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... /Adrian -----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 else! > -----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 > http://www.tcf.ua.edu/ScreenSite > > ---- > For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives: > http://bama.ua.edu/archives/screen-l.html ---- 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: http://www.tcf.ua.edu