Re: Gigli: From Theater to DVD Record?

>Everybody knew that _Gigli_ would be a bad movie, but who would have
>guessed that it would be excruciatingly-awful? The reviews for _Gigli_
>are currently 98% bad. This movie could set the speed record for the
>quickest theatrical release window of all time and end up on DVD within
>a few weeks.

Box office performance doesn't have anything to do with DVD release dates...if
it did, the $15 million grossing Solaris would have been out in December, but
it took longer than most movies to get to dvd.

Phil7101

"Phil7101" <6> wrote in message
news:...
> >Everybody knew that _Gigli_ would be a bad movie, but who would
> >have guessed that it would be excruciatingly-awful? The reviews
> >for _Gigli_ are currently 98% bad. This movie could set the speed
> >record for the quickest theatrical release window of all time and
> >end up on DVD within a few weeks.
>
> Box office performance doesn't have anything to do with DVD
> release dates...if it did, the $15 million grossing Solaris would
> have been out in December, but it took longer than most movies
> to get to dvd.


Considering that Affleck and Lopez each got $12 Million plus a
percentage of the "profits", _Gigli_ will never recover its production
costs at the box office. I would think that Sony Pictures might want to
get the DVD out as soon as possible in an attempt to recover as least
some of the costs of this bomb.

In its first two days, _Gigli_ was playing in 2215 theaters and took in
less than $3 Million -- actually attracting fewer patrons on Saturday
than it did on Friday:

Date (days) Rank Gross* Theaters Avg. Total*

Aug 2 2003 (2) 8 $1.349 -9% 2215 $609 $2.831
Aug 1 2003 (1) 7 $1.482 2215 $669 $1.482

Some multiplexes are showing _Gigli_ to its very few customers, on TWO
screens, while turning away customers for _Pirates of the Caribbean_ and
_Seabiscuit_. What a waste!

_Gigli_ got only 1.5 stars on the Internet Movie Database. Madonna's
horrible _Swept Away_ got 3.8 stars, so this illustrates the magnitude
of awfulness that this piece of **** must contain.

http://us.imdb.com/Details?0299930

I'm looking for Jennifer Lopez to dump Ben Affleck before the DVD comes
out. She can't afford to be associated with someone who can't act, can't
choose a good script and who's movies flop as badly as _Gigli_ has done.

http://www.leesmovieinfo.net/wbotitle.php?t=1999

Scot Gardner

Scot Gardner wrote:

> I'm looking for Jennifer Lopez to dump Ben Affleck before the DVD comes
> out. She can't afford to be associated with someone who can't act, can't
> choose a good script and who's movies flop as badly as _Gigli_ has done.
>
> http://www.leesmovieinfo.net/wbotitle.php?t=1999

Didn't Jlo's Maid in Manhatten do fairly poorly ? I had no interest in
seeing this, but two people I know who saw it, said it was really bad.


--
At the source of every error which is blamed on the
computer you will find at least two human errors,
including the error of blaming it on the computer.
--
Thats not funny!
---
Signature generated by SillySigz!
http://www.sturec.com/sillysigz.shtml

Peter

"Peter" <> wrote in message
news:bgk1kc$qgq$...

<<Didn't Jlo's Maid in Manhatten do fairly poorly ? I had no interest in
seeing this, but two people I know who saw it, said it was really bad.>>


There are bad movies, and there are BAD, BAD, BAD, BAD movies.

Apparently, _Maid in Manhattan_ falls under the first classification and
_Gigli_ falls under the second.

Scot Gardner

"Scot Gardner" <> writes:

>"Phil7101" <6> wrote in message
>news:...
>> >Everybody knew that _Gigli_ would be a bad movie, but who would
>> >have guessed that it would be excruciatingly-awful? The reviews
>> >for _Gigli_ are currently 98% bad. This movie could set the speed
>> >record for the quickest theatrical release window of all time and
>> >end up on DVD within a few weeks.
>>
>> Box office performance doesn't have anything to do with DVD
>> release dates...if it did, the $15 million grossing Solaris would
>> have been out in December, but it took longer than most movies
>> to get to dvd.


>Considering that Affleck and Lopez each got $12 Million plus a
>percentage of the "profits",

Doesn't this mean that they will end up owing the studio money?
--
See the documented lies of Pastor Frank: http://tinyurl.com/6009
Saddam's name coded in a famous and old book: http://tinyurl.com/6mr4
Back To The Future DVD Warning: http://tinyurl.com/6007
d a r k s t a r @ i g l o u . c o m | atheist #29

Keenan Clay Wilkie