K Borowski Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Tom, I bet you 10 large (= thousand) no fu**ing paypal or debit card bullshit, cash money. So help me God, Dec. 31, 2010, if you are right I owe you that much, or vice versa. Care to put your money where your mouth is big guy? I'm willing to go higher if that isn't enough for you too. I reserve the right to do my own personal best to prove you wrong through my work in the film industry though, so don't accuse me of insider trading. Custer and his men were slaughtered to the last man, but they sure did go out with one hell of a bang. So did the last samurai: "What could be more necessary?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted August 9, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted August 9, 2008 Hi Tom, You don't seem very sure do you :lol: $10,000,000 is low budget not Major Studio league. Stephen Okay, I will go up to $50 USD with each of you two, but that's enough for me. :ph34r: How about this to make the time-frame easier to judge: for the three-month period spanning Nov 1, 2010 through Feb 1st, 2011, 51% or more of American films with budgets over $10,000,000 USD will have been shot on digital rather than film. Film will account for less than 49% of American features with budgets over $10 million USD. Fair enough? :lol: And yes, David Mullen can be the final judge, if he is willing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted August 9, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted August 9, 2008 Hell I'll take you for $50 on film still being #1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K Borowski Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Tom, I still say ten large, but I'll bet you ten fins that it'll be number one too. Care to cover both bets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Lowe Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 I'm still waiting for these guys to accept the $50 bet. I see a lot of talk, but no one willing to put their money where their mouth is, other than Adrian. Come on, fellas? Yes or no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted August 9, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted August 9, 2008 I was about to say! In terms of this little bet, we'll have to have some way of all communicating. . my e mail is on my profile here, so let me know what transpires! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted August 9, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted August 9, 2008 I'm still waiting for these guys to accept the $50 bet. I see a lot of talk, but no one willing to put their money where their mouth is, other than Adrian. Come on, fellas? Yes or no? I am in at $50, happy to go higher <_< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 I see these guys saying, "I will only bet $5,000 ... $50 is way too low...." Chicken? :lol: I'm still waiting for these guys to accept the $50 bet. I see a lot of talk, but no one willing to put their money where their mouth is, other than Adrian. Come on, fellas? Yes or no? Tom, you need to explain your logic here. You are saying that I am chicken for taking a bet for $5,000.00 but I am not chicken if I take the bet for 50 bucks?????? Uhhh, maybe I'm stupid but would I not be chicken if I accept a bet for 50 bucks and reject a bet for $5,0000.00? I know math is my worst subject but I do know that $5,000.00 is a lot more money than $50.00. R, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eirik Tyrihjel Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 (edited) Sorry for bursting into your little betting here, but isn´t money just a trivial thing in this? There might be a thousand reasons for not wanting to go higher than 50US$, today you can go to professional gaming companies and bet on almost anything, even the pretty obvious (at low odds obviously but still), there is money to be made - still a lot of people prefer not to (including me). (Add to that the possibilities in the stockmarket) Isn´t the most important part of this bet, who is right and who is wrong, it is recorded here on full names... that is worth a lot in my book. (no need for big cash, unless the invloved have millions to spare) My point is: quit bickering over the amount and get on with it! (the bet) I think it is a very interesting one! (love this thread!) Edited August 9, 2008 by Eirik Tyrihjel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Lowe Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Erik is right. The bet is just for fun and bragging rights. Stephen has stepped up, so he's in for $50 USD. Consider this a handshake. Just waiting on Max now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted August 9, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted August 9, 2008 Stephen, is that 50 us or 50 swiss? :lol: Should be an interesting year. Did Mr. Mullen agree to judge? we need someone impartial . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K Borowski Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Okay, I will go up to $50 USD with each of you two, but that's enough for me. :ph34r: How about this to make the time-frame easier to judge: for the three-month period spanning Nov 1, 2010 through Feb 1st, 2011, 51% or more of American films with budgets over $10,000,000 USD will have been shot on digital rather than film. Film will account for less than 49% of American features with budgets over $10 million USD. Fair enough? :lol: And yes, David Mullen can be the final judge, if he is willing. Aren't you going to honor my bet too? $50, game on. . . Hell, I'll even come and deliver it to you in person if I loose, and then proceed to the nearest bar with another $50. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Max Jacoby Posted August 9, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted August 9, 2008 Tom of course I accept your bet. If you lose, pay me $50. The way things are going in 2010 I stand to win about 5 Euros. However in the unlikely event that I should lose, I will put up more money and treat you to a restaurant of my choice. Now if only you will explain to me how you plan to determine what films qualify, as I said previously basing it on what films are shooting by a certain date is almost impossible to determine. Obviously major studio means films financed directly by these studios, not by one of their subsidies (as in under the 20th Century Fox label, not Fox Searchlight or Fox Faith or of those) or whose distribution rights are acquired later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Lowe Posted August 10, 2008 Share Posted August 10, 2008 Max, how about this: My assertion is: "For the three-month period spanning Nov 1, 2010 through Feb 1st, 2011, 51% or more of American (narrative feature) films with budgets over $10,000,000 USD will have been shot on digital rather than film. Film will account for less than 49% of American features with budgets over $10 million USD." And same thing on my end. In the unlikely event that I lose, dinner at your choice of locales when you're in LA. Sorry, Karl, Adrian, etc, I have to limit this bet to only Stephen and Max. