Barnack

Limiting the list to movie that made more money and released after Godzilla Force Awaken/Last Jedi/Interstellar were quite something has well craft wise. But yeah Godzilla is up there imo, absolutely beautiful (lot of Rogue One wasn't bad either in that regard).

Would be if it hold up I think. Apocalyspe: 4,150 theater start Future Past: 3,996 theater start

Is it a type ? Did you meat out of a $39M intl. week.

I think the logic proposed is much more: Some people went to see Avatar/Titanic because of how popular they were, that being really big at the box office by itself bring curious to see what the success is about/so many people cannot be wrong and I think it is really true. There people at my work that bring box office into why they are going to see the movie or not.

IF it beat Beasts by "just" 100m, it would go in the column of wow that beauty and the beast got really big.

No to say a big end game spolier, but how could it not be a prequel, isn't the only question how far back it is ?

Or how low some went for what they had to work with in property value....

Céline had decade of success and a giant world star before Titanic (Had album going over 10 million sales before and she opened the Olympics in 1996): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celine_Dion_albums_discography

“Brightburn,” a coproduction with the H Collective, did better. This horror riff on the Superman myth (an alien boy comes to earth, raised as a typical human, but grows up on a different path) is another low-budget Screen Gems presentation (around $6 million). It managed $7.5 million for the weekend without significant star power (Elizabeth Banks the best-known name), bad reviews, and not a lot of attention in a weekend where “Aladdin” and “Booksmart” grabbed most of the air. Its Cinemascore is still embargoed, suggesting mediocre or lower. https://www.indiewire.com/2019/05/aladdin-box-office-booksmart-brightburn-1202144835/ I didn't even knew that was an option.

I feel like (if your market look like mine), nowaday 1) rarely an owner of the theater that care on place 2) a lot of screen to look at so they do not 3) Terrible staff of teenager that do not care what so ever. A lot of the terrible projection is pure laziness/understaff for the number of screen, for example it is common now for theater to not mask the screen for the good ratio (if it 2.25:1, 16:9, 4:3, etc...) that do not require any fancy technology equipment to do, make the experience much cheaper and terrible and it is not done purely because the theater do not care, usually there is not even someone in the room when the projection start to see if it is even the right movie playing and if it look ok so much they rely on the automatic digital projection.

In my market the trailer did play quite a bit in theater before movies, but I do not feel they play well and with what very well received comedy make these days a 7/10 one is not an easy sell.

Not sure if RT existence has any relevance here and not many in there have bad legs for what they were. Are you saying that before critics had no power for mainstream affair, for a little while when RT became more popular they had a big one and about 2 year's ago they stopped and turned back to irrelevant ?

Was it would have to calculate because it was quite common Transformer 2-3-4, Twilight, Mamma Mia, National Treasure franchise, the fockers franchise, Madea, many of the Fast&Furious, BadBoys 2, Miss Congeniality, Sex and the City, How the grinch stole christmas, Blind Side, Chipmunks, 300, Armagageddon, What Women want, Pretty Woman, Robin Hood, The Proposal (well a lot of Bullock and Will Smith filmography), almost all of Sandler filmography, The Mummy, Runaway bride, We're the millers, Daddy's Home, Taken franchise, The Great Gatsby, The Santa Clause, a lot of rom-coms, Patch Adams has a 22% RT score, made over 200m in 1998 and an over 5.0 multiplier and a A cinemascore, Dumb and Dumber has a 41 metascore.

With an expected 25/75 split or more intl heavy, for making 150m WW you are talking under 40m domestic for a 200m action Sci-fi. Valerian went really really bad and did 225m.

Yeah I agree, the more success you have with brands work and the more brand, the less reason you have to venture in them. Arguably the others have more reason and should try to venture in new things instead of trying to compete franchise vs franchise but with weaker ones.

This is true, liking or not a movie is a more a review by a reviewer, a critic goes more profound that did someone liked or not a movie (not something that will necessarily even be brought up at all or have any relevance in a movie critic) How the movie fit inside the artist body of work, how does it compare with current zeitgeist of similar movie, current cultural/social/political way the movie was made in. Film criticism is the study, interpretation, and evaluation of a film and its place in cinema history. Film criticism usually offers interpretation of its meaning, analysis of its structure and style, judgement of its worth by comparison with other films, and an estimation of its likely effect on viewers. Film theory (e.g. feminist, postmodernist, etc.) often informs the critical analysis of a film. Criticism may examine a particular film, or may look at a group of films in the same genre, or a director's or actor's body of work. Film criticism differs from movie reviews in several ways: it entails both analysis and judgement; it may be published many years after a film is released; it is usually longer and more complex than a movie review. A movie review documents the critical reception of a film at its time of theatrical or dvd release. It is more "consumer-oriented," placing more emphasis on recommendation than analysis. Reviews of feature films or mainstream films may be found in online databases, newspapers, and general interest magazines (e.g. New York Times, Village Voice, Cineaste). In-depth criticism and analyses of some feature films or mainstream films, foreign films, independent films, documentaries, etc. may be found in more scholarly or academic publications (e.g. Film Quarterly, Cinema Journal, Film International). https://researchguides.uvm.edu/c.php?g=290200&p=3481769

Does it ? 2009 top 10 box office metacritic score: avatar: 83 Transformer: 35 Potter: 78 twilight: 44 Up: 88 Hangover: 73 Star trek: 82 blind Side: 53 Chipmunks: 43 Sherlock Holmes: 57 Average: 63.6 1999: Star wars: 51 Sixth Sense: 64 Toy Story: 88 Austin Powers: 59 Matrix: 73 Tarzan: 79 Big Daddy: 41 Mummy: 48 Runaway Bride: 39 Blair witch: 81 Average: 62.3 1989: Batman: 69 Indiana Jones: 65 Lethal Weapon: 70 Look who's talking: 51 Shrunk the kids: 63 Back to the future 2: 57 ghostbuster 2: 59 Little mermaid: 88 Driving Miss daisy: 81 Parenthood: 82 Average: 68.5 Last year 2018: Black Panter: 88 Avengers: 68 Incredibles 2: 80 fallen Kingdom: 51 Aquaman: 55 Deadpool 2: 66 Grinch: 51 Fallout: 86 Ant Man: 70 Bohemian rhapsody: 49 Average: 66.4 --------------------------------------- Aren't critics (at least the getting to influence RT score) getting more and more closer and closer to your average movie goers, simple people that never studied/made movies, do not watch necessarily 400-450 new release a year in small festival, that simply watch the main hollywood affair and review them online ? I have the feeling that has the bar to becoming a "critic" is getting lower and lower (in term of movie knowledge) and the access to every movies for everyone got easier and easier the gap is getting smaller instead of larger no ? The critics favorites not winning the box office has been quite common since the 80s.

Regardless of content, It would be a bad moment for the audience review bomber to do it, if the first movie with the new system would show a big gap between verified score and non-verified that would show a confirmation to the people that think that those result were the result of trolling. They need to find a good way around the current system first.

Source ? 346 world release tracked by Mojo https://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?view2=worldwide&yr=2009&p=.htm 308 in 2018: https://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?view2=worldwide&yr=2018&p=.htm But I imagine there is many thousand not tracked by box office mojo. Needless to say that 200 or 500 movie made under 1 million and getting almost no release do not change much of anything to the global box office it it look like the domestic market.

One way could be removing special outlier (certain amount of std dev amount above the average top 10), so if one year have 2 special movie it would remove both), but yes going with the top movies is probably a better way to go than looking directly at global box office change. Some of the global box office increase come from for example a new China blockbuster industry, that do not really help an hollywood movie make more, but at the same time the industry became more top heavy helping the biggest title, it take those force into account better. Maybe I will try to do it from the start, and using a different amount of standard deviation to catch out liner and score the movies relative to how well they did relative to big movies of their time (maybe include the year just before and just after into it, many movie are holiday release like Avatar and half a 2009, half 2010 more than a pure 2009 affair, same for Force Awaken)

I am maybe a bit slow, but I really fail to understand what excluding EndGame from the 2018 global box office would mean in pratice, it is a 2019 release.

There is no End Game in 2018, so I imagine you didn't exclude Infinity War from that year average, 1108 would go down to 1003m For the total: 2009: 29.4 billion 2018: 41.1 billion Almost exact same 39.8% If it became more top heavy at the same time soem of the growth also include new China blockbuster.

Except beating the domestic OW record by 39% (second best ever only Return of the Jedi 23m beating Star Trek 2 14.3m being a bigger jump according to this): https://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/pastrecords.htm And I would imagine the OW record in a lot of market as well. Having the most attendance ever in some markets and some regions events.

The strange idea of a Jump Street shared universe for this would have sound much more interesting.

Ahhh: Which means nothing since if you increase the box office total by 150%, double the rate of inflation and it still loses to EG. Ok I thought you meant if you increase the box office total by 150% than double the rate of inflation it is still behind. Forget all of this.