Fanboys

TeeJay · 30 Oct 08 :: 22:35

Okay, here's something awesome that someone sent me (you can click them to enlarge). Aren't these just awesome? I love them! And I wish to God TWC knew who to listen to. Which is NOT their own marketing department, obviously. :fedup:

And finally, here's an updated version of the poster that I made a while back:

-TeeJay

domesticelefant · 30 Oct 08 :: 22:43

The group one is my favorite.
It seems that TWC doesn't listen to anyone.

TeeJay · 30 Oct 08 :: 22:50

With a marketing campaign like this, how can the movie do anything but tank? It's such a sad, sad story.

-TeeJay

larry-411 · 30 Oct 08 :: 22:52

"Real fans don't wait in line."

Ironic, eh?

TeeJay · 30 Oct 08 :: 23:04

No, real fans get up close and personal with the important people and get a front-row seat at an early screening of the movie.

-TeeJay

TheCentralScrutinizer · 30 Oct 08 :: 23:08

Second row, technically, but yeah. Hee!

And the group one is my favorite too.

domesticelefant · 30 Oct 08 :: 23:13

Sisterdebmac wrote:

Second row, technically, but yeah. Hee!

Haha, just thought the same. But the second row was also cool.

colorthestars · 30 Oct 08 :: 23:17

I like the group one too. I can't think of a logical reason not to pick that one. :clueless: But then again, a lot of their other moves don't resemble Earth logic either.

Last edited by colorthestars (30 Oct 08 :: 23:17)

Simon · 30 Oct 08 :: 23:27

Love those posters. Wish they were really up in cinemas.

TeeJay · 30 Oct 08 :: 23:34

You know what's weird, though. In Germany when writing dates, we separate the day, month and year by periods. And we always write the day first. So 2.6.2009 in Germany will read like June 2, 2009. It would be bad if people in Europe started thinking the movie was delayed until June! (But then again, who knows anymore...)

-TeeJay

domesticelefant · 30 Oct 08 :: 23:37

Who knows if the movie's coming to Germany at all ...

Illinoisguy1 · 31 Oct 08 :: 00:02

Thought you guys would like to read this.

But you may not like what he says about Fanboys.

Weinstein Company Blames Mystery Man For Spreading "False" Writedown Rumor
UPDATE: It's not just that The Weinstein Company is denying today's buzz in film financing circles that it's taken a $50 million writedown because of all the movies it's dumped into 2009. Nah, what's way more interesting is that it's blaming a specific guy for spreading the rumor. This afternoon, Harvey's attorney Bert Fields phoned to tell me on the record: "This story is complete false. There is no Weinstein writedown, not for $50 million, not for $5. We think we know who's feeding this venomous garbage to the media, and when we do he'll find himself on the wrong end of a very big lawsuit." So enquiring minds want to know: who's Harvey fighting with now? Because this unnamed guy, whoever he is, must be a heavy to have major people take what he says as near-gospel. Indeed, this morning I heard the buzz in film financing circles that The Weinstein Company had to writedown $50 million of Goldman Sachs' money this week. It's reportedly taking the loss because of those four films it dumped into next year, Crossing Over, Killshot, Fanboys and Shanghai, plus The Road... (And let's face it: who in their right mind thinks even one of those pics is going to make a dime of profit in 2009?) I also just received an emailed denial from Irv Reiter, the EVP of Financial Reporting at the Weinstein Company: "With regards to your blog entry of October 28 regarding the Weinstein Company I am writing to confirm that The Weinstein Company has not taken a writedown on any of the films mentioned; Kill Shot, Crossing Over, Fan Boys, Shanghai and The Road."

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/w … own-rumor/

TeeJay · 31 Oct 08 :: 00:06

Okay, I'm having problems with the business lingo. What's a writedown?

-TeeJay

Illinoisguy1 · 31 Oct 08 :: 00:12

Dictionary of Accounting Terms
write-down

reduction of part of the balance of an asset by charging an expense or loss account. The reason for a write-down is that some economic event has occurred indicating that the asset's value has diminished. An example is the obsolescence of some inventory.