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Brighton Posted August 10, 2008 Author Share Posted August 10, 2008 Max, how about this: My assertion is: "For the three-month period spanning Nov 1, 2010 through Feb 1st, 2011, 51% or more of American (narrative feature) films with budgets over $10,000,000 USD will have been shot on digital rather than film. Film will account for less than 49% of American features with budgets over $10 million USD." And same thing on my end. In the unlikely event that I lose, dinner at your choice of locales when you're in LA. Sorry, Karl, Adrian, etc, I have to limit this bet to only Stephen and Max. I don't think much of that window, as in my experience anyway, that's when the lower-budget and movie of the week stuff tends to get shot, which may skew the percentage towards digital. In any case, what are we talking about here? When it was shot, or when it was released? If you're talking about just shooting, how do you know when, it ever, a project will get released? There is already any amount of poop out there shot on video that is never going to be seen by anybody other than its producers, crew and immediate (and probably long suffering) families. My point is, at the time you're talking about I think people are still going to be in the "Honeymoon" phase with digital, and so just because they use it for one feature does not mean they are going to use it for everything. I mean, WB went Gaa-gaa over the Genesis for Superman Returns, but I notice The Dark Knight was shot entirely on film! Why not just compile a list of all the mainstream (not arthouse) multiplexes in a selection of capital cities, make a list of every film they have screened over the course of say, one year, and see what percentage of those was shot of film? Generally, anything deemed worthy of attracting sufficient custom from the great unwashed is going to have a budget in excess of $30 million. We are, I presume, talking about movies that actually MATTER. To the General public, not the Online Pubic :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Lowe Posted August 10, 2008 Share Posted August 10, 2008 I would be fine with looking at the first six months of releases in 2011 and going off that - since a lot of those releases would have been shot in 2010. But that means I will not collect my 100 smackaroos until mid- or late 2011. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted August 10, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted August 10, 2008 I'm fine with the box office look mentioned. Think of it as an investment if you win. . .what other way can double your money in a year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Lowe Posted August 10, 2008 Share Posted August 10, 2008 I'm fine with the box office look mentioned. Think of it as an investment if you win. . .what other way can double your money in a year? Buying gold with US dollars? ;) :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Max Jacoby Posted August 10, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted August 10, 2008 I would be fine with looking at the first six months of releases in 2011 and going off that - since a lot of those releases would have been shot in 2010. Sounds easier to prove, but remember, only films that have been produced by the studios themselves, not their subsidies or acquired later count. Your initial challenge was 'major-studio films', so I want to be absolutely clear on that. The average budget of those is probably around 70M or 80M I think, so 10M is a useless figure, I bet there won't be a major studio release that is under that. I think we should put the limit on 50M, after all the purpose of your bet is to prove that acceptance of digital by major studios, not by low budget films Films that feature a mix of digital and film (think Collateral) won't be counted, unless one of the formats was used in a very limited capacity (highspeed or background elements, etc...) There are six major studios by the way: Fox, Paramount, Sony, Universal, Warner & Disney. Oh and we'll simply COUNT the films of each format and the one with the highest number determines the winner, there's no need for you to try to get your head around percentages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted August 10, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted August 10, 2008 Stephen, is that 50 us or 50 swiss? :lol: Should be an interesting year. Did Mr. Mullen agree to judge? we need someone impartial . . . Hi, I dont think the judgeing will be a problem. 50 US is fine. Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Lowe Posted August 10, 2008 Share Posted August 10, 2008 Sounds easier to prove, but remember, only films that have been produced by the studios themselves, not their subsidies or acquired later count. Your initial challenge was 'major-studio films', so I want to be absolutely clear on that. The average budget of those is probably around 70M or 80M I think, so 10M is a useless figure, I bet there won't be a major studio release that is under that. I think we should put the limit on 50M, after all the purpose of your bet is to prove that acceptance of digital by major studios, not by low budget films Films that feature a mix of digital and film (think Collateral) won't be counted, unless one of the formats was used in a very limited capacity (highspeed or background elements, etc...) There are six major studios by the way: Fox, Paramount, Sony, Universal, Warner & Disney. Oh and we'll simply COUNT the films of each format and the one with the highest number determines the winner, there's no need for you to try to get your head around percentages. How about $30 million USD (that's major), and we don't concern ourselves with what combination of studio/production company/distributor actually greenlights the film. Those matters are all tangled up half the time anyway, because of financing, overseas rights, etc. $30 million is a big, legit movie, any way you look at it. That would actually cause films like the The New World and The Fountain to barely make the cut. If you went 40 million, they would not make the cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted August 10, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted August 10, 2008 $30M is alright with me. But we're agreed these have to be films which have gotten distribution into theaters? Or, is this still a point of contention? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Lowe Posted August 10, 2008 Share Posted August 10, 2008 Sure, only films that had theatrical distribution is fine by me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary McClurg Posted August 10, 2008 Share Posted August 10, 2008 (edited) Sorry, Karl, Adrian, etc, I have to limit this bet to only Stephen and Max. Man that isn't fair... I was going to put everyone's money in an escrow accout... if there was less than a $1m in bets I'd have to shoot a feature on ditigal... if more than $5m... I'd have to shoot on film... in between... I'd figure that out that later... :lol: Oops I forgot... I have to keep the money in the escrow account... :( Edited August 10, 2008 by Gary McClurg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted August 10, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted August 10, 2008 Damn, I was looking forward to a fun little side-bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now