Jump to content
Neo

Avengers Endgame | Conclusion to The Infinity Saga | April 26, 2019 | The most profitable movie of 2019. ALL HAIL PAPA FEIGE

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, LaughingEvans said:

 

So you use US dollar inflation rates to compare grosses that were made in OS markets? How does this makes sense to you? If you wanted more objective comparisons, why not use total admissions?

That the metric to go (if we assume the studio ended up back in the days making is revenues in US dollar back to them) to calculate how much moneys the studio made. Also it is a box office message board, not surprising that people (specially if they are american) tend to gravitate more toward box office counting than admission counting, there something to be said about a movie that achieve to sell higher price ticket than an other one for example.

 

If it make sense in 2010 to talk about Avatar box office in $2010 US dollar or EndGame box office in 2019 US dollar right now, it will automatically make sense to adjust it for inflation, comparing directly 2010 US dollar numbers with 2019 US dollar is a bit like comparing Can Dollar with US dollar without taking into account exchange rate.

 

But also practical, using total admissions do seem like a nightmare to do, domestic being an example for which we usually have no clue for admissions.

Edited by Barnack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Barnack said:

That the metric to go (if we assume the studio ended up back in the days making is revenues in US dollar back to them) to calculate how much moneys the studio made. Also it is a box office message board, not surprising that people (specially if they are american) tend to gravitate more toward box office counting than admission counting, there something to be said about a movie that achieve to sell higher price ticket than an other one for example.

  

If it make sense in 2010 to talk about Avatar box office in $2010 US dollar or EndGame box office in 2019 US dollar right now, it will automatically make sense to adjust it for inflation, comparing directly 2010 US dollar numbers with 2019 US dollar is a bit like comparing Can Dollar with US dollar without taking into account exchange rate.

 

But also practical, using total admissions do seem like a nightmare to do, domestic being an example for which we usually have no clue for admissions.

 

Sure, but it's a good metric as far as US BO goes. In OS territories, inflation is different to US Dollar, so to get accurate numbers, you'd have to take each local inflation into consideration and then re-adjust it to US Dollar. For example, for the biggest part of Avatar's release US Dollar to Euro was on average 0.7, while in 2019 the average is about 0.88.  This means that if you had exact same admissions and exact same ticket prices for 2 movies, one in 2009 and one in 2019 in EU, it would seem that the 2009 made more money, while in fact Euro has been (somewhat) stable between 2009 and 2019, so that would be technically false.

 

My economics are highschool level, but that's how I take it works.

Edited by LaughingEvans
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, LawrenceBrolivier said:

But why would you do that. There's no real point to adjust for any reason other than to try and denigrate or minimize what a movie you don't like (as much) achieved. That's basically the entire reason "adjusted for ____" ever got invented in the first place... some writer somewhere wanted to remind people that the amazing run some movie went on wasn't REALLY that impressive... at least not if you use some bad and simple math to arrive at a made-up number for some older movie they like better...

If counting dollars and not ticket sales is the box office race's original sin, adjusting for ______ is the second major wrong that doesn't make anything right. 

For domestic, I always adjust for inflation so that I can compare movies from different eras against each other. It is a much more accurate comparison of movie grosses.

 

 For WW, I never adjust for inflation because there are too many factors that make it impossible, like exchange rates. Any adjustment WW is complete guesswork, and is pretty much useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope the spoiler ban lifts at the same time the record goes down so I can post gifs from that scene, you know the one .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Walt Disney said:

For domestic, I always adjust for inflation so that I can compare movies from different eras against each other. It is a much more accurate comparison of movie grosses.

 

 For WW, I never adjust for inflation because there are too many factors that make it impossible, like exchange rates. Any adjustment WW is complete guesswork, and is pretty much useless.

It's not really accurate at all though.... Box Office is just a measurement of a movie's popularity in the context of when it came out.... if anything, you should compare how much MORE popular a box office champion was to whatever the average movies were that year. That makes for a sort of fairer comparison without having to make up numbers... that way, instead of using a bad estimation, you're measuring the distance a champ has from its competitors, and then you can get a better sense of how popular a thing really was, and you can compare the popularities, which is really all adjusing is trying... and failing... to do well. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LawrenceBrolivier said:

 Box Office is just a measurement of a movie's popularity in the context of when it came out....

This should be in everyone's signature as a reminder. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, LawrenceBrolivier said:

It's not really accurate at all though.... Box Office is just a measurement of a movie's popularity in the context of when it came out.... if anything, you should compare how much MORE popular a box office champion was to whatever the average movies were that year. That makes for a sort of fairer comparison without having to make up numbers... that way, instead of using a bad estimation, you're measuring the distance a champ has from its competitors, and then you can get a better sense of how popular a thing really was, and you can compare the popularities, which is really all adjusing is trying... and failing... to do well. 

I am not concerned with popularity compared to the average movie for a current year though. I am concerned with popularity of movies directly compared to each other. There are lots of weak years where a movie may be well ahead of its peers, but it would do poorly in a different year. I side-step that whole issue though by adjusting for ticket price inflation and stating this is what a movie actually earned. It’s the most effective way to compare movies to each other.

 

If you do not adjust fo inflation, then the “modern” movie will always “win” because ticket prices continue to rise. Adjusting gives a better comparison because you make ticket prices equal. You cant control other factors like re-releases, population growth, etc., but I don’t really want to. I want to compare dollars to dollars, and adjusting for inflation does that domestically.

 

You cant adjust for inflation WW because there are too many variables that make getting a dollar to dollar comparison almost impossible.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Walt Disney said:

I am not concerned with popularity compared to the average movie for a current year though. I am concerned with popularity of movies directly compared to each other.

I understand, I just think the aim is misguided and the methods so flawed that the comparison is ultimately useless... it's the movie nerd version of arguing over whether LeBron James could have beaten Michael Jordan one on one.... You'll never get anywhere near to the truth because you don't have a time machine... and so you can't even begin to accurately adjust for all the variables that come into play.

 

It's a daydream exercise that's somehow become a major part of this whole box-office thing... to the point where people who write about it for a living can't stop themselves from including these made-up numbers whenever the opportunity arises. 

The numbers don't just go up because of inflation and ticket prices. And the numbers don't mean one movie is "better" than another. You don't have to come up with a bad way to "level" the playing field.... because the field was never level in the first place! Just take the numbers for what they are and keep in mind the time those numbers occurred, and they make perfect sense without any extra work. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, LawrenceBrolivier said:

I understand, I just think the aim is misguided and the methods so flawed that the comparison is ultimately useless... it's the movie nerd version of arguing over whether LeBron James could have beaten Michael Jordan one on one.... You'll never get anywhere near to the truth because you don't have a time machine... and so you can't even begin to accurately adjust for all the variables that come into play.

 

It's a daydream exercise that's somehow become a major part of this whole box-office thing... to the point where people who write about it for a living can't stop themselves from including these made-up numbers whenever the opportunity arises. 

The numbers don't just go up because of inflation and ticket prices. And the numbers don't mean one movie is "better" than another. You don't have to come up with a bad way to "level" the playing field.... because the field was never level in the first place! Just take the numbers for what they are and keep in mind the time those numbers occurred, and they make perfect sense without any extra work. 

For my purposes, I don’t need a perfect comparison. I don’t want to control for variables like population growth or increased entertainment options. Every movies occurs in its own time period and under its own circumstances.  All I want to do is make it as close to a dollars to dollars comparison as possible. If I don’t adjust for inflation, then I am not really doing that. Comparing across eras becomes meaningless and the analysis is flawed if you don’t adjust. And it is a measure of popularity, but I find box office to be an excellent and objective measure of popularity.

 

Not adjusting is great if you just want to compare movies within a specific year or even a span of a few years. If you want an all-time comparison, I don’t see how you get there without adjusting for inflation. Adjusting for inflation isnt perfect, but it’s the best way to measure what I want to measure.

Edited by Walt Disney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, LaughingEvans said:

 

Sure, but it's a good metric as far as US BO goes. In OS territories, inflation is different to US Dollar, so to get accurate numbers, you'd have to take each local inflation into consideration and then re-adjust it to US Dollar. For example, for the biggest part of Avatar's release US Dollar to Euro was on average 0.7, while in 2019 the average is about 0.88.  This means that if you had exact same admissions and exact same ticket prices for 2 movies, one in 2009 and one in 2019 in EU, it would seem that the 2009 made more money, while in fact Euro has been (somewhat) stable between 2009 and 2019, so that would be technically false.

 

My economics are highschool level, but that's how I take it works.

An accurate number of what thought ? Feel like the sentence is missing some words.

 

If you are talking about studio money making, no it would be less accurate (again assuming they brought back the revenues in US device), Imagine the fantastic scenario: Avatar was big in venezuela in 2010 and now that amount of Venezuela device in 2019 would be really strange and near nothing in US dollar using the on the street exchange rate but a giant amount using some official exchange rate, is it more accurate to try to use that strange 2019 situation that has nothing to do with what Avatar did back in the days ? would it make sense to remove what the movie did in 2009-2010 in that market of it's total because with today exchange rate it would have been nothing ?

