Well here is an early Christmas present: “Hollywood's holidays are off to a dreadful start: Fewer people went to the movies the last two weekends than during the box-office hush that followed the Sept. 11 attacks 10 years ago. Domestic revenues tumbled to a 2011 low of about $77 million this weekend, when the star-filled, holiday-themed romance "New Year's Eve" debuted at No. 1 with a weak $13.7 million, according to studio estimates Sunday.” The crap Hollywood has been putting out for decades is akin to keeping the shelves stocked in retail stores —— except that Hollywood must constantly supply new merchandise in order to bring the customers in. In other words Hollywood cannot keep the shelves stocked with Corn Flakes the way a supermarket does. Keeping as many movie theaters open as possible is the bottom line for movie makers. Once ticket sales fall below a certain point theaters must close. The last big wave of closings saw the birth of the multiplex; more movie screens in much smaller theaters. The next big wave will bring a huge reduction in movie screens. That’s why Hollywood will do whatever it takes to halt a prolonged slide in attendance. If falling ticket sales is Hollywood’s nightmare an ever-shrinking audience size is the Frankenstein monster: “Divided by this year's average ticket price of $7.96, the combined $158 million haul means only an estimated 19.8 million people went to the movies the last two weekends.” The 19.8 million number means that approximately 6 percent of adult Americans go to movie theaters. That’s not impressive. Even if you add a point or two to the 6 percent it is the same people who go to movie theaters time and time again; i.e., movie theaters are not attracting new customers let alone attracting a new generation of movie fans. So Hollywood must rely on the audience it has to keep theaters open. The question is: How many theater-goers are lost forever each time there is a sustained slump in ticket sales? Movie-goers are separate from people who rent DVDs, although I’m sure there is some overlapping. That makes it difficult to get an accurate count of Americans who are willing to pay for movies. How movies are funded is the best-kept secret in Hollywood? My common sense tells me that American taxpayers ultimately pay to produce movies although I admit I do not know how it is done? Very few in the movie industry earn millions —— that is earn enough to NOT have to work when they are between projects. The second best-kept secret in Hollywood is what do all of those actors, technicians, production people, etc., do when they are not working on a movie? Lucky actors find work on TV or the stage —— not necessarily Broadway. Many have, or get, tax dollar jobs in the welfare state structure when they are between movies. I know that some fairly well-known politically liberal, second-tier, actors hold down jobs in higher education. The politically unconnected must fend for themselves until they learn how the game is played. Movie making is a subculture within American society; nevertheless, there is a full-blown culture thriving within Hollywood’s subculture; a culture driven by politics, tax dollars, and advertising. Check the TAX DEDUCTIBLE advertising dollars spent in newspapers and on TV to see how intertwined Madison Avenue and Hollywood have become. Bailout is the government phrase used for Wall Street. Sellout is the apt government phrase for Madison Avenue. Note that Hussein is making a big deal over confirming his consumer protection czar, Richard Cordray: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/18/richard-cordray-elizabeth-warren-cfpb_n_902101.html Her’s a brief video of Elizabeth Warren before Hussein dumped her for Cordray: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPgDO--j7Sw&feature=player_embedded"]CNN: consumer protection czar Elizabeth Warren talks top priorities - YouTube[/ame] Take this to the bank: Warren or Cordray —— consumer protection does not include protection from Hollywood or Madison Avenue. Finally, I’ve searched in vain for a percentage breakdown of movie audiences. A breakdown by gender, age, and race. I never looked for an education breakdown because I already know that any adult who buys a movie ticket has to be pretty stupid irrespective of formal education. Dec 11, 3:30 PM EST Movie audiences shrink below post-Sept. 11 level By DAVID GERMAIN AP Movie Writer http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-12-11-15-30-22
Hollywood and the popular media in general have gone bonkers. I have noticed for instance, their seeming obsession with an 80s cheese flick called "Hunk" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093231/ later remade into "Bedazzled". But their Hunk speaks liberal and cherishes all fringe liberal causes. And anyone other than their Hunk is a fair game and susceptible to any form of caricaturization. For the media, it's all black and white, no grey area. You're either their hunk, or you flunk. It's some kind of Bushism - you're with us or against us.
Huh? Where did you notice this obsession? This is the first I've ever heard of this movie. Who told you the popular media was obsessed with it, and where did they get such evidence? Okay, I think I get what you're saying. You think Bush is like Hunk, in the way both received drooling fanboy adulation and messiah-like worship from their followers. Not having seen the movie, I don't know whether to fully agree with that comparison. I'll need to know more. For instance, after Hunk was gone, did Hunk's groupies later deny that they had had a massive mancrush on Hunk? You know, in the same way that most Republicans now deny how much they loved DearLeaderBush. And did Hunk's groupies later revise history and declare that it was really everyone other than themselves who were engaging in hero worship?
Who knew it would be a lone-wolf domestic terrorist?... DHS identified theaters as possible terror targets 23 July`12 - Warning came only weeks before attack in Colorado See also: Mass murder 'normal' in world without God 23 July`12 - Ray Comfort explains why the 'Joker' pulled the trigger
