2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

All league discussion for the currently in-play box office seasons.

Moderators: Buscemi, BarcaRulz, Geezer, W

User avatar
silversurfer19
John Rambo
Posts: 7726
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 3:34 pm
Location: pretty much the ass end of the universe

Re: 2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

Post by silversurfer19 »

numbersix wrote:Image
Further proof of the damaging effects of alcohol. That poor old man has literally shrunk with every sip. And so has his shirt.

User avatar
Chienfantome
Captain Jack Sparrow
Posts: 9967
Joined: May 29th, 2010, 4:22 am
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Re: 2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

Post by Chienfantome »

I hope Baby Surfer won't look like this ;)
Fluctuat nec mergitur

User avatar
Geezer
Axel Foley
Posts: 4967
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 11:22 am

Re: 2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

Post by Geezer »

Buscemi wrote:
Geezer wrote:
Buscemi wrote:
Also why did you have to invite Geezer, Shryke (or anyone else, for that matter)? Everything was going fine until you decided to create another 2009 disaster. Geezer is going to complain non-stop when he isn't getting his way and he'll strike down every single measure to improve the game so he can look good (just like he's doing right now).
Which of my points were invalid? I'm only trying to make logical suggestions to IMPROVE the game. If I were just trying to improve my odds of winning, My main argument wouldn't be for decreasing the number of rounds, but for making sure new players get slotted in the 2-7 spots in the draft. But as you recall, I was fully on board with randomizing the slot of new entrants. I'm merely trying to eliminate non-starters, and make the waiver wire more meaningful THROUGHOUT the year.
Reducing the rosters by four is a step back. There were more competition when we increased them (I actually felt guilty of winning 2010 by so much) and if we reduce them by four (instead of my original suggestion of one), things will just get really boring.

And the wavier wire is fine the way it should be: as an alternative for switching delayed titles and getting just-included titles. If we reduce titles and feature more titles on waivers, people will abuse the wire. Also by reducing titles, we get five competitors and ten also-rans instead of fifteen even-strength teams (another advantage of increasing rosters, as the lower picks did as well as the higher picks).

And you saying that late round picks aren't significant: do you think that W would have had the strength to pass me had he not picked up Chronicle in the 11th? And I wouldn't have been able to pass him have I not had the roster spot to replace a late round pick (13th, I think) with Act of Valor (a movie I would have never been able to get at with a roster of 10). Though of course, Banks passed me (and possibly W) with The Hunger Games but there's no way things would have become dramatic without those extra picks.
I understand it is a dead issue, but Buscemi you are SO off base with this one. You are failing to incorporate SIMPLE MATH. You are acting like additional teams doesn't change what will be taken in each round. You are acting as if the 11th round of an 11 player draft will yield the same films as the 11th round of a 15 player draft. In reality, Saying that Chronicle in the 11th helped W win is not a valid point, because that film in a 15 player draft would have gone in the 8th round. And you're point on Act of Valor simply proves my point, that these late round picks are insignificant and only exist as "bonus" roster spots for anyone to rush to grab a new movie without even thinking about it and drop those 2 million dollar limited picks that were never going to do anything anyway. No THINKING, no DECISION, Just grab as fast as you can, because you don't have to worry about whether or not its the right thing to do, it's simply a no-brainer. Go back and learn some basic math before acting as if 154 picks is the same thing as 180. If you want to keep the game similar, you should keep the number of films taken similar.

And you won because your top movie made 100 million more than ANYONE ELSE'S top movie. If that happens again, and it might, the league will be over just as fast no matter how many films we take. It's a matter of simple math, there's just aren't that many impact films to go around.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man. - The Dude

Aquamann2001
Fletch
Posts: 628
Joined: January 15th, 2010, 5:54 pm

Re: 2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

Post by Aquamann2001 »

I know i am a new player this year but wanted to give my opinion. I think the draft order should be determined randomly. Last years results have really nothing to do with this year. Its not like a sports keeper league. Its a new season everyone Should have equall chance at getting first pick.

User avatar
silversurfer19
John Rambo
Posts: 7726
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 3:34 pm
Location: pretty much the ass end of the universe

Re: 2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

Post by silversurfer19 »

I see where you're coming from, Aquamann, but we have been running it this way for years and we definitely prefer it this way. It gives the person who has been last for the previous year a better shot at doing well, while obviously handicapping the best players in order to make it a fairer field. And by being a new player you have just as much chance of picking 2nd as you do picking 14th, so for the most part it is still quite random. Good to have you on board though (I presume by being part of this discussion you are) the competition just got that little bit more challenging.

Aquamann2001
Fletch
Posts: 628
Joined: January 15th, 2010, 5:54 pm

Re: 2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

Post by Aquamann2001 »

No movie is gonna come within 200 million dollars of dark knight rises. You bet your ass its gonna be challenging to make that ground up. I didnt realize picks 2 through 14 were random order. That makes me feel better thanks.

Buscemi
CONGRATS! You may now chose your own rank!
Posts: 16164
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 11:14 am
Location: Baltimore State Hospital for the Criminally Insane

Re: 2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

Post by Buscemi »

Aquamann2001 wrote:No movie is gonna come within 200 million dollars of dark knight rises. You bet your ass its gonna be challenging to make that ground up. I didnt realize picks 2 through 14 were random order. That makes me feel better thanks.
You sure about that? A lot of people have The Hobbit hitting $400 million (based on a popular book, previous Lord of the Rings films grossed $300 million each, this one will be much shorter than the others leading to more showtimes). Also, The Dark Knight Rises doesn't have the allure or the furor of the previous film (half of the film's gross wouldn't have been made if not for the mystery of Heath Ledger's death). Instead of Heath Ledger's Joker, you have Anne Hathaway in goggles and a Bane that no one can figure out what he's saying.

