HELLO DOLLY! (1 Viewer)

[GMpasqua]

With the exception of maybe MASH, Patton and Woodstock, Hello, Dolly! Still sells better than the other top grossing hits of 69-70: Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice, Cactus Flower, Catch-22 On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, The Reivers, The Adventures Beneath The Planet of the Apes, The Out-Of-Towners, Z, They Shoot Horses, Don’t They? Anne Of a Thousand Days, A Boy Named Charlie Brown, Chisum It has aged very well, new generations like it (they don't see Streisand as being miscast) and the stage show keeps it alive. When I worked for FOX Home Video the R&H titles, Star Wars and Alien films were among the top sellers The Top grosses from 69-70 do not sell nearly as well today as when they were in the theaters Top grossing film 1969: The LOVE Bug (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid sells much better) Top grossing film 1970: Airport (Patton, Mash sell better) Top grossing film 1971: Love Story (Fiddler on the Roof, A Clockwork Orange sell better) under performer "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" only made $2 Million in 1971 (Well near the bottom of the list) it is now one of the top selling films of the1970s on video and a child favorite) By the way, the flop "Song of Norway" was made for $2 Million and earned $4 Million in the US alone, so it wouldn't be regarded as a flop - even thought the critics trashed it (ironic isn't it)

 

[ahollis]

Originally Posted by JohnMor





The figures I've seen on participation statements are much smaller. Are you sure you're not talking about taking in 56 million at the boxoffice? Because that money goes to the theaters, not the studio. It's the money paid from the theaters to the studios that determines studio grosses, and that is subject to several different mathematical formulas.

I very much aware of the split between theatres and studios. If the 56 million is the box office then the studio split back then on a roadshow and general release would be somewhere in the 60% range and that is not including guarantees that were put up for the bids. Back in those days, theatres would bid on each individual film and the film rental could reach quite a high figure. If the 56 was box office then Fox would have taken in around 33 million and it would have covered the initial costs.

The 16 million that is talked about as the film rental, is the rental from the Roadshow release. The Roadshow of Dolly was a huge disappointment to Fox, who was looking to emulate The Sound Of Music. The General release, on the other hand, was much better received across the land. There were some engagements that lasted well over six weeks in smaller towns. The General release was also the exact same as the Roadshow right down to the intermission if the theatre wanted to use it.

 

[MatthewA]

Disappointing initial box office aside, I'm surprised no one has mentioned its presence in Wall-E as being a plus in getting it released. I'm sure many of the people who would buy a theoretical Blu-Ray may not have heard of Hello Dolly without it.

 

[Douglas Monce]

Originally Posted by JohnMor





The figures I've seen on participation statements are much smaller. Are you sure you're not talking about taking in 56 million at the boxoffice? Because that money goes to the theaters, not the studio. It's the money paid from the theaters to the studios that determines studio grosses, and that is subject to several different mathematical formulas.

Almost none of the boxoffice take goes to the theaters. Theaters make about 90% of their money from selling popcorn and candy.


Doug

 

[GMpasqua]

The Roadshow of "Hello Dolly" actually did very well. Only Funny Girl, Oliver and Fiddler on the Roof had longer runs (and none of those films came close to "Sound of Music" numbers) Dolly played for 8 months as a Roadshow in NYC, most other roadshows only played 4 months or less (Finian's Rainbow, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, Star!, Half a Sixpence, Sweet Charity, Goodbye Mr Chips, Happiest Millionaire) Other films weren't even released as roadshows even though they were planned to be (On a Clear Day, Darling Lili, 1776)


earlier Doctor Dolittle and Camelot had respectable roadshow runs in 1967 from 8 - 9 months


Thoroughly Modern Millie also ran for a year as a roadshow and was Universal Pictures top grossing film until "Airport"

 

[Douglas Monce]

Originally Posted by GMpasqua

Many films which didn't earn a profit in their theatrical run, have made more money in their tv/video sales. Many classic films (some considered the best of the best) did not earn a profit at the boxoffice but over the years have earned more money then some of the success stories.

Really, the "Wizard of Oz" was a flop in it's first release (as was "Gone With the Wind") but these film have made more money that most and will contine to make money.


Surpisingly some films that failed at the box-office are the winners on Video, while other boxoffice successes did not do well on video. You can not just look at the profit/loss margin in determing a hit/flop, many folder films continue to make money today making them more than profitable assets to a studio.


