A Look at The Biggest Box Office Stories from 1972-present (THABOS: The History of Amazing Box Office Stories) | IT'S FINALLY COMPLETE!!!!!!!

[Brainbug]

2004 in a nutshell:

 

[Lordmandeep]

Wackiest time was May 2007.

 

 

You had 3 super huge films that all opened massive and all had some of the worst legs i seen. 

[Brainbug]

20 minutes ago, Lordmandeep said:

Wackiest time was May 2007.

 

 

You had 3 super huge films that all opened massive and all had some of the worst legs i seen. 

 

I believe the subpar legs were the result of overcrowding the marketplace and mixed reception for all the 3 biggies. Still, each made over 300M DOM which in 2007 was huge.

[Lordmandeep]

9 minutes ago, Brainbug said:

 

I believe the subpar legs were the result of overcrowding the marketplace and mixed reception for all the 3 biggies. Still, each made over 300M DOM which in 2007 was huge.

 

Yeah i think the biggest thing was that watching all 3 films really was a let down.

 

At Worlds End was not bad as the fight was fun but the movie seemed as well written by people who just put random things together for most of it.

[Webslinger]

May 2007 was insane. There was so much hype surrounding all three of the big threequels that month, then they all opened huge (when you throw in the preview numbers for Pirates as we would today, all three would have surpassed the first Spider-Man’s previous May record), and then they all bottomed out when each of them let audiences down in one way or another. Memorial Day weekend that year was basically “these three movies... and then everything else competing for scraps” at many theaters.

 

The look back on 2003 was a lot of fun! It was my first year of close box office tracking, and it was quite a time to pick it up with so many interesting stories to follow.

[Eric Atreides]

The wait is ogre.

[Brainbug]

6 minutes ago, Eric in Boots said:

The wait is ogre.

[Eric Atreides]

2004

 

Mark Zuckerberg creates Facebook, hearings begin for the Iraq trial of Saddam Hussein, and George W. Bush is re-elected for a second term. Athens hosts the 2004 Summer Olympics, the Beslan school siege hits Russia, and NATO and the EU continue their expansions.

 

On TV, Sex and the City and Frasier saw their finales, while Tom Brokaw and Jimmy Fallon left NBC Nightly News and Saturday Night Live respectively. However, the big finale that year was Friends, whose series finale was watched by over 52.5 million viewers in the US, becoming the fifth-biggest finale in US television ratings history. 2004 also saw several premieres. ABC debuted Lost and Desperate Housewives, both of which became some of the highest-rated and most iconic shows of the 2000s. Other premieres include Entourage, Veronica Mars, Boston Legal, House, and...The Apprentice.

 

The music world saw major controversy at the Super Bowl, when Justin Timberlake tore off part of Janet Jackson’s clothes, exposing her breast on television. On a positive note, Outkast’s Speakerboxxx/The Love Below wins Album of the Year at the Grammys, becoming the first rap album to do so. In gaming, the Nintendo DS debuted on store shelves, Grand Theft Auto continued its rise with San Andreas, while Half-Life, Halo, The Sims, Metroid Prime, and Knights of the Old Republic each got sequels. Metal Gear Solid 3 was considered a return to form for the series, and World of Warcraft debuts, becoming the most iconic MMORPG of all time.

 

And with the passing of Ann Miller, Tony Randall, Ronald Reagan, Rodney Dangerfield, Fay Wray, Marlon Brando, and Johnny Ramone, we would also see the births of Millie Bobby Brown, Grace VanderWaal, Marsai Martin, and Noah Schnapp.

 

For the box office, things stayed about the same. There were plenty of anticipated sequels that made major bank, star-driven vehicles reigned supreme, and a fair share of box office records arrived throughout the year.

 

And the biggest hit of 2004 both domestic and worldwide, with a fair share of records, was the Dreamworks sequel Shrek 2. Taking place after Shrek and Fiona are happily married ogres, Shrek is forced to meet Fiona’s parents, both of whom are not exactly thrilled their daughter married an ogre. At the same time, an evil Fairy Godmother, who wanted Fiona to marry her son Prince Charming, tries to destroy Shrek and Fiona’s marriage, with it up to Shrek, Donkey, and a swashbuckling hitman, or hitcat, named Puss in Boots to save the day.

 

After Shrek became the biggest non-Disney animated film in history and put Dreamworks Animation on the map, a sequel was all but inevitable, with production beginning in 2001 before the first film was even completed. Shrek screenwriters Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio wanted this sequel to be a traditional fairytale, but the producers were not fans of the pitch, and after several disagreements, the two men left the project with screenplay duties now in the hand of Andrew Adamson, the director of the first movie. Adamson used the Sidney Poiter film Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner as a reference, and thus a script was made and put into production.

 

The first Shrek’s success also led to huge pay raises for the original stars. Mike Myers, Cameron Diaz, and Eddie Murphy were all paid $350,000 for the original film. But once the sequel was greenlit, all three actors negotiated an upfront payment of $10 million each for the sequel. Dreamworks co-founder Jeffrey Katzenberg speculated these payments were the highest in any of their careers.

 

 

One of the most important elements the producers wanted in the film was something new to see that audiences hadn’t seen in the first Shrek film. This led to an emphasis on more human characters in the film, including Fiona’s parents, the Fairy Godmother, Prince Charming, and even Shrek as a human. The team improved their appearance by adding more detail to make them look more realistic. Dreamworks allowed this dream to come true thanks to several computer systems that dealt with hair and fur, making it appear realistic and move realistically when the characters moved. Puss in Boots required a whole new set of tools for his fur, belt, and feather plume in his hat.

 

The sequel further built upon the the pop culture reference humor with the new setting of Far Far Away, a direct parody of Beverly Hills, and is where a good majority of the film’s visual gags take place. Puss in Boots was voiced by Antonio Banderas, which basically meant the filmmakers designed Puss to be a feline Zorro. This character was considered one of the highlights of Shrek 2, with him going on to have his own spin-off film in 2011.

 

On May 15, just four days before the film’s release, like the first film, Shrek 2 competed for the Palme D’Or at the Cannes Film Festival (yes really), and came out with great reviews. Many critics considered the film as good, if not better than its predecessor. With a splashy premiere, critic approval, and a beloved first installment, this was all set to be a hit. And it was a hit. A mega hit.

 

On its initial debut, May 19, Shrek 2 became the first film in history to open in more than 4,000 theaters, 4,163 to be exact. This resulted in its FSS being an astonishing $108 million, making it the second-biggest opening weekend of all time, only behind Spider-Man. And with its Wednesday debut, the film saw $128.9 million in its first five days. This by all accounts made it the biggest debut ever for an animated movie, dethroning Finding Nemo just one year after release.

 

But it did not stop there. The immense hype and love for this sequel continued into the following weekend, Memorial Day, where the film saw $72.2 million, resulting in the biggest second weekend of all time. And it didn’t stop there. With the whole rest of the summer ahead of it, Shrek 2 stayed in the top 10 for 10 weeks straight and finished its domestic run with $441.2 million. Alongside a $928.8 million worldwide haul, this made Shrek 2 a juggernaut, becoming the third-highest grossing film of all time both domestically and worldwide, and the highest-grossing animated film of all time by all accounts, unseating Finding Nemo for the honor. The film would hold onto that title worldwide for six years, and domestically for an astonishing 12. Alongside merchandise and DVD sales estimated to earn over $800 million, this made Shrek 2 Dreamworks Animation’s most profitable film in history.

