[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "Day of the Roses"
- Subject: Re: "Day of the Roses"
- From: "Roderick Smith" <rodsmith@werple.net.au>
- Date: 3 Nov 1998 10:08:55 GMT
- Newsgroups: aus.rail, aus.tv
- Organization: Rail News Victoria
- References: <362AE59E.4872E00B@hermes.net.au> <01bdfb40$6dbb1da0$0d9c0ccb@jen-s-computer> <01bdfb47$63de3a40$409c6ccb@bits-n-pc-s> <362B33BD.CC5BBCFE@ozemail.com.au> <70fe4k$o9k$1@izvestia.its.unimelb.edu.au> <362B47CB.EFA98F11@ozemail.com.au> <362f82d0.13901322@news.accsoft.com.au> <362C8818.30B45827@ozemail.com.au> <362E19B9.17CAA9EA@bigpond.com> <70n3rc$jn8$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <362F3618.996DB8B5@ozemail.com.au> <362FCE07.9ACDC409@eisa.net.au>
- Xref: news.mel.aone.net.au aus.rail:35097 aus.tv:69661
Being cheaper than Titanic does not justify adopting a soap-opera plot not
based on the reality of the accident or of the investigation (coronial or
judicial). It would have been *cheaper* to stick to reality. The tacky
plot stripped a lot of the dignity supposedly being given to the
unfortunate victims and the brave rescuers.
--
Regards
Roderick Smith
Rail News Victoria Editor
Tony Gatt <tgatt@eisa.net.au> wrote in article
<362FCE07.9ACDC409@eisa.net.au>...
> > johnparker20@hotmail.com wrote:
> Thats right, but.. think about the amount of money spent / available for
the making of
> Titanic and the fact that it was destined to be a box office hit. That
means bums on
> seats, and about $12 (not directly to the movie makers, but they get a
cut..) for
> everyone who sees it. Not to mention the video sales and advertising
income.
> Day of the Roses was produced as a Telemovie, much smaller budget, and
not as many
> opportunities to recoup the costs.--