Mon Dec 17, 2012 9:43 am
Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:17 am
HoneyTalkNelson wrote:In the new Hopkins film, the statement is made, supposedly by Hitchcock to the head of Paramount, that "the last five Martin and Lewis pictures lost money."
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Before this myth becomes fact, I present the following.
Martin and Lewis were the sixth top grossing motion picture stars in 1956, and the seventh top grossing stars in 1955.
Here is where their movies ranked on the top 100 grossing films for each year, according to Daily Variety:
THREE RING CIRCUS - #24, $4,000,000
YOU'RE NEVER TOO YOUNG - #28, $3,400,000
ARTISTS AND MODELS - #21, $3,800,000
PARDNERS - #24, $3,600,000
HOLLYWOOD OR BUST - #23, $3,300,000
As you can see, they ranked among the top third-grossing films for each year.
I HATE mis-information like this!
Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:28 am
Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:09 am
HoneyTalkNelson wrote:ARTISTS AND MODELS was the most lavish M&L production and that was budgeted at roughly 1.5 million.
Mon Dec 31, 2012 12:12 pm
HoneyTalkNelson wrote:In the new Hopkins film, the statement is made, supposedly by Hitchcock to the head of Paramount, that "the last five Martin and Lewis pictures lost money."
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Before this myth becomes fact, I present the following.
Martin and Lewis were the sixth top grossing motion picture stars in 1956, and the seventh top grossing stars in 1955.
Here is where their movies ranked on the top 100 grossing films for each year, according to Daily Variety:
THREE RING CIRCUS - #24, $4,000,000
YOU'RE NEVER TOO YOUNG - #28, $3,400,000
ARTISTS AND MODELS - #21, $3,800,000
PARDNERS - #24, $3,600,000
HOLLYWOOD OR BUST - #23, $3,300,000
As you can see, they ranked among the top third-grossing films for each year.
I HATE mis-information like this!
promiseland wrote:What were the investments for each of these? This could tell another story.
Todd McCarthy of The Hollywood Reporter ... said, "Hitchcock might be a work of fantasy and speculation as much as it is history and biography, but as an interpretation of a major talent's inner life and imagination, it's undeniably lively and provocative."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitchcock_(film)#Critical_response
Hosted by ElviCities