Thread: Al Gore's Desperate Bid to Keep Keith Olbermann

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 39
  1. #21  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    441
    Where's the outrage over Keith's $10 million salary? It comes down to two 1%ers battling it out. The DUmp should hate both of them.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    That is tinfoil. Just like the kind of DU talk about radio prior to Air America (even after in some cases). If it would make them money, they would do it in a heartbeat. I don't care how often The Simpsons makes fun of Fox, that network isn't going to kill a cash cow. Same with Southpark (although that is more libertarian than conservative in the modern sense ... which is pretty much Jesus, Guns, Israel and fuck you asshole, I want my tax cut).
    Funny how you can cite tinfoil while wearing it.

    Air America was kept on the air through massive infusions of cash before it collapsed. Most networks or studios won't even entertain a conservative pitch, so any conservative project either gets in via stealth, or is stillborn, and there is a long history of Hollywood tanking shows or movies that make them uncomfortable, while promoting crap that makes them feel good, but is doomed at the box office or on the tube. Proof of this is the string of expensive post-Iraq antiwar movies that tanked, one after the other, and yet the studios kept churning them out. Meanwhile, movies that showed us in a good, or even less evil light, like The Kingdom, did far better, but were not emulated.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Some of the Hope & Change is good but it is mostly of the kook variety. You have to buy the narrative and I really don't. Sometimes, it looks stale.
    Especially if you emphatically hate the message.
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Rush is self satire, if anything.
    No, Rush is quite adept at skewering the left. His song and commercial parodies are particularly funny.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Don't know the others but there is more than one political cartoonist that can skewer the President without descending into Kenyan Mau Mau cliche.
    You don't know Mark Steyn or PJ O'Rourke? Seriously? There are lots of political cartoonists, writers and the like who can skewer the president without going birther, but I also know that you won't be able to point me to one. Meanwhile, Michael Ramirez tears him a new one almost daily.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Whatever.
    Whatever=I don't have an answer, but I'm not going to admit it.

    Quote Originally Posted by michaelsean View Post
    Where's the outrage over Keith's $10 million salary? It comes down to two 1%ers battling it out. The DUmp should hate both of them.
    No, they only hate our 1%ers. Their 1%ers are just fine.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Woodland Park, Colorado, United States
    Posts
    8,563
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Rush is self satire, if anything.

    Don't know the others but there is more than one political cartoonist that can skewer the President without descending into Kenyan Mau Mau cliche.

    Whatever.
    And this is why your opinion carries so little weight. Not only are you wrong 99% of the time, you follow up with blatant dishonesty like this. Are you seriously convinced that Rush is merely "Satire" or is he THE MOST LISTENED TO AND INFLUENTIAL talk show host ever?

    I personally believe this is your lame attempt to minimize the devastating damage Rush does to Libertardians on a daily basis.
    Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil.
    C. S. Lewis
    Do not ever say that the desire to "do good" by force is a good motive. Neither power-lust nor stupidity are good motives. (Are you listening Barry)?:mad:
    Ayn Rand
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Proof of this is the string of expensive post-Iraq antiwar movies that tanked, one after the other, and yet the studios kept churning them out. Meanwhile, movies that showed us in a good, or even less evil light, like The Kingdom, did far better, but were not emulated.
    Didn't The Hurt Locker win the Academy Award for best picture?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    Best Bounty Hunter in the Forums fettpett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southwest Michigan (in Exile)
    Posts
    8,757
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Didn't The Hurt Locker win the Academy Award for best picture?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...he_Hurt_Locker

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hurt_Locker
    Summit Entertainment took The Hurt Locker wider to more than 200 screens on July 24, 2009 and more than 500 screens on July 31, 2009. As of March 21, 2010, the film grossed $40,016,144 against its $15 million production budget, and the domestic total of $16,400,000 places it at number 117 of all films released in the U.S. in 2009.[1]