 

Honestly, Shrek 2’s growth is pretty astonishing and kind of a rarity even today. Sure, sequels to Austin Powers and John Wick saw massive jumps, but those movies had a small audience and had room to grow. Shrek was already a massive hit, one of the biggest films of 2001 in fact. Yet Shrek 2 managed to see such a substantial growth of audience, close to double, from a film that already had such a large audience, and only a three year gap. That is almost unheard of. 

 

There’s plenty of reasons why Shrek 2 exploded the way it did. The first film was beloved, CG animation was still huge, little feature animation or family film competition, summer weekdays. But I think what’s important to recognize is that Shrek 2 did what every sequel should do: build off of what people loved from the first movie and expand the world and characters, giving new material people have never seen before. And this is best shown with how the film builds off of the relationship between Shrek and Fiona.

 

As a property, Shrek is best known for its edge. Mocking Disney and fairy tales, snarky adult humor, edgy pop culture references. And that is a big part of the series and its charm, and why it has lasted as the poster child of Internet meme culture. But really, the whole series works as well as it does because of the love between Shrek and Fiona. It feels weird to actually analyze this series after the Internet has made the property into a joke, but I really do mean this.

 

 

The first Shrek was a very simple story about a monster who isolates from the world because of the discrimination and hatred he was given, befriends a talking donkey who was sold by his owner because he talks way too much, and falls in love with a beautiful princess locked in a tower because of a secret she can’t show to anyone. Shrek is a series about the outcasts, and the film allows the romance between Shrek and Fiona to build upon it. They’re supposedly of two different worlds, yet the way they are sheltered and bottle up their secrets make them all the more compatible. Fiona transforming into an ogre, subverting the traditional fairy tale and allowing her to be in her true beautiful form, connecting with her real Prince Charming is just icing on the cake.

 

Shrek 2 is the film that tests their marriage, ups the stakes in their relationship, and also shows what both are going through with the need for love. Shrek tries to change himself for Fiona. Forces are trying to split the couple. But like any great fairy tale, love always wins. That love permeates throughout the film, and it’s beautiful to see these two fight for their love and win it all in the end. This is best shown in the climax, combining the film’s great animation, hilarious comedy and references, pop culture savvy and passionate love for its two heroes in one glorious package.

 

 

There was plenty to love about Shrek 2, and it was especially reflected in its box office. For Dreamworks, this was both a needed reprieve after a slew of box office bombs, a sign about what people loved from this series and what they wanted to see from Dreamworks Animation. And it’s through Shrek 2’s success we would see hit after hit after hit after hit with the studio in the years to come.

 

 

[Eric Atreides]

Going to second domestic and third worldwide was the glorious return of Peter Parker with Spider-Man 2. When the first Spider-Man was finished, Raimi immediately signed on for a sequel, with Alfred Gough and Miles Millar writing the screenplay in April 2002. And when Spider-Man broke the opening weekend record and destroyed the $100 million barrier, Sony fast-tracked the sequel, then titled The Amazing Spider-Man, for a 2004 release and a massive $200 million budget. David Koepp would also sign on to co-write the script. The script was set to include Doctor Octopus, the Lizard, Black Cat and New Goblin as the villains.

 

Michael Chabon would rewrite the original draft, which saw Doc Ock as a younger man infatuated with Mary Jane and caught up in a love triangle with her and Peter. Harry Osborn, angry over the death of his father by Spider-Man, also puts a $10 million price on Spider-Man, making the city turn against the webslinger. Both were rejected by producer Avi Arad.

 

Raimi, alongside screenwriter Alvin Sargent, looked through all of the drafts, picking out the best moments to craft his story. Raimi felt since he told the origin story it was necessary to build on the idea by exploring Peter’s internal conflicts as New York’s friendly neighborhood Spider-Man. It’s his personal wants against the responsibility he has been bestowed with, and the positives and negatives that come inbetween. The story was mainly inspired by the 1967 storyline Spider-Man No More!, as well as Superman II.

 

 

Doctor Octopus was chosen as the villain for two reasons. The first being that Doc Ock was already considered as the first bad guy way back in the Cannon days. Second, he had a unique design and a sympathetic figure with humanity.

 

One of the more unique aspects of this film’s production was its camera system, the Spydercam (hah!). For those who don’t know, the Spydercam is a suspended camera system used to create multidimensional, repeatable movement. For the scenes where Spider-Man is swinging through the city, the Spydercam is utilized, which allowed viewers to feel as if they were swinging thousands of miles above the ground and dropping 50 stories, making these sequences feel believable and more dynamic. The camera’s movement was done through motion control, which made it very cost-effective.

 

Upon its initial release on June 30, analysts believed Spider-Man 2 would be the biggest movie of the summer. That did not happen as I just explained in the last post, but obviously it was still a huge hit. Its Wednesday debut saw $40.5 million, becoming the biggest Wednesday and opening day of all time...well if you take out the $5 million Matrix Reloaded got from Wednesday night previews. And with it also debuting during the Fourth of July frame, its numbers from Wednesday to Monday amounted to an astonishing $180 million, becoming the biggest opening week of all time for a movie. Its $88.2 million three-day was also the biggest three-day ever for the Fourth of July weekend, surpassing Men in Black II.

 

The film would then go on to earn $373.6 million domestic and $789 million worldwide, a pretty minor decrease from the breakout smash that was the first one. Oddly like Shrek 2, Spider-Man 2 knew how to build on what people loved from the first one, while also expanding on the ideas, world, and characters. Critics lauded the film for its layered story and sympathetic villain, with Roger Ebert saying it was the best superhero film since Superman. And since then, the film is considered the high-water mark for all future Spider-Man movies. All future releases are judged by what this movie was able to achieve, and whether that’s fair or not, it does show that Sony, Raimi and Marvel were still able to come out on top. This success obviously warranted a third film, but we’ll get to that later...pizza time.

 

Third domestic, fifth worldwide, Mel Gibson retold the story of Jesus to...mixed results, but major box office success. The Passion of the Christ served as a retelling of the story of the Passion, the last hours of Jesus of Nazareth’s life, based on the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

 

In 2002, Gibson, a staunch Catholic, mentioned during the press tour for Signs that he was interested in directing again. Sure enough, in September 2002, Gibson announced he would direct The Passion of the Christ. While films about Jesus have been done before, the one notable aspect of the film was its language. Instead of being done in English, all of the dialogue would be in Latin and Aramaic. Why would Gibson want the film to be in two dead languages most people don’t know? Simply put, it was to surprise audiences who were watching a story they were already familiar with. "I think it's almost counterproductive to say some of these things in a modern language. It makes you want to stand up and shout out the next line, like when you hear 'To be or not to be' and you instinctively say to yourself, 'That is the question.'" So, while Gibson and co-writer Benedict Fitzgerald wrote the script, professor William Fulco translated the film into Latin and reconstructed Aramaic. Gibson also wanted the film to not have subtitles, to make it feel more authentic and have Gibson rely more on “filmic storytelling”. However, once theaters demanded subtitles in order to have the movie play, Gibson reluctantly placed them in the movie.

