You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
I thought the trick was to obfuscate obscene profits by artificially raising the costs of production, by "paying themselves" through shell companies— to imply it's more than the total revenue, then bankrupting those companies with further costs as they funnel the money back to their main accounts.
Thus avoids pesky things like taxes, and further increases profits by shorting stocks and other neat accounting wizardry. Think: the Harry Potter movies; on paper they lost money, but we all know they've made billions.
They have nothing to gain by intentionally tanking a movie; aside from extending their trademark rights and maintaining licencing arrangements, or something like that. Which, actually, could totally be it.
They have nothing to gain by intentionally tanking a movie; aside from extending their trademark rights and maintaining licencing arrangements, or something like that. Which, actually, could totally be it.
While I don't necessarily think it was intentionally tanked, I'd say that Fantastic Four (2015) happened because 20th Century Fox just wanted to extend their ownership of the rights and didn't care about the quality of the movie at all.
That's what I meant; "intentional" in the sense of a willful lack of any effort beyond "necessary". Sci-fi movies like these are essentially CGI boner-fests; simply cheaping out on the render-farm server time could be seen as intentional sabotage.
They hired the worst team possible to make this movie; really, no one should be surprised over the outcome.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] TheTrigger 0 points 7 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago
I thought the trick was to obfuscate obscene profits by artificially raising the costs of production, by "paying themselves" through shell companies— to imply it's more than the total revenue, then bankrupting those companies with further costs as they funnel the money back to their main accounts.
Thus avoids pesky things like taxes, and further increases profits by shorting stocks and other neat accounting wizardry. Think: the Harry Potter movies; on paper they lost money, but we all know they've made billions.
They have nothing to gain by intentionally tanking a movie; aside from extending their trademark rights and maintaining licencing arrangements, or something like that. Which, actually, could totally be it.
[–] fricknmaniac 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
While I don't necessarily think it was intentionally tanked, I'd say that Fantastic Four (2015) happened because 20th Century Fox just wanted to extend their ownership of the rights and didn't care about the quality of the movie at all.
[–] TheTrigger 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
That's what I meant; "intentional" in the sense of a willful lack of any effort beyond "necessary". Sci-fi movies like these are essentially CGI boner-fests; simply cheaping out on the render-farm server time could be seen as intentional sabotage.
They hired the worst team possible to make this movie; really, no one should be surprised over the outcome.