Did Gary Kurtz have the wrong job?

They're both box office success', Twister was just a bigger one on the domestic front.

We all know which film was more of an overall success.

 

Actually, since it makes the "that's no moon, it's a space station" reference, we COULD argue that Twister is merely sponging off the success of the OT.




Rick McCallum loves you!

 

Even better: in ROTK, Sam screams "NOOOOOO!". Just like when Obi-Wan screamed "NOOOOOO!" in TPM! Clearly ROTK is just ripping off TPM.

 

Let's not forget the ROTK trailer's rip of the "what does your heart tell you" bit in TPM!

How 'bout Spider-Man and how Peter as a child said "Aunt May, Aunt May, is that an angel?"


Come on Hollywood! TPM cannot be expected to write the whole movie for you!


Rick McCallum loves you!

 

Well again I'm not going to go by adjusted because know Twister ia a box office success and FOTR is not. That just does not look right there. So we will just have to agree to disagree.

You can disagree all you like but the evidence is in the adjusted figures. Twister wasn't that good but it still did well. You just remember the more recent success of FOTR. Before this film, there were other films (yes, Twister) that filled seats.

EDIT: and 75 is still very good for a film considering the thousands (millions?) of films made in the past.

While TESB drop-off was large, I explained why this is so. It's called regression toward the mean. When a film does unusually well (Gone with the Wind) films have only one way to go...down. When a film does just very well (TESB) there is still a lot of room to top that figure. Although the sky is the limit with films.

 

Can I just point out that all the B.O. figures posted on the previous page were only DOMESTIC (USA) figures. A lot of films make most of their money overseas. so while Reloaded took less than AOTC domestically, Reloaded beat it in Worldwide gross total.

BTW - does anyone know a site which lists Adjusted figures for Worldwide takings?

g

 

*sigh* You guys fell into their trap.

Having lost on all the factual points about Kurtz, the anit-PT crowd has cleverly changed the subject to something totally off-topic, box office take.

A producer has as much to do with a film's box office take as a car engine has to do with how fast a person runs.

We have covered this old, tired ground about "adjusted adjusted box office ticket sales" in many other threads. And it has nothing to do with the issue of Kurtz and his inability to be an effective producer on the business end of the production.

 

Please. The subject of how well-liked TPM was came up, and then someone brought up the money. The pro-Kurtz argument certainly hasn't been lost. Because in the end, no matter how much spun-over irrationalizaton PT gushers can offer, the fact remains: Kurtz produced the two most well-liked films in the series. McCallum produced the two most disliked films in the series. Kurtz is the only major player to work on ANH and ESB, but not the others. The only one.

 

Kurtz produced the two most well-liked films in the series. McCallum produced the two most disliked films in the series.

Nice opinion. Too bad myself and many, many others don't share it. Simply repeating one opinion over and over again can't counter the many facts about Kurtz's ineffectiveness behind the scenes.

I offered several facts that oppose the pro-Kurtz crowd that went un-responded to. Not surprising though.

 

It isn't opinion. The two most well-liked films in the series are ANH and ESB. The two most disliked filsm are TPM and AOTC. That's the way it is.

As for which films are more well-made, that's not a matter of opinion either. If it was TPM or AOTC against ROTJ, then it could be reasonably argued that either is a superior film, which isn't very clear-cut. In the case of ANH and ESB though, the gulf is too wide.

 

The word "liked" implies opinion. One can find counteropinion all over the darn place. For instance, a poll on the JC reveals ESB and AOTC to be the two best-liked of 'em, and you don't see me declaring that correct either.


Rick McCallum loves you!

 

Yes, "liked" is opinion. And the general opinion is that ANH and ESB are the best Star Wars films. It's palpable. They're also the best in terms of the filmmaking language, but one doesn't have to necessarily do with the other. However, in this case, they are the same.

 

royalguard-
Having lost on all the factual points about Kurtz, the anit-PT crowd has cleverly changed the subject to something totally off-topic, box office take.