 

However, despite the ambition, Gibson’s idea did not go over well with the big wigs at Hollywood. Despite Gibson’s starpower, the film’s religious storyline, and Gibson’s vision of an ultra graphic and ultra violent retelling told through dead languages made it a hard sell. And despite the film turning out to be a hit, it’s still understandable to recognize that this would be a huge risk and one that might be fraught with controversy...we’ll put a pin on that last part.

 

So Gibson and his production company Icon decided they would produce the film independently, with the entire $30 million production cost coming straight from Gibson and Icon’s wallets. During filming, several theological advisers were on set as consultants. A local priest was also on set daily, providing counsel, Confession, and Communion to star Jim Caviezel, with Mass being a frequent period for the cast and crew.

 

 

But even after the film was produced, Gibson couldn’t get any distributor. Partly for the elements studios already balked at, but also because of the heavy controversy surrounding the film. A joint committee of two branches found in both the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Anti-Defamation League earned a version of the script before it would be released in theaters. The statement read like this:

 

“[The Passion of the Christ is] one of the most troublesome texts, relative to anti-Semitic potential, that any of us had seen in 25 years. It must be emphasized that the main storyline presented Jesus as having been relentlessly pursued by an evil cabal of Jews, headed by the high priest Caiaphas, who finally blackmailed a weak-kneed Pilate into putting Jesus to death. This is precisely the storyline that fueled centuries of anti-Semitism within Christian societies. This is also a storyline rejected by the Roman Catholic Church at Vatican II in its document Nostra aetate, and by nearly all mainline Protestant churches in parallel documents...Unless this basic storyline has been altered by Mr. Gibson, a fringe Catholic who is building his own church in the Los Angeles area and who apparently accepts neither the teachings of Vatican II nor modern biblical scholarship, The Passion of the Christ retains a real potential for undermining the repudiation of classical Christian anti-Semitism by the churches in the last 40 years.”

 

While Gibson and other conservative figures disagreed with these statements, these statements made the film a pariah to Hollywood, and more or less put a permanent stain on Mel Gibson’s career, especially when it’s been confirmed Mel Gibson’s a garbage anti-Semite. 20th Century Fox was in talks to distribute, but after public protests, they balked out. But hilariously enough, Fox would then go on to distribute for the home video release. Go figure!

 

With all the backlash and controversy, Gibson decided instead of giving another studio the same criticism he had received, he would distribute and market the film itself, with the help of the relatively obscure Newmarket Films.

 

To save costs, Gibson avoided press junkets and interviews, instead opting for small-scale television ads and church groups. By promoting his film to churchgoers and Evangelical leaders as a powerful film about the Passion, and possibly as a film to persuade non-believers, this allowed a grassroots campaign that spread across the country, with congregations set up at movie theaters, pre-screenings with Evangelical groups, and licensed merchandise targeted towards Christains. These kind of tactics are still used today for Christian films.

 

But of course, the big day happened. Opening on February 25, Ash Wednesday, with all the backlash and controversy, it was no surprise the film got polarizing responses, even by audiences. Some lauded it for its honesty and brutality, others considered it an antisemitic snuff film. Yet it’s through the months of controversy that made the film something people had to see to make up their own minds. And that resulted in something huge.

 

Its 5-Day opening tallied up to about $125.2 million, which made it the biggest 5-Day opening of  all time, barely edging out Return of the King, and its 3-Day of $83.8 million took down Hannibal for the biggest February opening of all time, and that record would be held for 11 years. Keep in mind Passion opened at a time when February was considered a dump month, where studios rid their hands of the movies they have little faith in. This meant Passion had a barren marketplace and all of the attention. This would result in great legs throughout the month of March and up until Easter in April, resulting in an incredible final total of $370.3 million domestically, making it the biggest R-rated film in history, a record that is still up today even after the likes of Deadpool and Joker. And honestly, who knows if that record will ever be toppled? Including overseas numbers meant a worldwide total of $611.5 million.

 

Like I said before, part of the reason why the film did so well was its controversy and polarization. It made the film a discussion point across all ends of the political and religious spectrum that people had to see it to make up their own minds. This made the film both a massive talking point, and an easy film to ridicule, with shows like South Park and Family Guy mocking the film, people’s response, and Mel Gibson after the film’s release. But I guess that goes to show how to utilize free advertising to sell your movie. If only it didn’t benefit such a terrible person.

 

In 2005, The Passion Recut was released, which removed five minutes of the movie’s more graphic content, but it did not come anywhere close to the original cut’s success, only generating $567,692. In June 2016, writer Randall Wallace mentioned he and Gibson were working on a sequel focusing on the resurrection with Jesus, with Jim Caviezel to return. Very little else has been said on the project, but Caviezel did say the script just got a fifth draft done in March 2020. We’ll see how that does if it ever comes out. Oh, and fuck Mel Gibson.

 

On a lighter note, fourth place domestic, seventh place worldwide was the comedy sequel smash of the holidays, Meet the Fockers. 2000’s Meet the Parents focused on Greg Focker (Ben Stiller, played by Ben Stiller, meeting his girlfriend Pam Byrnes’ (Teri Polo) parents, only to end up butting heads with her father Jack (Robert De Niro), a strict, no-nonsense, overprotective patriarch. This sequel sees Pam’s parents meeting Greg’s parents, a duo of eccentric, unconventional middle-class parental figures, played by Dustin Hoffman and Barbra Streisand. This was actually Streisand’s first film in eight years. Family drama and hi-jinx ensue!

 

When the first Meet the Parents debuted in 2000, it was one of the biggest sleeper hits of that year. It opened to a solid $28.6 million, and legging out to almost six times that for a $166.2 million haul and $330.4 million worldwide, as well as DVD sales repping $200 million. This was thanks to the film’s broad comedy and relatable premise of a guy trying to impress their girlfriend’s parents. Naturally a sequel was in the works, and it built off of the ideas and themes of the first film well here. Tensions between family members, especially on the other side, are a constant, and the movie pokes fun at these issues by having the liberal, middle-class, hippie Fockers clash with the upper-class, suburban, WASPy Byrnes in a way that was relatable and funny to couples the world over. And wouldn’t you know it, the film came out just in time for Christmas, when family reunions and family rivalries were common.

 

 

With the goodwill of Meet the Parents and a clever release date, Meet the Fockers opened on December 22 to great success. Its 3-Day was $46.1 million, while the 5-Day tallied up to $70.5 million. This made Meet the Fockers the biggest Christmas opening of all time, usurping Catch Me If You Can, and the fourth biggest December opening ever, only behind all three LOTR movies. It was actually only a hair below Fellowship. The film also posted the largest Christmas Day ever with $19.1 million. The following week was the bigger story, as the film would drop only 10% from the 3-Day with $41.7 million, and would see record numbers on New Year’s Eve ($12.2 million) and New Year’s Day ($18 million). All of this continued into 2005, with the film wrapping up its run with $279.3 million domestically and $522.7 million worldwide, making it the highest-grossing comedy of all time. This also became the biggest film in both Ben Stiller and Robert De Niro’s career.

