Eevin Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 One of the most amazing box office runs of all time. It steadily built on terrific word-of-mouth. Rose 90% to $1.26m in its fourth weekend, in May, and didn't drop below $1m on a weekend again until the next February. It never hit #1, and yet managed to be the #5 film of 2002, alongside films like Spider-Man, Attack of the Clones, The Two Towers, and The Chamber of Secrets. It made $368m worldwide on a budget of just $5m. It made the equivalent of $358.3m domestically adjusted for inflation, and remains the highest-grossing romantic comedy of all time by a lot. An absolutely unprecedented run, one we might never see again. http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=main&id=mybigfatgreekwedding.htm 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TalismanRing Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 (edited) Crazy, it didn't have a $10m w/e until it's 20th with a Labor Day aided $11.1m when it reached $78.848m. Then didn't have another w/e higher than that and still went on to $241+m 2002 Date (click to view chart) Rank Weekend Gross % Change Theaters Change / Avg. Gross-to-Date Week # Apr 19–21 20 $597,362 - 108 - $5,531 $597,362 1 Apr 26–28 16 $804,683 +34.7% 141 +33 $5,706 $1,626,751 2 May 3–5 16 $666,304 -17.2% 147 +6 $4,532 $2,567,045 3 May 10–12 11 $1,262,562 +89.5% 247 +100 $5,111 $4,112,413 4 May 17–19 10 $1,135,207 -10.1% 275 +28 $4,128 $5,669,706 5 May 24–26 11 $1,247,000 (Estimate) +9.8% 260 -15 $4,796 $7,300,000 (Estimate) 6 May 24–27 11 $1,590,085 +40.1% 260 -15 $6,115 $7,642,884 6 May 31–Jun 2 11 $910,901 - 236 -24 $3,859 $8,863,863 7 Jun 7–9 12 $1,688,563 +85.4% 443 +207 $3,811 $11,002,602 8 Jun 14–16 12 $1,755,197 +3.9% 455 +12 $3,857 $13,642,098 9 Jun 21–23 14 $1,776,990 +1.2% 444 -11 $4,002 $16,318,140 10 Jun 28–30 13 $2,002,184 +12.7% 493 +49 $4,061 $19,340,988 11 Jul 5–7 11 $2,508,748 +25.3% 499 +6 $5,027 $23,576,174 12 Jul 12–14 12 $2,230,158 -11.1% 495 -4 $4,505 $27,031,170 13 Jul 19–21 14 $2,497,454 +12.0% 530 +35 $4,712 $30,862,103 14 Jul 26–28 10 $3,004,597 +20.3% 569 +39 $5,280 $35,417,552 15 Aug 2–4 9 $3,002,241 -0.1% 657 +88 $4,569 $40,172,975 16 Aug 9–11 8 $3,133,316 +4.4% 723 +66 $4,333 $45,063,979 17 Aug 16–18 6 $5,700,072 +81.9% 1,064 +341 $5,357 $52,777,170 18 Aug 23–25 4 $7,261,842 +27.4% 1,329 +265 $5,464 $63,690,730 19 Aug 30–Sep 1 2 $11,100,764 +52.9% 1,619 +290 $6,856 $78,848,210 20 Aug 30–Sep 2 2 $14,809,546 +104% 1,619 +290 $9,147 $82,556,992 20 Sep 6–8 2 $10,372,316 -6.6% 1,695 +76 $6,119 $95,824,732 21 Sep 13–15 2 $10,772,146 +3.9% 1,764 +69 $6,106 $110,443,668 22 Sep 20–22 3 $9,748,969 -9.5% 1,853 +89 $5,261 $124,052,987 23 Sep 27–29 4 $9,434,602 -3.2% 1,841 -12 $5,124 $136,628,662 24 Oct 4–6 4 $8,223,801 -12.8% 1,971 +130 $4,172 $147,717,828 25 Oct 11–13 5 $8,453,159 +2.8% 2,016 +45 $4,193 $158,954,054 26 Oct 18–20 4 $7,145,309 -15.5% 2,014 -2 $3,547 $169,292,979 27 Oct 25–27 5 $6,209,500 -13.1% 1,967 -47 $3,156 $177,698,447 28 Nov 1–3 6 $5,623,149 -9.4% 1,977 +10 $2,844 $185,244,976 29 Nov 8–10 6 $5,854,005 +4.1% 1,975 -2 $2,964 $192,857,165 30 Nov 15–17 6 $4,713,464 -19.5% 1,812 -163 $2,601 $199,574,370 31 Nov 22–24 8 $3,657,055 -22.4% 1,585 -227 $2,307 $204,520,221 32 Nov 29–Dec 1 11 $3,985,057 +9.0% 1,257 -328 $3,170 $210,585,352 33 Dec 6–8 13 $2,013,029 -49.5% 1,257 - $1,601 $213,263,148 34 Dec 13–15 12 $1,704,285 -15.3% 1,230 -27 $1,385 $215,640,319 35 Dec 20–22 13 $1,461,534 -14.2% 973 -257 $1,502 $217,765,974 36 Dec 27–29 12 $2,760,697 +88.9% 951 -22 $2,902 $222,517,469 37 2003 Date (click to view chart) Rank Weekend Gross % Change Theaters Change / Avg. Gross-to-Date Week # Jan 3–5 13 $2,661,106 -3.6% 1,194 +243 $2,228 $227,898,505 38 Jan 10–12 16 $2,102,547 -21.0% 1,212 +18 $1,734 $230,876,712 39 Jan 17–19 15 $2,173,330 +3.4% 1,171 -41 $1,855 $233,841,212 40 Jan 17–20 15 $2,601,083 +23.7% 1,171 -41 $2,221 $234,268,965 40 Jan 24–26 14 $1,704,430 -21.6% 1,143 -28 $1,491 $236,448,697 41 Jan 31–Feb 2 15 $1,538,527 -9.7% 1,076 -67 $1,429 $238,540,872 42 Feb 7–9 17 $1,003,360 -34.8% 971 -105 $1,033 $239,952,321 43 Feb 14–16 24 $475,282 -52.6% 533 -438 $891 $240,686,319 44 Feb 14–17 25 $531,331 -47.0% 533 -438 $996 $240,742,368 44 Feb 21–23 29 $214,809 -54.8% 353 -180 $608 $241,055,385 45 Feb 28–Mar 2 40 $130,928 -39.0% 260 -93 $503 $241,250,669 46 Mar 7–9 49 $71,321 -45.5% 170 -90 $419 $241,356,536 47 Mar 14–16 70 $20,903 -70.7% 74 -96 $282 $241,406,779 48 Mar 21–23 80 $9,651 -53.8% 36 -38 $268 $241,423,860 49 Mar 28–30 96 $5,587 -42.1% 21 -15 $266 $241,433,282 50 Apr 4–6 133 $1,696 -69.6% 6 -15 $282 $241,437,427 51 Apr 11–13 146 $27 -98.4% 1 -5 $27 $241,438,208 52 Italics indicate four day weekend. Edited February 4, 2017 by TalismanRing 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmlover Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 Most impressive run of its entire decade hands down, IMO. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franfar Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 (edited) Wait this film came out after 2000 @Telemachos Edited February 5, 2017 by franfar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 30 minutes ago, franfar said: Wait this film came out after 2000 @Telemachos That rule should be changed to until 2010 or something Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franfar Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, John Marston said: That rule should be changed to until 2010 or something But that's not really classic though The "rules" that films were constrained in from mid-2000s at the very latest) onward were different from before then. No longer did films have large multipliers on the regular, tentpoles became more dominant, bigger and bigger bombs have been occurring, star power's role in a film's success has been altered, etc. It was truly a different era Edited February 5, 2017 by franfar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 19 minutes ago, franfar said: But that's not really classic though The "rules" that films were constrained in from mid-2000s at the very latest) onward were different from before then. No longer did films have large multipliers on the regular, tentpoles became more dominant, bigger and bigger bombs have been occurring, star power's role in a film's success has been altered, etc. It was truly a different era Some exceptions IMO should be ok 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franfar Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 3 minutes ago, John Marston said: Some exceptions IMO should be ok Ofc. My Big Fat Greek Wedding was truly a phenomenon that won't be repeated in the near future Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TalismanRing Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 2 hours ago, franfar said: Ofc. My Big Fat Greek Wedding was truly a phenomenon that won't be repeated in the near future It's the kind of long crazy run we can sometimes still find in Japan - as seen with No Name but even that originally opened wide and much bigger and has the momentum of an acclaimed movie which BFGW didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grim22 Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 11 hours ago, TalismanRing said: It's the kind of long crazy run we can sometimes still find in Japan - as seen with No Name but even that originally opened wide and much bigger and has the momentum of an acclaimed movie which BFGW didn't. MBFGW just seemed to capture the zeitgeist in a big way. It's pretty much impossible to find movies making over 1M per weekend in their 9th month of release now. It it was definitely a moment in time though, the TV show "My big fat Greek life" came out just a year later and lasted only 6 episodes, and none of the cast went on to bigger things either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmlover Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 I'm still surprised Nia Vardalos never even landed a hit TV show over the years as she tried and failed repeatedly in recapturing her lightning-in-a-bottle success here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