Also international sales make more than half of a films revenue, some hits do not do well overseas, while others do better overseas. Film grosses were just for USA and Canada and are not a true reflection of a films actual revenue. Most films which flopped in the USA were profitable when international sales were factored in (but the studios want the shareholders/IRS to believe the a did not make a profit so they won't have to pay out additional monies.)


For a while if a films didn't do "Sound of Music" business (esp a musical) it was considered a flop (Which is just about ever film released until "the Godfather") But those expectations were unreasonable, most films released after "Sound of Music" did respectable business when compared to the other hits of the year.

You are correct that many films have been come money makers after failing in their first release IE Its A Wonderful Life, but The Wizard of Oz, and Gone with the Wind are not among them.


Wizard cost about $2.4 million to make, and earned $16 million at the box office. Gone with the Wind cost around $3 million to make, and took in around $25 million in its original release. They couldn't be considered a flop by anyone's measure.


Doug


Edit: Sorry got the wrong figures on OZ. It did in fact only make about $3 million in its original release, and did not become profitable until 1949.

 

[Andy_G]

Not to mention West Side Story. But I have a feeling we'll have to wait until MGM shakes out before we see that one.

 

[Will Krupp]

[COLOR= rgb(24, 24, 24)]The 16 million that is talked about as the film rental, is the rental from the Roadshow release. [/COLOR]

No, it is the total take returned to the studio.


Why do you feel so determined to revise history to convince everyone DOLLY was initially profitable? It doesn't change the movie or have anything to do with our affection for it, nor does it change the fact that most people who are posting on this thread would snap up a blu-ray release in a heartbeat. It didn't make back its cost and was a very expensive flop for Fox, end of story. It doesn't mean we can't still enjoy the hell out of it.

 

[GMpasqua]

Dolly did not make back it's cost in it's theatrical run, but it is far from the disaster history seems to lead us to believe. Same with Cleopatra, which never could have made back it's cost in 1963 no matter how good it was (it was just too expensive and at 4 hours too long) Even though it was the highest grossing film of 1963 (Beating out "It's a Mad Mad World" and "The Great Escape" in ticket sales)


But these films were very popular in their day. History just looks at the numbers and people think - it flopped, it must be pretty bad. People thought "Thoroughly Modern Millie" was a flop because they consfuse it with "Star". Authors often write it bombed when in fact it ran for over a year as a roadshow engagement and was Universal Pictures Top grossing film up to 1970. (some bomb)


The reviews for "Hello Dolly" were far better than those for "The Sound of Music" but the film did not make back it's cost, but it was the 5th highest grossing film of 1970. Not a bad achievement for any film. To call it a flop shines a negative light on it, when it fact it wasn't poorly received, it was just "too expensive" and no film in that era ever made back it's cost if it was "too expensive" Most of FOX's hits were low cost films like MASH while the expensive films like Tora Tora Tora were expensive risks that shouldn't have cost what they cost. THere are Flops and then there are "Flops"


Most Disney films were not the top grossing film the year they were released. Those figures are added on from multible re-releases (and at higher ticket prices) so they do not give you an acurate account of how well a film did the year it was first released. Granted mutilble re-releases prove a film has earning power, but to say it was the top film of the year is incorrect.


Film studios also hid studio costs in expensive films hoping they could take the tax write-off

so even profitable films have shakey accounting. "Butch Cassidy" also used the $2 Million dollar set from "Hello Dolly" yet it isn't recorded as being part of that film's budget (though it should have been, so "Butch" made a profit were Dolly didn't, tax results were still the same)


To label a film a flop, esp one like "It's a Wonderful Life" or "The Wizard of OZ" makes no sense in 2010, IAWL and OZ have made more money in the tv/video market than most films and have proven to be hits. If a film has made back it's cost over time and become a classic the "Flop" label can no longer apply. Flop is really a distributor term and one that does not reflect the value of any given film in today's world.

 

[Everett S.]

There were many factors to Hello Dolly's troubles. First the release date could not be set until the closing of the Broadway show. Then an all black version (the great Pearl Bailey)

opened on Broadway, so Fox had to wait for it to close. But it was a hit! At that time most roadshow theatres were big 2000 seat houses & up, in big city

downtowns. I saw the hardticket showing 3 times @ the NEW theatre Balto. Md.. After the 1968 riots less people would go downtown @ night.

Anyway add this to not so good films(Sweet Charity,K.East of Java,Finigan's Rainbow,Paint Your Wagon,Chitty ,Chitty BB, Ice Station Zebra).

Compair this with the year before-Charly,Funny Girl,Gone With The Wind 70mm,2,001,Romeo & J.,The Lion in Winter, Easy Rider all big hits!