 

Despite mediocre reviews, this was the clear #1 of the holidays and capped off a banner year for Ben Stiller. Along Came Polly, Starsky & Hutch, and Dodgeball all became box office hits this year and solidified Stiller as a major movie star, resulting in several more hit films in the years to come. In 2010, a third installment titled Little Fockers was released. However, reviews were scathing while the film dropped more than 40% from the last movie. Tragic!

 

Pixar continued what they did best in fifth place (fourth worldwide) with the superhero comedy The Incredibles. Focusing on a family with superpowers, this was the first film not initially developed in house at Pixar. Animator Brad Bird, best known at the time for his work on The Simpsons, was in a production deal with Warner Bros. Feature Animation and in the process of directing The Iron Giant, his first film. The idea came from his love of 1960s comics and spy films, as well as his personal life. As he was approaching middle age, Bird was going through personal issues, wondering if his career goals would come at the expense of his relationship with his family. This would become the basis of the main plot, where the father Bob Parr would go through his mid-life crisis after retiring from his days as a superhero.

 

The film was supposed to be done with 2D animation at Warner Bros., but the failure of The Iron Giant led to Bird leaving the studio and bringing his idea to Pixar, as he was college buddies with creative head and terrible person John Lasseter. It became a CGI film in the process. For the characters, Bird thought up the line-up and based their powers on family archetypes. The dad is expected to be strong, so Bob has super strength. The mom is pulled in a million directions, so Helen has elasticity. Teenage girls are insecure, so Violet has invisibility to hide away from people. Ten-year-old boys are hyperactive, so Dash has super speed. Babies are unrealized potential, so Jack-Jack has multiple powers.

 

Because Brad Bird and the team he brought over to Pixar were familiar with 2D animation, and not CG, this made The Incredibles a trickier film to produce. And Bird’s vision, being the first time Pixar would have a solo director on a project, made it the most complex film ever for the studio.

 

 

While Pixar had dabbled with human characters, this was the first film by the studio to have an entirely human cast. Humans are considered one of the hardest things to execute in animation, and despite Boo from Monsters, Inc. being good practice, Pixar had to create new technology that would allow them to animate detailed human anatomy, clothing, and realistic hair and skin on an entire cast of human characters. Brad Bird even insisted on making things challenging for the animators by letting Violet have long hair that obscured her face. It wasn’t until the end of production they were even able to have her hair successfully executed.

 

And as an action movie with a large scope and world behind it, there were a slew of problems when it came to special effects and locations. Fire, water, smoke, air, steam, explosions. All of this is hard to pull off in CG animation, and The Incredibles was supposed to include all of this in one movie. Disney was very reluctant on making The Incredibles for all these technical reasons, and suggested the movie should be live-action instead, but Lasseter denied this and production soldiered on.

 

The film was released on November 5 in the midst of intense competition for animation and family fare. And with rave reviews, as well as arriving at the peak of Pixar’s popularity, The Incredibles followed in the footsteps of its Pixar predecessors. Its opening weekend was a staggering $70.5 million, leading to a host of records. It was the biggest Pixar opening, the second-biggest animated opening, and the biggest opening weekend for both Disney and a completely original movie. And despite the November competition, The Incredibles still continued to play well in the weekends to come with $261.4 million domestic and $631.6 million worldwide, only behind Finding Nemo in terms of Pixar releases.

 

Despite all the hardships the animation team went through, it was yet another win for Disney and Pixar in what had been six back-to-back wins and counting. This would result in The Incredibles becoming one of Pixar’s biggest franchises, with several video games, a few short films, a ride at Disney California Adventure, and a sequel in 2018. We have a lot to say when it comes to that movie.

 

But despite the success for this specific movie, Pixar itself was on shaky ground. Michael Eisner and Steve Jobs were not very fond of one another, and the agreement Pixar had with Disney, to quickly sum up, was not beneficial to the team that actually makes the billion-dollar enterprises Disney now owned. In January 2004, the two companies attempted to reach a new agreement that was better on Pixar’s end, but Eisner was not impressed. Negotiations between the two went on for months until there was a public break-up in mid-2004, with Disney creating Circle 7 Animation who would take charge of all the Pixar productions Disney owned at the time, while Pixar was seeking new partners, with The Incredibles and the upcoming Cars set to be the last Pixar films under the Disney name. But would these troubles last for long?

[Eric Atreides]

Sixth place was home to the second-biggest film worldwide with Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. The third installment in the Harry Potter saga, this film was a lot of firsts for the series. While the first two movies released back to back a year apart, this took a while longer to come out. Heyman wanted future movies to have more time between each other to allow the films to grow and develop, which meant these movies would now go through an 18-month production cycle. While Chris Columbus saw great success with the first two Potter films, he declined this installment because these films were taking time away from him and his kids.

 

And so, the hunt for a new director was underway. And after a slew of candidates, including Guillermo del Toro, Marc Forster, M. Night Shyamalan, Callie Khoul, and Kenneth Branagh, it was given to Alfonso Cuaron, as Rowling was a fan of his previous work and Heyman felt his style would fit best with the themes of this latest installment. Cuaron was reluctant to take the part, having not read the series nor seen any of the movies. But after reading the books, he instantly fell in love with the story, and attached himself to the project.

 

The first thing Cuaron did was ask Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson to write an autobiographical essay about their characters, so Cuaron could have a better understanding of their personalities, interests, and traits. Watson delivered a 10 page long essay, Radcliffe was just two, and Grint didn’t write one since Ron would have just not done the work in the first place. This was important for Cuaron, because this was the best way for him to understand his main actors and how they understand their characters.

 

Another big change was found in the film’s costumes. Cuaron wanted a more mature, naturalistic tone, which reflected in how the Hogwarts students wore their uniforms. Says Cuaron, “Each teenager's individuality was reflected in the way they wore their uniform. So I asked all the kids in the film to wear their uniforms as they would if their parents weren't around.” Cuaron also wanted the characters to wear modern street clothes when they weren’t in lessons. Rowling agreed, as she argued that outside of class, these students probably would wear more comfortable outfits. 

 

When filming began in February 2003, Prisoner of Azkaban, once again, broke away from what the first two films had done. This was the first of the series to extensively use real-life filming locations, with almost all the outdoor locations actually being shot outdoors. And while Chamber of Secrets started going into darker directions, this was the film that really turned things around. Not only was the story darker, but so was the film’s presentation. Cinematographer Michael Seresin employed moody lighting and more shadows on the film, creating a more dreary atmosphere than the last two. Seresin also used wide-angle lenses heavily in filming, to help amplify Hogwarts’ prominence in the story and offer a chance for the actors to use their body language more to convey their emotions.

 

 

Upon its US release on June 4, Prisoner of Azkaban opened to $93.7 million, making it the biggest opening for a Potter movie, as well as the third-biggest opening ever at that time. In the UK, the film also opened to the biggest opening week ever for the territory, repping about £23.9 million, or $43.5 million, a record that would be held until 2015’s Spectre. Having said all that, the film was the beginning of Harry Potter as a more frontloaded brand. With three movies in, as well as the lack of Thanksgiving and Christmas, Harry Potter started to become more fan-driven in its appeal, resulting in a 63% drop in its second weekend, and finishing at $249.5 million domestic and $795.6 worldwide, making it the lowest-grossing Potter film to this very day, and only ahead of Crimes of Grindelwald for the Wizarding World in general. Having said all that, if almost $800 million is your rock bottom, then I think it’s clear Heyman, Rowing, and co. were doing something right. Since then, Prisonzer of Azkaban has lived on as a fan favorite and another instance of Harry Potter as an all-time juggernaut.

