"Atlas Shrugged" out on Friday!

Michael Bergeron · Apr 17, 2011

Laffo said:
If you are a Randian you'll like this "Movie." Folks that admire her work are unshakable in their arguments in support of her virtues.
If you dislike her politics, philosophy and find her work dull, you'll find the Movie the same.
I don't believe we'll see Parts 2 and 3, and the Acting is some of the worst I've seen since Troll 2.
Laffo.

Had a look for the film here in Canada and didn't see any screenings so I guess I'll have to pass on it.

I admire her work in the same way as I admire the works of other political philosophers. Like many others she has valid points that in their purity could never work in reality.

KnightAsylum · Apr 17, 2011

Laffo said:
As it opened in only 300 Theatres, packing the House isn't hard.
300 Houses x 300 Seats (being generous) x 6 showtimes (also generous) = 540,000 Patrons.

540,000 Patrons @ $12.00 (National average) = $6.4 million opening weekend IF EVERY TICKET is sold for EVERY SHOW. With the scathing reviews anyone without an interest in Rand will be staying away, so the second week is going to be tough on this film. It will have some organized support from Groups mobilizing people to see it, so the fall off won't be as quick as normal. (In the business we call this having legs, this Movie had none out of the Gate)

Without a Political Patron we won't see Parts 2 and 3.

Laffo.

You don't have to try and discount my comment, it is OK, don't feel threatened by this movie or the message. No one will make you see it, or the next two when they do come out.
I don't go see Micheal Moore films either so I understand, i just don't feel the need to try and run around discounting the films because I don't agree with them at their core level.
To each their own, I for one am going to see it again this need weekend with a few other friends.:thumbsup

Kerr Avon · Apr 17, 2011

Guri said:
It comes off as only the hardworking super rich and super powerful hold the country together and should thus be rewarded with extravagant lifestyles, rather than a much more sympathetic position of limited state, that we all benefit from being able to make our own decisions about our futures.

I'm looking forward to the next two.

You may have gotten that from the movie, and I'm not sure that it was as well explained until later in the book, but no, it's not about the super rich or super powerful holding the country together. It's about those who have the mental capacity to innovate, to look beyond the standards already set and achieve beyond those. It's about taking the risks no one else is willing to take, and when succeeding having EARNED their lifestyle and their wealth. It's about being the scientific, engineering, and economic explorer, charting new technologies and new services that no one else have done before.

Kerr Avon · Apr 17, 2011

Laffo said:
Without a Political Patron we won't see Parts 2 and 3.

I was actually wrong earlier, it's budget was only about $10 million. That means it almost made all of it's money back in one weekend then. DVD sales are expected later as well, so this movie is going to probably end up being pretty profitable when all is said and done. As it was privately funded by the producer it doesn't need a patron and it's entirely possible it will have the sequels made later.

Did a quick look around and looks like it made about $2 million on 299 screens. That's a little sad, but hopefully things will pick up on it. Either way, I'll be buying the DVD when it comes out.

Guri · Apr 18, 2011

Kerr Avon said:
It's about those who have the mental capacity to innovate, to look beyond the standards already set and achieve beyond those. It's about taking the risks no one else is willing to take, and when succeeding having EARNED their lifestyle and their wealth. It's about being the scientific, engineering, and economic explorer, charting new technologies and new services that no one else have done before.

Yeah, I got the idea that risk taking involves intelligent decisions because of the possibly of losing everything so the reaping of the rewards of success should not be penalized by taking it to give to those who didn't risk anything.

What I'm saying is that the message of how EVERYONE benefits from this is cloudy. From the perspective of people who don't have millions of dollars to risk, don't have the mental capacity to innovate and are sold the idea of getting a cut of the profits from those who do, it's shown as pure selfishness to not be okay with having some of it taken.

My understanding is that Rand was all about selfishness, though. As I said, they didn't drive home enough at the factory that without rewarding the innovators, those that are working for them will not HAVE work... it was overshadowed by Dagny's 'stupid altruism' speech.

You know one other thing that they did show a bit was when Dagny pointed out that the rail line WORKERS should be allowed to take a risk and drive the train, rather than be 'protected' by the union... Dagny was going to reward those that took a risk with her by giving them good jobs and not hiring anyone from the union if she succeeded because they were not willing to take the risk. That shows giving everyone a choice of investing in the risky new metal and profiting from their risk taking, not just those at the top. I just think the point would be better served if there were some characters on that level who we could relate to rather than focusing only on the rich innovators.

