GibbsFactor Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Carrie Fisher back as Princess Leia? Hmm, not so fast The actress's rep tells CNN she was just joking when she confirmed she'll be returning to the role that made her famous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Exactly. Can't even tell the difference. I defy anyone to confidently identify which pic is from the 1980s and which is more recent. You can't do it. You have to guess. Meg is timeless. I know I can't. She'll probably look like that at 120. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Disney paid 2 billion dollars to sell a bunch of toys and merch that'll go along with an awful movie. Star Wars junkies will go see it no matter what. It'll do well at the box office, but that doesn't mean they'll be good. Yes because nothing sells merchandise like a terrible movie..... No, Disney spent $2 billion for the rights to Star Wars, and will spend probable $200 million minimum for each picture. The primary asset they are paying for is the movie receipts which for passed movies have earned huge money.... Star Wars Episode 1 $1,027,044,677 (1999) Star Wars Episode 3 $__848,754,768 (2005) Star Wars Episode 4 $__775,398,007 (1977) ----- 2.7 billion in today's money adjusted for inflation No by far the most valuable component of the deal is the right to make more movies... and that only works if they make good movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsFactor Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Yes because nothing sells merchandise like a terrible movie.....No, Disney spent $2 billion for the rights to Star Wars, and will spend probable $200 million minimum for each picture. The primary asset they are paying for is the movie receipts which for passed movies have earned huge money.... Star Wars Episode 1 $1,027,044,677 (1999) Star Wars Episode 3 $__848,754,768 (2005) Star Wars Episode 4 $__775,398,007 (1977) ----- 2.7 billion in today's money adjusted for inflation No by far the most valuable component of the deal is the right to make more movies... and that only works if they make good movies. 4 billion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Carrie Fisher back as Princess Leia? Hmm, not so fastThe actress's rep tells CNN she was just joking when she confirmed she'll be returning to the role that made her famous. If Disney wanted her back, she'd be back. Star Wars changed her life... It's made her a house hold name today 35 years after the movie. ---------- Post added March-7th-2013 at 11:20 AM ---------- 4 billion. Thanks... yeah 4 billion... It's a very large investment by an organization which knows how to make good movies, and what happens when you make bad ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Exactly. Can't even tell the difference. I defy anyone to confidently identify which pic is from the 1980s and which is more recent. You can't do it. You have to guess. Meg is timeless. I see more boobage in the 2nd pic, which makes me think she's younger there, but the hair in the first pic has an 80s flair....hmmmm, need more time to examine. Must do a Oogle search. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metalhead Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Exactly. Can't even tell the difference. I defy anyone to confidently identify which pic is from the 1980s and which is more recent. You can't do it. You have to guess. Meg is timeless. Are you saying that she looks identical in these two pictures? I don't see that at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjah Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Are you saying that she looks identical in these two pictures? I don't see that at all. If I didn't know better, I'd swear they're actually the same picture twice... maybe with some very minor color adjustments between them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 If I didn't know better, I'd swear they're actually the same picture twice... maybe with some very minor color adjustments between them. Are you being sarcastic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjah Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Are you being sarcastic? Nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofSparta Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Are you being sarcastic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma There Goes That Man Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 I know you guys are just being kind to Meg Ryan who looks good for her age but come on, you can easily tell the difference in those pictures. Look at her face, the wrinkles, bags under her eyes and sagging in the 2nd one is obvious. I feel like you're just playing around... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 I know you guys are just being kind to Meg Ryan who looks good for her age but come on, you can easily tell the difference in those pictures. Look at her face, the wrinkles, bags under her eyes and sagging in the 2nd one is obvious. I feel like you're just playing around... LOL. That's what I'm trying to figure out. Are they just messing with us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 LOL. That's what I'm trying to figure out. Are they just messing with us? That's what I'm trying to figure out. Are you messing with us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 That's what I'm trying to figure out. Are you messing with us? Actually, the first picture is from 2013. The second was taken in the 1990's after an all-nighter where Meg just partied a little too hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Actually, the first picture is from 2013. The second was taken in the 1990's after an all-nighter where Meg just partied a little too hard. We'll never know, she is an ageless beauty and that is the responsibility of the modern American actress. Do people think they are making any woman an actress these days? They pick the ones who look the same forever! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 We'll never know, she is an ageless beauty and that is the responsibility of the modern American actress. Do people think they are making any woman an actress these days? They pick the ones who look the same forever! Or that plastic surgery can maintain forever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 First picture I pulled was from When Harry met Sally. The 2nd picture was as recent as I could find that would download. And yes, they are being sarcastic or in denial, which just isn't a river in Egypt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 first picture i pulled was from when harry met sally. The 2nd picture was as recent as i could find that would download. And yes, they are being sarcastic or in denial, which just isn't a river in egypt. Absolutely. Meg is the perfect example of what can happen in 30 years and if you try and escape it with plastic surgery. Sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bliz Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Carrie Fisher back as Princess Leia? Hmm, not so fastThe actress's rep tells CNN she was just joking when she confirmed she'll be returning to the role that made her famous. "just joking?" Seriously, actress rep, you expect us to believe that crap? Gee Carrie, ha ha what a funny joke. So presumably they're in discussions but it's not confirmed and signed yet so she's not technically allowed to say anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Botched Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 "just joking?" Seriously, actress rep, you expect us to believe that crap? Gee Carrie, ha ha what a funny joke. So presumably they're in discussions but it's not confirmed and signed yet so she's not technically allowed to say anything. It would be hilarious if they did offer the role to her and she passed on it. I'd have crazy respect for her forever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjah Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Are you being sarcastic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 http://www.realitytvworld.com/news/george-lucas-mark-hamill-carrie-fisher-harrison-ford-in-talks-1033842.php?utm_source=scribol.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=scribol.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.