 

Roland Emmerich was found in seventh place (sixth worldwide) with the environmental disaster film The Day After Tomorrow. This film was a unique disaster film as it tackled the very serious issue of climate change at a time when environmentalism was becoming a big talking point. It followed humanity, specifically a father-son duo, dealing with extreme freezing, tornadoes, hail storms, and other natural disasters caused by global warming and climate change due to humanity’s neglect and mistreatment of Mother Nature.

 

Based on the book The Coming Global Superstorm, the way the film got produced was a touch interesting. Writer Michael Wimer staged an auction for Emmerich’s script, where it was sent to all major studios along with a term sheet. They had 24 hours to decide whether or not they would produce the movie, and they had to allow Emmerich to direct it. 20th Century Fox, who worked with Emmerich on Independence Day, were the only studio that accepted these terms. Filming took place on November 2002, and was shot in Toronto and Montreal (shout out to our beautiful Canadian forum members).

 

One of the more unique aspects of the film was its political undertones. Coming out at the tail end of Bush’s first term, Emmerich made this film to criticize Bush and Cheney’s climate change policies, having the president in this film be weak and feeble and the Vice President bear a resemblance to Dick Cheney. It was clear Emmerich went into the movie with good intentions and promote the very real dangers of climate change that are still an issue to this very day. Having said that, the execution did not go over well.

 

Scientists were very critical over the film’s depiction of climate change. While some lauded it for tackling an issue, its over the top nature made scientists worry the idea would be considered a joke or too unrealistic to most people. While rising sea levels, the disruption of ocean patterns, and more destructive storms are a part of climate change, they do not occur as quickly or as severely as the film appears to be. The superstorm and second ice age this film posits is just unrealistic, and even if it would, these events occur over decades or even centuries instead of a few hours.

 

 

And at the same time, climate change deniers were offended by the movie too. Patrick J. Michaels, a former research professor at the University of Virginia and a staunch climate change denier lambasted the film as propaganda. So basically, scientists hated the movie for its lack of realism, and deniers hated the movie for promoting something that is real and is destroying our world. Truly, this movie appealed to no one...or did it?

 

Despite the questions of scientific accuracy, most folks didn’t really care about the science and were taken in by the visual effects and destruction. And sure enough, on Memorial Day weekend, while it did open in second place behind the juggernaut that was Shrek 2, it didn’t matter. Its 3-Day was a fantastic $68.7 million, and a jaw-dropping $85.8 million for the 4-Day, becoming the second-biggest Memorial Day debut ever, as well as the biggest opening weekend for a film not to debut at #1. Its 3-Day was the third-biggest ever for a Fox release, only behind X2 and Attack of the Clones, and it all surmounted to $186.7 million domestic and $552.6 million worldwide. This made it the highest-grossing Hollywood film ever made in Canada, and deep down, that’s the most beautiful record of all.

 

Jason Bourne returned in eighth place, thanks to the anticipated sequel The Bourne Supremacy. This installment continues Jason Bourne on his amnesiac quest, as he is trapped in another conspiracy by the CIA and Treadstone, while also trying to discover more about his past. During production of The Bourne Identity, there were no plans for a sequel, as apparently the crew felt they wanted to make another if it won’t be as good, or better, than the first one. But of course, then The Bourne Identity was a solid hit, and money talks.

 

Due to the awful production from the last movie, Liman was let go, and so English director Paul Greengrass took the reins after the producers saw his work on 2002’s Bloody Sunday. His shaky cam usage, making it feel as if the audience is participatory and in the action, felt like a perfect fit according to the producers, and thus Greengrass’ participatory style would define this movie, and the series as a whole going forward, becoming a polarizing feature of the series in the process.

 

Production was definitely not as eventful as it was with Identity, though there were some interesting tidbits. Because of the multiple locations of the film, Greengrass decided he would shoot in reverse order of the film. The climactic car chase and ending of the film was shot first in Moscow, then the majority of the film would be shot in Berlin, while the opening scenes in Goa, India were shot last.

 

 

Speaking of the ending, this also saw a last-minute change. Two weeks before the film was set to release, both Greengrass and Damon agreed the original ending was unsatisfactory, so they thought up a new ending, and phoned the producers about their new idea. It would cost about $200,000 to do, and Damon had to leave the set of Ocean’s Twelve. The producers reluctantly obliged, but it was worth it. The new ending tested way higher compared to the original ending. And I’m sure Frank Marshall and company were glad they chose this conclusion in the end from a box office perspective.

 

Opening on July 23, the film earned a very impressive $52.5 million, which was well above industry expectations, almost double what The Bourne Identity earned in 2002. With the strong goodwill of the first Bourne film, as well as positive reviews for the sequel, this meant an explosion in its opening weekend, and a sizable jump in the final box office haul, with $176.2 million domestic and $288.5 million worldwide, a respective 45% and 35% leap from Identity.

 

It’s clear at this rate Jason Bourne has managed to hit the mainstream, and people were getting excited. And at this point, there was nowhere to go but up...

 

After Bruckheimer saw massive success with Disney last year, that success continued with National Treasure, the ninth-biggest movie domestic. Nicolas Cage stars as Benjamin Franklin Gates (get it?), a historian and cryptologist looking for hidden treasure left behind by the Founding Fathers. The back of the Declaration of Independence has a hidden code that points to the national treasure, but Gates isn’t the only one on this quest. Ian Howe, played by Sean Bean, is also on the case, so it’s up to Gates and his two companions to race against the clock and find the national treasure before it’s too late.

 

This project first began in 1997, with an idea developed by Disney marketing head Oren Aviv and Charles Segers, with the script written by Jim Kouf. Jon Turtletaub, known for films like While You Were Sleeping and Phenomenon, signed on in 1999, with the project ending up at Touchstone Pictures in 2001. I’m assuming this is where Bruckheimer joined the fray, as he had a good relationship with the people at Touchstone, and Bruckheirmer’s relationship with Cage is likely why he signed on in 2003. But as the film went into production, the film moved from Touchstone to Disney, likely because of the film’s PG rating.

 

 

After the monster success of Pirates of the Carribean last year, it was fair to say there were high expectations for this release, and it delivered. The Pirates connection, Cage’s starpower, and broad appeal across all audiences earned the movie a $35.1 million opening weekend, the highest of Cage’s career.

 

However, the real kicker was its legs. Smartly positioned the weekend before Thanksgiving, this gave the film two holidays to boost box office and get families and moviegoers into the seats, which paid off tremendously. The following weekend saw the film drop only 8.5% for a $32.2 million second weekend. Post-Thanksgiving, which typically sees massive drops, saw a pretty impeccable 47% drop. It continued to play well throughout December and even into January, resulting in the film finishing almost 5 times its opening, despite mixed reviews, on the way to $173 million domestically. Overseas was nearly identical, resulting in $347.5 million worldwide.

