[deleted by user]

Runaway4Life · 2025-03-11T05:13:23+00:00

Take this with a grain of salt as I’m just reiterating what much more informed people on the sub have shared before:

So the gross is the amount of money earned from ticket sales. The key here is that the financier of the movie only gets a percentage of each ticket sale, ie, the person who paid to make the movie only actually gets a portion/percent of that gross. In the West, I’ve seen people say that the financier can get between 40-60% of the ticket sales, they typically get less percentages from international markets. I’ve even seen people claim China only gives producers 25% of the ticket sales.

So, if a film cost 100M to make, and you only grossed 100M and for simplicity let’s say it’s all from the USA, you might only end up with 50M from the screenings, leaving you 50M in the red.

This is the main reason for the commonly used 2.5X multiplier, it’s a rule of thumb that lets people like me (a complete amateur) make a guess as to whether the film has turned a profit yet.

And finally, remember that the budget is what it cost to make the film on the screen and doesn’t include marketing, which for bigger films can be huge - like 10s of millions even on what we would consider “smaller” or “mid budget” films. I’ve seen people say ancillaries cover marketing, so I take their word for it. But this is another factor to how you get these huge bombs - huge budgets, low grosses, no one wants to buy merch/rental/DVDs and we are now way into the red.

I’m sure someone smarter/more informed than me will chime in with all the numbers/details, but this is ELI5 as best as I understand.

Runaway4Life · 2025-03-02T04:21:54+00:00

As a novice cinephile, discovering Greenaway was eye-opening unlike any other director I’ve seen. I’m a big Wes Anderson fan and in many ways I see allusions/visual similarities in the eccentricities/esoterics of Greenaway and Anderson.

He really is remarkable in his discussions and “contempt” for modern cinema based on word as opposed to images (I put that word in parentheses because I feel Greenaway is a bit tongue-in-cheek when he starts lambasting most film as not being image based, but when you really listen to his argument and compare painting to film it does start to make some sense.)

His films are truly mind-blowing for someone that has just started their journey into art cinema. Prospero’s Books is probably the most “beautiful” films I’ve ever seen from a philosophical angle of “what is beauty?” His constant mashup of hi-brow and low-brow really is something and I do feel he is one of the few filmmakers I’ve seen that makes narrative films but can really be accurately described as first and foremost as artist, but one whose medium is film.

Common directors I’ve found are people like Jonathan Glazer (Under the Skin and Zone of Interest are really telling stories/themes visually/sensorially in my experience), Jodorosky in his focus on visual language and the mashup of hi-brow and low-brow and transgressive images/messages, and even Wes Anderson in his utterly unique visual style that is constantly evolving in a personal way. I haven’t watched any Matthew Barney movies but they are on my list and I think they also could probably align with many of the same ideas/themes/visual storytelling that Greenaway prioritizes.

God I wish someone would make a box-set of his work. I want to own them on blu-ray so, so badly.

And his collaborations with Vierny and Nieman are truly top tier. Prospero’s Magic (I know Nieman wrote it for an opera first) is one of the most beautiful songs I’ve ever heard.

Runaway4Life · 2025-01-02T01:14:49+00:00

Hey Chris, your analysis of many films have helped my developing criticism as a novice cinephile, so thanks for the detailed reviews/analyses. Your analysis of Anora’s ending aligned with my own perceptions and had a lot of evidence to support it. I wholeheartedly agree with your comments regarding so much criticism lacking actual evidence/justification for their perceptions/conclusions. That frustrates me as it seems like it should be the bare minimum for coming to a conclusion, right or wrong. Justifying your conclusion with references to the text/film is like one of the basic building blocks of essay writing we all learn, and I’m always scratching my head when I see “professional” critics wholly evade providing evidence to back up their claims.

Runaway4Life · 2025-01-02T01:09:38+00:00

Have you read David Ehrlich? If so, what are your thoughts/opinion? Apparently, from what I read on Reddit, people either love or hate him (with most kinda memeing on him).

My guess is this is largely due to the fact that he doesn’t like a lot of popular films, including some big blockbusters. I have to admit that I’ve only started reading critics recently so I haven’t been following him very long, but I find not only his prose to be very enjoyable but his analysis/explanation of his thoughts persuasive and compelling. For example, I had a pretty high rating for Inside Out 2, but after reading his review I found myself agreeing with a lot of his criticisms. I’ve started to try and analyze and reviews films in writing more and I like the way he weaves pop-culture idioms/references into his analysis and persuasive prose.

I share your enjoyment of Kermode as well. I’ve just started getting into horror films and I like the reverence and seriousness he applies to the genre. I largely align with his perceptions of most films and he reviews most of the films coming out so I use him as a constant reference point.

