David Prowse Banned From 'Star Wars' Party

[Tribal Warfare]

Darth Vader Banned From 'Star Wars' Party

Things aren't going well for the original Dark Lord of the Sith.

Dave Prowse, who wore the Darth Vader costume in the first three 'Star Wars' films, has been banned from the forthcoming Lucas Film Star Wars Celebration party in Orlando, Florida. Not only that, he's been told his presence won't be welcome at any Lucas Film/Star Wars-related events.

As Prowse announced on his website: "It is with regret that I have been informed by my friends at C2 Ventures, Ben and Phillip, that I am not to be invited to C5 this year or any other Lucas Film associated events. After enquiring, the only thing I have been told is that I have 'burnt too many bridges between Lucas Film and myself' -- no other reason given ..."

Hmmm. There could be a reason, though, seeing as Uncle George is probably fuming at the comments Prowse recently made to SlashFilm about not receiving any residual payment for 'Return of the Jedi' -- because it didn't make a profit(!): "I get these occasional letters from Lucasfilm saying that we regret to inform you that as Return of the Jedi has never gone into profit, we've got nothing to send you. Now here we're talking about one of the biggest releases of all time ..."

Maybe poor old Dave should learn to keep his mouth shut. Otherwise we'll have to sit through another re-release of the original films with Prowse's presence completely replaced by a digital Vader. Seriously, you know it could happen ...

[Deberg_1990]

Hmmm....im guessing that wasnt him at in the suit the end of Episode III ?

[Red Brooklyn]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

Hmmm....im guessing that wasnt him at in the suit the end of Episode III ?

Indeed not.

Actually, I believe it was the Devil himself. Hayden Christensen.

[MOhillbilly]

[Skyy God]

Dude has a point. No way Jedi wasn't profitable. Take Harry Potter & the Order of the Phoenix, which grossed $938M. WB claims it's still $167M in the hole. How, you may ask. Accounting magic.

The really, really, really simplified version is that Hollywood sets up a separate corporation for each movie with the intent that this corporation will take on losses. The studio then charges the “film corporation” a huge fee (which creates a large part of the “expense” that leads to the loss). The end result is that the studio still rakes in the cash, but for accounting purposes the film is a money “loser” — which matters quite a bit for anyone who is supposed to get a cut of any profits.

In [the Harry Potter] statement, you’ll notice the “distribution fee” of $212 million dollars. That’s basically Warner Bros. paying itself to make sure the movie “loses money.” There are some other fun tidbits in there as well. The $130 million in “advertising and publicity”? Again, much of that is actually Warner Bros. paying itself (or paying its own “properties”). $57 million in “interest”? Also to itself for “financing” the film. Even if we assume that only half of the “advertising and publicity” money is Warner Bros. paying itself, we’re still talking about $350 million that Warner Bros. shifts around, which get taken out of the “bottom line” in the movie accounting.

http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2010/07/...ting-explained

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Pittsie

Dude has a point. No way Jedi wasn't profitable. Take Harry Potter & the Order of the Phoenix, which grossed $938M. WB claims it's still $167M in the hole. How, you may ask. Accounting magic.

The really, really, really simplified version is that Hollywood sets up a separate corporation for each movie with the intent that this corporation will take on losses. The studio then charges the “film corporation” a huge fee (which creates a large part of the “expense” that leads to the loss). The end result is that the studio still rakes in the cash, but for accounting purposes the film is a money “loser” — which matters quite a bit for anyone who is supposed to get a cut of any profits.

In [the Harry Potter] statement, you’ll notice the “distribution fee” of $212 million dollars. That’s basically Warner Bros. paying itself to make sure the movie “loses money.” There are some other fun tidbits in there as well. The $130 million in “advertising and publicity”? Again, much of that is actually Warner Bros. paying itself (or paying its own “properties”). $57 million in “interest”? Also to itself for “financing” the film. Even if we assume that only half of the “advertising and publicity” money is Warner Bros. paying itself, we’re still talking about $350 million that Warner Bros. shifts around, which get taken out of the “bottom line” in the movie accounting.

http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2010/07/...ting-explained

... ..... **** Hollywood hard...

That's just completely absurd. And they don't even make any effort whatsoever to hide the fact that the studios do this shit intentionally. Why can't Hollywood ****s make any decent movies these days? Cause the greedy dumbshits have dug a hole for themselves so deep that there's no crawling back out. And this just shows that it's been going on for decades.

[Bowser]

Originally Posted by Pittsie

Dude has a point. No way Jedi wasn't profitable. Take Harry Potter & the Order of the Phoenix, which grossed $938M. WB claims it's still $167M in the hole. How, you may ask. Accounting magic.

The really, really, really simplified version is that Hollywood sets up a separate corporation for each movie with the intent that this corporation will take on losses. The studio then charges the “film corporation” a huge fee (which creates a large part of the “expense” that leads to the loss). The end result is that the studio still rakes in the cash, but for accounting purposes the film is a money “loser” — which matters quite a bit for anyone who is supposed to get a cut of any profits.

In [the Harry Potter] statement, you’ll notice the “distribution fee” of $212 million dollars. That’s basically Warner Bros. paying itself to make sure the movie “loses money.” There are some other fun tidbits in there as well. The $130 million in “advertising and publicity”? Again, much of that is actually Warner Bros. paying itself (or paying its own “properties”). $57 million in “interest”? Also to itself for “financing” the film. Even if we assume that only half of the “advertising and publicity” money is Warner Bros. paying itself, we’re still talking about $350 million that Warner Bros. shifts around, which get taken out of the “bottom line” in the movie accounting.

http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2010/07/...ting-explained

Just.....insane. Seriously, wtf? All that for a tax break and an opportunity for execs to throw fives times the stripper and blow parties they would have been able to afford without these "distribution fees"?

And really, how do you NOT pay Darth ****ing Vader?

[Red Brooklyn]

That's insane.

[Brock]

Chewbacca has the good sense to keep his mouth shut.

[Red Brooklyn]

Originally Posted by Brock

Chewbacca has the good sense to keep his mouth shut.

Not that anyone but Harrison Ford can understand him anyway.

[Swanman]

Originally Posted by Brock

Chewbacca has the good sense to keep his mouth shut.

What is Boba Fett's stance on this mularkey?

[morphius]

Originally Posted by Swanman

What is Boba Fett's stance on this mularkey?

He is still digesting the news.

[Red Brooklyn]

Originally Posted by morphius

He is still digesting the news.

AY-OH!

[Fat Elvis]

Originally Posted by morphius

He is still digesting the news.

On Tatooine, the news digests you.

[Swanman]

Originally Posted by morphius

He is still digesting the news.

He made it out. A silly sarlacc pit can't keep Boba down.