 

As I said last time, Pirates of the Caribbean was Disney taking their first steps into competing with the big franchises. National Treasure, a $100 million action release, was another instance of Disney becoming more competitive and building their live-action tentpole portfolio to great success. And three years later, Cage’s treasure hunting escapades became bigger than ever.

 

Meanwhile, one week before National Treasure, Robert Zemeckis attempted to change the animation industry and film industry altogether with The Polar Express in tenth place. Based on the children’s book, it follows a young boy on Christmas Eve, starting to doubt his belief in Santa Claus. On that night, a mysterious train stops by his house, and the boy is invited by the conductor to attend the train. Its destination? The North Pole, where the boy and other kids on the train get to meet Santa Claus before he sets off for Christmas.

 

In 1999, Tom Hanks earned the rights for the book’s adaptation, with him set to play The Conductor and Santa Claus. The one condition was that the film would not be animated. However, when Robert Zemeckis was on board, that condition was removed. Zemeckis felt that doing a live-action adaptation would be awful, be wildly expensive, and rob the film of the book’s look. So Zemeckis, being the tech enthusiast that he is, used the tools of performance motion capture to create a film never seen before.

 

For those who don’t know, motion capture is the process of recording the movement of objects or other people. In film, this means recording actors, often in tracking suits and with facial tracking technology, and using those recordings to animate CG character models. This meant during filming that Tom Hanks, who played five different characters in the film, was in a black-box stage, often by himself, and with rudimentary props. His movements and expressions were recorded and translated into characters like the boy, the conductor, the hobo, and Santa Claus. Daryl Sabara of Spy Kids fame dubbed over Hanks when it came to the role of the boy. Hanks was set to play every single role in his motion-capture suit, but to avoid Hanks exhausting himself, other actors would be in the motion-capture suits acting alongside him, like Nona Gaye, Peter Scolari, and the late Michael Jeter.

 

 

This made the film pretty ambitious from a technical standpoint, but it came at a big price. The film’s production budget was a mind-boggling $165 million, making it the most expensive animated film ever up to that point. An estimated $125 million marketing cost was also not pretty. So this meant the film had to be a real hit in order for Zemeckis’ crazy idea to work.

 

Upon its release on November 10, alongside a debut in about 70 IMAX venues, the movie saw a mixed reception. Some critics lauded the film for its emotional resonance and enchanting atmosphere, while others criticized the movie’s padded story and animation style. Many argued the realistic designs and stilted movements dipped into the uncanny valley, with some saying the movie looked downright horrifying.

 

So when it finally opened to $30.6 million for the 5-day, that result was...okay. It didn’t come anywhere close to what movies like The Incredibles or Shrek 2 or even Shark Tale did in 2004, and those production costs were still a problem, but it could have been worse, and its Christmas setting meant it could leg out during the holidays. And leg out it did.

 

The film saw a 33% drop in its second weekend, and in its third weekend, Thanksgiving, the film jumped to 24%, in spite of intense competition from Incredibles, National Treasure, Spongebob, and Christmas with the Kranks. As December rolled around, with more and more people checking the film out, it finished its run more than 5.3 times its 5-Day opening with $162.7 million domestic and $286 million worldwide. I don't know if the film was in the black by the end of its theatrical run, but it didn’t embarrass itself, and it was clear there was an audience for this film, and future motion-capture productions.

 

Since then, the film has seen an annual re-release in IMAX, which helped add about $27.5 million more to the total. The film would also go on to have a 4D theme park ride and train-travel experiences based on the movie have popped up over the years. In 2006, ABC gave the film its network television debut, and was a huge hit, earning 13.2 million viewers. And since then, the film has been an evergreen property every December thanks to cable reruns, and has earned its fans.

 

This success would not translate to motion-capture animated films however. Motion capture is mad expensive compared to regular CG animation, so these movies had to be big hits to justify their money spent. Movies like Beowulf, Monster House, A Christmas Carol, and The Adventures of Tintin saw either middling numbers at best to awful results at worst. In 2011, Mars Needs Moms earned $39.2 million worldwide on a $150 million budget, becoming one of the biggest bombs in film history, and basically killing the mo-cap animated movie as we know it. Tragic!

 

However, the technology has been used in live-action movies and video games, where it probably should stay for the time being.

[Eric Atreides]

Along with the green ogre, Dreamworks also found success in eleventh place with Shark Tale, which was #9 worldwide. Taking place in a literal underwater city, it follows a talking fish named Oscar, who dreams of being rich and famous. When it appears as if Oscar killed one of the sons of a shark mob boss named Don Lino (just go with it), he decides to keep it up and create this lie that he’s a Sharkslayer, soon finding fame and fortune. And along with Don Lino’s outcast shark son Lenny, Oscar tries to keep this great white lie going.

 

One of the more notable things about this movie, like many other Dreamworks releases at the time, was its all-star cast. Shark Tale featured an all-star cast full of A-listers like Robert De Niro, Renee Zellweger, Jack Black, Angelina Jolie, and even Martin Scorsese, who was pestered by his wife to be in the movie because she wanted him to be in something his daughter would be allowed to see. But the big star(fish) here was Will Smith, arguably the biggest movie star at the time, in his first ever animated role. In fact, the character designs were designed so that the fish would actually bear a resemblance to the original actors...it was not very well-done.

 

However, the one...unique tidbit of the film is that when marketing started, people, including kids, thought to themselves, “wait a minute...I’ve seen this before.” Sure enough, in the spirit of Antz and The Road to El Dorado, Katzenberg had Shark Tale in production at the same time as Finding Nemo, another animated film about fish, produced by Katzenberg’s rivals Pixar and distributed by Disney, his former stomping ground, and releasing about a year or so after Nemo. Sure there were aesthetic differences, but this seemed pretty fishy (I’m sorry). Katzenberg did say this was coincidental, and he has been open with the people over at Pixar over projects...but even kids knew this was nothing more than bluffing. 

 

 

Regardless, the film was made, and debuted at the Venice Film Festival on September 10 on the largest inflatable screen in the world for some reason, and saw general release on October 1. Thanks to the goodwill of Dreamworks and Shrek 2, the film opened to $47.6 million. This made it the second biggest debut for an October release and the fifth biggest opening for an animated movie. With no competition all throughout October, this resulted in Shark Tale earning $160.9 million, becoming Will Smith’s eighth $100 million grosser. We really were living in the Willenium. Worldwide was $367.3 million.

 

However, responses were far from favorable, among both critics and audiences. Shark Tale has since been considered one of the worst Dreamworks films for its overemphasis on pop culture references, lame jokes, and uncanny fish designs. Roger Ebert mentioned in his review how odd the film was. “Since the target audience for Shark Tale is presumably kids and younger teenagers, how many of them have seen the R-rated Godfather and will get all the inside jokes? Not a few, I suppose, and some of its characters and dialogue have passed into common knowledge. But it's strange that a kid-oriented film would be based on a parody of a 1972 gangster movie for adults."

 

The film also saw a fair share of controversy. The film’s mob sharks were all stereotypes of Italian mafia members, which resulted in the Italic Institute of America protesting against the film for perpetuating negative Italian-American stereotypes. Meanwhile, the American Family Association argued the film was designed to promote the acceptance of gay rights to children, because...Lenny the shark is effeminate and him being a vegetarian is a metaphor for being gay? Homophobes are weird.

 

Thirteenth place was the very expensive historical epic Troy, directed by Wolfgang Petersen. This film was a loose adaptation of Homer’s Iliad, an epic poem set during the Trojan War, depicting the battle between the warrior Achilles and King Agamemnon. Brad Pitt played Achilles, while Brian Cox was Agamemnon. Co-stars were Eric Bana as Hector and Orlando Bloom as Paris.

 

Shot on the island of Malta, when the film was completed, the production costs for Troy ended up to about $185 million. Brad Pitt and Grecian warfare doesn’t come cheap. This really put the film under pressure to deliver at the box office. And as it turns out, the film went out on top. Troy opened on May 14 to $46.9 million, becoming both Pitt and Petersen’s biggest openings ever, on its way to a solid $133.4 million. Overseas was the bigger story, as the movie saw 70% of its haul from international markets, with $364 million. All told, Troy ended up earning $497.4 million, which landed it #60 on the all-time box office charts back in 2004.

 

 

Sadly, things weren’t perfect. Reviews were mixed and Brad Pitt himself said he was disappointed in the film. In a New York Times interview in 2019, Pitt had this to say: “I had to do Troy because [...] I pulled out of another movie and then had to do something for the studio. So I was put in Troy. It wasn’t painful, but I realized that the way that movie was being told was not how I wanted it to be. I made my own mistakes in it. What am I trying to say about Troy? I could not get out of the middle of the frame. It was driving me crazy. I’d become spoiled working with David Fincher. It’s no slight on Wolfgang Petersen. Das Boot is one of the all-time great films. But somewhere in it, Troy became a commercial kind of thing. Every shot was like, Here’s the hero! There was no mystery.” In 2007, a Director’s Cut was released, including almost 30 minutes of new footage.

 

Fourteenth domestic, tenth worldwide was the glorious return of Danny Ocean and friends with the anticipated sequel Ocean’s Twelve. Bringing back the original cast, this sees Danny Ocean traveling to Europe and taking part in three huge heists in Rome, Paris, and Amsterdam. One of the more unique aspects about this sequel was its major increase of supporting cast members. Catherine Zeta-Jones plays the Europol agent hunting Danny Ocean down, and Vincent Cassel plays a famous con man known as the Night Fox. Other actors include Topher Grace, Eddie Izzard, Cherry Jones, Albert Finney, Robbie Coltrane, and Bruce Willis. There was also a sequence where Julia Roberts’ Tess pretends she’s the celebrity superstar...Julia Roberts, in what is arguably the greatest joke in the history of cinema.

 

 

Opening on December 10, Ocean’s Twelve managed to open just above the first movie with $39.2 million. Having said that, it failed to reach that film’s heights. The film garnered a polarizing response, with some enjoying the more laid-back tone and witty dialogue, while others were disappointed in the film for its confusing plot and final twist. This meant the film earned $125.5 million domestic and $362.7 million worldwide, a sizable decrease from the last movie. Since then, Ocean’s Twelve has garnered its fans, and even Steven Soderbergh considers this movie the best of the series.

 

Having said that, the mixed reactions led to the franchise moving in a safer direction. In 2007, Ocean’s Thirteen was a more conventional release, and only grossed slightly less than its predecessor, despite better reviews. In 2018, the spin-off film Ocean’s 8 was released, this time focusing on a team of women with Sandra Bullock as Danny Ocean’s sister Debbie. It became the second-biggest Ocean’s movie domestically, but the worst performer worldwide.

 

Going to 17th place was a film that was just as, if not more controversial than Passion of the Christ. Fahrenheit 9/11 was directed, written by, and starred filmmaker and political commentator Michael Moore, then known for the 2002 documentary Bowling for Columbine. This doc was a critical look at George W. Bush and his presidency, the Iraq War, and the media.

 

Like all controversial things in Hollywood, this was linked to...the Weinsteins. While Fahrenheit was set to be financed by Mel Gibson’s Icon Productions, the film would actually be picked up by Miramax in May 2003. Miramax already worked with Moore back in 1997 for The Big One, so it seemed like a good match.

 

Back then, Miramax was owned by Disney, and even today, Disney does not often dip its toes into political features. For Fahrenheit 9/11, the Disney board didn’t know that Miramax was developing this anti-Bush film until there was a posting on The Drudge Report. Michael Eisner then ordered Harvey Weinstein to drop the film entirely, likely because Eisner didn’t want the Disney name to be associated with such a controversial release. Weinstein saw no need to drop the film, as its $6 million budget was below the threshold Miramax needed to ask for Disney’s approval, and the film was not set to be NC-17, a rating Disney was vehemently against.

 

And thus a compromise was made. If the Disney executives didn’t like the movie, Miramax would drop it. After the film was nearly finished, and saw rave responses at test screenings, Weinstein asked Eisner and other Disney executives to watch the film. They all declined, despite the compromise they made. Reportedly Disney executive Brad Epstein watched the film and liked it, but he gave heavy criticism to the board of directors. Eisner told Weinstein Disney’s board would not allow Miramax to release the film, blocking the film from release. Furious by Eisner’s decision, the Weinsteins personally acquired the rights to the documentary, thus establishing Fellowship Adventure Group. Along with Lions Gate Entertainment and IFC Films, the film was finally able to see the light of day. It’s a story that was very much like Passion of the Christ. Only fitting these stories are connected to two horrible people.

 

 

In April 2004, the film was selected to compete at Cannes for the Palme D’Or, and on its premiere, the film earned a 15-20 minute standing ovation, the longest in 25 years according to Weinstein. This resulted in the film winning the Palme D’Or, the first time a documentary earned the honor since The Silent World in 1956. This saw conservative backlash and anti-French sentiments, but funny enough only one of the Jury members was French and four of the nine were American. Funny that. When the film was submitted to the MPAA, the film earned an R rating, which did not go over well with Moore, who a PG-13 so everyone, including teenagers, can see his input on George W. Bush. And despite an appeal, the film stuck to its R rating, though some theaters did allow unchaperoned teens to see the movie.

 

And so, riding on its Cannes victory, the massive media coverage over Disney blocking the film’s release, the failure to appeal to a PG-13, and anti-Bush sentiment reigning supreme just a few months before the 2004 election, Fahrenheit 9/11 exploded in popularity. It opened on June 25 in only 868 theaters, but managed to earn $23.9 million, making it the first time ever a documentary opened to #1, and with a grand total of $24.1 million including its 2-theater Wednesday debut, this made Fahrenheit 9/11 the biggest documentary in history in just the span of a couple days. And it didn’t even land in 1,000 theaters.

 

That success was also coupled by the film staying in the news even after it opened. Moore’s criticisms of Bush and the Iraq War saw heavy criticism from Bush supporters and political commentators. British-American journalist Christopher Hitchens declared the film distorted history and featured untruths, while former New York mayor Ed Koch considered the film to be propaganda. Moore would then publish the sources he used online, and a document that proved he established agreements between the points in his film and the findings of the 9/11 Commission.

