it limped onto screens here I didn't bother - opportunity missed there.
RadicalEdward, by raw_bean	Apr 18th, 2005 12:28:08 AM
I think Latauro was actually joking about 'Garth Franklin'. He said he logs onto 'militia sites' with that name. ------ As for downloading the film, no-one was suggesting it was a way to punish the distributor. The point was, that many impatient people will download the film rather than wait to see it in the cinema, and then not bother to pay to see it when it does come out, thus reducing the amount the film makes. I think the basic counterpoint to your arguments being presented by many here is: the film company should have more faith in its product, or it's going to end up losing money by delaying. Clearly there are factors affecting the decision either way, and the decision becomes a compromise between the risk of spending the extra money for a simultaneous release and possibly losing out, and the risk of losing paying viewers by waiting too long, until they either become disinterested, or watch the film illegally. ------- As such, we'd need to be in command of a lot more facts than we are to determine whether the right decision (financially speaking) was made in this case, and even then it was really just a 'best guess' as to what was the right thing to do. But, at the end of the day, from a UK film-fan's point of view, whatever the rationale, not being able to see the film in the cinema 'till August both sucks and blows.
Some questions to TheReturnofHP... by Wonder Man	Apr 18th, 2005 01:20:51 AM
Why are you taking this so personally? And if you argue viciously enough, will your marketing manager at Buena Vista give you that raise you've been hanging out for? Please, for humanity's sake, stop sucking the corporate dick for nine seconds and take a look at the facts. What Lat says about the Oz release date for Sin City being changed from May 26 to Aug 11 AFTER the film took $29 mil in its US opening weekend is absolutely true. Now, I'm sure your counterparts in the Buena Vista International distribution team have their reasons. Now, I don't think I'd be alone in thinking that it'd be just swell if they let us in on them. Because this is one of the few films of 2005 that has actually aroused any sort of tangible excitement in the moviegoing public. (And that isn't limited to film geeks. Flicks don't open to $29m in April on the strength of geeks, not even the words 'Star Trek' in the title gets ya that any more. Critics, Industry AND John Q Public are all interested in this film.) Look at this logically. Whatever their reasons, in this day and age, a 4 month delay is unreasonable in anyone's language and you know it. BVI have pulled a dick move and you know it. And don't throw junkets at me: Sin City has so many stars that BVI could close their eyes, throw a dart and hit 3 reasonably well known actors to pay shitloads and drag Down Under for 4 days. It's an ensemble film with box office and critical heat: they could bring ANYONE. The Ocean's 11/12 films have possibly the world's most in-demand casts and yet, these films were released in most territories within a month of the US release. (And another thing: if you're as ambivalent toward the worries of us kids Down Under as you claim, then why would you be any sort of authority on the Oz/NZ release date? As you can imagine, my Bullshitmeter is flashing in all sorts of places.) My point is, you're being obstinate, obtuse and downright rude for no real reason. Unless you were offended. Which would mean you're a frustrated marketing/distribution flack. Which would mean you need to get over yourself. Now, if you're that frustrated with your career that you need to float contrived baseless arguments and degenerate to sophomoric name calling on a movie geek website, then, really... you need to quit. Make that film you've always wanted to make. Do SOMETHING with your life, but don't hang your inanity out here for all of us to see. It's embarrassing, for you to say it and for us to read it. Oh, and for the record? I'll be seeing it on the big screen no matter what - or, if it gets legitimately released on US DVD before that, I might make a transaction with my pals at Amazon. I, like many of my filmgoing brothers and sisters, just don't like being jerked around, particularly when our cinemas are currently screening the worst roster of films in recent memory (look at the Top 5 for the last few weeks if you need confirmation). We're clearly getting blasted with dreck that no reasonable person would see at any other time of the year... EXCEPT when there's no competition. And, poor aggreived talkbacker, Sin City represents competition. Now there's marketing in action: flood us with so much crap that we lose the power to distinguish the good from the bad, counting on us to cave in and choose something for the hell of it. And thus, The Pacifier makes millions. Good to see you and your ilk are earning your wages there, HP. Run along, I'm done with you now.
"Unfortunately, as keyed up as I was for Sky Captain, by the tim by El_Barstardo	Apr 18th, 2005 01:48:47 AM
Exact same thing happened with me. I was so hyped for this film I had it as my desktop for a while. But by the time it got hear the hype-o-meter was long dead and I couldn't be bothered seeing it. Still havn't.