TheCentralScrutinizer · 31 Oct 08 :: 00:13

I think it means that they're reporting a $50 million revenue loss for the year, and have to write it off on their taxes. But I could be wrong. Shocking (not) considering every single movie they released was a complete flop. Remember, the only good news they've had in the recent past was the opening weekend of Rob Zombie's Halloween remake last year (and it dropped 50% the next week and fell off the screens in a few weeks), and the opening weekend of Forbidden Kingdom. It was number one for the week, but I think it only did like $16 million or something. They have no money. That's a fact. And poor Harvey's terrified that everyone is starting to realize that his studio is circling the drain and has been for about 2 years. It's sad really because it could've been the opposite. But he's got no one to blame but himself.

TeeJay · 31 Oct 08 :: 00:17

Okay, so it's kinda like an accrual, I guess. Well, gee, Harvey, and you're surprised that your movies tank when you treat them like you do?

-TeeJay

larry-411 · 31 Oct 08 :: 00:30

Basically (if it's true) what it means is that that they have declared a $50 million loss, partly on the basis of having to move the films. By doing so, they pay less in taxes.

The Forbidden Kingdom made $21M opening weekend and took in $52M domestic, $73.5M overseas, for a total of $125.6M worldwide. But I don't know how much they got -- Lionsgate was the primary distributor and obviously got the lion's share (no pun intended).

TheCentralScrutinizer · 31 Oct 08 :: 01:22

Exactly what I was trying to say, Larry. Thanks.

And I was not certain about the numbers for Forbidden Kingdom. Only that it opened at #1 that week. It looked like a good movie and I still want to see it, but I'll be damned if TWC will get a dime of my money for it.

BiggestChrisMarquetteFan · 31 Oct 08 :: 05:20

I love those Fanboys posters especially the group one!

Chnyst · 01 Nov 08 :: 17:43

I like those posters that Teejay posted....the 40 yr old version one though...horrible!!

Here's a pic I found that I thought was kinda cool

Last edited by Chnyst (01 Nov 08 :: 17:47)

domesticelefant · 01 Nov 08 :: 19:54

Cool pic, Sean!

TeeJay · 01 Nov 08 :: 21:16

So, is that Kyle's or Matt Perniciaro's?

And... eeeeek! I just paid money to see a Weinstein movie in the theater. Bad, bad me! (I didn't know until the movie started rolling, though. I swear!)

-TeeJay

larry-411 · 01 Nov 08 :: 22:48

TeeJay wrote:

And... eeeeek! I just paid money to see a Weinstein movie in the theater. Bad, bad me! (I didn't know until the movie started rolling, though. I swear!)

ROFL What movie?

Simon · 01 Nov 08 :: 22:52

Them crafty Weinstein's.

What was it?

TeeJay · 01 Nov 08 :: 23:15

Grace Is Gone. Can't say it was great. I like John Cusack a lot, so I enjoyed it for him being in it.

-TeeJay

Chris Marquette Message Board

#2026 30 Oct 08 :: 22:35

Re: Fanboys

#2027 30 Oct 08 :: 22:43

Re: Fanboys

#2028 30 Oct 08 :: 22:50

Re: Fanboys

#2029 30 Oct 08 :: 22:52

Re: Fanboys

#2030 30 Oct 08 :: 23:04

Re: Fanboys

#2031 30 Oct 08 :: 23:08

Re: Fanboys

#2032 30 Oct 08 :: 23:13

Re: Fanboys

#2033 30 Oct 08 :: 23:17

Re: Fanboys

#2034 30 Oct 08 :: 23:27

Re: Fanboys

#2035 30 Oct 08 :: 23:34

Re: Fanboys

#2036 30 Oct 08 :: 23:37

Re: Fanboys

#2037 31 Oct 08 :: 00:02

Re: Fanboys

#2038 31 Oct 08 :: 00:06

Re: Fanboys

#2039 31 Oct 08 :: 00:12

Re: Fanboys

#2040 31 Oct 08 :: 00:13

Re: Fanboys

#2041 31 Oct 08 :: 00:17

Re: Fanboys

#2042 31 Oct 08 :: 00:30

Re: Fanboys

#2043 31 Oct 08 :: 01:22

Re: Fanboys

#2044 31 Oct 08 :: 05:20

Re: Fanboys

#2045 01 Nov 08 :: 17:43

Re: Fanboys

#2046 01 Nov 08 :: 19:54

Re: Fanboys

#2047 01 Nov 08 :: 21:16

Re: Fanboys

#2048 01 Nov 08 :: 22:48

Re: Fanboys

#2049 01 Nov 08 :: 22:52

Re: Fanboys

#2050 01 Nov 08 :: 23:15

Re: Fanboys

Board footer