I worked downtown @ the Mayfair theatre until it closed,they all closed within a month of each other.


BTW the opening nite aud. hated The Lion in Winter! the crowd wanted their money back, it was a chairity & they asked us to give refunds of course it

was reserved seating & the tickets had all been sold months before! I had seen it the week before @ a press screening, & it got a standing ovation of

about 2,000.



lol








































It also had The Sound of Music RS.

 

[Derek M Germano]

I have a particular fondness for HELLO, DOLLY! and would love to see what this handsome 70mm production would look like in high definition. Hopefully, the Blu-ray will appear sometime soon.

 

[Joe Caps]

For the SG release of dolly, Fox produced a very long Doc on themaking of the film, that was supposed to be a second disc in the set - then didn't reolease it. I know quite a few people who were interviewed for the set. It would be nice if they release it.

I went to all of these big budget musicals when they were first released in New York city. It got to be embarassing -I would goand there would be just a small scattering of people throughout the 70mm showing!!

Particularly badly atteneded were Star, Half aSixpence, finians rainbow, Funny Lady, 1776, darling Lili, Ona Clear day, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, Happiest Millionaire.

 

[GMpasqua]

"Hello Dolly" should look better than "The Sound of Music" on blu-ray. It looked better in the theater in 70MM, the negative isn't a worn as "Sound of Music" and more money was spent on the production.


FOX has screened a number of new 70MM prints:

Dolly

Cleopatra

Star!

Doctor Dolittle

Those Magnificent Men/Flying Machines

Agony and the Ecstasy


All looked (to Quote Moulin Rogue)...Spectacular! Spectacular!


So what's Fox waiting for???????


By the way I saw "1776" in NYC at Radio City Music Hall and the place was packed

 

[benbess]

Originally Posted by GMpasqua

"Hello Dolly" should look better than "The Sound of Music" on blu-ray. It looked better in the theater in 70MM, the negative isn't a worn as "Sound of Music" and more money was spent on the production.


FOX has screened a number of new 70MM prints:

Dolly

Cleopatra

Star!

Doctor Dolittle

Those Magnificent Men/Flying Machines

Agony and the Ecstasy


All looked (to Quote Moulin Rogue)...Spectacular! Spectacular!


So what's Fox waiting for???????


By the way I saw "1776" in NYC at Radio City Music Hall and the place was packed

Where are you seeing these??

 

[GMpasqua]

The Egyptian Theater, The Aero Theater, The Cimerama Dome and The Motion Picture Academy in Los Angeles.


They have run these films several times over the last 5 years. Also new 70 MM prints of:


The Sound of Music

West Side Story

Patton

South Pacific

It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World

Oklahoma!


plus :

How the West Was Won (in 3 panel Cinerama)

and The Ten Commandments in (Vista Vision)


All worth putting up with the Los Angeles traffic (which is h**l)

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Well, count me as one of the philistines ) TSoM, CCBB, et al will be on Blu before then? I sure hope TSoM, CCBB, et al do great on BD and convince the studios to release more in the near future...


_Man_

 

[Erik_H]

I have owned copies of "Dolly" on VHS, laser and DVD and attended a screening of a new 70MM print at the Egyptian about 7 years ago. If done properly, this would look great on Blu-Ray.

Interesting factoid about the Todd-AO print that was used for the DVD edition (a 35MM print was used for the earlier video versions, none of which included the Todd-AO credit in the opening titles): it contains several alternate takes/shots. There is at least one shot in the opening number "Just Leave Everything to Me" and in the title number that are different between 35MM and Todd-AO. The most notable change between 35MM and Todd-AO is probably the long tracking shot of Streisand at the beginning of the "Before the Parade Passes By" number (as she walks and then runs to join the parade)---if you compare the 35MM and Todd-AO versions of that tracking shot, the differences are immediately apparent.

 

[GMpasqua]

FOX usually releases musicals around Mothers day, so any announcements would come late this year or in January. The studios already have the sci-fi and action film audience - time to bring in some others.


Hello Dolly

The King and I

Oklahoma

Carousel

Can-Can

 

[Matt Hough]

The Sound of Music seems to be selling quite well, so I'd be very surprised if we don't get The King & I next year (and maybe Oklahoma!, too, if we're lucky).

 

[GMpasqua]

wouldn't be surprised if Sound of Music is near the top this week - there are 3 versions - expensive box set, Digibook and Blu-ray case - so all bases are covered. Plus Target's sale with Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (my Target was almost sold out of CCBB day one, guess many people took advantage of the cross promotion).