| Author |
Topic:
The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #1: The tyranny of the opening weekend box office
|
soitscometothis
Registered:
Jul '03
|
Date Posted:
7/3 2:56am
Subject:
RE: The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #7: Jar Jar Binks
|
Jar Jar was something of a scapegoat for people's problems with TPM. He really became the poster-boy for everything that was wrong about the film, back when nobody wanted to believe that GL had lost his magic touch. He was not TPM's main problem however, just a symptom, imo.
My biggest complaint with Jar Jar was that I couldn't understand what he was saying, but the (heavy) musical cues suggested it was funny or important. Very frustrating.
With better writing and a less irritating voice the character could have worked.
-----signature-----
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
NYCitygurl
Title: Manager of SFFBC, C&G, and NSWFF
Registered:
Jul '02
|
Date Posted:
7/3 6:23am
Subject:
RE: The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #7: Jar Jar Binks
|
Jar Jar discussion over now, please.
6. VHS proved bigger but not necessarily Beta.
Although many experts argued the smaller tapes were superior in quality, Sony kept its Betamax format exclusive to its own VCRs while its competitors proliferated the VHS tape as the format of choice among consumers. So did Sony learn a lesson? Do you own a MiniDisc player?
-----signature-----
Master of padawanlost, Ultima_1, Jedimaster_JainaSolo, and Vaders_Angel 
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
rumsmuggler
Registered:
Aug '00
|
Date Posted:
7/3 6:33am
Subject:
RE: The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #6: VHS proved bigger but not necessarily Beta
|
|
A friend of mine still has a function betamax player and collects films for it whenever he can find them.
-----signature-----
" Conan, what's best in life?" " Crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentations of the women."
W.W.L.D. What Would Lando Do
"Why is the rum always gone?"
Retcons = making the dumb stuff look even dumber.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Drac39
Registered:
Jul '02
|
Date Posted:
7/3 8:36am
Subject:
RE: The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #6: VHS proved bigger but not necessarily Beta
|
|
Essentially they won the HD war doing the same thing. If PS3 wasn't a factor they wouldn't have won.
-----signature-----
Go Cubs!
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
somethingfamiliar
Registered:
Aug '03
|
Date Posted:
7/3 9:10am
Subject:
RE: The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #6: VHS proved bigger but not necessarily Beta
|
|
I can remember visiting the early incarnation of our neighborhood video store in a tiny space with both formats on the shelves after we proudly bought our first VHS machine. I never actually saw a movie on Beta. iirc, the machines were more expensive than VHS.
-----signature-----
I'm not a quitter, but that human pile of garbage would make Satan weep.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Princess_Tina
Registered:
May '01
|
Date Posted:
7/3 9:35am
Subject:
RE: The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #6: VHS proved bigger but not necessarily Beta
|
Drac39 posted:
Essentially they won the HD war doing the same thing. If PS3 wasn't a factor they wouldn't have won.
No, I think the key to winning the Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD war was lining up the studios' support. The "war" was essentially over when Warner announced it would no longer be format neutral.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
DarthArsenal6
Registered:
Oct '01
|
Date Posted:
7/3 10:38am
Subject:
RE: The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #6: VHS proved bigger but not necessarily Beta
- Date Edited:
7/3 10:41am (1 edits total)
Edited By:
DarthArsenal6
|
I own a mini disc and I think it was a shame that sony ceased production
Where are you gonna record your own music and how now ?
just stupid !
I think it will make a comeback simply becase recording on CD is hard, not reliable and can be expensive. And Ipods and such devices are just downloaders of music which in my opinion doesn't help one atom bit for someone who creates music.
However Beta was doomed because it could only record 1 hour compared to 3 or 5 hours on SP that VHS provided.
I couldn't agrue for the fact that PS3 and puesuading film companis to go Blu
which Sony won its war, but common sence previal, good qaulity and long hours play always gets the customers vote.
-----signature-----
|-o-| {OO} <-o-> /-o-\ <=o=>
"You mean you'll put down your rock, and I'll put down my sword and we'll try and kill each other like civilized people?"
A,B XY
DA6 calender goes from March 31st to April 2nd, no one fools DarthArsenal6.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
The_Smirking_Revenge
Registered:
Jul '08
|
Date Posted:
7/3 12:05pm
Subject:
RE: The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #6: VHS proved bigger but not necessarily Beta
- Date Edited:
7/3 12:10pm (2 edits total)
Edited By:
Zaz
|
"I said enough. Consider that a warning."
Now, Beta...
I think it all just boils down to VHS having a much better marketing scheme than Beta.
-T_S_R
-----signature-----
"It's not about money...It's about sending a message."