Another thing that could hurt the box office (as in, the difference between $450 million and $500 million) is if Nolan gets his way and only allows IMAX theatres with film projectors to run the IMAX version of the film. There are fewer than 50 theatres in the world left with that setup and many large cities don't even run film on their IMAX auditoriums anymore. A film like The Dark Knight Rises (which was partially shot on IMAX cameras) would benefit on the IMAX screen and more than a select few should be allowed to get the experience. If James Cameron can embrace both formats (he even provided open-matte versions of Avatar and Titanic for IMAX), Nolan should too.
Everything on this post is strictly the opinion and only the opinion of Buscemi.

Spotify: http://open.spotify.com/user/1244530511 ... 9GBj16VEmr

User avatar
Shrykespeare
Site Admin
Posts: 14273
Joined: September 12th, 2009, 11:38 pm
Location: Glendale, AZ

Re: 2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

Post by Shrykespeare »

Avengers might hit $400 too. If it's, you know, actually GOOD.
Happy 60th birthday Jet Li! (4/26/23)

Aquamann2001
Fletch
Posts: 628
Joined: January 15th, 2010, 5:54 pm

Re: 2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

Post by Aquamann2001 »

I think Dark knight rises will get 600mil. Gonna break biggest opening weekend ever easily.

User avatar
Chienfantome
Captain Jack Sparrow
Posts: 9967
Joined: May 29th, 2010, 4:22 am
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Re: 2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

Post by Chienfantome »

Reviews of The Avengers are good in France. Some even great.
Fluctuat nec mergitur

User avatar
W
Norman Bates
Posts: 7242
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 4:37 pm

Re: 2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

Post by W »

Avengers has a 9.1 with 3500 ratings on IMDb. How much you can trust it, I don't know...

Most of the possible negatives of TDKR (Bane, Tom Hardy as Bane, Anne Hathaway as Catwoman, no Joker) could easily come true bringing it from other-worldly back to Super-Blockbuster status ($350-400 ish M). Personally, I like Tom Hardy though the only experience I think I've had of him is Warrior, from playing the two Arkham games Bane looks bad ass, and I believe in Nolan. That said, Avengers has a shot at being super-huge as well as The Hobbit.

Also, Spider-Man, the first of the Raimi trilogy grossed over $400 M. The first MIB adjusts to $427 M in today's dollars. Pixar has made a $400 M film (Brave doesn't look to do anything near that, but they have). This is the last Twilight, so it has a chance to go even higher than the $300 ish M it normally does.

Will all this happen? Hell no. Will any of this happen? Who knows, that's why we play.
Tenet: Criterion Edition. Now with more Backwards Man.

User avatar
Shrykespeare
Site Admin
Posts: 14273
Joined: September 12th, 2009, 11:38 pm
Location: Glendale, AZ

Re: 2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

Post by Shrykespeare »

Just got a message from empire13. He's in. That makes 16. So unless we get a few more last-minute entries, that should close things out as a one-division tournament.

Final field:

So now:

1. Buscemi
2. Surfer
3. Chien
4. Six
5. Ozzy
6. Monkey
7. W
8. Banks
9. Shryke
10. Geezer
11. leestu
12. tranny
13. donnie
14. JohnErle
15. aquamann
16. empire13
Happy 60th birthday Jet Li! (4/26/23)

User avatar
silversurfer19
John Rambo
Posts: 7726
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 3:34 pm
Location: pretty much the ass end of the universe

Re: 2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

Post by silversurfer19 »

Aquamann2001 wrote:I think Dark knight rises will get 600mil. Gonna break biggest opening weekend ever easily.

$600m? Not a chance in hell. Much of TDK's business was repeat viewings primarily because it had one of the greatest villains of our time. I just don't see TDKR having that from what I've seen so far. Also, like Boussh mentioned, TDK benefited from the Heath Ledger factor. But one of the most important things I've noticed is the lack of promotion for the movie so far. I remember the lead up to TDK and the viral marketing was everywhere for months, there were the real life city puzzles etc and online games all hyping up the movie. I've seen virtually nothing so far. It just doesn't seem to have that epic must see factor like what we have seen with Prometheus this year. It almost feels like Warner Bros have taken a back step because what has been released so far has been so underwhelming.

Granted, it will still likely be the biggest movie of the year, although I easily think The Hobbit could match it, but I don't think it's going to be blowing too many records out of the water. And I don't think it'll beat Avatar.

User avatar
W
Norman Bates
Posts: 7242
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 4:37 pm

Re: 2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

Post by W »

The possibility is there that The Avengers can match it as well if it's as good of quality as we've been hearing. It'll all depend on legs.
Tenet: Criterion Edition. Now with more Backwards Man.

User avatar
silversurfer19
John Rambo
Posts: 7726
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 3:34 pm
Location: pretty much the ass end of the universe

Re: 2012-13 Full Year Sign-Up Sheet

Post by silversurfer19 »

Exactly, a movie can reach $300m no problem if there is a big enough fan base - look at Twilight. But if it wants to hit $400m, $500m even, it has to have awesome legs with the average guy and girl of all age demographics wanting to see it and willing to see it more than once. TDK managed that. There will be a big surge for the new movie opening weekend and even the weekend after, but it's after a month we will see just how popular the film is. If, like TDK it is still bringing in close to $30m then maybe it has a shot at really big numbers, if not, it will just be your average big tent pole summer movie. From what I've seen so far, I'm leaning towards the latter.

Post Reply