Thanks for the news on the DVD/Blu-ray release, madscntst.
![[ghost_smiley]](http://www.dsboards.com/SMF/Smileys/classic/ghost_smiley.gif "Smiley")
Hopefully we'll get more details sooner rather than later.
As for the piece on EW's Web site, well, where to begin because so many holes can be poked into what's written - and I'm not just referring to what's written about DS. And actually, it's interesting that the writer should quote something from Owen Gleiberman because in the past Mr. Gleiberman has been quite vocal with his criticism over how box office analysts will all too often pick and chose the figures that will support their often biased points of view while ignoring the ones that don't. And, of course, the industry itself makes that very easy to do because they're oh so secretive about film budgets - so much so that analysts themselves have to make up their own figures or go with figures already made up by others - and the variations in the amounts can be so divergent as to be ridiculous. I mean, just look at DS. As we've said, places like the Hollywood Reporter say DS' budget was $100 million, while places like boxoffice.com say $175 million. And then there are the ones in between like Box Office Mojo that say $150 million or Variety that say $125 million. And each one of these places is just as self-assured as the others that they have the correct budget figure. But quite obviously it's impossible for them all to be correct. And considering how much the success of a film hinges on its budget vs. its box office, who's to know which analysts are getting it right and which are way off?
A perfect non-DS example to illustrate that last point is
Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance. Now, that film has so far made $134.5 million worldwide, and the EW writer is saying that anyone who says it was a success is just wrong. And if one goes with the budget figured of $105 million that been tossed about by some sites it would be a nobrainer that it wasn't successful. However, what about the budget figure of $57 million that I've seen on many more sites? The situation looks a lot more rosy with that figure, no? And who's to say which one of those budget figures is the correct one? But if you're an analyst who's already biased for or against the film, I wonder which one you're going to pick?
![[ghost_wink]](http://www.dsboards.com/SMF/Smileys/classic/ghost_wink.gif "Wink")
(And it's also interesting that a lot of places are proclaiming that
Magic Mike is shaping up as a huge success because it supposedly cost only $7 million. However, in recent days I've come across other places that are saying not so fast because the film really cost $30 million. Who's right? Who knows?)
As for DS, its success can also be just as subjective depending on what budget figure one wants to go with. If it really did cost $100 million, then it's been quite successful - but if it cost $175 million, well, it hasn't exactly been successful. Though I have a feeling that neither of those budget figures are correct and the truth lies somewhere in the middle of the two. But who really knows? And WB probably isn't ever going to reveal the actual figure, so it will more than likely always be up for speculation, which is why analysts will probably be able to have a field day with the film for years to come. Though the bottom line is that even if DS doesn't meet the success standards of Depp and Burton's other films and is therefore a box office disappointment, it's most certainly not a flop, and it most certainly should not be lumped in with films like
John Carter and
Battleship, both of which cost much more than DS (even if one goes with their lowest budget estimates) and have brought in comparatively less than DS. In fact, DS shouldn't even be lumped in with a film like
What To Expect When You're Expecting because even when one factors in its foreign gross, the worldwide total for
What To Expect When You're Expecting is barely more than it supposedly cost to make. But, of course, you can't tell any of that to the EW writer because obviously he's already made up his mind that DS does indeed belong there. (Though once again it's so very interesting that
Wrath of the Titans wasn't lumped in.)
And finally, one thing I might also take exception to is Dread Central's often repeated inferences that word of mouth for DS hasn't helped it. Well, it may not have helped it to become huge - but just what do they think has been helping DS to perform so well for so long during weekdays? Oh, wait - Dread Central probably doesn't even realize that DS has been performing so well for so long during weekdays because I'm betting they haven't paid attention to its box office beyond its first few weeks because, well, that seems to be the case with most of these sites - and by now we all know what film of Depp's is the perfect illustration of that.
What's actually unfortunate is that the average person probably has no idea that much of what they're reading in these type of articles is based on cherry picking through guestimation and speculation, and that's even the case when the picking may not be all that biased.
58 days 12 hours 26 minutes 30 seconds since the Depp/Burton Dark Shadows has been in release(ET)!!
Topic: Depp/Burton DARK SHADOWS Is In Release!! (Read 350315 times)