- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: MCU: Most Successful Franchise in US History
Posted on 4/8/14 at 11:20 pm to Freauxzen
Posted on 4/8/14 at 11:20 pm to Freauxzen
You have to account for inflation. If I used the same amount of gas this year as I did in 1977 which would I pay more for?
box office adjusted for inflation
all time ticket sales
The author made the mistake of a bold claim "in US history" but decided not to adjust for inflation because if they did the title would have been false.
box office adjusted for inflation
all time ticket sales
The author made the mistake of a bold claim "in US history" but decided not to adjust for inflation because if they did the title would have been false.
This post was edited on 4/8/14 at 11:28 pm
1
Posted on 4/8/14 at 11:31 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
And while they've retreated, pinning their hopes on a Nolan-influenced world, Marvel has a chance to be successful with a C-level property later this year.
I don't know that they pinned their hopes on Nolan's Batman movies. The Batman movies were more in response to Sony's Spiderman movies, and I think most would agree that it was a very good response.
The problem is that Marvel's response to Sony's and Fox's movies took things to another level when they came up with the idea of making individual movies based on Avengers characters, and then having them all head toward a final Avengers' movie. It was a really novel idea that was ambitious to say the least. I think by the time that reality set in for DC, Marvel was already about to finish up their "phase 1".
Now DC is behind the eight ball, especially since they can't use the highly successful Batman character that Nolan created to jump start their own similar set of movies leading to a JL movie. And now they appear to be unwilling to properly build their characters like Marvel did, and are going to try and throw them together sooner than they should so they can get to their JL movie ASAP.
DC needs to take a deep breath, rewrite what appears to be a rushed attempt to introduce multiple characters in the upcoming MOS2 movie, and make individual movies for their new Batman, Wonder Woman, and whoever else they was to be in their first JL movie.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 2:13 pm to Bamatab
quote:
I don't know that they pinned their hopes on Nolan's Batman movies. The Batman movies were more in response to Sony's Spiderman movies, and I think most would agree that it was a very good response.
They're pinning their hopes on the kind of ultra-realism that Nolan brought, that's all I mean.
Where Marvel and the MCU are giving us a Silver Age take on comic book movies (in feel not in storyline), DC is going for something akin to a graphic novel.
Was it a good response though? That remains to be seen. Sure it made some money for a short time, but it's over.
quote:
The problem is that Marvel's response to Sony's and Fox's movies took things to another level when they came up with the idea of making individual movies based on Avengers characters, and then having them all head toward a final Avengers' movie. It was a really novel idea that was ambitious to say the least. I think by the time that reality set in for DC, Marvel was already about to finish up their "phase 1".
Now DC is behind the eight ball, especially since they can't use the highly successful Batman character that Nolan created to jump start their own similar set of movies leading to a JL movie. And now they appear to be unwilling to properly build their characters like Marvel did, and are going to try and throw them together sooner than they should so they can get to their JL movie ASAP.
DC needs to take a deep breath, rewrite what appears to be a rushed attempt to introduce multiple characters in the upcoming MOS2 movie, and make individual movies for their new Batman, Wonder Woman, and whoever else they was to be in their first JL movie.
I agree. Too bad one of DC's writers doesn't, Goyer:
quote:
I mean, it’s too early. I know that Warner Bros. would love to make their universe more cohesive. There have been a lot of general conversations about that, but it’s really, really early. I’m not sure. Marvel has had enormous success, but I’m not sure that everybody should try to emulate them either. It’s just been vague conversations so far.
LINK
Marvel started with cohesion, or that idea of cohesion. Yeah they made individual films first, but there was the goal to combine.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 2:24 pm to DoUrden
quote:
The author made the mistake of a bold claim "in US history" but decided not to adjust for inflation because if they did the title would have been false.
I get what you're saying, but it is a fact that this franchise has made more money than any other in history. You can't argue with that, and inflation doesn't even dispute that.
Sure, in terms of comparative dollars, others are higher...but no franchise has grossed more dollars in US history. That is true.
ETA: BTW, this will be completely shattered if James Cameron decides to keep making more Avatar films (after this trilogy).
This post was edited on 4/9/14 at 2:25 pm
Posted on 4/9/14 at 2:25 pm to CocomoLSU
Isn't Star Wars gonna be every year also? That's gonna rack up the cash.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 2:27 pm to CocomoLSU
quote:
I get what you're saying, but it is a fact that this franchise has made more money than any other in history. You can't argue with that, and inflation doesn't even dispute that.
Sure, in terms of comparative dollars, others are higher...but no franchise has grossed more dollars in US history. That is true.
Yup.
quote:
ETA: BTW, this will be completely shattered if James Cameron decides to keep making more Avatar films (after this trilogy).
Depends on how many films, but yeah...Avatar was something like 1.5 billion in the US or whatever. Ridiculous.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 2:30 pm to Master of Sinanju
quote:
Isn't Star Wars gonna be every year also? That's gonna rack up the cash.
True. SW may ultimately win in the end.
But James Cameron films make BANK. Two of his movies (fricking TWO) have grossed about 5 billion dollars worldwide. I realize this article is about domestic BO, but still...for two movies to have grossed that much money is insane. I don't even care if IMAX/3D prices drove the totals up. And the next two Avatars will keep printing money for Cameron. shite, Terminator 2 made over half a billion dollars 23 years ago.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 2:31 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
Avatar was something like 1.5 billion in the US or whatever. Ridiculous.
$760 million.
Titanic was $658.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 2:37 pm to CocomoLSU
Does anyone else think that only having certain characters to work with may have worked to the MCUs advantage?
It allowed them tighter focus on the stories they can actually tell because so much stuff is off limits.