A final stab(!) at this pic release "conspiracy" theory by fertilecelluloid	Apr 18th, 2005 02:30:12 AM
US box office is a major determining factor on how a US film is marketed overseas. Yes, SIN CITY did a big first week, but it dropped 50% second week. If it was moved from May to August, there's a good reason. The film performed strongly initially. Perhaps August is a better month to release the film due to the nature of its competition at that time. I'm not sure what it would have been up against in May, but everything is relevant. Clearly, the shift has been reasoned based on its US release. There's no point raising HELLBOY as an example of films that suffered box office-wise because they did not exploit net hype and the US release buzz because HELLBOY did well in its first week (when fans saw it) and dived heavily in its 2nd week when only average punters remained to see it. Despite what everybody here would like to think, us fans are in a minority. Films that net big box office bucks do it with average punters. This is why genre flicks often dip drastically after first week. The "fans" are not there to make up the numbers because they've already seen the film. Fans are important to a first weekend, but a film needs to have wide, word-of-mouth appeal to truly find "legs" at the box office. The STAR WARS films are an interesting case because the fan base of the series is global. The fan base of a Frank Miller graphic novel or of Rodriguez is niche (relatively speaking). Maybe the Oz distrib wanted SIN CITY release in August because its 2nd week competition may not be as strong during that month. A very good point made here is that downloading the pic (instead of paying to see it) will simply justify a studio's resistance to such material if the impact is reduced box office. It is important that we support "difficult" pictures. SIN CITY is difficult because it is hyperviolent. Mr. and Mrs. Average Punter do not, as a rule, rush off to see hyperviolent material. They are conservative. They watch their pennies. They see what is "acceptable" and it matters to them how they are perceived by their friends and family. Don't underestimate the value of these people endorsing stuff like SIN CITY. Only mainstream popularity takes a particular genre out of the niche. When big money is being risked, that is necessary and preferable.
HP......we need sauce! by thanner	Apr 18th, 2005 04:39:38 AM
If SIN CITY was such a HUGE risk, as with any other film, why don't they open first in Australia, to see how it fares with a Western audience before tweaking it & opening Stateside? The results of a poor showing there are far less damaging, and gives the opportunity to get it right before the oh so important opening weekend in the US.
Why so vitriolic? by Ballzboy	Apr 18th, 2005 05:05:52 AM
I don't understand why you seem to be taking this so personally, HP. The main argument seems to be that Sin City was FURTHER delayed after a fairly solid first week in the US. You have not adressed these points in your personal-insult-laded responses. Delayed releases in Australia are quite often 'justified' by our different school/public holidays, but also because of the films percieved target demographic - eg 'fanboy films' such as Hellboy, Sky Captain, the Blade films & Sin City are often delayed. The studios here seem to be unsure how to market such films, and hence will find a 'slow' week to release them. But then we do get occasional bonuses with 'big name' nerd shit - X-Men 1 & 2, the Star Wars prequels, Spidey 1 & 2, and the upcoming Batman Begins were/will be released a day EARLIER (not counting time zone difference) than the US.
This is better than a car crash by Latauro	Apr 18th, 2005 05:08:01 AM
Normally, I wouldn't dignify Mr HP with another response, but this is just bemusing. If you'll scroll up, you'll discover the "feeble insults" come from HP (what does "fucking petulant children" from that same post qualify as?). Wonder Man asked some good questions, and instead of answering them you attempted to belittle him. You wanted me to provide evidence of the changed release date, and I did so. You have provided no evidence that the international release dates have been "set in stone", instead beating a drum about nobody else understands how anything works. I'm happy -- if not eagre -- to engage in a genuine debate about this topic, but all you've done is insult everyone else on the board. The general rule about trolls is to ignore them, but I have a morbid fascination as to how you can keep going with this (although my current theory is that it's a big cry for attention). As for those of you who have posted intelligent and well thought-out arguments (regardless of which side you come down on), thank you. You're the reason I write this column. Also, all the free shit I get.
The point is Raw_Bean that it never boils down to faith by TheAllSeeingEye	Apr 18th, 2005 06:30:34 AM
Given Sin City's limited budget, (in comparison to major titles), it was never going to be a massive release which is why it's so exciting to see people keyed up to see the movie. Regardless of it's success, it's still very much a small independent film and Buena Vista simply will not invest in more prints of the movie to pander to the demands of what they perceive as a tiny percentage of the cinema going public. The public here are fickle when it comes to exactly what comic book movie adaptations we buy tickets for; X-Men, Spiderman and Batman are all mainstream comics that most people are familiar with not mention just bursting with merchandising potential. Consider then that most people won't have a fucking clue what Sin City is, it's a violent movie, (eliminating a MASSIVE audience section in children
Wonder Man "We're clearly getting blasted with dreck that no rea by TheAllSeeingEye	Apr 18th, 2005 06:50:19 AM
Yes, but this time of year isn't known for its massive blockbuster releases now is it? The movies being shown at at the moment might be total shit it's still not reason enough to spend a mountain of cash to bring out a movie that MIGHT be succesful in order to make the cinema look a teensie little bit more appealing. FertileCelluloid has already said that US ticket sales have dived in the second week; what does that spell for Australia, New Zealand and UK markets? Buena Vista simply won't spend mountains of cash on making the prints; why is that such a hard thing to accept for most people? Like i said before, we'll have to accept the time honoured tradition of getting the old prints from the states; something that's been going on for fucking donkeys years. What we're experiencing is NOTHING new and it will happen again. Accept it.