Laffo · Apr 18, 2011

KnightAsylum said:
You don't have to try and discount my comment, it is OK, don't feel threatened by this movie or the message. No one will make you see it, or the next two when they do come out.
I don't go see Micheal Moore films either so I understand, i just don't feel the need to try and run around discounting the films because I don't agree with them at their core level.
To each their own, I for one am going to see it again this need weekend with a few other friends.:thumbsup

Guess what? I run a Theatre so I was just showing the math and mechanics behind the exhibiting of a film. Had I said "You're Wrong" or "The politics behind this suck," you could have taken offense. Since you said the Theatre was packed, I merely pointed out that 300 Theatres, with this film written up in every major Newspaper wouldn't be hard to sell out shows. But it's about your comment being discounted, not that someone could have some expertise on the matter.

Boo Hoo, mean old Laffo beating up on that Guy who liked that Ayn Rand movie.

Why exactly would you make assumptions about whether I watch Michael Moore or "feel threatened by this movie or the message?" Nothing I posted was anything other than raw facts about the Movie Exhibition Business and how the life span of a Movie works. Somehow that was an slight to your precious opinion of Atlas Shrugged.

By the way, my opinion that the acting sucked is because the acting sucked. Again I said nothing about what I think of Ayn Rand or her work, or whether I liked the Movie or not. I spoke to the performances and that is all.

Yeah, "to each his own."

Laffo.

Laffo · Apr 18, 2011

Kerr Avon said:
I was actually wrong earlier, it's budget was only about $10 million. That means it almost made all of it's money back in one weekend then. DVD sales are expected later as well, so this movie is going to probably end up being pretty profitable when all is said and done. As it was privately funded by the producer it doesn't need a patron and it's entirely possible it will have the sequels made later.

Did a quick look around and looks like it made about $2 million on 299 screens. That's a little sad, but hopefully things will pick up on it. Either way, I'll be buying the DVD when it comes out.

As per my post to Knight Asylum, a $2 million open is not good. In fact worse than I predicted. It cost $10 million to make the film. That number does not include what it costs to market, ship, make prints, pay licensing, royalties, points on production and insurances associated with prints, completion bonds and litigation negation that must be retained.

It was rushed into production by said Producer as they were about to lose the rights to the property. That in no way guarantees the same Producer will bankroll another part if this one goes belly up. DVD sales, Netflix and Cable will be where this film makes money, if it does.

But what do I know?

Laffo.

Kerr Avon · Apr 18, 2011

Laffo said:
As per my post to Knight Asylum, a $2 million open is not good. In fact worse than I predicted. It cost $10 million to make the film. That number does not include what it costs to market, ship, make prints, pay licensing, royalties, points on production and insurances associated with prints, completion bonds and litigation negation that must be retained.

But what do I know?

Apparently not that adjusted by the number of theatres, it was #3 in the rankings by percentages. Sure, $2 million isn't great, but it's still a good start. I think the movie will be profitable ultimately, but it's not going to be a single weekend and is going to take the DVD sales as well.

Ozymandius · Apr 18, 2011

Sure, $2 million isn't great, but it's still a good start.

Sorry dude, but you are just kidding yourself. A $2 mill opening for any movie in even the worst month is a major bomb.

Kerr Avon · Apr 18, 2011

Ozymandius said:
Sorry dude, but you are just kidding yourself. A $2 mill opening for any movie in even the worst month is a major bomb.

Weekend Box Office Results for April 15-17, 2011 - Box Office Mojo

Average take per theatre had it #3, taking $5,640 per theatre, only behind "Rio" and "Scream 4" That means at a ticket price of $9.75 each, which is what I paid, they sold 578 seats per theatre. I'm not saying that's a smash hit, but for the size and distribution, it's a respectable take.

Try doing a bit o' math there Dundee and maybe you'll see things in perspective

tgreco · Apr 19, 2011

with an 8% on the Tomato meter... don't expect business to uptick

Laffo · Apr 19, 2011

Laffo said:
If you are a Randian you'll like this "Movie." Folks that admire her work are unshakable in their arguments in support of her virtues.
Laffo.

I said that and you, obviously a Rand fan say

Kerr Avon said:
Weekend Box Office Results for April 15-17, 2011 - Box Office Mojo

Average take per theatre had it #3, taking $5,640 per theatre, only behind "Rio" and "Scream 4" That means at a ticket price of $9.75 each, which is what I paid, they sold 578 seats per theatre. I'm not saying that's a smash hit, but for the size and distribution, it's a respectable take.

