User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.8763 seconds
40 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Troma time! With Fleishaker as Jeremy Brown!
pardon me?
is this a common expression I've never heard?
Look, I understand that the book doesn't seem like it would be filmable, but it wouldn't have gotten as far as it did if someone didn't have a fairly inspired idea on how to translate it. Soderbergh and Pitt aren't just a couple of nobodies in the industry--they're pretty talented people who know what they're doing with a movie.
Keep in mind that anything we've heard about this movie is coming from the entertainment media, not generally known for its journalistic integrity.
I can see the film being more about the story of the book, the characters, and the phenomena surrounding Beane and sabermetrics, rather than just the book's content on screen.
pardon me?
is this a common expression I've never heard?
I think it was a typo. They didn't mean ankle, they meant cankle.
It's common only in Variety.
They meant Ankiel.
For shame, Ted, this is a family website.
Worked okay for the Muppets. But like Muppet Babies, it should be a cartoon, and it should focus on sabermetricians, with animated Bill James in the Kermit role, animated Rob Neyer as Scooter, etc. (There is, obviously, no Miss Piggy.)
Nice!
Of course not. They're not selling jeans.
LABaWaHoo is the obvious go-to guy on this sort of thing, but as he and I are likely the only two that actually do read Daily Variety (Variety is the NYC one, to note) while I agree this is likely to get picked up in turnaround with Columbia staying in at least a limited financing role, the 98% number presented here is wishcasting.
Soderbergh is not without smirches on his resume (whatever you think of all that was done to Out of Sight, it is in the end about money, and that isn't the only one), and Pitt is not a guaranteed draw, even with a name director. Ask Marty Brest and Meet Joe Black, though by all accounts that was square in Brest's love affair with his 3-hour cut, even in the face of critics (DV's own Peter Bart screened it before release and told him to cut an hour) noting otherwise.
Long story short? It was always intended as a quirky fall movie, and was perfect for it. Get Shorty had succeeded there, there was no reason to think OoS wouldn't. Then, Universal decided at almost literally the last moment to make it a summer movie. Keep in mind this was summer '98. Armageddon, Godzilla, X-Files, Saving Private Ryan...this was the morass that Universal, IIRC lacking any sort of summer flick, threw OoS into with no warning and zero promotion.
(EDIT) Lethal Weapon 4, too. And Rush Hour.
(EDIT2) And Deep Impact. Truman Show. Take out Rush Hour, that was fall.
Projected Summer 1998 Grosses
Out of Sight debuted 6/26. A film that would depend, even in fall, on a decent opening and solid word-of-mouth (this was 1998, before the industry had completely killed that concept like they have now), had 4 days. It opened with Dr. DoLittle, a week after X-Files and Mulan had opened, and then 4 days later: Armageddon. 9 days later, Lethal Weapon 4.
I have an abnormal interest in the business end of movies and TV, I know. First-time visitors to my place almost invariably note that in a very small apartment there are 4 bookshelves in the living room, and most then note one of two things: the number of baseball books, or the number of books on Hollywood business. I've got way more baseball books, of course, but it's probably much more common to run into someone with a bunch of those than someone with three different books about talent agencies (Lew Wasserman bio, a William Morris agency history, something else I'm forgetting) or four different studio histories.
So I may be in the minority, but Daily Variety is a hell of a read. Really, it's not remotely unlike following sports, though without a favorite team (I guess one could "root" for one studio or another, though why would be a question.) It's year-round, it has the same dramas, it has the same black and white outcome that doesn't necessarily reflect the best 'team' or who made the best decisions. It's its own thing, but it has the same draw, for me.
SODERBERGH: What do you mean Amy?
AP: Well, you know I wasn't exactly pumped about the animated Bill James...
SS: C'mon, Roger Rabbit was awesome!
AP: but where did the robots come from?
SS: They're symbolic.
AP: Symbolic?
SS: Sure ... steroids, y'know.
AP: Excuse me?
SS: Yeah, see, they look like cars and planes and stuff but then they, oh I dunno, they kinda "transform" into these giant baseball players.
AP: That sound familiar to you at all?
SS: No ... it's groundbreaking. They've never seen stuff like that at Cannes.
AP: And the evil computer?
SS: Numbers are taking over baseball ... it's like HAL in 2001.
AP: And this new role for Rob Schneider ...
SS: Creative license. I combined David Forst, Grady Fuson, and Nick Swisher into one role.
AP: But Rob Schneider?
SS: He's a comic genius!!
AP: Steven, I think you've been working a little too hard lately ...
And "torpid mitting" means weak audience response.
I thought "torpid mitting" referred to Derek Jeter.
Anne Thompson: "She's asserting her power to just say no....Pascal can afford to let this movie go because it was always a risky play, and she clearly isn't willing to take a gamble right now unless she believes in it."
David Poland: "I don't have an answer. But I am 98% sure that the simplified line being floated out there that Amy Pascal was either asserting herself or just couldn't find it in her heart to back the script changes is not the full story."
thompson writes for variety, poland has an industry blog.
??
You're gonna have to learn that Variety speak!
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main