Jump to content
Olive

Top Movies of All-time in China (Updated on May 19th, 2018)

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Kalel009Shel said:

Sweet Jesus furious 7 made 398m USD in china?!! Omfg

 

 

 

 

398M is the highest single day gross of F7 in local currency. Although its final run was not far off at $391 million. All time highest grosses are in the list below, in local currency of course. 

 

1 Monster Hunt 2.438 billion China 2015
2 Furious 7 2.427 billion United States 2015
3 Transformers: Age of Extinction 1.977 billion United States
China
2014
4 Lost in Hong Kong 1.612 billion China 2015
5 Mojin: The Lost Legend 1.592 billion China 2015
6 Avengers: Age of Ultron 1.464 billion United States 2015
7 Goodbye Mr. Loser 1.441 billion China 2015
8 Jurassic World 1.420 billion United States 2015
9 Avatar 1.340 billion United States 2009
10 Lost in Thailand 1.268 billion China 2012
Edited by KP1025
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, peludo said:

^ If I am not wrong, Titanic did 1.308 billion Yuan, adding the releases of 1998 and 2012, so it would rank 10th instead Lost in Thailand.

IMHO in this case a POV thing, as the 3D version changed considerable more than to 'only' add 3D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, peludo said:

I did not know that. There were many changes relative to original version?

He opened up the ratio ('opened up to 16:9 from the original 2.35:1 aspect ratio'),

I added spoiler tags for the rest, I realized via the following quote that this post is too long for this kind of thread (especially as it is bordering into OT - strongly)

 

Spoiler

 

now parts of the surrounding are to be seen that weren't before.... He used the full frames of the original material for finding his new version. I hope I describe it right, that's not my usual terms-I-know area.

Sounds not important? = according to critics the changes were that massive in their POV, that they adjusted their ratings to a considerable higher one.

But he did not cut out scenes or so, it's all within the scenes known already (beside to exchange a star / sky background to the correct one matching to the date, but that's more an insider thingy)

I asked someone here out of the art... (term?), for those it's partly like another movie (especially with the added 3D = used in a way strongly supporting the scene's intended impact also)

Cameron seems to be a frontrunner in having a feel how / for which scene... 3D is used at it's best storytelling impact or so.

Btw, it also had an $18m budget,... = absolute o.K. IMHO, but if you think about it, wow, some smaller movies have less for their movies with to pay crew and cast...

Sometimes my head is spinning over all the payed and reached amounts (generally speaking)

 

About the possibilities of ratio changes, I found a website using I guess a computer game (???) for showing ratio possibilities, maybe that explains better than me

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/02/16/the-order-1886-169-1080p-vs-2-401-1920x800-video-and-screenshot-comparison-pixel-count-vs-art/

 

edit: looked up and found several examples in the net, partly the lights seem to differ a bit too

 

Titanic-3D-BD_1.jpg?1902c1

 

Titanic-2D-BD_07.jpg?1902c1

 

hmm. I can not see the pics, I mean the ones where her hairs are much brighter, more too see, the focus stronger on her... whilst speaking with him

http://www.blu-raydefinition.com/reviews/titanic-limited-3d-edition-blu-ray-review.html

 

 

Edited by terrestrial
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, terrestrial said:
Spoiler

 

He opened up the ratio ('opened up to 16:9 from the original 2.35:1 aspect ratio'), now parts of the surrounding are to be seen that weren't before.... He used the full frames of the original material for finding his new version. I hope I describe it right, that's not my usual terms-I-know area.

Sounds not important? = according to critics the changes were that massive in their POV, that they adjusted their ratings to a considerable higher one.

But he did not cut out scenes or so, it's all within the scenes known already (beside to exchange a star / sky background to the correct one matching to the date, but that's more an insider thingy)

I asked someone here out of the art... (term?), for those it's partly like another movie (especially with the added 3D = used in a way strongly supporting the scene's intended impact also)

Cameron seems to be a frontrunner in having a feel how / for which scene... 3D is used at it's best storytelling impact or so.

Btw, it also had an $18m budget,... = absolute o.K. IMHO, but if you think about it, wow, some smaller movies have less for their movies with to pay crew and cast...

Sometimes my head is spinning over all the payed and reached amounts (generally speaking)

 

About the possibilities of ratio changes, I found a website using I guess a computer game (???) for showing ratio possibilities, maybe that explains better than me

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/02/16/the-order-1886-169-1080p-vs-2-401-1920x800-video-and-screenshot-comparison-pixel-count-vs-art/

 

edit: looked up and found several examples in the net, partly the lights seem to differ a bit too

 

Titanic-3D-BD_1.jpg?1902c1

 

Titanic-2D-BD_07.jpg?1902c1

 

hmm. I can not see the pics, I mean the ones where her hairs are much brighter, more too see, the focus stronger on her... whilst speaking with him

http://www.blu-raydefinition.com/reviews/titanic-limited-3d-edition-blu-ray-review.html

 

 

 

People still saw it as titanic so I don't think that's relevant when making box office lists.