75Live Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 this is one run to this day I still don't fully fathom I liked it at the time and I can see why people enjoyed it too. I get that part, but yeah like some already said in here, it had to be mostly timing. Yes it's usually that way for most movies, but I think it is probably the second biggest reason this did so well. The first is that obviously people liked the film. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmlover Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 Andrea Martin was hilarious in this. She could make even reading out of the phone book sound funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grim22 Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 19 minutes ago, 75live said: this is one run to this day I still don't fully fathom I liked it at the time and I can see why people enjoyed it too. I get that part, but yeah like some already said in here, it had to be mostly timing. Yes it's usually that way for most movies, but I think it is probably the second biggest reason this did so well. The first is that obviously people liked the film. I wonder how much the post 9/11 environment contributed as well. This was perfect escapism at the time, I assume. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmlover Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 1 minute ago, grim22 said: I wonder how much the post 9/11 environment contributed as well. This was perfect escapism at the time, I assume. Pretty much. I already mentioned in the Spider-Man thread that people wanted escape at that time, which no doubt boosted a handful of box office totals. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webslinger Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 This is still the most insane box office run I've followed. I remember seeing ads for it in the Seattle papers that kept on touting its continued staying power during the summer, and around August, it occurred to me that it might be on the verge of breaking out when I realized that it was already August and the film had been playing at one of my local theatres since June 14 - whereas virtually every low-budget art film last one week (or maybe two if it was unusually successful). It ultimately ended up playing at that same local theatre until February 13 - the week the film was released on video and DVD. Really, I think the fact that says it all is that it had multiple weekends in wide release in which it average more money per location than it did in its first weekend of limited release. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasmmi Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 Yeah, it was only a couple a weeks ago that it lost its record of highest grossing film not to hit number one to Sing. I wouldn't be surprised if having 23 weekends that increased from their previous weekend isn't also a record too. But it's possible something like ET maybe have managed that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 I completely understand its run because I was married to a Portuguese woman at the time and I could relate to and understand most of the observations and jokes in the film. I was the munga cake white guy married to a European woman and her family. I guess you just have to be in that situation to fully get it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Old Tele Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 2 hours ago, baumer said: I completely understand its run because I was married to a Portuguese woman at the time and I could relate to and understand most of the observations and jokes in the film. I was the munga cake white guy married to a European woman and her family. I guess you just have to be in that situation to fully get it. Yes, it spoke to any immigrant family or those who married into them -- regardless of backgrounds. And there are a LOT of immigrant families here. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 (edited) On 2/4/2017 at 10:35 PM, John Marston said: That rule should be changed to until 2010 or something Do you really consider Inglorious Bastards or District 9 classic runs though? Yeah a lot of movies did well and had great runs that year (Up, Hangover, Star Trek, Taken, etc) but they are still relatively recent and the only instant "classic" run of the year is Avatar which is still discussed by many on the main boards today. I'd say this is better to stay pre-2000 until the next three or four years. Lots of good runs before that period to talk about. (just using 2009 as an example, since technically that would be considered acceptable under that rule) Edited February 13, 2017 by Mango Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...