Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) — Page 2

but advertising income something something

---

I admired everything about this picture other than the screenplay. I left feeling as though it has been over hyped to high heaven. The performances, score and photography were aces but the story left me cold. It's as if Samuel Beckett and Harold Pinter collaborated on an episode of Superman: The Last Stand.

Fantod, you need to do your research before you assert them as fact. It was never meant to be a $100 million blockbuster. Its not tanking and is probably one of the best reviewed films of the year. Not trying to be cruel, but if you want others to take you seriously on this board you need to do some research. Does it matter if they got the seating count of the St.James wrong?

No one had an issue with you pointing out the inaccuracies. No one cared about them. Which is different.

As for the box office, it is hard to compare the final box office grosses of two movies after their run to a movie still in the midst of increasing its number of screens and still earning money. If it opened big and was shrinking, you could more easily make predictions. It's not, though, so you can't.

On a similar note, though. Who cares? If you like a movie, and it doesn't make a profit, is it any less of a movie. Or, in your case, if you dislike a movie, why do you need the box office to show that you were on the right side on this movie?

Similarly, will all the people who love Side Show be wrong about the show when it closes early and doesn't recoup?

Updated On: 11/25/14 at 10:54 PM

Oh yes, anybody who doesn't like this movie has a lot to learn because they are not on the intellectual level as BroadwayNYC2. And existentialism is "a philosophical theory or approach that emphasizes the existence of the individual person as a free and responsible agent determining their own development through acts of the will", not a generic term for whenever something tries to be "deep" but comes off as annoying, preachy, and pretentious. And my response to you was about box office, not about the quality of the movie, so there is no need to be rude.

Updated On: 11/25/14 at 11:09 PM

But to say every film that doesn't make $100 million is a failure, which is ludicrous, and to not take into account the number of screens Birdman is playing on when you make such a proclamation is poor analysis.

A movie on 800ish screens can only make a fraction of a movie on 3,000+ screens, which seems obvious.

And whether this movie continue to add screens and increase its box office over time, or shrink and tank... is still completely unknown.

You keep using the metrics for how to judge a movie with a different release strategy than Birdman. Here is the definition of a platform release:

"A platform release is a limited release strategy, whereby the film opens in only a few theaters, then gradually expands to more theaters as word of mouth spreads and the marketing campaign gains momentum. Depending on the film's success, there is even the possibility to expand into a wide release. The advantage of this strategy is that marketing costs are conserved until a film's performance has been established. This way, if a film turns out to be very popular or critically acclaimed, the distributor may opt to spend more money than originally planned and push for a wider release; if the movie flops, the distributor can withdraw from the campaign without having spent much money promoting and advertising the film.

In the early stages of a platform release, the key metric is the per-theater average gross, not the total box office gross. Art house and independent movie theaters like to see a high per-theater average, as proof that they will be successful if they release the film. A distributor using this release strategy must take care that they do not expand the release too quickly: If a film is successful early on, many theaters will be interested in playing it; but if the distributor releases the film into too many theaters at this stage, the limited audience will be spread over multiple theaters, lowering the per-theater average and making the film appear weaker."

I'm not tracking the box office strength of this movie, since... well, I liked it, so who cares?! But, if you do insist on tracking it and making predictions based on the raw box office total, that info might be good to take in. The reduced up-front marketing, the total being less important than the pre-screen average, etc., etc. How widening it too fast could be a bad thing...

The movie is now considered to be in wide release. The averages in limited release were extremely high, but on the first weekend of wide release it had a $2,884 average, which is quite low for any movie, and has since dropped. It might expand even further (that information isn't out yet) but it probably won't be going into the 1,000+ theatre range, and so that is why I don't believe it will make back its money. I could be way off target, and I am not saying you are wrong for believing it will make back its money, I am merely explaining my position because you are claiming that I am wrong, which is not factually true, and I have my reasons for my thinking.

Oh, and I know how limited release works, but it doesn't always work.

Once the Academy Awards are announced, however, the film could re-expand if it is nominated for best picture, and I could eat my words and be totally wrong, but on the current track that it is on, I don't think it will make back its money, unless rentals are really strong, but movie studios don't publish that information.

Updated On: 11/25/14 at 11:54 PM

Just got back from seeing this. I loved nearly every minute of this. I adored the cinematography, the characters and the performances, although I will admit, it is still turning over in my feeble mind.

I went to the 1:15 showing and it was packed. Granted, it was in a small theater at the megaplex, but I had people sitting in seats on either side of my party...no empties. I can't remember the last time I've had that experience.

If I were alone, I would have turned around and watched the film again. Now I can't wait to do so.

---

It would make a fun jazz drumming double bill with Whiplash.

What were the credits like? I can't recall... nor can I imagine credits so annoying that they lent themselves to not be viewed.

haterobics, the names were breaking up and coming together, I just found it really annoying as if I had epilepsy they cause a seizure...

---