Difference between Brahmastra vs Drishyam vs PS1 propganda - Page 2

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

With the kind of numbers that Drishyam is getting, highly doubt occupancy was 30%. It's a bonafide super hit. One anecdote vs. total numbers.

And KJo himself admitted earnings of Brahmastra was lower than budget, but budget itself was meant for a trilogy. Reasonable people would be willing to understand that, but if it's looked at a single film, it didn't make back the budget.

But the noise on social media would have you thinking Brahmastra beat Maverick. It's going to invite trolling when people see other movies doing much higher percentages on much lower budgets, with no gimmickery attached to it like 200 influencers gushing over it.

I am sure I would know more about the occupancy of the theatre in which I watched the movie

I am not denying that Drishyam was a superhit. Neither did I talk about the whole India occupancy. Just about the theatre in my area. Just shared my personal experience.

All the buzz around Brahmastra was well deserved. Brahmastar was all anybody talked about both online and offline. This is one movie franchise that will continue to make buzz

People are interested. Accept this very simple fact

I too wonder why a film with bigger names attached making more money generated more buzz than Drishyam 2. What a mystery. 😆

Not sure about PS2, but I am sure it would have obviously generated a lot of conversation in their own media circles.

Originally posted by: M.Wheeler

What is that supposed to mean? Are you implying that I am a liar?

I am sure I would know more about the occupancy of the theatre in which I watched the movie

I am not denying that Drishyam was a superhit. Neither did I talk about whole India occupancy. Jut about the theatre in my area. Just shared my personal experience.

Seriously, You are my friend. This was really not cool

Quoting from what I said: One anecdote vs. total numbers.

Where did you get 'liar' from that? Why are you accusing me of things I never said?

I'm saying you are wrong. Drishyam's makers are actually getting more screens because the occupancy is very high.

But you talked about something you saw during one show in one theater in one city as opposed to Bollywood belt.

Not even all India, like Brahmastra numbers were reported. Drishyam HINDI because it's been released/being released as different movies in other languages.

Brahmastra box office didn't reach its budget. That's just a fact. Drishyam 2 and PS1 box office exceeded budget many fold. Also facts.

But the way Brahmastra got hailed on social media, it sounded like the ultimate in box office record breakers.

Originally posted by: semantic.error

I too wonder why a film with bigger names attached making more money generated more buzz than Drishyam 2. What a mystery. 😆

Not sure about PS2, but I am sure it would have obviously generated a lot of conversation in their own media circles.

Ranbir is a bigger name than Ajay Devgan? I don't think even Ranbir himself will dare make that claim at this point in his career.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Quoting from what I said: One anecdote vs. total numbers.

Where did you get 'liar' from that? Why are you accusing me of things I never said?

I'm saying you are wrong. Drishyam's makers are actually getting more screens because the occupancy is very high.

But you talked about something you saw during one show in one theater in one city as opposed to Bollywood belt.

Not even all India, like Brahmastra numbers were reported. Drishyam HINDI because it's been released/being released as different movies in other languages.

Brahmastra didn't reach its budget. That's just a fact. Drishyam 2 and PS1 exceeded budget many fold. Also facts.

But the way Brahmastra got hailed on social media, it sounded like the ultimate in box office record breakers.

I edited my post. But if you want to continue I have no problem 😆

Explain this - "With the kind of numbers that Drishyam is getting, highly doubt occupancy was 30%. "

Explain to me HOW AM I WRONG about the theatre occupancy in which I watched the film? I mean I was present there and you were not

It was my personal experience. I actually felt very bad that you implied that I am somehow lying about theatre occupancy

But if that is not what you meant then its ok

Originally posted by: M.Wheeler

I edited my post. But if you want to continue I have no problem 😆

Explain this - "With the kind of numbers that Drishyam is getting, highly doubt occupancy was 30%. "

Explain to me HOW AM I WRONG about the theatre occupancy in which I watched the film? I mean I was present there and you were not

You watched one show in one theater. Theatre occupancy is reported all over the place. Not only that, they had increase the number of screens because more people were lining up.

That makes you wrong.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Ranbir is a bigger name than Ajay Devgan? I don't think even Ranbir himself will dare make that claim at this point in his career.

Well I dared. Sue me?😆

Originally posted by: semantic.error

Well I dared. Sue me?😆

Why? You're a random person on the internet.😆 You can proclaim yourself raja of Dadar if you want. No one would care.

Now if RK dared to call himself bigger than Ajay Devgan, there is a minor chance of severe trolling.😆

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

You watched one show in one theater. Theatre occupancy is reported all over the place. Not only that, they had increase the number of screens because more people were lining up.

That makes you wrong.

But I clearly highlighted in my initial post that theatre in I watched had 30% occupancy. Just my personal experience

I cannot be wrong about my personal experience. That does not even make sense

Originally posted by: M.Wheeler

But I clearly highlighted in my initial post that theatre in I watched had 30% occupancy. Just my personal experience

I cannot be wrong about my personal experience. That does not even make sense

It is a personal anecdote. For all we know this could have been one theatre that was like this out of many. It also depends on how many screens a particular movie had.