Sin City is a big risk in Australia because Aussies hate violenc by El_Barstardo	Apr 18th, 2005 08:38:37 PM
That's why violent australian films like Chopper and Mad Max always flop in comparison with stuff like danny deckchair. BTW, could someone please tell me how much these 'prints' cost, cause I find it hard to believe that it is the 'mountains of cash' some people are claiming. And if they are that expensive, why are they sending them out here on a row boat (which they must be if it's taking 4 fucking months for them to get here)?
El Bastardo, i wouldn't say explaining this is like talking to a by TheAllSeeingEye	Apr 18th, 2005 11:02:34 PM
Let's get something straightl violent movies aren't natural box office gold and my statement was purely there to illustrate the kinds of films that studios and distributors are willing to push. Are you that fucking dense that this concept escapes you? It's not a movie for everybody but hey, you've got a hard-on for it so hey i must be wrong; you clown. As for the comments about 'prints' and the cost; let's just say they aren't cheap and by asking me to give you an exact figure you aren't actually disproving my claim. You've got fingers so pull them out of your arse and try researching it on say google; come back with an exact figure because I
"Chopper was a hit and a success in oz and oversea's, ya retard. by El_Barstardo	Apr 19th, 2005 01:09:14 AM
Really? Shit, next you will be telling me Mad Max actually made a dollar! Fuck, and all this time I thought Danny Deckchair was our only big international hit.
Radical Edward by El_Barstardo	Apr 19th, 2005 01:20:49 AM
So you are going on and on with your little diatribe, but you yourself have no idea what a print costs? Give me a fucking break. I never said the film was a sure thing (what film is?) BUT my point was Australians love their violent flicks just like the Americans (if not more so) so releasing it here is no greater risk than releasing it over there. You are talking like it's fucking India where all non Bollywood films flop or something. I also never said it was surprising, like you said, they have been doing it for years. Difference is times have changed thanks to the wonders of technology. In the 80's and 90s it didn't matter cause I never even KNEW what the fuck was comming out in America, and what you don't know doesn't hurt you. But these days I do, and fact is by the time Sin City gets over here it will be next to IMPOSSIBLE to enter the film spoiler free without distancing myself from the internet entirely. Distributors may have been pulling this shit for years, and you can justify it in any way you want, but fact is they need to get with the times or it is going to cost them. Because it's not me who is 'fucked', as you put it, but them, thanks to my good buddy Mr Broadband. So go tell your bosses (because only a fucking plant would be defending this practice like you and HP are) to start developing a new distribution buisness model, because the old one is done.
El_Bastardo by thanner	Apr 19th, 2005 03:53:19 AM
I know we love the fact that americans just don't seem to quite get irony, but shit, it seems we haven't got the hang of sarcasm, eh! .......by the way, you left out Welcome to Woop Woop along with Danny Deckchair
Print cost by fertilecelluloid	Apr 19th, 2005 03:57:09 AM
Around US$1700 for a small run in US; around AUSD$2900 for small run in Australia.
"Don't try to feign articulacy. You'll be hung out to dry here, by Wonder Man	Apr 19th, 2005 03:58:19 AM
Hahahahaha... funniest thing I've heard all hour! Like it's a regular Algonquin Round Table you got going here.
To FertileCelluloid and Radical Edward... by Wonder Man	Apr 19th, 2005 04:13:17 AM
Thanks to you both for presenting intelligent, cohesive arguments in a compelling and articulate manner. It's refreshing to know that there are still Talk Backers capable of civil and thoughtful debate; who don't feel the need to inflict their impotent adolescent rage upon their fellow fans. It's good to see. So, sincerely... thank you.
Thank you, Wonderman... by fertilecelluloid	Apr 19th, 2005 06:07:48 PM
Much appreciated.

Talkbacks

AICN-Downunder: Ghost Rider; Step in Time; Big Turkey; Silence; Amityville; Sin City

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks