benbess
Senior HTF Member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2009
- Messages
- 5,660
- Real Name
- Ben
I enjoyed this film quite a bit when it came out in 1992. Ron Howard isn't David Lean, but I thought it was a quite entertaining epic. And it was filmed in 70mm, and so might make a particularly nice blu-ray.
I always thought the film was a financial failure, but some research turned up that on a budget of about 30 million it had world wide box office of about 130 million. In other words, even with prints and advertising costs, it looks like it was solidly profitable.
Another surprise is that apparently a "director's cut" exists for the film that's quite a bit longer. The theatrical version is 140 minutes, but a version was shown on TV that's about 170 minutes.
Anyone else think this would make a nice blu-ray? It seems like that not many of Ron Howard's films have made it to blu, even though most of them were solid hits...
I always thought the film was a financial failure, but some research turned up that on a budget of about 30 million it had world wide box office of about 130 million. In other words, even with prints and advertising costs, it looks like it was solidly profitable.
Another surprise is that apparently a "director's cut" exists for the film that's quite a bit longer. The theatrical version is 140 minutes, but a version was shown on TV that's about 170 minutes.
Anyone else think this would make a nice blu-ray? It seems like that not many of Ron Howard's films have made it to blu, even though most of them were solid hits...