I think it's kind of a case of restrictions enhancing creativity instead of stifling it.
It allowed them tighter focus on the stories they can actually tell because so much stuff is off limits.
I think it's kind of a case of restrictions enhancing creativity instead of stifling it.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 2:42 pm to CocomoLSU
quote:
but no franchise has grossed more dollars in US history
$4 per ticket will gross less than $12 a ticket. Sure I can sell a a hundred tickets today, charge more for them, and have more dollar in my hand. By the authors standard today's bread is the largest grossing bread of all time, but that doesn't tell me anything other than bread is more expensive today.
If you take tickets sold for each franchise and apply today's prices I wonder how the numbers would look, and MCU even has a couple of extra movies i think.
This post was edited on 4/9/14 at 2:44 pm
Posted on 4/9/14 at 2:46 pm to DoUrden
quote:
$4 per ticket will gross less than $12 a ticket. Sure I can sell a a hundred tickets today, charge more for them, and have more dollar in my hand. By the authors standard today's bread is the largest grossing bread of all time, but that doesn't tell me anything other than bread is more expensive today.
But you could also say that one particular bread has made more money than any other bread in history.
That's the point.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 2:48 pm to DoUrden
quote:
$4 per ticket will gross less than $12 a ticket. Sure I can sell a a hundred tickets today, charge more for them, and have more dollar in my hand. By the authors standard today's bread is the largest grossing bread of all time, but that doesn't tell me anything other than bread is more expensive today.
If you take tickets sold for each franchise and apply today's prices I wonder how the numbers would look, and MCU even has a couple of extra movies i think.
But the problem is that you can keep going with that, I mean if you're going to compare just straight ticket prices, you have to compare what goes into that ticket price too. Why does the price rise? How much competition is involved, etc. All of those questions are important too.
So although this:
quote:
$4 per ticket will gross less than $12 a ticket. Sure I can sell a a hundred tickets today, charge more for them, and have more dollar in my hand. By the authors standard today's bread is the largest grossing bread of all time, but that doesn't tell me anything other than bread is more expensive today.
Is true. Tickets have a value related to the whole of entertainment right? Not just a "movie ticket."
You can't really end there. Back when Gone with the Wind and even Star Wars came out, there were few options. So if you're going to analyze based solely on an elevated ticket price, then it's equally important to say how many movies were out/how much competition? Etc.
Didn't GWtW have maybe like 1 or 2 competitors on the 1 or 2 screens where it played? Your pull on the audience is much easier if there's less to do.
This is why both values are important simply evaluating my inflation-adjusted numbers doesn't paint a full picture either.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 2:50 pm to drizztiger
quote:yea the bulk of the money Starwars brought in was in the 70's..... and there are only 6 movies. add inflation i bet just those 6 movies beat Marvel.
Note: Doesn't account for inflation, is US only, and most Marvel films are released in 3D.
Note is important.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 3:03 pm to Freauxzen
I understand what you are saying, but the author takes nothing into consideration when making his claim other than "made more money." If he wants credibility to me do some homework and work and present your case.
Using his philosophy I should have a column based on Wonder Bread (just pulled that out of the air) being the highest grossing bread of all time.
Using the link at the top of the page the six Star Wars films sold 598.1 million tickets at $10 a ticket that's 5,981 billion gross.
Using his philosophy I should have a column based on Wonder Bread (just pulled that out of the air) being the highest grossing bread of all time.
Using the link at the top of the page the six Star Wars films sold 598.1 million tickets at $10 a ticket that's 5,981 billion gross.
This post was edited on 4/9/14 at 3:13 pm
Posted on 4/9/14 at 3:17 pm to DoUrden
quote:
I understand what you are saying, but the author takes nothing into consideration when making his claim other than "made more money." If he wants credibility to me do some homework and work and present your case.
So you don't understand that there's a difference between a straight gross and a gross adjusted for inflation? It isn't a magical number or made up, the industry tracks BOTH inflation adjusted numbers and straight ticket sales numbers.
quote:
Using his philosophy I should have a column based on Wonder Bread (just pulled that out of the air) being the highest grossing bread of all time.
And there's nothing wrong with that statement.
quote:
Using the link at the top of the page the six Star Wars films sold 598.1 million tickets at $10 a ticket that's 5,981 billion gross.
Agreed. Star Wars is a beast in adjusted dollars. So are Snow White, GwtW, and the Wizard of Oz. Good for them.
Ticket prices have risen, less people physically go to movies, and there are a lot more options for people to spend their time, not to mention DVD sales, toy sales and everything else.
I'm just saying the data is certainly incomplete, but making it "inflation adjusted," doesn't make it more complete. It just looks at it from a different angle.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 3:20 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
So you don't understand that there's a difference between a straight gross and a gross adjusted for inflation?
Yes I do and that's why I have a problem with the author.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 3:22 pm to DoUrden
quote:
Yes I do and that's why I have a problem with the author.
Why?
Both numbers are important to understanding the cultural and economic impact of a film.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 3:32 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
Doesn't account for inflation,
Those star wars number are amazing considering that.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 3:39 pm to Freauxzen
"Most Successful Franchise in US History"
Who gets to define the meaning of "success?"
He makes a grand claim then picks one things that works for his argument. IMO it should have been titled "Top grossing franchise in US history."
Who gets to define the meaning of "success?"
He makes a grand claim then picks one things that works for his argument. IMO it should have been titled "Top grossing franchise in US history."
Posted on 4/9/14 at 3:46 pm to DoUrden
Let's just add in the Disney animated movies and call it a day, I'd be surprised if anything even sniffs the amount I money the have made.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News