Is This Going To Beat Avatar?
Its slowing down especially in US, would di$ney buy out theaters to beat their own record. With them building Avatar land , they may pull out from record
shareYes....
it Will beat Avatar....
and if by "slowing down" you mean having completely normal holds last week and ABOVE average hold this week and weekend...then ya its slowing down....
EG should be at a hold 2.540 Billion By Sunday...
By Next sunday it will pass 2.7 B
and Then for the rest of its run it will finish in The 2.8 + Billion Range
EG should Finish has the highest grossing movie ever World Wide
2nd highest Grossing movie ever domestically with IMO around 870 M+
We wont see another film do this for at least another decade...and Its very possible some of EG records Will never be broken...
I find it extremely hard to believe any film will ever have a 1.2 B+ global opening ever again.
I guarantee no film will ever TOP the previous opening Weekend record by 100 M...before EG the highest any film ever topped The opening weekend record was like 50 M...
IF another film ever does top EGs 357 M OW(which IMO it might take at least a Decade) Theres zero chance it will top by 101 M to break EGs record..
all in all...
EG literally exceeded all possible expectations
exceeded all expectations besides domestic, right? it was suppose to at least challenge TFA. Now 900m domestic may be a challenge.
share@darkpast
Hell... 850 million may be a challenge.
No one expected it to beat The Force Awakens. Before it was released the most optimistic expectations were that it would end up with about $800 million domestically, and around $2.5 billion globally, those were considered pie-in-the-sky nearly impossible best case scenario figures.
shareThis week and weekend have been "above average holds", Bill?
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Sunday to Monday drop was 76%. The normal Tuesday recovery "bump" was just 17%. That's "above average"?
Thursday's gross was 7.5 million...DOWN from 21.5 million the previous Thursday!!!!
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
THAT'S "above average holds", huh?
What I find interesting is when you adjust for inflation nothing beats Gone With the Wind. Nothing probably ever will when factoring that in.
shareGone with the Wind is not the highest grossing worldwide release if you adjust for inflation, it is only the highest grossing US release. It's actually practically impossible to do inflation adjusted figures for worldwide totals. Also, I'm not sure how reliable those estimates are. According to Box Office Mojo, the Wizard of Oz only made 1/10 the BO of Gone with the Wind, which I find implausible.
The Gone with the Wind numbers are just fanciful estimates. Considering people used to go to the cinema much more often before TV existed, never mind the internet, I'm sure that if anyone bothered to really research the statistics properly, then all of the top 20 films in terms of number of tickets sold would be pre 1960.
Inflation adjusted figures for worldwide totals are easy as you are looking at the total dollar value only. For the people who do not understand measurement: you have to define what you are looking for, first.
In this case it's monetary gains, in today's dollars. Because people can relate to dollar value! (And THAT'S what you are looking for when comparing movies this way) If you have the worldwide gross of a movie in dollars of that time then you can apply the inflation corrected amount in this this time.
Here endeth the lesson.
They are easy to calculate if you calculate them incorrectly, yes.
shareYou are comparing dollar values from then with now. It's simple, really.
shareSimple and wrong, yes.
shareWhat is wrong about that? The totals were written in dollars. Dollars of their time. The inflation of the dollar is well known. What is wrong about that? We are talking about Hollywood movies, right?
shareyes, you can do any calculation you want and rank films accordingly, but what is the point? What sense does it make to convert currencies into dollars in 1940, and then apply US inflation rates, ignoring exchange rates?
What you really want to know is how many tickets were sold. OK but all that would tell you is that Cinema was more popular when there was no television,Xbox or internet. Films like Starwars and ET played for YEARS at the cinema. Can you imagine that today, when within 6 months of release you can watch a film in HD in your home theater?
The number of dollars a movie made at the Box office is a hard number that everyone can agree on. Obviously with fluctuating inflation, exchange rates, increase in the overseas BO(especially in China), increasing competition from other forms of entertainment, comparing Box Office for films released a long time apart doesn't make much sense.
You CAN convert foreign currencies into dollars in 1940 and then apply US inflation rates, but it's arbitrary and dumb. Inflation adjusted figures make sense only for the US box office, which is why Boxofficemojo does not show worldwide inflation adjusted numbers.
There are two numbers that objective and don't require arbitrary tampering: The number of dollars grossed, and the number of tickets sold. Everything else is just making shit up.
I want to know what a dollar bought in the past compared to what it buys today. So it makes perfect sense to attribute a dollar value to the total revenue of that time, then adjust that for inflation to the current dollar value. It's not rocket science and it gives a good and realistic comparison.
shareyou will find that what a dollar buys you is very different depending on which country you are in, and which year.
shareCertainly. But for a meaningful comparison you have to compare the value in the USA only. Like when you want to determine if Rockefeller was richer than Bezos.
sharealienzen is right. Just using inflation doesn’t really show you the true box office, because there are other things to consider. Not just how much more the dollar is worth now. Back when Gone With the Wind came out, you could go see a movie for roughly $0.25. If you try to convert that same price to today’s value, you come up with $4.48, according to https://www.calculator.net/inflation-calculator.htm Nowadays you’re looking at anywhere from $10-$16 or more for a regular ticket. And then there’s 3D and IMAX, which is even more expensive to see. The math doesn’t add up. The rate of inflation doesn’t apply to current theatre prices. It’s expensive as hell to see a movie nowadays, especially if you buy any food from the concession.