 

What will you do with movie that made their revenues before the Euro like Titanic ? How will you transfer the deutschmarks -franc, etc... revenues of the 1990s.

 

In your example the 2009 probably made more money from a USA company point of view (money being in US dollar for them).

 

If you are trying an exercise trying to express admission and not box office in money, than yes it would probably be more accurate (if ticket price didn't move differently than local inflation) or if you are looking in some fantastic how much money it would have made in 2019 with the same admissions that back in the days also yes your method would be better.

 

 

Edited by Barnack
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is it certain Endgame will beat Avatar, or just likely?

Edited by FrozenUnicorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FrozenUnicorn said:

So is it certain Endgame will beat Avatar, or just likely?

 

2 minutes ago, FrozenUnicorn said:

So is it certain Endgame will beat Avatar, or just likely?

Certain unless Disney does something unthinkable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only way I could see it missing it is if collectively everyone decides to wait for the digital release. At this point OS holdovers from last week though could push it to the record by this weekend so it's almost a nonfactor. They could easily call it at Saturday Comic-Con.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mekanos said:

Only way I could see it missing it is if collectively everyone decides to wait for the digital release. At this point OS holdovers from last week though could push it to the record by this weekend so it's almost a nonfactor. They could easily call it at Saturday Comic-Con.

I think it’s pretty certain considering global society does nothing collectively. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mekanos said:

Only way I could see it missing it is if collectively everyone decides to wait for the digital release. At this point OS holdovers from last week though could push it to the record by this weekend so it's almost a nonfactor. They could easily call it at Saturday Comic-Con.

How? Unless I am missing something with Tuesday's take it looks like it is $6M behind. Figure another $500K in the US on Wednesday and Thursday it goes into weekend $5.5M behind.  Say another $1M over the weekend in US and another $1M foreign that means end of weekend $3.5M behind.  Where is it going to come up with enough for Marvel to announce this Saturday?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, KeithF1138 said:

How? Unless I am missing something with Tuesday's take it looks like it is $6M behind. Figure another $500K in the US on Wednesday and Thursday it goes into weekend $5.5M behind.  Say another $1M over the weekend in US and another $1M foreign that means end of weekend $3.5M behind.  Where is it going to come up with enough for Marvel to announce this Saturday?

OS actuals are not actually in yet. They are delayed. This happened last weekend and caused Endgame to suddenly get a huge jump. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mekanos said:

OS actuals are not actually in yet. They are delayed. This happened last weekend and caused Endgame to suddenly get a huge jump. 

What was the estimate last week for OS and what was actual? When is that through? Where can you see this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, KeithF1138 said:

What was the estimate last week for OS and what was actual? When is that through? Where can you see this?

I think OS actuals were updated Sunday. I wouldn't be able to pull the figures up right now because they probably weren't reported by trades (just BOM), but other people might.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Mekanos said:

I think OS actuals were updated Sunday. I wouldn't be able to pull the figures up right now because they probably weren't reported by trades (just BOM), but other people might.

So looking at BOM. It seems international got a big bump last week, but the weeks proceeding it were showing steady decline. So I guess people think that this week will be similar to last week internationally.  Looks like to me 2 weeks ago it mad 1.5M internatioal then bumped to $5M.  So I guess if International is about $5M this week again it will happen this week.

Edited by KeithF1138
  • Astonished 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've decided I like IW just a smidge more than EG. It's very close and both are peak CBM, but IW's pacing is just flawless, the action is slightly superior, and I really love how unorthodox it is as a movie with a successful villain arc. 

 

New ranking time

 

Superb

1. Infinity War

2. Endgame

3. The Avengers

4. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2

5. Black Panther

6. Thor Ragnarok

 

Great

7. Guardians of the Galaxy

8. Spider-Man: Homecoming

9. Iron Man

10. Captain America: Civil War

11. Captain America: The Winter Soldier

 

Good

12. Ant-Man

13. Thor

14. Ant-Man and the Wasp

 

Meh

15. Doctor Strange

16. Age of Ultron

17. Captain Marvel

 

Poor

18. Thor: The Dark World

19. Spider-Man: Far From Home

20. Captain America: The First Avenger

21. Iron Man 3

22. The Incredible Hulk

23. Iron Man 2

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.