SCREEN-L Archives

March 1999, Week 4


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Fri, 26 Mar 1999 00:35:16 +0100
text/plain (94 lines)
Ooops, I wouldn't say anything agains anyone who can name all those figures,
can you name all the people who saw it as well? :) Seriously though, I heard
that it was not hit, but the maybe meant here in Sweden. I personally though
it was a very good movie, something in the same heart as Altman's The
Player. Anyway much more original than most movies released last year. And
that Gwyneth, well, what can I say that hasn't been said? Not much...


-----Original Message-----
From: Film and TV Studies Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Ressel, David Lee
Sent: den 24 mars 1999 01:10
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Oscar nominees

Not a hit?  Truman Show au contraire?   For 1999, I have it w/ a North
American Gross of $125.556 million and a Foreign of  $122.800.  At a
production cost of aprox. $65.0 ( I could be off), and P+P of $25.0 I say
they broke even on domestic alone, and gravy on foreign, plus more foreign
receipts to be counted and a big video receipts.

 I think, Truman's  June release hurt its Oscar awards most of all, plus who
can stop Harvey & Corky's Miramax Juggernaut! On trade ads alone, I am sure
Variety & HR made beaucoup coin. Not to mention, the dinners,
disinformation, development deals, a flurry of flacking and who knows what
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 1999 1:16 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: Oscar nominees
> Another interesting thing is that Truman Show received no prizes. On the
> other hand it wasn't any hit in the box-office...
> /Adrian
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Film and TV Studies Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of paul wiener
> Sent: den 19 mars 1999 15:58
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Oscar nominees
> Scott, I would be the first to second your opinion of "Shakespeare in
> Love"
> as overrated. I nearly walked out of it several times (anyone care to
> write
> about the joys of walking out on movies - 5, 30 or 70 minutes into it?) ;
> not until the last 20 minutes did I like it, though the acting was
> terrific. Just another feel good movie. "Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern Are
> Dead" was far far superior in every respect. "Thin Red Line" is a much
> more
> interesting film than "Ryan" but doesn't hold together well or make you
> feel good, except for cinematography. "Ryan" would be nothing without
> Hanks
> and the first bloody 25 minutes. I don't even like to choose anymore among
> Oscar nominess. They're almost always all hyped crapola. At least "Life Is
> Beautiful" was original.
> By the way, where's the discussion of the Kazan Oscar honors? It seems
> once
> you turn 70 no one is allowed to criticize you anymore? Kazan could do a
> lifetime of good by saying something important about his decision at the
> Oscars. My money says he won't. He's already been professionally honored
> enough, so don't believe ANYTHING anyone says: this honor is purely
> political.
> Paul B. Wiener
> Special Services Librarian
> SUNY at Stony Brook
> 516/632-7253
> [log in to unmask]
> ----
> Online resources for film/TV studies may be found at ScreenSite
> ----
> For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives:

To sign off Screen-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF Screen-L
in the message.  Problems?  Contact [log in to unmask]

Screen-L is sponsored by the Telecommunication & Film Dept., the
University of Alabama: