[Professor S]

I want to apologize if I came off as snippy in this thread. I just realized how my tone has been and I don't know why I did that. I guess there is a lot on my mind right now, with an upcoming engagement to my longtime gf, my computer giving me fits and work getting nuts.

Sorry if I came off to willfull, I'm trying to tone that part of my personality down.

And Null, I do get what you're saying, but I disagree with your association of art with profit. It may have destroyed what the movie was trying to accomplish, but that and profiting off of it are two separate things. To make a profit, first you have to get asses in seats, and the studio directly marketed their film to those asses who would not be allowed to sit in the seats. Plus, according to the research I posted the PG-13 crowd are the lionshare of the repeat viewing audience, which is why movies like Titanic, LoTR and Pirates of the Carribbean do so well. Its the PG-13 audience that have the expendible money and more importantly TIME to see those movies multiple times. When you have a niche movie like SOAP, you NEED multiple viewings to make lots of money.

I understand what you're saying, I just think you're incorrect in this case, and the empirical research backs me up on this as well as my years in marketing. Maybe I can't 100% prove you wrong, which is pretty much impossible in anything you could say, but I'll accept 90% any day.