Screen Counts/Crowd Reports for Boring Post-Turkey Weekend
Author |
Message |
Stillnasatic
Speed Racer
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:17 am Posts: 142
|
Closer
1:45 Show-70% full
Trailors:
The Life Aquatic-people were coming in and out of the theatre
The Aviator-^
Million Dollar Baby-some interest
Spanglish-whispers
Hitch-laughs
Closer: It was a great dialogue film which isn't for most people...It lacked harmony and that's what the turnoff of the film might of been for some people...Overall, I thought it was awesome and Portman would definetly deserve an Oscar win here...This movie was one where you either loved it or hated it...like someone mentioned before
Grade: A-
|
Sun Dec 05, 2004 5:58 pm |
|
 |
publicenemy#1
Extraordinary
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 12:25 am Posts: 19401 Location: San Diego
|
I might see Closer or National Treasure in an hour, whoo hoo.
|
Sun Dec 05, 2004 7:10 pm |
|
 |
Libs
Sbil
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm Posts: 48677 Location: Arlington, VA
|
loyalfromlondon wrote: The audience didnt understand the film or were mislead so that's why they didnt like it. I knew what it was about therefore my review is right and there's is wrong. Come on Libs :wink:
To think people went in expecting some sort of feel-good film or Notting Hill 2 is one of the most lazy ways to defend your review Libs.
Closer created a great marketing campaign. I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone who didnt know what the movie was about.
So why didn't everyone love it?
Um...? Were you saying I said the italicized part? Because I didn't, and that's not what I was trying to say.
What I think happened in some cases was that the general, unsuspecting audience went in, expecting some studio film because of the actors (notably Roberts), and got a vicious, talky art film instead.
|
Sun Dec 05, 2004 7:11 pm |
|
 |
teenman
The Incredible Hulk
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 1:10 pm Posts: 510
|
National Treasure
7:30pm yesternight at Edwards Renaissance 14
65-70% of 294 stadium seats (even few front rows were all but empty)
Short review:
At least the movie was okay, even with good actors in it. But I didn't care about it sometimes. 7/10
|
Sun Dec 05, 2004 7:30 pm |
|
 |
Anonymous
|
Libs wrote: loyalfromlondon wrote: The audience didnt understand the film or were mislead so that's why they didnt like it. I knew what it was about therefore my review is right and there's is wrong. Come on Libs :wink:
To think people went in expecting some sort of feel-good film or Notting Hill 2 is one of the most lazy ways to defend your review Libs.
Closer created a great marketing campaign. I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone who didnt know what the movie was about.
So why didn't everyone love it? Um...? Were you saying I said the italicized part? Because I didn't, and that's not what I was trying to say. What I think happened in some cases was that the general, unsuspecting audience went in, expecting some studio film because of the actors (notably Roberts), and got a vicious, talky art film instead.
It was my interpretation of what you said, I didn't use quotation marks.
The idea that audiences didnt know it was an art film is kinda nuts.
|
Sun Dec 05, 2004 7:31 pm |
|
 |
Chris
life begins now
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:09 pm Posts: 6480 Location: Columbus, Ohio
|
loyalfromlondon wrote: Libs wrote: loyalfromlondon wrote: The audience didnt understand the film or were mislead so that's why they didnt like it. I knew what it was about therefore my review is right and there's is wrong. Come on Libs :wink:
To think people went in expecting some sort of feel-good film or Notting Hill 2 is one of the most lazy ways to defend your review Libs.
Closer created a great marketing campaign. I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone who didnt know what the movie was about.
So why didn't everyone love it? Um...? Were you saying I said the italicized part? Because I didn't, and that's not what I was trying to say. What I think happened in some cases was that the general, unsuspecting audience went in, expecting some studio film because of the actors (notably Roberts), and got a vicious, talky art film instead. It was my interpretation of what you said, I didn't use quotation marks. The idea that audiences didnt know it was an art film is kinda nuts.
Why? Even for people who dont read reviews and just see it because it had Roberts or Law in it? I think that is very possible.
|
Sun Dec 05, 2004 7:34 pm |
|
 |
Anonymous
|
Chris wrote: loyalfromlondon wrote: Libs wrote: loyalfromlondon wrote: The audience didnt understand the film or were mislead so that's why they didnt like it. I knew what it was about therefore my review is right and there's is wrong. Come on Libs :wink:
To think people went in expecting some sort of feel-good film or Notting Hill 2 is one of the most lazy ways to defend your review Libs.
Closer created a great marketing campaign. I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone who didnt know what the movie was about.
So why didn't everyone love it? Um...? Were you saying I said the italicized part? Because I didn't, and that's not what I was trying to say. What I think happened in some cases was that the general, unsuspecting audience went in, expecting some studio film because of the actors (notably Roberts), and got a vicious, talky art film instead. It was my interpretation of what you said, I didn't use quotation marks. The idea that audiences didnt know it was an art film is kinda nuts. Why? Even for people who dont read reviews and just see it because it had Roberts or Law in it? I think that is very possible.
It not about reviews.
The marketing campaign didn't feature Roberts trademark wide mouth smile or shrieking cackle. Find a audience member who didnt know what Closer was about and I'll take it back. But I think the odds are stacked highly against it. That's the whole reason it's not in every market in North America. It's a artsy fartsy film and every ad on tv or trailer in the theater did a good job of advertising that fact.
|
Sun Dec 05, 2004 7:51 pm |
|
 |
publicenemy#1
Extraordinary
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 12:25 am Posts: 19401 Location: San Diego
|
Probaly the last crowd report of the day, haha.
Closer
Edwards Mira Mesa Stadium 18
4:30, 350 seater, 70% full
Trailers -
Monster-In-Law
Million Dollar Baby
Hitch
Hide and Seek
Spanglish
Not much reactions.
Movie - Fantastic, one of the year's best films. The cast didn't fail to impresse me. Clive Owen, who I rarely see on screen really surprised me, as did Natalie Portman, both of them are the only ones I can see getting (and hope) to get an Oscar nod. Julia Roberts and Jude Law are both very good as well but nothing that really impressed me. I have to say, with all the negative comments I've heard I'm very glad I enjoyed it. - A
The audience seemed to like it, no walk outs but no clapping or talking after the movie ended.
|
Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:03 am |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|