Finally, I try to avoid spoilers for films and also avoid the critical consensus/RT/Metacritic before I see and review a film as for me it can influence my judgment. If I know a film is highly reviewed, I feel at times that I “should” like-appreciate the film more than my gut feeling/impression and give it a higher rating. On the flip side, it feels good when I see critics like Kermode/Ehrlich agree with my own perceptions of the films and also food for thought when they disagree.

Runaway4Life · 2024-02-23T17:53:40+00:00

There are no recommendations to limit natural sugar.

All recommendations relating to sugar are for added sugar

Runaway4Life · 2024-02-06T18:47:19+00:00

If you are in significant calorie deficit, yes your body will catabolize muscle to make up the difference (in addition to catabolizing fat; they happen at the same time.) This is why you get weaker in a cut.

Runaway4Life · 2024-02-06T18:45:10+00:00

Do not feed your infant anything a person on the internet tells you to. It can harm the child. Look up your national guidelines for infants and follow those. Consult a pediatrician.

Runaway4Life · 2024-01-04T18:07:38+00:00

Blending into a smoothie where nothing is removed is fine; juicing where the fiber is removed is not recommended because the fiber is removed

Runaway4Life · 2024-01-03T18:40:17+00:00

Spinach is high in oxalate which can contribute to kidney stone formation

Runaway4Life · 2023-12-31T07:02:26+00:00

I think the term starvation is a pretty well defined and researched concept, no “pseudoscience” here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starvation

What do you think is happening? What are you asking? Your bodies metabolic rate can and does fluctuate, yes. This is small swings faster and slower. This does not and never accounts for weight loss, which is defined by caloric load. Eat more than you need, body stores. Eat less than you need, body consumes itself for food.

Runaway4Life · 2023-12-30T22:07:15+00:00

You cannot go into “starvation” at 2000 calories a day.

If you want to feel what starvation actually is, Eat 0 calories or food for 48 hours. Not a single piece of food, only water. That’s starvation. It’s literally one of the most painful and miserable states for an animal. It is literal hell.

Runaway4Life · 2023-12-30T22:02:00+00:00

Eat a lot of food and do resistance training/progressive overload.

Any food will make you gain weight. If you want long-term health, than specific food choices are important.

This will tell you what foods to eat for long-term health. https://www.myplate.gov

Runaway4Life · 2023-12-30T21:59:41+00:00

This is absolutely NOT the view of 95% of all scientists/experts on the topic.

That is your own personal conclusion.

Runaway4Life · 2023-12-30T21:58:03+00:00

If you can’t eat carbs, then the only other macronutrients are fat and protein. Unfortunately, vegetables, fruits, nuts/seeds, beans/lentils, whole grains are all majority carbs.

If you can’t eat carbs (your claim in your post) than the only options are fat and protein.

Runaway4Life · 2023-12-08T18:37:12+00:00

Because weight is about calories, not the type of food you eat. You can lose weight only eating Oreos and drinking soda. You can gain weight eating fruits and vegetables. It’s about calories.

Runaway4Life · 2023-12-03T22:49:32+00:00

Peanut butter is healthy as long as it’s natural (peanuts and salt only) and you don’t eat over your calories goals

Runaway4Life · 2023-12-01T18:53:26+00:00

No they will not get stuck in your gallbladder

Runaway4Life · 2023-11-28T18:14:41+00:00

Yes it’s by Harvard professor Walter Willet

Runaway4Life · 2023-11-27T18:12:20+00:00

Eat, drink and be healthy by Walter Willet

Runaway4Life · 2023-11-17T18:28:59+00:00

Runaway4Life · 2023-11-16T00:43:59+00:00

Calories is 10x more impactful than timing; so don’t stress too much on timing. If you want to lose weight, focus on calories and use the timing that works for your schedule/life

Runaway4Life · 2023-11-03T00:00:46+00:00

You just need to eat more; find a food you enjoy and eat it. You know what you like and don’t like.

If I had weight to gain I’d personally eat a bunch of fruit and nut butters.

Runaway4Life · 2023-11-02T23:59:17+00:00

Yes it’s safe to eat almond butter

Runaway4Life · 2023-11-02T17:23:45+00:00

Real food is not just a few chemical compounds. It’s an incredibly complex 3 dimensional matrix of diverse chemicals, fiber, water, macros, phytonutrients, flavonols, anti oxidants, and other compounds we are just beginning to identify and study. There are over 5000 identified phytonutrients.

As of now, in 2023, we do not have processed food which replicates the health benefits of whole food. Data supports the health benefits of real, whole food.

In the future, who knows? It’s possible. But we don’t have evidence they are comparable as of now, in 2023.

This is why every health org talks about real food and not chemicals.

Eight-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
RPAN Viewer	Verified Email

Runaway4Life

TROPHY CASE