Also, if you live in a smaller town or city, you can likely see a movie far cheaper than someone in a bigger city with a larger population. There’s also discounts to take into consideration, as many places charge less for children and seniors, not to mention early shows before noon or discount days (like Tuesday specials, where I’m from where you get to see a movie for around $7 or $8 on Tuesdays. It used to be around $5 like 10 or less years ago).
The population also grew exponentially over the last several decades. Just imagine, the worldwide population back when Gone with the Wind came out, was roughly 2.3 billion people, give or take. In just 80 years, we more than tripled in population.
Really the best way to see how popular a movie is, is to forget about the dollar value all together, and just look at how many people bought tickets. That tells you how many people put their butts in seats to actually watch the movie, and does away with discount prices or IMAX ticket sales. TV and streaming uses viewer #’s. Interesting that movies don’t.
Here’s an interesting piece I read about how inaccurate it is to use inflation when discussing movies. https://www.usi.edu/media/3655032/How-the-MPA-Miscalculates.pdf
I have just shown an easy way to obtain and compare an approximation of the gains some movies got in their own time, from the perspective of a current cultural reference standing point.
shareBut we have more than triple the population of people today - than in 1920s
shareMost of the increase in the world population has been in third world countries, so how is this relevant to BO? How much did Africa and India contribute to the box office?
shareSo? The question is not how easy it has gotten to reach the amount.
share....aaannnd after this laughable post about Endgame having "above average holds" on it's third week and weekend billbrown has, predictably, disappeared.
It's like he realized..."Oh shit...I really stepped in it this time!". At least he left it as is this time and didn't delete/edit.
Even if his predictions on this one fall flat, it will be no where close to your epic failures documented on this board. You realize that, right?
share....aaannnd after this laughable post about Endgame having "above average holds" on it's third week and weekend billbrown has, predictably, disappeared.
^^^
Queen, Do you at any point do research before posting...
I remember noting both on the 1st and 2nd weekend that EG was having Above average holds, I dont remember doing it the 3rd weekend But I could have
the point being...
did you actually look at EGs holds before typing this awful attempt at Insulting me?
EGs 1st Weekend hold was 58% off a completely unprecedented 357 M OW
EGs 2nd Weekend hold was 57%
EGs 3rd Weekend hold was 52%
Next I ask you, have you done any research into what the average 2nd weekend holds for Blockbusters are and Especially CBM's?
The Majority Of CBMs have 2nd weekend holds of 55 to 60%....
Above average holds are 55 to 50%
Great Holds are Sub 50%
EGs holds were right in The Above average range...
Especially when you consider the astonishing Opening Weekend Number....for EG to have a 58% 2nd weekend drop off a 357 M OW...Its border Line Amazing...
I get it, EGs success kills you, You Missed by almost 100 Million + on EGs opening weekend...You spent Months strangely claiming Presales were overblown and EG wouldnt live up to expectations...I get that I'm your enemy who embarrasses,Abuses and Haunts you with failures...
But you cant just make things up....Just because you want me to be wrong about saying EG had Above average Holds....doesnt mean you can lie about it
Unfortunately for you there are facts, and those facts are on my side...
EG did in fact have above average holds...
PS...I'm sorry But I couldnt help thinking about one of your all time great fails after mentioning you were trying to LIE above...
remember a few months ago when You were at the end of your rope and literally every prediction you made about CM went down in flames and you tried to Make a UP A COMPLETE LIE and I caught you ........TWICE
lol remember when you intentionally Lied about Boxoffice.com and claimed they Predicted Captain Marvel to make 540 Million Domestically on their 1st forecast, so you could try to claim CM didnt live up to expectations in a desperate attempt to save face after all Half dozens of your other predictions failed....
lol remember how I then completely destroyed your life by pulling up The archive and showing That you completely LIED and Bo.com Never made that forecast...
and then Hilariously you made it worse By Intentionally LYING again to try and cover up your previous lie and in this LIE you claimed "Well it must have been one of their other forecasts because I definitely saw it"
remember then how I asked you "wouldnt it just be easier to admit you lied and move on rather than having me prove you LIED again and Post all the archives"....
lol you then made the fatal mistake of saying "Post Them".....and I did...Proving You LIED Yet again
Man, Good Times...
Yes....
it Will beat Avatar....
This could be a huge fail, time will tell!
[–] Bubbathegut (5712) 14 days ago
Yes....
it Will beat Avatar....
This could be a huge fail, time will tell!
^^^^
Oh Man bubba....what am I going to do....I might come up 15 million dollars short?
How am I ever going to recover from such a horrifically awful Prediction?
I mean seriously....I predicted Avatar to make 2.8 M....I might ultimately be off by Less than 2%
Man I will never LIVE this HUGE FAIL down......
Meanwhile if you want to see a True HUGE FAIL.....again I TRUMP YOU with your own failures-
"1 Billion?
posted 5 months ago by Bubbathegut (5712)
51 replies | jump to latest
What are the chances of this beating WW?
nil or zero? "
^^^
definition of HUGE FAIL
[–] Bubbathegut (5712) a month ago
Yes....
it Will beat Avatar....
This could be a huge fail, time will tell!
^^^^^^
what do you think Bubba?
time has "TOLD".....
No HUGE fail here.....
Next time, dont jump the gun....
Epic fail!