MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Posted Wednesday, December 22nd, 2004 - 17 Comments »

Sony Summer Dates

The Lords Of Dogtown -  6/10
Fun With Dick and Jane – 6/24
Bewitched – 7/8
Stealth – 7/29
Deuce Bigalow: European Gigalow – 8/12

17 Comments »

17 Responses to “Sony Summer Dates”

  1. teambanzai says:
    December 22, 2004 at 3:49 pm

    Is the Lords of Dogtown really necessary after the excellent documentary from last year?
    Fun with Dick and Jane, again necessary? I’m not a big Jim Carrey fan, however on the upside Judd Apatow. Hmmmm.
    Bewitched, could Will Ferrell be due for a dud? I’m not sure if I want to see this one.
    Stealth, I haven’t seen Jerry Bruckheimer’s name anywhere near this and I do like action movies plus W.D. Richter and Rob Cohen I might have to give this one a look.
    Deuce Bigalow, um well the first one was funny.

  2. JimmyConway75 says:
    December 22, 2004 at 7:36 pm

    Between the Hot Button rundown of summer releases and the Hot Blog updates with additional info…all I can say is…I can’t wait to hear what the indies and the dependents are offering. With the *possible* exception of the redundant Dogtown, that Sony slate looks fairly atrocious.

  3. Mark says:
    December 22, 2004 at 7:51 pm

    I’ll give Dogtown a try because the docu was pretty damn good.

  4. Josh Massey says:
    December 23, 2004 at 7:21 am

    I think Will Ferrell already had his dud – “Anchorman.” Not only was it not that funny, but while I’m sure it made a profit, it should have done far more box office than it did.

  5. bicycle bob says:
    December 23, 2004 at 8:36 am

    since when is a comedy that cost 26 million to make and grossed over a 100 mill worldwide and will probably double that on video, considered a dud?
    get ur head out of ur arse

  6. Stella's Boy says:
    December 23, 2004 at 11:23 am

    bicycle bob, did Anchorman really cost only $26 million to make? I remember reading that the budget was around $50 million or so. And I do think its domestic box office was disappointing. No one really expected Dodgeball to make more money here. But, I agree, it certainly wasn’t a dud.

  7. bicycle bob says:
    December 23, 2004 at 2:41 pm

    don’t have the exact figures (maybe david can help) but i did read and saw the production logs and it said 26 million for anchorman. which would mean a solid hit. especially with the dvd sales coming up.

  8. Martin says:
    December 23, 2004 at 5:48 pm

    Anchorman looked like a disappointment in comparison to Dodgeball, but the movie still did something like $85 million. I really doubt that when Dreamworks signed on they expected to do even that much. Plus a ton more on DVD. Anchorman is the sort of movie that comes just BEFORE a dud. I never saw it, but it did a solid $85 mill on Ferrell’s name alone. Word of mouth was not so great, which down the line hurts his next film.

  9. Mark says:
    December 25, 2004 at 11:26 am

    What word of mouth? All I hear is how great it was. Its not made for people over 50. Come on now. Even Pep’s Mom liked it.

  10. PeppersDad says:
    December 25, 2004 at 12:37 pm

    At least my mom didn’t drop me on my head like yours did to you. Intentionally. 75 times.

  11. Joe Leydon says:
    December 25, 2004 at 4:53 pm

    Hmmm. Not much Christmas spirit in THIS area.

  12. Blue Stealer says:
    December 25, 2004 at 5:47 pm

    Pepper, you are the most bitter person to post on this site. On every subject. No every person. Maybe you need to wake up on the right side of the bed or get laid. Would that help your disposition?

  13. PeppersDad says:
    December 25, 2004 at 5:54 pm

    Really sorry about my part in it. It’s just that when I checked in earlier, I saw that Mark woke up this cheery morning and, in the spirit of the holidays, took it upon himself to goad me all over this website.

  14. PeppersDad says:
    December 25, 2004 at 6:38 pm

    Blue Stealer -
    Thanks for your generous advice but, really, I’m not feeling bitter at all. Maybe just a little tired because, in fact, I did get laid last night. Four times. And she was soooooo good! Please thank your mother for me.

  15. Joe Leydon says:
    December 25, 2004 at 9:16 pm

    Pepper: Lay off the mother remarks. You’re better than that.

  16. PeppersDad says:
    December 25, 2004 at 9:33 pm

    You’re right, Joe, and much appreciated. I promise: No more mother retorts.

  17. Mark says:
    December 25, 2004 at 11:38 pm

    Don’t worry about Pepper. Its her time of the month.

Leave a Reply

The Hot Blog

Comments Most Recent Archives

lazarus on: Don Draper: Critic

Jermsguy on: Review: Man of Steel (spoilers)

leahnz on: Don Draper: Critic

Keil S. on: Don Draper: Critic

Joe Leydon on: Don Draper: Critic

Keil S. on: Don Draper: Critic

christian on: Don Draper: Critic

movieman on: Don Draper: Critic

movieman on: Don Draper: Critic

palmtree on: Don Draper: Critic

Quote Unquotesee all »

“I don’t really think, Sean, that you need to know about my various sexual liaisons. Or that anyone else needs to. I did write about them. I filled a hundred pages of Moleskine notebooks with my one-night stands, my affairs. But I decided they didn’t belong in a professional memoir. First of all, these are real people we’re talking about. Many of them were enjoyable. Some were abject failures. My wife said to me when she read the pages, ‘Of what purpose is this in a memoir? Of what purpose is this other than to titillate?’ The point is, I never see them. It’s because I have nothing in common with them, frankly. And probably didn’t at the time. I could not provide a sensible reason why I married these women. The thing is, in the case of my marriages, it takes two people to fuck up a marriage. It wasn’t simply the fault of these women that I lost interest in them and realised they were insignificant relationships. Which is how I look at them right now–as being insignificant. I see them as blips.”
~ William Friedkin On Cutting Interviewers Off At The Sass

“I have to imagine from Mr. Spielberg’s point of view, the paradigm shift in the 1970s was just the new “normal,” a “halcyon era” from which we are straying in the 21st century–because theatrical exhibition is tenuous (as it has been since the 1940s), the home video market has dried up and people are watching pirated movies on their phone. Spielberg’s coming-of-age era was for him the halcyon period that the 21st century “implosion” will cause to go “crashing into the ground.” But he is wrong. The market for movies is actually diverse and highly segmented–although from the top-down movie industry vantage point and media punditry you would not think this to be true.  Would we really mourn for Mr. Spielberg or ourselves if Lincoln would have been made for cable or had played on public television?  Is it bad for humanity that cable television is creating wonderful, resonant stories in long-form series that people want to watch at home on TV (or streamed onto their computer)? I don’t think so, but it is a paradigm shift and it might affect people’s theatrical moviegoing habits. Televisions in people’s homes have had that effect for seven decades–it is not a new phenomenon. As Art House cinema impresarios we need to focus on what WE can do at our theaters and in our communities. It is not productive for us to fret over what pundits say or about what well-meaning filmmakers like the Stevens–Spielberg and Soderbergh–say. We should fret about what we can do in our communities. What we can do to support filmmakers.”
~ From A Response By Russ Collins, CEO, Michigan Theater – Ann Arbor And Director, Art House Convergence, To Mr. Spielberg