What are you talking about?

I offered several facts that oppose the pro-Kurtz crowd that went un-responded to. Not surprising though.

Poor you.
Well I've just checked back through this thread to read your posts. Several times you've complained about the 'anti-PT crowd' ignoring facts for opinion.
I had to go all the way back to page 1 of this thread to find any of your famous 'facts'. Here they are:

He couldn't keep the budget for ESB under control. He fought with Lucas over creative direction of the story, which was overstepping his bounds as producer. These are facts,

The matter of ESB going over budget has been discussed on this thread, I've addressed it myself.
It's your opinion that fighting with Lucas was overstepping his bounds, others disagree, including myself.

So there it is : you posted one fact - that ESB went over budget and this matter has been discussed quite a bit, it's implications, reasons etc.
Where are all these 'facts' of yours that went unresponded to?

What are you complaining about?


If you can point me to any other posts of yours on this thread which contained facts (not opinions) then please do so.

g

 

Most people that talk about the fall off of ESB were not around to experience it. At that time it was the most successful sequel Ever. Sequels outgrossing the originals is a fairly new event with Hollywood films.

I think when discussing Kurtz one has to look at the different jobs Lucas had when making the OT. Lucas was a director & producer. I think for a director Kurtz is a terrific person to have. He will do whatever it takes to give the director what he needs for a film. As an executive producer, studio or a financial institution Kurtz is a headache since the budget is not his primary concern. After Lucas stepped down from the director's chair he & Kurtz were bound to clash. I think their goals became different. Lucas wanted to escape the studio system & he needed ESB to do well for that to happen. I don't think Kurtz cared one bit for Lucas' monetary concerns & that might have been something that got under his skin. I think for ESB Kurtz's loyalty was to the director, the same as it was for American Grafitti & Star Wars.

Ironically Lucas was able to escape the studio system yet continues to make studio type films. There has been little originality in the films he has made since his break from Hollywood. The man who was once considered the most experimental of the film brats is more content with his toys than with making films. Since money is no longer an issue with Lucas I wonder what the PT would be like if Kurtz were allowed to play in George's sandbox.

 

You really believe that, don't you?

 

Well, I am sure that after your last post he is now filled with all kinds of self doubt.

 

Ok, I think I got the Wordwide adjusted figures:

ANH: 4,928,000,000(seems a bit much?)

TESB: 2,194,000,000

ROTJ: 1,835,000,000

ANH SE: 321,000,000

TESB SE: 155,000,000

ROTJ SE: 111,000,000

TPM: 1,107,000,000

AOTC: 648,000,000 (not adjusted)


So, here it is folks. Source here

 

That can't be right.

Star Wars pulled about $400 million at the B.O.

Inflation isn't that ridiculous.

This isn't the Weimar Republic.

 

Talk about

Box
Office
Results
Inevitably
Neuters
Good

threads...

(in my opinion, of course...)

Seriously, these are statistics that have no meaning whatsoever when you start comparing 1977 to 2003. Especially if you're trying to make a point about the popularity or quality of a film.

You have to account for inflation, because a dollar spent in 1977 isn't worth the same as a dollar spent in 2003.

You have to account for the fact that ticket prices were different on top of the inflation difference.

You have to account for the fact that one ticket in one cinema at one particular time could buy three tickets somewhere else a few weeks later.

You have to account for different ticket prices in different countries (assuming you're looking at worldwide figures)

You have to account for the advent of video, DVD and home cinema. (If you saw the original Star Wars, you saw it in the cinema. If you saw it 40 times, then you saw it 40 times in the cinema. Watching it at home simply wasn't an option until the early 80s.)

You have to account for the competition that each film had, and the number of screens showing the film.

All in all, it turns into a very, very vague bunch of numbers that prove nothing; other than "Gone with the Wind" is everybody's favourite film.

 

A producer is responsible for the pre-release part of the film, he has little or nothing to do with it post-release.

 

Those numbers definitely aren't right.