[bootlegga]

Quote:

LOS ANGELES (TheWrap.com) - If you thought the first Sarah Palin documentary, "The Undefeated," bombed at the box office, wait until you see what happened to the latest nonfiction film to focus on the conservative gadfly.

"Sarah Palin: You Betcha!," filmmaker Nick Broomfield's unflattering look at the Alaska governor-turned-presidential hopeful, grossed only around $7,000 in six locations during its opening weekend. Freestyle Releasing distributed the film.

That shakes out to about $389 per day per theater -- meaning that an average of fewer than 40 people a day saw the film in each location. That's like the equivalent of the popcorn line on Saturday afternoon for box office winner "Dolphin Tale."

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/years-second-s ... 07443.html

Not a big surprise really - her supporters won't go see a movie like that - and why would some who doesn't like her want to spend 2 hours watching her?

[DanSC]

It looks like American politics will need a new boogy-man.

[r_p]

there is only one type of movie Palin belongs in, and it ain't a documentary..

[BartSimpson]

This is a hatchet job and that fact that it is a bomb has all to do with the film maker and not the subject.

[BartSimpson]

DanSC wrote:

It looks like American politics will need a new boogy-man.

No matter who wins the GOP nomination you can count on the leftards to pour their bile out on the person, deservedly or not.

I recall how John McCain was the darling of the left until he won the nomination, then all of his 'friends' turned on him and showed their true colors.

Nothing has changed.

[carrion5]

What a shame. She should've starred in in the apocalyptic movie 2012 instead. I can see it now: 2012: The Year Sarah Palin Assumes the Presidency

Geez, I'd rather see an inventory management robot running for president. Sure it would mean the rise of Skynet, but who doesn't want efficient results? I for one would welcome our new robot overlords.

[Thanos]

Films with genuinely offensive subject matter usually bomb anyway. Why pay to see Palin anyway? Just turn the TV to (ugh) FOX and she's usually on there anyway spreading her wisdom with a healthy dollop of completely baffling grammar.

[BartSimpson]

carrion5 wrote:

What a shame. She should've starred in in the apocalyptic movie 2012 instead. I can see it now: 2012: The Year Sarah Palin Assumes the Presidency.

The earliest she could assume the Presidency would be at noon on January 20, 2013.

That's if she runs.

[BartSimpson]

Thanos wrote:

Films with genuinely offensive subject matter usually bomb anyway.

Not really. Just to be fair, if Michael Moore did a hatchet job on Palin I've no doubt it would be a financial success. I don't like the man, but at least he does evidence some talent.

[Thanos]

That's because Moore has the same type of deluded personalities in his fanbase that Palin does. To them he (she) can do no wrong and, as NRO hack Rich Lowry once said of Palin, little starbursts go off in their eyes whenever their idols do/say something the find interesting. The love of fans can be really pathetic sometimes.

[xerxes]

r_p wrote:

there is only one type of movie Palin belongs in, and it ain't a documentary..

Larry Flint thought the same way...

[r_p]

xerxes wrote:

r_p wrote:

there is only one type of movie Palin belongs in, and it ain't a documentary..

Larry Flint thought the same way...

"thankyou for your vote, big boy"

[2Cdo]

There was a first film?