Ezen Baklattan Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 (edited) February 16, 2014<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> Asuming RTH's number is spot on, that would be a 31% drop on Sunday. Considering the weekend, that seems like a bit much, but may the Saturday number is too high after all. Awesome number either way. Edited February 16, 2014 by Spaghetti Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecstasy Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 (edited) Take off the 3D surcharges and IM3 didn't gross much more than CF globally, if more at all. LOL So I guess Cf destroyed IM3 WW too. Let me ask you this: What would you rather take to the bank $1.2b or $861m? Edited February 16, 2014 by ECSTASY 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Stingray Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 lol. You still at it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
druv10 Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 LOL So I guess Cf destroyed IM3 WW too. lol, Marvel hate by some is laughable. Take solace in that, they'll continue to make movies and haters can't do a damn thing about it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathlife Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 So CF vs IM3 is now a thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmnerdjamie Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 So CF vs IM3 is now a thing? If it is, I'll take Frozen and be done with that debate. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJohn Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 So CF vs IM3 is now a thing? Everything is a thing in this forum. You are clearly new here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
druv10 Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 So CF vs IM3 is now a thing? Not really. Some Hunger Games' fans are just insecure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Stingray Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Not really. Some Hunger Games' fans are just insecure. All fanboys are insecure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Katniss versus Tony Stark: of course WW money is money, but studios see a lower percentage of that than domestic, not to mention CF cost $100m less to make than IM3, and a good $75-100m less to market. That, combined with Katniss grossing 20m more in 2D than IM3 did in 3D means "destroyed" is a valid term (domestically, at least). CF will be more profitable for Lionsgate than IM3 is for Marvel, and I suspect the merchandise sales might be a lot closer than people expect too. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 (edited) Destroyed is not a valid term. If Hunger Games beat Iron Man by 100m, that would be destroyed. 20m is small potatoes between blockbusters. Budget comparisons and the like are irrelevant when it comes to straight-up comparison of box office gross. Edited February 16, 2014 by 4815162342 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJohn Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 There is something we must not forget here. Disney is distributing Iron Man 3 WW. CF had his rights sold in every country, so doesn't this mean Disney gains much more OS from Iron Man 3 than Lionsgate with CF? But yes, CF destroyed Iron Man 3 DOM. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJohn Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Destroyed is not a valid term. If Hunger Games beat Iron Man by 100m, that would be destroyed. 20m is small potatoes between blockbusters. Take out 3D and we are probably talking of a 50M difference. Plus Iron Man 3 needed Avengers and 3D. CF didn't had any of that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FilmBuff Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Seeing frozen for the 5th time! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Films Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Frozen- 955.7m WWNearly there 1 billion 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Stingray Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Destroyed is not a valid term. If Hunger Games beat Iron Man by 100m, that would be destroyed. 20m is small potatoes between blockbusters. Budget comparisons and the like are irrelevant when it comes to straight-up comparison of box office gross. But an extra dimension ain't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Take out 3D and we are probably talking of a 50M difference. Plus Iron Man 3 needed Avengers and 3D. CF didn't had any of that Irrelevant. Money talks, not where the money comes from. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Films Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 (edited) Frozen- 5.86m. Up to 376.05m domesticallyGO FROZEN Edited February 16, 2014 by DreamgirlsFilms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 (edited) But an extra dimension ain't. Not really. It may be if you want to judge pure ticket sales and domestic popularity, but when it comes to a simple comparison of who made how much, money is money. 20m is just that, 20m. It's a small fraction of their total gross. CF did not destroy IM3, it edged past it. Edited February 16, 2014 by 4815162342 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayumanggi Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 (edited) Of course worldwide numbers are more important. Money is money. The thing though is, and this is just my opinion, comparing domestic numbers is the 'fairest' way to size up two movies. A lot of factors should be considered when we talk about worldwide numbers which make comparisons somewhat irrelevant. Edited February 16, 2014 by kayumanggi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
copy2.thumb.jpg.344d957d147bdc91dbc557bf24ccbfbb.jpg)