Edited by Infernus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw, I recently came to know Titanic actually, really, literally made 44m$ in its first run here in 1997 (or 1998). That is absolutely incredible, amazing, unbelievable, humongous etc. etc. A pure mathematical adjustment of the figure with respect to average market growth and change in Exchange Rate would increase it to...get ready for it... well above 3B$, maybe even close to 4B$ depending on the market growth between 1997/1998 and 2003. I think it is the highest any movie ever made, adjusted, in any one country. I am saying I 'think' because I remember someone saying in the main china thread that some movies in the past may have gotten hundreds of millions of admissions in their time, here. Only Gone with the wind in US (1.6B according to mojo but with lots of reruns, if we take the titanic rerun figure in china and adjust it that would add another 400-500m+ to its gross), Star Wars 1 in US (again with lots of reruns) and Avatar in China (1.2B+ in China, although if we take 3D into account then it will easily get lower than Titanic and a few others like ET and Sound of Music in US) come close.

Edited by Infernus
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Infernus said:

People still saw it as titanic so I don't think that's relevant when making box office lists.

Hence the reason I said in the 1st post this:

Quote

IMHO in this case a POV thing, as the 3D version changed considerable more than to 'only' add 3D

 
As  is IMHO OT I put spoiler tags for the rest (and will edit my other post to do the same, it's too long for specialized thread like this)
 

Spoiler

That sentence is IMHO not something final, I only pointed out that there might be a reason to see it in another way.

Ppl might not have realize the changes much, the critics / ppl with awareness say it's a big difference, so who knows how much it influenced them to like it more or not whilst watching it in the cinema (again?)...


I am surrounded in RL by artists (even in the school I am working a 2nd job are some, but other work and private live are full with artists, me not, but I do editing... work for them) out of different fields of art. Didn't find anyone who said it's the same. I had to ask them as I do not see 3D..., missed the 3D re-release entirely for work reasons (I think) = never bought the 3D disc, as... only 2D sighted

= I have no personal opinion about it, but I am aware about different POVs

 

And in general?

A rerun done so many years later is nothing I'd add in any list anyway, that's one of the reasons me personally do not use BOMs all-time charts, especially as I do not accept their calculation model for inflation, spread out re-releases... Funnily enough other websites have too such lists... with entirely other results = I use my own calculation models

 

I look into each 1st run release (not like the 4 theater for 2 weeks and then going wide, I mean real releases) and release and the year of its release (circumstances...) for it's own, split up per general details - incl the newer one we are actually live in - into 8 different time-phases (term?).

I enjoy to follow the actual ride, but more for the 'it gets people back in cinemas that weren't going for years'... like.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, terrestrial said:

Hence the reason I said in the 1st post this:

 
As  is IMHO OT I put spoiler tags for the rest (and will edit my other post to do the same, it's too long for specialized thread like this)
 

  Hide contents

That sentence is IMHO not something final, I only pointed out that there might be a reason to see it in another way.

Ppl might not have realize the changes much, the critics / ppl with awareness say it's a big difference, so who knows how much it influenced them to like it more or not whilst watching it in the cinema (again?)...

 

I am surrounded in RL by artists (even in the school I am working a 2nd job are some, but other work and private live are full with artists, me not, but I do editing... work for them) out of different fields of art. Didn't find anyone who said it's the same. I had to ask them as I do not see 3D..., missed the 3D re-release entirely for work reasons (I think) = never bought the 3D disc, as... only 2D sighted

= I have no personal opinion about it, but I am aware about different POVs

 

And in general?

A rerun done so many years later is nothing I'd add in any list anyway, that's one of the reasons me personally do not use BOMs all-time charts, especially as I do not accept their calculation model for inflation, spread out re-releases... Funnily enough other websites have too such lists... with entirely other results = I use my own calculation models

 

I look into each 1st run release (not like the 4 theater for 2 weeks and then going wide, I mean real releases) and release and the year of its release (circumstances...) for it's own, split up per general details - incl the newer one we are actually live in - into 8 different time-phases (term?).

 

 

Yes, it is entirely upto someone whether he considers Reruns as parts of a films gross. But what I was saying is that if a person does usually consider them, then there is no reason to exceptionalize Titanic merely due to relatively more techincal (but not plot altering at all) differences in its re-release.

Edited by Infernus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Infernus said:

Yes, it is entirely upto someone whether he considers Reruns as parts of a films gross. But what I was saying is that if a person does usually consider them, then there is no reason to exceptionalize Titanic merely due to relatively more techincal (but not plot altering at all) differences in its re-release.

