LC:FC in PREproduction for over 1 year?!

Enigma,

Do you care to share your expert advice when it comes to major film production?

Clearly after reading this thread one can assume you are a major Hollywood movie producer with all sorts of useful knowledge on how long it takes films to be produced.

/sarcasm off

Its actually not uncommon to have films in pre-production for more then a year. In fact, some of the biggest films ever made were in pre-production for years before they finally got off the ground. Regardless, typical JREF lackey behavior.
 
Eckolaker said:
Enigma,

Do you care to share your expert advice when it comes to major film production?

Clearly after reading this thread one can assume you are a major Hollywood movie producer with all sorts of useful knowledge on how long it takes films to be produced.

/sarcasm off

Its actually not uncommon to have films in pre-production for more then a year. In fact, some of the biggest films ever made were in pre-production for years before they finally got off the ground. Regardless, typical JREF lackey behavior.
Click to expand...
Huh? What makes you think i am a movie producer? Anyway if you think LC:FC is going to be a big hit you really have got to seek psychiatric help.
 
so, i had posted in that LC thread, just breifly. some user had posted some long, mostly irrevelant reply. luckily, i was so busy yesterday that i only had time to waste a couple minutes responding. i posed a breif response, and promised to address the rest of his arguments later.

since the f*cking thread was deleted, again, i guess i don't have to waste my time, huh? i used to wonder why they had remove the "find more posts by..." link in everyone's profile.

seriously, what a waste of time it is posting over there...
 
jhunter1163 said:
But anyway, it's obvious that Dylan is fast losing control over there, and he's getting testy about it.
Click to expand...
Heh. Dylan rules his little world with an iron fist. Of course, I'm sure he knows that he doesn't have to encourage honest debate; that's what this forum is for. ;)
 
It'll soon be him and Killtard all together! There is also that user whose in the 8th grade and doing a presentation on Dylan for his class. He's gonna eventually realize how wrong Dylan is and will jump on board here.
 
chipmunk stew said:
Given that Dylan is now claiming that his "over 3000" U.S. screens figure was not a target for opening but rather total screens, let's revisit Fahrenheit 9/11's numbers:

Opening weekend: 868 screens
2nd weekend: 1725 screens
3rd weekend: 2004 screens
4th weekend: 2004 screens
5th weekend: 1855 screens
and the numbers continued to decline in subsequent weeks

Dylan, the most widely-screened documentary in history maxxed out at 2004 U.S. screens. What makes you think your film will succeed better by half?

edit: Another interesting number--An Inconvenient Truth, a well-received and popular film with a lot of above-ground buzz, maxxed out at 587 screens U.S.
America: Freedom to Fascism?--10 screens total
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to defend LC:FC in any way, just trying to be a sceptical thinker - but are you sure that those screen numbers are the total number of screens that the movie has ever played on?

Isn't it just as possible (going only by the figures that you have provided) that Fahrenheit 911 played on 868 screens in week 1, and then by week 5 was playing on a different set of 2004 screens? Giving a total of 2,872 screens?

Obviously this quibble doesn't make it any more likely that Dylan will achieve his target, as it's inherently unlikely no matter how the number of screens is calculated.
 
Last edited:
Posted by: dylan avery Jan 23 2007, 04:12 PM
"JREF. Y'all are a bunch of %ucking losers. You can quote me on that.
Everyone else, move on to more important things."​
Click to expand...

Disruptive behavior on the LC forums! Against the rules! Baaan! :p

Seriously though - Dylan. Grow up dude.
 
Matthew Best said:
Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to defend LC:FC in any way, just trying to be a sceptical thinker - but are you sure that those screen numbers are the total number of screens that the movie has ever played on?

Isn't it just as possible (going only by the figures that you have provided) that Fahrenheit 911 played on 868 screens in week 1, and then by week 5 was playing on a different set of 2004 screens? Giving a total of 2,872 screens?

Obviously this quibble doesn't make it any more likely that Dylan will achieve his target, as it's inherently unlikely no matter how the number of screens is calculated.
Click to expand...

total screens is actually tracked by the industry because that's how many prints of movie that have been made (based on requests by theaters owners/chains).

so if a movie opens to 2464 screens, thats how many prints of the movie was made prior to release date and shipped out to the theaters (theaters get a print of a movie up to two weeks prior to release date). It also means, that these prints were in production up to three months prior to release date (so again, Dylan, March?? um.. that means your movie should have been DONE by now).

When the numbers increase in the next week, that means more theaters ordered prints, or a theater decided to show it on more than one screen.

When the numbers go down, thats how many prints were returned to the distributor.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/

is a good place to research box office earnings.

Here check out the business for Dreamgirls:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=daily&id=dreamgirls.htm

notice how for the last half of December it was on a few screens (meant that it was released in time for Academy Awards consideration) but by End of janauary, its now up to 2000+ screens.


And check out the listing for future releases:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/schedule/

They already know the screen amount for opening day, and these have yet to be released.
 
Last edited:
"It's a death trap, it's a suicide rap
We gotta get out while we're young
'Cause tramps like us, baby we were born to run..."

Springsteen had them down...
 
So the industry term "number of screens" really means "number of prints"?

If you have just one print which tours the country then it could conceivably end up playing in 3,000 screens. It would take ten years or so, of course!
 
So therefore, they can get more than 3000 screens if they put it up online like they did for their other films...
 
Matthew Best said:
So the industry term "number of screens" really means "number of prints"?
Click to expand...

yup basically

If you have just one print which tours the country then it could conceivably end up playing in 3,000 screens. It would take ten years or so, of course!
Click to expand...

if its one print, then it only counts as one screen....so if he showed it at 3000 theaters, it'd only count as 1.

he can say it was shown on 3000 screens, but business wise, its how many prints were ordered and made.
 
The Silver Shadow said:
Response to Arus808:
And the funny thing is, Dylan would've known that if he went to film school...

:p
Click to expand...

haha, the hilarious thing is, I only took one semester dealing with film making, and introductory course, and I know more about film making than Dylan did in his two attempts at film school!
 
Alex Jones and Do-Over clip here:

http://rapidshare.com/files/13073841/jones_avery.mp3

No $20 million budget, no $2 million budget like AJ "heard" from his "inside sources"; no March release in theatres; Do-Over has apparently deluded himself into thinking that it will actually be shown at Cannes; FC will be "monumentally different" than the last do-over because they're "literally almost triple checking every sentence, ya know"; ISI, Mineta "all the hard stuff"; he's working with "real luminaries" in the bidnizz (cough); he and his fellow twoofers have been "demonized" by the media; and he doesn't want to compete with Spiderman 3.

SSDD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom