Rudolf Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 Take France as an example in 2011 $2.0b and in 2012 $1.7b (15% down), mainly because of successful local movies in 2011 (Intouchables,Rien a Declarer) and less successful local movies in 2012 (Asterix, Marsupilami) so 2 Hollywoodmovies with the same BO in France 2011 and 2012 would produce very different compare-values with your method. The top 15 Hollywood-Blockbusters only fell 6% from 2011 (497.1m) to 2012 (466,7m). So compare-values produced with them vary less. Why should the relative success of a HollywoodBlockbuster in France depend on break-outs of local movies? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tower Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 (edited) Take France as an example in 2011 $2.0b and in 2012 $1.7b (15% down), mainly because of successful local movies in 2011 (Intouchables,Rien a Declarer) and less successful local movies in 2012 (Asterix, Marsupilami) so 2 Hollywoodmovies with the same BO in France 2011 and 2012 would produce very different compare-values with your method. The top 15 Hollywood-Blockbusters only fell 6% from 2011 (497.1m) to 2012 (466,7m). So compare-values produced with them vary less. Why should the relative success of a HollywoodBlockbuster in France depend on break-outs of local movies? Because local films are just as much a part of the market as Hollywood films. What you think of as a negative, I think of as a positive. Edited March 27, 2013 by Tower Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vc2002 Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 China should be around 2:1 at this point. TF4 $300m in China -> $600m in the US: TF4 is supposed to be the highest grossing film of all time in China, so it shouldn't be equal to Avatar's 750m DOM which was a surprising breakout. $600m looks fair. Xmen DOFP and Captain 2 both made $116m in China -> $232m , pretty close to their actual DOM takes. TASM2 $96m in China -> $192M very close to the DOM take And now Ape II looks to be another $100m grosser in China -> $200m in the US. Even closer 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Filmovie Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 (edited) Good Thread Edited September 14, 2014 by Filmovie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kraken Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 Ok, so, for Colombia I tried two methods: 1) BOM gives us a benchmark of 1.5 million dollars that gives a similar amount of films per year as 100 millions DOM. That would give you a multiplier of 66,6. Now, there's a lot of different prices depending on city, day of the week, time of the day, seat, 3D, 4D and a bunch of other stuff but the Ministry of Culture gives us an average price of 9000 pesos. With current ER that would give us a multiplier of 200 admissions to DOM equivalent dollars. 2) The benchmark of 1 million in admissions is usually surpassed by 10 to 15 films, the same ammount for 200 millions DOM. That lines up with method 1. So, I'd say it would be 66,6 dollars to dollars and 200 admissions to dollars. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PangeaMovies Posted March 26, 2016 Share Posted March 26, 2016 In India, the box office collection is very different. The highest grossing film till now is PK. It was released in 2014. Nowadays, there is a strong competition among all Bollywood films in reaching to that 100 Crore Rupees (~1 Billion USD) box office mark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 (edited) I've collected data for the total box office gross in 2015 for a number of territories. The list is by no means comprehensive, it was generally much easier to get information for other English-speaking and European territories. This isn't the only way to put international numbers in perspective, I know that some of you have directly compared the top blockbusters. However, I think this is a pretty good way to do it. It also helps to give a sense of where Hollywood blockbusters do comparatively poorly compared to local releases - India being the most extreme example. Regional conglomerates are in bold. Total 2015 box office in US$ millions, converted from local currency using average exchange rate for 2015, where applicable. Ratio is US + Canada box office compared to territory in question, generally rounded to nearest whole number. Sources listed below table. Quote Territory Total B.O. Ratio Source US + Canada $11,129 n/a (1) Asia/Pacific $14,100 0.8 (2) China $6,780 1.6 (3) Japan $1,794 6 (4) South Korea $1,440 8 (5) India $1,225 9 (6) Hong Kong $256 43 (6) Taiwan $239 47 (7) Australia $922 12 (8) New Zealand $135 82 (9) EMEA $9,700 1.1 (2) United Kingdom $1,889 6 (10) France $1,476 8 (6) Germany $1,295 9 (6) Italy $738 15 (6) Russia $729 15 (11) Spain $586 19 (6) Netherlands $306 36 (6) Turkey $250 45 (12) Switzerland $233 48 (11) Sweden $216 52 (6) Poland $211 53 (11) Denmark $179 62 (6) Norway $153 73 (11) Austria $152 73 (11) Finland $102 109 (6) Portugal $83 134 (11) Greece $70 158 (11) Czech Republic $68 164 (11) Hungary $63 177 (11) Romania $52 215 (11) Israel $134 83 (6) South Africa $79 141 (6) Latin America $3,400 3 (2) Mexico $892 12 (13) Brazil $593 19 (13) Argentina $228 49 (13) Columbia $164 68 (13) Chile $115 97 (13) Sources: Box Office Mojo - Yearly Box Office MPAA Theatrical Market Statistics 2015 Variety - China Box Office Growth Motion Pictures Producers Association of Japan - Statistics Variety - Korea Sets Box Office Records in 2015 German Films - Market Studies Variety - Hong Kong Box Office Screen Australia - Box Office Motion Pictures Distributors' Association of New Zealand - Press Release BFI - The Box Office 2015 Celluloid Junkie - EU Box Office Box Office Türkiye - Yearly The Hollywood Reporter - Latin America's Film Industry Paradox Edited October 21, 2016 by Jason 6 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purple Minion Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 From Screendaily: Strong dollar slowed 2016 int'l box office despite local currency gains Top international markets 2016 China led the way on $6.6bn, Japan on $2bn, India on $1.9bn, the UK on $1.7bn, France on $1.6bn, South Korea on $1.5bn, Germany on $1.1bn, Australia on $900m, Mexico on $800m, and Brazil, Italy, Russia and Spain on $700m each. Rounding out the top 20 are Netherlands, Indonesia, Taiwan, Argentina and Hong Kong on $300m each, and Poland and Turkey on $200m apiece. More details per region here: http://m.screendaily.com/5116128.article 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiffy Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 On 3/22/2017 at 3:11 PM, Purple Minion said: From Screendaily: Strong dollar slowed 2016 int'l box office despite local currency gains Top international markets 2016 China led the way on $6.6bn, Japan on $2bn, India on $1.9bn, the UK on $1.7bn, France on $1.6bn, South Korea on $1.5bn, Germany on $1.1bn, Australia on $900m, Mexico on $800m, and Brazil, Italy, Russia and Spain on $700m each. Rounding out the top 20 are Netherlands, Indonesia, Taiwan, Argentina and Hong Kong on $300m each, and Poland and Turkey on $200m apiece. More details per region here: http://m.screendaily.com/5116128.article Why is Germany weaker on a per capita basis as compared to the other major European markets like UK and France? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 1 hour ago, Jiffy said: Why is Germany weaker on a per capita basis as compared to the other major European markets like UK and France? Not sure what you're asking here - if you're wondering whether it's because of lower average ticket prices or lower admissions per capita, it's the latter. Average ticket prices (in USD) are actually higher in Germany than in France, and probably about the same as the UK (UK used to be higher but probably not last year after the post-Brexit weakening of the GBP). If you're asking why Germany has lower admissions per capita than other major European markets, I don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiffy Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 17 minutes ago, Jason said: Not sure what you're asking here - if you're wondering whether it's because of lower average ticket prices or lower admissions per capita, it's the latter. Average ticket prices (in USD) are actually higher in Germany than in France, and probably about the same as the UK (UK used to be higher but probably not last year after the post-Brexit weakening of the GBP). If you're asking why Germany has lower admissions per capita than other major European markets, I don't know. The latter (lower admissions per capita) was my question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Jiffy said: The latter (lower admissions per capita) was my question. It actually may be the wrong way to put the question - I just took a quick look at admissions per capita for major European countries + Nordic countries in 2015, and it's not so much that Germany has unusually low admissions per capita, but that the UK and France have unusually high admissions per capita (by European standards). For perspective, admissions per capita in the domestic market is 3.8 - Canada only is 3.3. France - 3.1 Germany - 1.7 Italy - 1.8 Spain - 2.0 United Kingdom - 2.7 Russia - 1.2 Denmark - 2.4 Finland - 1.6 Iceland - 4.3 Norway - 2.3 Sweden - 1.7 Edited March 28, 2017 by Jason 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peludo Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 To see that 2.0 ratio in Spain is so sad. In 2004 it was 3.25... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tower Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 I actually made a table for admissions per capita in 2016 for the markets I could find a month or two ago: Market Admissions(M) Population(M) Admissions per capita Iceland 1.5 0.338 4.43 South Korea 217.026 50.801 4.27 USA+Canada 1,315.2 359.572 3.66 Ireland 15.782 4.758 3.32 France 212.72 66.984 3.18 Mexico 327 122.273 2.67 United Kingdom 168.26 65.382 2.57 Norway 13.125 5.252 2.50 Estonia 3.291 1.318 2.50 Denmark 13.5 5.749 2.35 Spain 103.3 46.812 2.21 Luxembourg 1.25 0.576 2.17 Netherlands 34.178 16.979 2.01 Italy 112.5 60.59 1.86 Sweden 17.8 9.982 1.78 Belgium 19.7 11.353 1.74 Austria 15.100 8.774 1.72 Switzeland 13.432 8.401 1.60 Finland 8.69 5.503 1.58 Hungary 14.593 9.83 1.48 Czech Republic 15.622 10.572 1.48 Germany 121.104 82.176 1.47 Portugal 14.891 10.341 1.44 Japan 180.189 126.86 1.42 Poland 52.071 38.439 1.35 Russia 191.117 146.839 1.30 Latvia 2.516 1.953 1.29 Lithuania 3.668 2.849 1.29 Slovenia 2.4 2.064 1.16 Argentina 48.9 43.85 1.12 Slovakia 5.694 5.426 1.05 Croatia 4.295 4.191 1.02 China 1,372 1,381.54 0.99 Greece 10.025 10.784 0.93 Brazil 185 206.441 0.90 Cyprus 0.737 0.848 0.87 Belarus 7.996 9.505 0.84 Bulgaria 5.532 7.154 0.77 Turkey 58.285 79.815 0.73 Romania 12 19.76 0.61 Montenegro 0.3 0.622 0.48 Serbia 3.249 7.076 0.46 Liechtenstein 0.016 0.038 0.42 Georgia 1.1 3.72 0.30 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiffy Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 On 3/28/2017 at 0:48 AM, Jason said: It actually may be the wrong way to put the question - I just took a quick look at admissions per capita for major European countries + Nordic countries in 2015, and it's not so much that Germany has unusually low admissions per capita, but that the UK and France have unusually high admissions per capita (by European standards). For perspective, admissions per capita in the domestic market is 3.8 - Canada only is 3.3. France - 3.1 Germany - 1.7 Italy - 1.8 Spain - 2.0 United Kingdom - 2.7 Russia - 1.2 Denmark - 2.4 Finland - 1.6 Iceland - 4.3 Norway - 2.3 Sweden - 1.7 On 3/28/2017 at 5:17 PM, Tower said: I actually made a table for admissions per capita in 2016 for the markets I could find a month or two ago: Market Admissions(M) Population(M) Admissions per capita Iceland 1.5 0.338 4.43 South Korea 217.026 50.801 4.27 USA+Canada 1,315.2 359.572 3.66 Ireland 15.782 4.758 3.32 France 212.72 66.984 3.18 Mexico 327 122.273 2.67 United Kingdom 168.26 65.382 2.57 Norway 13.125 5.252 2.50 Estonia 3.291 1.318 2.50 Denmark 13.5 5.749 2.35 Spain 103.3 46.812 2.21 Luxembourg 1.25 0.576 2.17 Netherlands 34.178 16.979 2.01 Italy 112.5 60.59 1.86 Sweden 17.8 9.982 1.78 Belgium 19.7 11.353 1.74 Austria 15.100 8.774 1.72 Switzeland 13.432 8.401 1.60 Finland 8.69 5.503 1.58 Hungary 14.593 9.83 1.48 Czech Republic 15.622 10.572 1.48 Germany 121.104 82.176 1.47 Portugal 14.891 10.341 1.44 Japan 180.189 126.86 1.42 Poland 52.071 38.439 1.35 Russia 191.117 146.839 1.30 Latvia 2.516 1.953 1.29 Lithuania 3.668 2.849 1.29 Slovenia 2.4 2.064 1.16 Argentina 48.9 43.85 1.12 Slovakia 5.694 5.426 1.05 Croatia 4.295 4.191 1.02 China 1,372 1,381.54 0.99 Greece 10.025 10.784 0.93 Brazil 185 206.441 0.90 Cyprus 0.737 0.848 0.87 Belarus 7.996 9.505 0.84 Bulgaria 5.532 7.154 0.77 Turkey 58.285 79.815 0.73 Romania 12 19.76 0.61 Montenegro 0.3 0.622 0.48 Serbia 3.249 7.076 0.46 Liechtenstein 0.016 0.038 0.42 Georgia 1.1 3.72 0.30 Cool info. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aabattery Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 Had a go at looking at NZ vs US in local currency: From this you can see that the US gross is usually about 37-64 times larger than the NZ box office. Which is a pretty fat range, but hey. There you go. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...