* denotes a recently updated blog
Send e-mail tips to us:
Section Editor: Paul Hooson
Contributors: Kevin, Adam Stone, Tracey Coyle
All original content copyright © 2003-2009 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark. Wizbang Pop™ is a trademark of Wizbang®, LLC.
Powered by Movable Type 3.35
Hosting by ServInt
Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.
Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.
Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.
Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.
Comments (3)
Blades of Glory had a $61 m... (Below threshold)1. Posted by jpm100 | April 15, 2007 7:43 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Blades of Glory had a $61 million dollar budget?
1. Posted by jpm100 | April 15, 2007 7:43 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 15, 2007 19:43
2. Posted by Darby | April 16, 2007 1:20 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Aside from a few really poor special effects shots.... Bad CGI mostly. I thought Pathfinder was an excellent movie. That it's doing poorly doesn't surprise me... 300 is a hard act to follow.
2. Posted by Darby | April 16, 2007 1:20 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 16, 2007 01:20
3. Posted by phreshone | April 16, 2007 10:58 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I was interested to see how weak Aqua Teen Hunger Force performed (as expected for a niche movie), and then I noticed that it had a relatively limited release, so on a per screen basis it did fairly well considering its limited appeal.
It will be interesting to watch if they keep the release more limited but longer run, giving the movie goer a chance to see a movie before yanking it. Also will they be smart enough to announce a late DVD release date to encourage the 14-30 year old set (stoners) to see it (multiple times) in the theatres instead of waiting buy it
3. Posted by phreshone | April 16, 2007 10:58 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 16, 2007 10:58