Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 1:08 pm
Kinda the point I was trying to make, but you said it with less words!Cliff wrote:Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

A message board dedicated to the discussion of Minnesota Viking Football.
https://beta1.vikingsmessageboard.com/
Kinda the point I was trying to make, but you said it with less words!Cliff wrote:Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Well just skimming the topic, I read a lot about people just basing how good the movie was by how much they liked and enjoyed it.VikingMachine wrote: Kinda the point I was trying to make, but you said it with less words!
I know theres more too it than JUST that but ultimately isnt that the point? How award worthy is a movie that is technically superior yet nobody enjoys?? Seems a little silly to me but I often disagree with the critics.Krulik wrote: Well just skimming the topic, I read a lot about people just basing how good the movie was by how much they liked and enjoyed it.
What what was the last Best Picture that didn't do well in the box office? They may not go hand in hand, but generally, the "better" movies are more appreciated and more liked on a wider basis.VikingMachine wrote: I know theres more too it than JUST that but ultimately isnt that the point? How award worthy is a movie that is technically superior yet nobody enjoys?? Seems a little silly to me but I often disagree with the critics.
They "might" do ok but they arent any of the top grossing movies of all time and I suppose one could argue that they may have done a large portion of their gate (the award winners) BECAUSE of the buzz surrounding their nomination. Other movies like Pirates of the Carribean gross 400 million because people enjoy the film, not because of what a stiff collar says about it.Krulik wrote: What what was the last Best Picture that didn't do well in the box office? They may not go hand in hand, but generally, the "better" movies are more appreciated and more liked on a wider basis.
Which movie is better than which movie is still an opinion.Krulik wrote: What what was the last Best Picture that didn't do well in the box office? They may not go hand in hand, but generally, the "better" movies are more appreciated and more liked on a wider basis.
That's not necessarily true. Again, there are some big names in that movie. A lot of movies (especially with big names) make money before people even know if they like the movie ...VikingMachine wrote: They "might" do ok but they arent any of the top grossing movies of all time and I suppose one could argue that they may have done a large portion of their gate (the award winners) BECAUSE of the buzz surrounding their nomination. Other movies like Pirates of the Carribean gross 400 million because people enjoy the film, not because of what a stiff collar says about it.
I dont know Cliff. I dont recall any movies in say the top 100 grossing movies of all time that blew and made money just because of the big names. I can name a few movies though that had a bunch of big names, blew and also didnt do well at the box office.Cliff wrote: That's not necessarily true. Again, there are some big names in that movie. A lot of movies (especially with big names) make money before people even know if they like the movie ...
How do people know they're good movies before they go and see them at the box office? It logically doesn't make sense. Something attracted people to a movie before they had an opinion about it -- otherwise they wouldn't have gone. You can't possibly know if you'll like a movie before you actually see it ...VikingMachine wrote: I dont know Cliff. I dont recall any movies in say the top 100 grossing movies of all time that blew and made money just because of the big names. I can name a few movies though that had a bunch of big names, blew and also didnt do well at the box office.
Which one? I was referring to Dead Mans Chest and I didnt think that was critically acclaimed or Oscar nominated, although I havent looked it up and could be wrong.Krulik wrote:Pirates was critically acclaimed and Oscar nominated.
Uh previews and word of mouth....that makes perfect logical sense and is the way that most people decide IMO.Cliff wrote: How do people know they're good movies before they go and see them at the box office? It logically doesn't make sense. Something attracted people to a movie before they had an opinion about it -- otherwise they wouldn't have gone. You can't possibly know if you'll like a movie before you actually see it ...
Movies that win awards get out that same way often times ... do they not?VikingMachine wrote: Uh previews and word of mouth....that makes perfect logical sense and is the way that most people decide IMO.
Yes but they get the added benefit of extra publicity because of their nominations and yet usually dont do anywhere near the gate that Austin Powers for instance would do.Cliff wrote: Movies that win awards get out that same way often times ... do they not?