Posted by: brody9311
Posting time: 4.9 years ago on 1/12/2016 5:33:00 PM
Last edit time: never edited.
Archived on: 2/12/2017 1:51:00 AM
Views: 538
SCP: 7
7 upvotes, 0 downvotes (100% upvoted it)
~2 user(s) here now
The sub for anything movie-related, from blockbuster superhero flicks to tiny foreign indies.
Please use spoiler tags!
Please abide by the voat sitewide rules: 1. No linking to content that's illegal in the US, including movies under copyright. We have a zero-tolerance policy for this type of spam. If you post these links you will be banned. 2. Max of 1 out of every 5 links you submit can be to content you are associated with.
Feedback and Suggestions Thread
Related subs: /v/trailers /v/truefilm /v/horror /v/tv
NSFW: No Authorized: No Anon: No Private: No Type: Default
Content violates spam guidelines
Content contains or links to content that is illegal
Content contains personal information that relates to a Voat users real world or online identity
Content or User violates User Agreement
Hi, it looks like you're new. Welcome to Voat!
Voat is a censorship-free community platform where content is submitted, organized, moderated and voted on (ranked) by the users.
Archived World War Z Sequel Loses Director (ign.com)
submitted 4.9 years ago by brody9311
view the rest of the comments →
[–] rlaptop7 0 points 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) 4.9 years ago
There is a equation that some hollywood types use for deciding if there should be a sequel.
If the original makes X dollars, then the sequel will make at least 0.6X dollars or whatever.
If 0.6X makes money, then a sequel can happen.
Not that this is a good idea, mind you.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] rlaptop7 ago
There is a equation that some hollywood types use for deciding if there should be a sequel.
If the original makes X dollars, then the sequel will make at least 0.6X dollars or whatever.
If 0.6X makes money, then a sequel can happen.
Not that this is a good idea, mind you.