Log In
Create Account
SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ
Login
Create Account
Search
Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...
RSS Feed
Hosting by DigitalOcean
Support ST on Ko-Fi
Links Only
50 Results
100 Results
250 Results
500 Results
1000 Results
5000 Results
2 Weeks
2 Months
6 Months
1 Year
2 Years
5 Years
All Time
Live
Down to Post
Backboards:
Live
________________
1: Dec 12, 08:55
2: Dec 11, 23:59
3: Dec 11, 14:43
4: Dec 11, 11:29
5: Dec 11, 07:59
6: Dec 10, 18:15
7: Dec 10, 12:28
8: Dec 10, 09:30
9: Dec 10, 05:59
10: Dec 9, 17:07
11: Dec 9, 13:47
12: Dec 9, 10:33
13: Dec 9, 07:33
14: Dec 8, 17:50
15: Dec 8, 10:32
16: Dec 8, 06:23
17: Dec 7, 16:52
18: Dec 7, 07:17
19: Dec 6, 14:40
20: Dec 6, 10:07
Posts: 154
David, re: your James Wan comment on B2, I just don't see it.
Posted by
MDH
Jan 17 '19, 06:36
Aquaman is huge I'll give you that. Fast and Furious he inherited. His other movies, meh?
Linked.
(www.boxofficemojo.com)
Responses:
His last 6 movies have cost 455mil (200mil guess for Aquaman) -- they've made 3.438 billion to date. -- nm
-
Will Hunting
Jan 17, 07:15
Now look at the financial outlays for those performances... -- nm
-
David
Jan 17, 06:48
4
You're right. For some reason I thought the Conjuring cost more, was thinking of something else I guess! -- nm
-
MDH
Jan 17, 07:00
100m WW on 1.5 budget. That's as good as a lottery ticket win for a studio. -- nm
-
Reagen
Jan 17, 06:50
his ROI is impressive -- nm
-
decline
Jan 17, 06:50
1
We should have started a movie studio in the late 90s. Cheap horror is where the money is, and we said as much all the way back then. -- nm
-
David
Jan 17, 06:50
He delivers winners cheaply. Conjuring made 300 ww on 20 production costs. -- nm
-
Reagen
Jan 17, 06:40
Post a message
top
Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.