"We have just lost cabin pressure"
OBAMA '08
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Zaz
Title: Manager:
The Amphitheatre
Registered:
Oct '98
|
Date Posted:
7/3 12:37pm
Subject:
RE: The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #6: VHS proved bigger but not necessarily Beta
|
|
Apple made precisely this same mistake and Microsoft didn't. Make the technology freely available to all, and the best technology will prevail. Imagine that the technical people will pay for better technology when they can get something reasonable for free is not too likely. It wasn't marketing, it was Sony not understanding how the market was going to work.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
The_Smirking_Revenge
Registered:
Jul '08
|
Date Posted:
7/3 1:32pm
Subject:
RE: The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #6: VHS proved bigger but not necessarily Beta
|
"It wasn't marketing, it was Sony not understanding how the market was going to work."
I'd say that falls directly under marketing. After all, understanding the market is the first step to understanding how to present your product to consumers.
-T_S_R
-----signature-----
"It's not about money...It's about sending a message."
"We have just lost cabin pressure"
OBAMA '08
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
gonzoforce
Registered:
Feb '02
|
Date Posted:
7/3 8:56pm
Subject:
RE: The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #6: VHS proved bigger but not necessarily Beta
|
|
I remember the VHS vs Beta War back in the 80's I was a kid back then, but I do remember there were two different kinds of recording devices. I don't think we ever had a beta in my family, but I cleary remember some of my friends did.
-----signature-----
"The sea was angry that day my friends, like an old man trying to send back soup in a deli" - George Costanza
"My name is George, I’m unemployed and I live at my parents" - George Costanza
"You're an anti-dentite" - Cosmo Kramer
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Rogue1-and-a-half
Title: Manager: Amphitheatre
Registered:
Nov '00
|
Date Posted:
7/5 8:02am
Subject:
RE: The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #6: VHS proved bigger but not necessarily Beta
|
|
Given that 'beta' has become its own perjorative and catchphrase, I'd say this is worthy.
-----signature-----
All they found of the Duchesse d'Alencon was her head.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
NYCitygurl
Title: Manager of SFFBC, C&G, and NSWFF
Registered:
Jul '02
|
Date Posted:
7/10 7:06pm
Subject:
RE: The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #6: VHS proved bigger but not necessarily Beta
|
5. Movie star salary inflation.
Jim Carrey raised the bar to $20 million with The Cable Guy; since then, Tom Cruise, Mel Gibson, and Will Smith have pushed the club into the $25 millionÐplus range (including profit participation deals). As salary inflation spirals upward, so do production costs. And, funny, we have yet to see any positive correlation between an actor's paycheck (did we say Paycheck?) and the movie being any better for it.
I agree completely.
-----signature-----
Master of padawanlost, Ultima_1, Jedimaster_JainaSolo, and Vaders_Angel
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Zaz
Title: Manager:
The Amphitheatre
Registered:
Oct '98
|
Date Posted:
7/10 9:08pm
Subject:
RE: The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #5: Movie star salary inflation
|
|
Back in the day when the studio supplied everything, the stars didn't need to make too much money. Now they have to supply their own security, training and futures. Even so, they are paid to 'open' movies, and they don't always do it.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
solojones
Registered:
Sep '00
|
Date Posted:
7/11 2:51am
Subject:
RE: The 50 Biggest Hollywood Disasters -- #5: Movie star salary inflation
|
Yes and no. On the one hand, perhaps actors competing for bigger checks has driven costs up. That's true.
On the other hand, films are also in general making a lot more money than they used to. So, though I'm no actor and naturally sympathize more with writers in particular, I see the actors' point here. If a film makes 700m worldwide and you were the main actor and the reason perhaps most people went to see it... well, doesn't it make sense to get 25m of that? These seem like huge numbers, but that's 3.5%. If production costs are 200m and then another 200m goes to theatres (that's being really liberal with that number, too). The rest of the company and crew are still clearing 275m.
Now, should the salary's be more percentage and less up-front cash? Yes, it would seem to make sense to most people. That way people aren't making tons of money on bombs. And I can see the inclination to think that way. However, studios don't like to do that because if they make a deal for 5% (which would be a lot, granted), they are risking losing a lot of money if a movie's a hit. And they want to root for their movies to be hits, not worry about stars getting too much.
But here's the bottom line- the money's going somewhere. A movie that makes hundreds of millions of dollars over its production costs as more and more blockbusters are these days... well, they're not giving that money to the poor. They're not giving raises to the crew. Money is going:
1) back into the studio to fund other movies
and
2) into the producers' pockets
I really don't think mega-actors are the problem. Production costs have inflated for many reasons. But the rise of mega-stars who get paid a lot conversely means more hype and more ticket sales. Do I really like the idea of people getting paid so much? Of course not. I'm a conservative spender. But the bottom line is that someone has to get the money, and even these actors getting tons of money are often not even getting a huge percentage of the net. If they're the reason the money came in, why not reap the benefits? Sure I'd love that movie to go to the writers but the truth is people don't go see movies for writers. It's just reality.
_solojones
-----signature-----
6 x 9 = 42 Proud member of the Colbert Nation  Obi-Wan Kenobi and Obi-Wan Kenobi in Ghost Ship Executor All Hail Cliegg's Blue Leg!
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