    According to the Los Angeles Times, The Hurt Locker performed better than most recent dramas about Middle East conflict. The film outperformed all other Iraq-war-themed films such as In the Valley of Elah (2007), Stop-Loss (2008) and Afghanistan-themed Lions for Lambs (2007)
    It didn't bomb
    Last edited by fettpett; 02-07-2012 at 04:41 PM.
    "Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings..." Patrick Henry
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    Senior Member Apache's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Tree rats are watching you
    Posts
    6,733
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Didn't The Hurt Locker win the Academy Award for best picture?
    Oh yes, the Academy Awards really takes into account what a good movie is...
    Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.
    Ronald Reagan

    We could say they are spending like drunken sailors. That would be unfair to drunken sailors, they're spending their OWN money.
    Ronald Reagan

    R.I.P. Crockspot
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Didn't The Hurt Locker win the Academy Award for best picture?
    I didn't say that it didn't. What I said was that it tanked at the box office. It grossed $12,647,089 in the US. It's budget was about $11 million, and that doesn't include distribution or advertising costs.

    The decision to make the Hurt Locker made no financial sense. Every previous anti-Iraq War movie had lost money, in some cases, spectacularly so, and it's not like the director or cast indicated any hope of reversing that trend. The other antiwar movies had Tom Cruise, Tommy Lee Jones and a host of other big names, but still tanked, and the Hurt Locker was a cast of relative unknowns. Redacted was directed by Brian DePalma, and it sank like a stone, and De Palma's movies have usually made money, while Bigelow's track record as a director is uneven, at best. Bigelow's only commercial success was Point Break. Near Dark is a great action movie, but Strange Days is an incomprehensible muddle, and even with Cameron's name attached, it lost money. Again, not exactly an indicator of financial success.

    From an artistic point of view, the movie is utter crap. The characters are caricatures of Soldiers and the EOD procedures are utter BS, but they serve to make the lead look like an idiotic adrenaline junkie. It's a run of the mill antiwar flick, with an obscure cast, over the top performances and an unlikely plot.

    So, why would a studio put money into a movie whose genre had already demonstrated no box office appeal, with a director whose movies almost always lose money? And how did the lowest grossing movie ever to win best picture become the darling of the Academy Awards crowd in the first place?
    Oh, yes it did. In order for a movie to make money, it has to generate at least four times its production budget. Half of the gross for any movie is taken by the theaters at the box office. Half of what is left goes to the distributors. That leaves one-fourth of the gross for the production company/studio. The movie had a production budget of $11 million, which means that its break-even point was $44 million. IMDB had its domestic gross at $12,647,089, so the studio got back roughly $3.15 million on an $11 million investment.

    The irony of making a box office bomb about a bomb-disposal crew speaks for itself.
    Last edited by Odysseus; 02-07-2012 at 05:37 PM.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #28  
    Power CUer FlaGator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    The Swamps of N. Florida
    Posts
    22,179
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Didn't The Hurt Locker win the Academy Award for best picture?
    The Hurt Locker costs $15,000,000 to make and took in, according to www.boxofficemojo.com a lifetime domestic amount of $17,017,811. Not a resounding success. It's foreign take was $32,212,961 which is the only thing that keep the picture from being classified as a failure.

    I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.
    C. S. Lewis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #29  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,639
    Quote Originally Posted by FlaGator View Post
    The Hurt Locker costs $15,000,000 to make and took in, according to www.boxofficemojo.com a lifetime domestic amount of $17,017,811. Not a resounding success. It's foreign take was $32,212,961 which is the only thing that keep the picture from being classified as a failure.
    The IMDB numbers vary a bit, but it was still a loser. The boxofficemojo total gross was $49,230,772. The theaters got half, and the distributors got half again. At most, the studio got back $12.5 million on a $15 million investment, which means that they lost $2.5 million. That's a failure. Now, compared to some of the other antiwar movies that did just as badly (or worse), it might have been less of a failure, but being the least catastrophic failure in the genre isn't exactly something to crow about.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #30  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,787
    Ah. I see the disconnect. If it isn't The Green Berets, it is "anti-war."
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •