| re: And then there was SUGAR ... | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 02:13 pm EST 12/29/22 | |
| In reply to: re: And then there was SUGAR ... - dbdbdb 11:01 am EST 12/29/22 | |
|
|
|
| I forgot about A Guide for the Married Man and didn't check for a list of all his movies, and I don't remember ever before hearing of The Boatniks, although I must have. Thanks for looking into this more thoroughly. I generally don't trust stuff on Wikipedia as I have found so many errors there. I can't tell you that the numbers on Wikipedia are wrong, but what I feel I can reasonably say, having looked at the Wiki pages and at what Variety reported as the gross for each of the films, is that the fact that Wiki uses different sources for different films when reporting this info makes it hard to judge the accuracy. For instance, Wiki uses Variety for both How to Succeed and The Boatniks, and the figures there are the figures reported in Variety. But the figure for A Guide for the Married Man comes from a book on 20th Century Fox, and it is rather more than the Variety figure. Wiki reports $7,355,000, while Variety reported $5,000,000. By January 7, 1976, Variety reported that it was up to $5,500,000, still well under what Wiki reports. Either way it did bring in a lot more (for the time period) than How to Succeed, but which is correct? With Where Were You When the Lights Went Out?, the figure in Variety was $3,500,000, while Wiki, using a website called The Numbers, reports a much higher $7,988,000. That higher figure is also not reported in the Variety of January 7, 1976, which listed all films that had grossed $4,000,000 or more. I don’t see Where Were You When the Lights Went Out? on this list, although I might be missing it as it is a very long list. But it is definitely not in the area of films that made between $7,500,000 and $8,000.000. It’s possible that the figures not from Variety are, in fact, the correct ones or at least closer to correct, but then is it possible that the Variety number for How to Succeed is also too low? In any case, it would seem that How to Succeed did least well of these pictures, which is too bad. Maybe it was too long after the show. Perhaps it would have done better a year or two earlier. |
|
| reply | |
|
|
|
| Previous: | re: And then there was SUGAR ... - dbdbdb 11:01 am EST 12/29/22 |
| Next: | re: And then there was SUGAR ... - dbdbdb 05:27 pm EST 12/29/22 |
| Thread: |
|
Time to render: 0.030644 seconds.