Comments on: Rush Hour 3’s Box Office Disappointment: Steve Mason Responds

By: Steve Mason

Steve Mason — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 23:10:00 +0000

Love the debate. For the record, I’m not a movie critic. I’m a box office analyst. I write about numbers.

FYI - Rush Hour 2 delivered $9.47M on its first Monday in release a 52% drop from Sunday. Rush Hour 3 did just $5.2M yesterday, down 60% from Sunday.

By: Andy

Andy — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 22:22:22 +0000

I get the feeling someone from filmwad has been leaving comments on /film.

“Steve Mason is an dumbass”, you’re completely missing the point of anything this site has said about Rush Hour 3’s intake, and just making an asshole out of yourself.

By: Peter Sciretta

Peter Sciretta — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 22:18:55 +0000

There are two different conversations: We are talking about financial profit. Considering a big company made this film and not a single person (aka artist) the main purpose is to turn a profit. So Steve analyzes the profit results of movies. Because guess what. If Rush Hour 3 doesn’t turn a profit, there won’t be a Rush Hour 4. There might not be another Brett Ratner or Jackie Chan big budget movie for a while. That’s why we analyze this stuff. And you can’t skew numbers. Numbers are numbers, facts are facts. Rush Hour 3 under performed (ie disappointed) on opening weekend.

In terms of quality, that is judged by moviegoers and critics. The critics on rotten tomatoes gave the film a 20%, which is extremely low. The user rating on the same site is 62%, which isn’t nearly as low, but falls into “may-be a rental category.” So in terms of quality, the film is also disappointing.

By: Jay01

Jay01 — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 21:46:14 +0000

Next time I see a Van Gogh painting, I’ll be sure to ask someone how many copies it sold and how well the painted did in the market before making my judgment on its artistic value.
Anyone who judges a film based off the money it makes is a fucking idiot to begin with.
The film is a disappointment in a film sense, regardless of how much ‘revenue’ it makes.

- This movie, is just that, a movie. It is not a film, and it is a disappointment.

Brett Ratner is just a sequel directing lackey that doesn’t belong in the film industry, along with all the other directing for money whores out there.

By: Steve Mason is a dumbass

Steve Mason is a dumbass — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 21:30:40 +0000

Rush Hour 3 is on its way to do 350 plus million worldwide and thats a disappointment. And that is not including what it’s gonna do in DVD sales. God your a dumbass. How in the HELL did you become a movie critic. How in the fuck does a movie make 50 million opening weekend and yet, that makes it a disappointment??? Will Smith’s movies does 50 million on its opening weekends all the time and nobody is calling any of his movies a disappointment. Its plain and simple, you didn’t like the fucken movie, and you were going to bash the movie anyway that you could. You were going to grab at any lil’ straw that you could pull on to so you could bash Rush Hour 3 opening weekend. You are no fucken better than Bill O’Reilly, the same person that this very site bashed for trashing Bourne Ultimatum. You fucken hypocrite. FILMWAD.COM trashed the movie but still acknowledge that Rush Hour 3 had a strong weekend, and they talk about Stardust, a 70 million dollar movie, doing only 9 million opening weekend and that was the REAL disappointment. Give it up, I FUCKEN WIN, YOU GUYS ARE WRONG FOR YOUR SLANDER GARBAGE, AND YOU GUYS NEED TO BE FIRED! GO TO FILMWAD.COM EVERYONE!!!