Try doing a bit o' math there Dundee and maybe you'll see things in perspective

No, he doesn't have to do the Math. As an Exhibitor that knows how to interpret those figures, it's a flop. It didn't sell out 3/4 of the available seats. Again, it's the second, third weeks and beyond that prove the popular success of a film. If that's what's important to you guys about Atlas Shrugged. I'm confused why it's so important it be a critical and popular hit. The Novel wasn't. It was widely panned and for years sold poorly, yet has persisted as influential to some folks.
Pretending the Movie is doing well does'nt change the evidence it's not at this time.
I'm sure there will be organized viewings ala Passion of the ****** so it has the ability to become a cult following. That being said I'd expect at least 1/3 of the prints to go back.
Laffo.

Husker75 · Apr 19, 2011

This movie tanked? good. looked horrid. Just like the book.

After realizing how many find this stuff influential, I'm just gonna take this flop to mean that maybe there is still some hope for humanity.

And before anyone gets upset, i'm not going into politics, or attacking you. I'm just saying I think it sucks, and can only serve to further degrade the quality of film, the way I feel the book degrades literature. Just my opinion. Clearly I'm not a fan.

I'm perplexed it even has 8 percent fresh.
then I realized that 8 percent is made up of two critics.

who still only gave it 2 1/2 and 3 starts, respectively.

How can anyone kid themselves into thinking this movie is good?
The trailer alone made my eyes roll back into my head.

Kerr Avon · Apr 19, 2011

tgreco said:
with an 8% on the Tomato meter... don't expect business to uptick

That's the critics. People who have seen it, however, gave it an 85% fresh.

Laffo · Apr 19, 2011

Kerr,
I would show you how all these numbers and grosses and reviews effect business and Film Buying but it would be a waste of time. I'd show you reports and real data, but it would be pointless.
You've already made plans to see "the sequels made later," (actually the rest of the Novel in additional 2 parts, not sequels), buy the DVD and go with friends. You've already made up your mind and are not objective.
Ironically it's the very people championing this Movie about Government and BUSINESS, and that posted a link to a table with figures in 3 columns devoted to how much momentum Movies lose after the first week that don't have a realistic view of what's going on with this Film's opening weekend.
To be clear, this Movie means no more of less to me than the new Arthur. I look at it as a commodity.
You guys as Ayn Rand fans cannot do that. I've yet to run across one of you guys that can be objective about it.

The people who disagree with you aren't necessarily wrong..

Laffo.

Guri · Apr 19, 2011

Laffo said:
You guys as Ayn Rand fans cannot do that. I've yet to run across one of you guys that can be objective about it.

The people who disagree with you aren't necessarily wrong..

Laffo.

I thought my critique was pretty fair. :unsure

tgreco · Apr 19, 2011

Kerr Avon said:
That's the critics. People who have seen it, however, gave it an 85% fresh.

you mean 85% of people who were inclined to like it in the first place.... liked it?!

maybe you should go look at those audience reviews, because the fact that it's all 5 stars smacks of Poll bombing

I'm sure 85% of Hubbard followers who saw Battlefield Earth gave it 5 stars and chanted "ignore the critics" too

Solo4114 · Apr 19, 2011

Ultimately, it's the "built-in audience" that I think will make or break this project, but that was pretty much always gonna be the case, I'd figure. I don't begrudge fans of whatever their continued enjoyment (god knows I've seen similar debates on Firefly/Serenity forums...), but I think you're looking at a niche/indie project here rather than widespread acceptance of the material. If the hardcore fans get more of what they want, though, and are willing to pay for it, I doubt anyone will care.

Laffo · Apr 19, 2011

Guri said:
I thought my critique was pretty fair. :unsure

Okay. So your "fair" opinion of the the Movie didn't make enough of an impression on me in my response to Kerr Avon to satisfy you?

With an emoticon nonetheless.
This place sometimes...

Laffo.

Guri · Apr 19, 2011

Laffo said:
Okay. So your "fair" opinion of the the Movie didn't make enough of an impression on me in my response to Kerr Avon to satisfy you?

With an emoticon nonetheless.
This place sometimes...

Laffo.

My response was more about your sweeping, insulting generalization about all Ayn Rand fans. :rolleyes

This is exactly why we can't talk politics on this board.

If anyone wants to discuss this movie via PM, I'm all for it, but I'm done here.

"Atlas Shrugged" out on Friday!

Legendary Member

Sr Member

Master Member

Master Member

Sr Member

Sr Member

Sr Member

Master Member

Sr Member

Master Member

Sr Member

Sr Member

Well-Known Member

Master Member

Sr Member

Sr Member

Sr Member

Master Member

Sr Member

Sr Member

Similar threads