While in town visiting his parents, Atlantic editor Conor Friedersdorf decided to work some reporting into his trip by checking out last night's premiere of The Undefeated, aka the Sarah Palin documentary, and interviewing the folks who made their way out to the late-night showing. AMC at The Block in Orange is one of only 10 theaters in the country rolling out the film. He figured there'd be a huge turnout in a county where "even Richard Nixon's association with this place is treated as a point of pride."OK, good. That made me smile.
What he came back with was a sad yet hilarious account of being the only one in the theater.
But what do I find in today’s OC Register? Why, it’s this:
Distributor: Strong opening for Palin film in Orange (Frank Shyong)
Sarah Palin's documentary "The Undefeated" grossed just $68,000 nationwide on its opening weekend, but the film's debut in Orange was met with enthusiasm and strong numbers.Huh? Reporter Shyong was working with factoids provided by the film’s distributor:
According to a news release from the film's distributor, ARC Entertainment, "The Undefeated" earned a per screen average of more than $11,000 on its opening weekend at the AMC 30 at the Block.Good grief. So many stupid people. So little chance of avoiding them.
The news release called the opening "stronger than expected." The film debuted at just 10 theatres nationwide, with Orange representing its second most popular location with Atlanta the most popular. ARC Entertainment CEO Trevor Drinkwater said they selected Orange after extensive demographic research that identified the town as a pro-Palin market.
Palin supporters and others [gosh, exactly who?] have fought to shape the film's media hype since its opening. An article on the Atlantic's website on Friday described an empty theater on opening night and several major news outlets picked up the news.
But Ron Smith, a member of the California chapter of Organize 4 Palin, said that comparison is ridiculous because the reporter only attended the midnight showing. He saw the movie twice on Friday, once at 4 p.m. and again at 7 p.m.
"If I had known there was a midnight showing, I would have been there," said Smith, who drove from Long Beach to see the movie. "But most of us conservatives have a job, and things to do at night, like sleeping."
Smith claims that the halls were 80% filled at the two showings he attended.
Gosh, maybe we can hear from an objective party. Shyong contacted the theater but they refused to comment on how much business the Palin film has been getting.
So, what are we to make of all of this?
I believe the Atlantic guy. But of course he only attended the midnight showing. His inference that the movie wasn’t doing well seems reasonable to me, even if, in the end, the film does well.
But would the film’s distributor lie? —Sure. That “$11K per screen” business sounds hinky to me. (Remember, nobody showed up for midnight.) Smith? —He might have exaggerated a bit, but I doubt that he was lying.
My guess is that, on Friday, business was lots better for the earlier showings—maybe not 80%, but decent; hence the reports by Smith, et al. And the Atlantic guy likely really did find the theater empty for that midnight showing. That would leave an impression on me, too.
Woo notes that The Atlantic’s Friedersdorf has inspired pushback and right-wing conspiracy theories (How I Became the Subject of a Conspiracy Theory). Friedersdorf explains that someone claiming to be involved in marketing the film blogged that the midnight showing was never advertised and that, therefore, Friedersdorf must have attended a “secret showing” provided by theater employees! No wonder nobody attended!
Now, in fact, the midnight showing was advertised (e.g., in the LA Times and elsewhere), and Friedersdorf collected proof of that. He sent it to the blogger, asking for a correction and an apology.
The blogger’s response? “The film's listing in the LA Times only proved ‘how elaborate such a setup could be.’”
Ah, yes. The refutation of his charge is in fact just further evidence for it! Unbelievable.
Sarah Palin supporters have busily promulgated this ridiculous and incompetent conspiracy theory. Unsurprisingly, Andrew Breitbart joined in the fun, repeating the daffy theory that is so easily refuted with perfectly available facts. And, beyond all that, Friedersdorf has been subject to vulgar ad hominem attacks.
But of course!
There have always been stupid (and loutish) people. So, OK, nowadays, some of ‘em are called “tea partiers” and Sarah Palin fans. And, as usual, lots of ‘em live right here in Orange County.
But I worry that these people will actually get their candidate elected.
If someone like Palin or Bachmann secures the Presidency, I just don’t know what I’ll do. Obviously, reason would be useless on their supporters.
What do you do when reason becomes useless?
I have no idea. Hide.
4 comments:
To anyone with a brain, you'er right on point. But here's a brief commentary from another site that helps explain these people's adoration:
"But in the dream world of Palin’s hardcore fan base -- and perhaps even her own mind -- none of this matters. Instead, Palin partisans focus on her constructed identity: a patriotic, God-fearing small-town girl who grew up in a Normal Rockwell Ameritopia of state fairs, basketball tournaments, beauty pageants and wooden churches. To announce one’s support for Palin is to declare one’s belief that this vision of America somehow can be recaptured, that the country’s social contract can magically be turned back to the era of sock hops and drive-in restaurants, if only Americans elect the right people. To put down Palin, on the other hand, means that you hate America."
Hide? How about you move to Europe?
Or, you move to Arizona? I like that better.
Definite, and perhaps definitive, proof that the lunky belief in a liberal-biased media is BS. Good reporting, BvT!
Post a Comment