Plot alone is not all what a movie makes work, lightning angles,... and when pros tell me unanimous it's a major change in the meaning of movie changing,,,, and I see a lot of critics adjusted their rating for Titanic based on the changes than I think it is worth mentioning.

It does not take away anything from each version IMHO.

 

again: I only pointed out the possibility of another POV = I do not know why the chart ot the top 10 lists another title as #10, but there might be another reason than a mistake. I got the idea based on reactions in my surrounding and via the post about the change ratings (that started me to check on that)

I do not exceptionalize Titanic alone if its about re-reease, I do that with all re-releases in general and with all that change into 3D...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, terrestrial said:

Plot alone is not all what a movie makes work, lightning angles,... and when pros tell me unanimous it's a major change in the meaning of movie changing,,,, and I see a lot of critics adjusted their rating for Titanic based on the changes than I think it is worth mentioning.

It does not take away anything from each version IMHO.

 

again: I only pointed out the possibility of another POV = I do not know why the chart ot the top 10 lists another title as #10, but there might be another reason than a mistake. I got the idea based on reactions in my surrounding and via the post about the change ratings (that started me to check on that)

I do not exceptionalize Titanic alone if its about re-reease, I do that with all re-releases in general and with all that change into 3D...

 

Yes I agree that the changes might be pretty significant to some people but I don't think 98% of the audience noticed it particularly. Actually, a lot of them may have indeed noticed it but most of them would have just taken it as slight remastering and digital improvement of parts as happens with re-releases of most old movies and not deemed it significant enough for it to be considered a particularly different version (as in they may have considered it as titanic 1.1 but not 2.0 or 1.5) of the original. And we are talking about box-office and not film technicalities or how different it was from the original. So the GA matters more than the critics here. So I see no real reason for the re-release's gross to not be included in the original's. Of course you don't consider any sort of re-release's gross as part of the original's so you obviously wouldn't consider this either but I am not talking about you but in a more general sense. If a list considers re-releases of all the movies (as all official lists do) Titanic's re-release should be no exception - that is the one-line gist (or jist) of what I essentially want to say.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Broshnat said:

Does anybody have an all-time list based on admissions?

 

my country's website says (interested to see if someone has another version)

 

China
# admissions title
FLcn_small.png 65.563.022 Monster Hunt
2 62.447.888 Fast & Furious 7
FLcn_small.png 48.990.635 Lost in Hongkong
4 46.983.545 Transformers 4
FLcn_small.png 44.916.806 Mojin - The Lost Legend
FLcn_small.png 44.539.577 Goodbye Mr. Loser
7 40.039.923 Titanic
FLcn_small.png 38.267.511 Lost in Thailand
9 37.080.095 Jurassic World
10 36.588.027 Avengers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, peludo said:

I have been revising the all time list (http://www.cbooo.cn/Alltimedomestic) and I am a bit confused with the film "2012". It has two entries (#82 and #83), both with 452.27m Yuan. Does anyone know the real gross of this film? Thank you in advance.

2012  466m

2012 3D 137m

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Top grossing Chinese movies of each year since 2000
2000-生死抉择/Final Decision-120M
2001-大腕/Big Shot's Funeral-43M
2002-英雄/Hero -250M
2003-手机/Cell Phone-53m
2004-功夫/Kung Fu Hustle-173M
2005-无极/The Promise-181M
2006-满城尽带黄金甲/Curse of the Golden Flower-291M
2007-集结号/The Assembly-250M
2008-非诚勿扰/ If You Are the One-325M
2009-建国大业/ The Founding of a Republic-416M
2010-唐山大地震/Aftershock-673M
2011-金陵十三钗/The Flowers Of War-609M
2012-人再囧途之泰囧/ Lost in Thailand-1267M
2013- 西游·降魔篇 / Journey to the West: Conquering the Demons-1246M
2014-心花怒放 / Breakup Buddies-1169M
2015-捉妖记 / Monster Hunt-2438M
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rank Title Gross Country Year
1 The Mermaid

3.354 billion / $502 million

China
Hong Kong
2016
2 Monster Hunt 2.439 billion / $381 million China
Hong Kong
2015
3 Furious 7 2.426 billion / $390 million  United States 2015
4 Transformers: Age of Extinction 1.977 billion / $320 million United States
China
2014
5 Mojin: The Lost Legend 1.682 billion / $255 million  China 2015
6 Lost in Hong Kong 1.613 billion / $253 million China 2015
7 Avengers: Age of Ultron 1.464 billion / $240 million United States 2015
8 Goodbye Mr. Loser 1.441 billion / $222 million  China 2015
9 Jurassic World 1.420 billion / $228 million United States 2015
10 Avatar 1.340 billion / $204 million United States 2009

 

Just think if Zootopia entered the Top 10... 0_0 It probably won't stay there for long though.  Just food for thought. 

Link to comment
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.