6 ms·
Wow - Howard's character is arguably more important to the story than Phoenix's. Was he that big of a draw back then to be able to demand so much more pay? We
by wyldfire 3y ago
Wow - Howard's character is arguably more important to the story than Phoenix's. Was he that big of a draw back then to be able to demand so much more pay? Well - he had probably been in "Gladiator" just prior, so I guess he was a hot commodity. It looks like William Hurt, Sigourney Weaver, Adrien Brody, Brendan Gleeson all got paid pretty well. The movie made money despite not finding favor with critics.
> Ebert named the film the tenth worst film of 2004 and subsequently put it on his "Most Hated" list.
I dunno, I enjoyed it. I'm a simple man.
- bazoom42 3y agoActors get paid for their ability to draw an audience, which largely depends on the success of their previous work. Howard was a nobody, but probaly got paid a lot better for her next movie, since this movie was a success.
- karma_fountain 3y agoThis was Bryce Dallas Howard's first film so it was her big break, before that she had only done theater. Hopefully she got a percentage of the profit and some extra money for promoting the film. Edit: Also worth noting that her father is Ron Howard so she probably didn't need the money.
- cm2187 3y agoOn the other hand he also put Usual Suspects on that list (he argues the plot is too complicated). Can't disagree more.
- getlawgdon 3y agoI enjoyed it also. Memorable and unique.
- woobar 3y agoIt was also one of the first movies for Jesse Eisenberg, but I cannot find his character (Jamison) in the list. I wonder if it was renamed during shooting. There is a small part for Joseph ($8K total), but there is no character with this name in the final cast.
- finikytou 3y agoits one of my favorite modern movies. everything is done brillantly and the cinematography is probably shyamalan's best
- i80and 3y agoEbert's critique isn't wrong IMO, but I think misses the bigger picture about what did work well in the film
- devin 3y agoI recently learned that Ebert gave a positive review to Con Air.
- unsupp0rted 3y agoIf a movie isn't entertaining, then it's bad. If a movie is at least entertaining, then it's good.
- bigmattystyles 3y agoAnd for what con air was, he was right.
- wozniacki 3y agoFrom what I have learned about this whole show business / movie business / music business game as played at least in N. America and U.K. (?), the whole thing is pretty rigged and works on a "handshake" basis for the lack of a more loftier term. Hollywood , for the sheer amount of global power it wields, is amazing when you think about how its run like a company town & how little scrutiny it gets overall. I highly recommend watching the HBO series, Vinyl (2016) about a record executive from the 1970s & the music business then. All those radio hits - that were hit and the ones that werent - you've always scratched your head about make a lot more sense when you understand the inner workings. [1] Vinyl (2016) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3186130/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3186130/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinyl_(TV_series) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinyl_(TV_series)
- Retric 3y agoMovie goers buy individual tickets which makes a huge difference vs radio. Unpopular movies get booted from theaters very quickly where unpopular songs can stick around on the radio indefinitely. And it doesn’t matter how connected you are, movie flops quickly kill careers.
- verticalscaler 3y agoStop this shade throwing at a great work of cinema or the bunny gets it. Con Air is a timeless classic and he was totally right.
- yuppiepuppie 3y agoThe pay gap in the star cast is huge for Howard. Was she just starting her career at this point?
- wmf 3y agoYes, it looks like this was her first or second notable role.
- wharvle 3y agoYeah, sixth film credit… but the second one for which her character had a name. And that other film appears to have had a box office under $1.4m, with a collection of basically nobody notable attached, including the director.
- dylan604 3y agoI laugh at IMDB listings with the heavy (uncredited) listings in people's credits. Why not just tell the truth with listing the credit as Extra?
- KETHERCORTEX 3y agoProbably because "Uncredited" signifies the absence in credits sequence(s) in general for crew and staff, while the term "Extra" applies just to actors.
- ekianjo 3y ago[flagged]
- nox101 3y agoDo you have some evidence he was paid or just making stuff up? AFAICT he was a pretty honest reviewer giving his own opinions. People have different tastes. Like some people like stinky tofu and others find it disgusting. Some people like The Village and some don't. My sister likes everything, for example all episodes of Star Wars, 1 though 9. Whereas I only like 4,5,6 and find the rest to be horrible. She liked the latest "Haunted Mansion" so I watched and found it atrocious.
- ekianjo 3y ago> Do you have some evidence he was paid or just making stuff up? It's fairly easy to corrupt a single person (this happens everyday, everywhere) and even if he was never paid, he probably had people he liked in the industry that he would not dare to criticize because, you know, they were friends. I'll trust review aggregators any day over a single person's opinion.
- bazoom42 3y agoAggregators can be gamed.
- nytesky 3y agoSeriously, wasn’t the RT manipulation all over the news? https://www.vulture.com/article/rotten-tomatoes-movie-rating.html https://www.vulture.com/article/rotten-tomatoes-movie-rating...
- ekianjo 3y agoits MUCH easier to corrupt a single person. which is why individual corruption is thriving
- bazoom42 3y ago
- huytersd 3y agoI’m a simple man too. Ebert is like Punxsutawney Phil to me. He’s right about 30% of the time.
- rvbissell 3y agoSame. Maybe I was a naive young adult, but I totally did not anticipate the twist in that plot. So in that regard I felt like I got my money's worth.
- echelon 3y ago"Signs" was one of my favorite films of the 2000s, if you don't nitpick about the water. Suspenseful, well acted, leaves you guessing, eager for more. Suffice to say, I eagerly anticipated "The Village" from the moment the first trailer dropped. The costumes looked cool. The colors, the creatures, the mood and the mystery. I don't think I've ever left a theater quite so disappointed. The twist ruined what had been a magical experience for the better half of the film. I wanted the magic to endure, but I got slapped with a bad episode of "The Outer Limits". Shyamalan remains a fantastic filmmaker for his hits, but this one hurt me. I don't wait for films anymore.
- grecy 3y agoI felt exactly the same about signs, and really loved the village. I don’t really like the world we’ve built, and I fantasize about leaving it behind. That’s a major reason I lived in the Yukon for years (many people living more like the village than outside it) These people (the village founders) had an idea and went for it. I really like that.
- zeroonetwothree 3y agoSigns is the worst movie I’ve ever seen. The plot makes no sense and it’s not like it has good character development or dialogue so that leaves nothing.
- smazga 3y agoI'm a fan of the "aliens are demons" and "the water is holy" (you know, because he's a priest) interpretation. It's a stretch, but makes the water fit into the story better (in my opinion).
- BizarroLand 3y agoYep. Signs was the movie that revealed to me my irrational fear of aliens walking in the distance for uncertain purpose. Not joking, I am a big strong man but I was holding onto my girlfriend and shaking like a leaf during that movie. Then the water scene happens and ruined the whole movie for me. But I still get hairs standing up on the back of my neck if I think too long and hard about 7' tall aliens walking sideways in the distance. (Actually getting creeped out just typing this out). I love it that there is a thought that can disturb me. I don't know where it comes from and I can't exactly control it. Anyway, same thing with the Village. Great mood. Great cinematography. Great acting. Supernatural horror ominous period piece. So much well crafted build up that ended with an unfunny rehash of the ending of Monty Python's Holy Grail. Total cop out to the rest of the story. Unforgivable.