 

The constant media coverage made people, including Bush supporters, see the film in order to make up their own mind, resulting in the film earning several theater expansions throughout the summer, and earning $119.2 million domestic and $222.4 million worldwide, making it, again, the biggest documentary in history, and to this day, no doc has come anywhere close to Fahrenheit’s success.

 

And coming out less than four months before the presidential election, there was interest in how the film would impact the upcoming election. Many journalists and analysts believed it would just feed into the thoughts and emotions of Bush haters instead of convincing others to vote against him. Moore himself just hoped Bush would be out of the White House, and stated his film was meant to be an organizing tool and energize people to vote Bush out of the office. Regardless of the film’s influence, George W. Bush was re-elected for a second term.

 

Regardless, despite its actual success, it can’t be denied Fahrenheit 9/11 was a phenomenon unlike anything else and it turned Michael Moore into a household name overnight. His future releases like Sicko and Capitalism: A Love Story would go on to be some of the biggest political documentaries ever, though nowhere near Fahrenheit numbers. In 2018, Fahrenheit 11/9 was released, this time focusing on the Trump administration. It saw nowhere near the same success, grossing only $6.7 million. Let’s just hope this film ended up being more successful in getting our evil-in-chief out of the office.

[Brainbug]

2004 was the summer of succesfull and (mabye more importantly) beloved sequels. Shrek 2, Harry Potter 3, Bourne 2, Spider-Man 2 all delivered greatly on the quality front.

 

Shrek 2's entire sequence with the ending fight accompanied by I need a Hero is still possibly my favourite single scene in animation. I consider those 5 minutes perfection.

 

Prisoner of Azkaban is imo the best book and film in the franchise. Although the age jump of the actors was never more noticeable, that movie is just fantasy done absolutely right.

 

I remember seeing The Polar Express' Trailer like 100 times in television but ive never actually seen the film itself.

[Eric Atreides]

Going down to 28th place was the teen comedy classic Mean Girls. Loosely based on the self-help book Queen Bees & Wannabes, this stars Lindsay Lohan as Cady Heron, who returns with her family to the United States after living in Africa for 12 years. After befriending the two school outcasts, Cady soon discovers high school is divided into cliques and friend groups, with the alpha clique of the bunch being “The Plastics”, a trio of rich pretty girls who rule the school’s social pyramid. After the Plastics, led by Rachel McAdams’ Regina George, become interested in Cady, the new girl seems to be doing alright for herself. But then Cady falls in love with Regina’s ex-boyfriend Aaron Samuels. And all hell breaks loose.

 

Queen Bees & Wannabes, which focuses on high school cliques and the mental damage they have on young girls, landed in the hands of SNL writer and actress Tina Fey, who contacted SNL creator Lorne Michaels over turning the book into a film. Michaels then optioned the film to Paramount Pictures, and a movie was greenlit. Being non-fiction, Fey developed the plot from scratch, using elements and stories from her own experiences at high school, as well as naming the characters on friends and people she knew. One notable exception was the character of Janis Ian, who was named after the famous singer of the same name, and was the musical guest in the very first episode of Saturday Night Live.

 

As for the casting, it was there where things had to be crucial for the movie to work. Lindsay Lohan first read for Regina George, but the producers felt she would fit the role of Cady better. Lohan agreed, as she didn’t want her playing a “mean girl” to ruin her reputation. Amanda Seyfried also auditioned for Regina George, but they felt Seyfried’s spacey and daffy sense of humor would fit better with Karen Smith, the airhead of The Plastics. Regina George would actually be given to Rachel McAdams, as they felt McAdams’ kind and polite personality made her perfect for a mean-spirited role. This casting would happen at the same time McAdams was cast in The Notebook. Tina Fey would also appear in the film as Cady’s teacher, as did other SNL veterans like Amy Poehler, Tim Meadows, and Ana Gasteyer.

 

Opening on April 30, the film’s success was quite surprising. Opening to $24.4 million, it became the fourth-biggest debut ever for an April release, and opened above many other teen movies at the time, including Lohan’s own Freaky Friday last year. And sure enough, with great critical reception and a passionate audience of teenage girls, this resulted in $86.1 million domestic and $130.1 million worldwide, becoming Paramount’s biggest hit since School of Rock in 2003.

 

Upon its release, the film earned critical acclaim, with people lauding the film for Tina Fey’s writing, fantastic performances, and satirical edge. This put Tina Fey on the map, and that momentum would continue with the NBC sitcom 30 Rock, becoming one of the most acclaimed NBC sitcoms in history. Rachel McAdams, helped also by The Notebook the same year, became a superstar overnight, with future hits like Wedding Crashers, Sherlock Holmes, The Vow, Spotlight, Doctor Strange, and Game Night. Amanda Seyfried saw her debut with Mean Girls, and would also see a strong career in the years to come, with her biggest success being the Mamma Mia movies. Lindsay Lohan also continued her success as a teen idol after years of success with Disney.

 

 

But Mean Girls didn’t truly take off until well after the movie was released. With its acclaim and popularity amongst teen girls, Mean Girls became a mainstay in slumber parties for years to come. And with this generation living in the digital age when social media was just starting to emerge, Mean Girls exploded online, with quotes, GIFs and memes becoming a mainstay on Twitter and Tumblr. Celebrities like Mariah Carey and Jennifer Lawrence mentioned their love for the movie, and the White House referenced the movie on their Twitter with a picture of Bo, Obama’s pet dog. Since then, Mean Girls would also become the subject of parody, with an MTV sketch featuring Ed Sheeran and Iggy Azaela in 2014, and Ariana Grande parodied the Christmas pageant scene in her music video “Thank U, Next”.

 

Tina Fey explained the film’s breakout success best: "Adults find it funny. They are the ones who are laughing. Young people watch it like a reality show. It's much too close to their real experiences so they are not exactly guffawing." Like any great movie, it works on different levels. There’s great dialogue and funny actors for adults to latch onto, but for the actual teens watching it, it’s a mirror to their own high school life, which lets them relate to the movie and appreciate it as one of the rare high school movies that actually represents what high school is about.

 

In 2011, ABC Family produced Mean Girls 2 to cash in on the film’s newfound success, but it only featured Tim Meadows returning, and was considered a disappointment to fans. A spin-off titled Mean Moms was set to be made and star Jennifer Aniston, but no word on the project has come out since 2015.

 

In 2018, Mean Girls was turned into a Broadway musical, earning 12 Tony nominations in the process. And this past January, Tina Fey announced the Broadway version of Mean Girls would be adapted as a feature film.

 

And finally, all the way down to 57th place was the horror classic Saw. Starring Leigh Whannell and Cary Elwes, this film sees two complete strangers awaken chained in a dilapidated bathroom, with no idea how they got here. And one sadistic serial killer named John Kramer, better known as The Jigsaw Killer, gives the two men a game. Adam (Whannell) is urged to escape. Lawrence (Elwes) has to kill Adam, or else his wife and daughter dies. Hi-jinx ensue!

 

Saw was the brainchild of two recent Australian film school grads: James Wan and Leigh Whannell. Inspired by the low-budget releases of The Blair Witch Project and Pi, both of them wanted to write and fund a film as cheaply as possible. Their idea for the cheapest film to shoot was having two actors in one room. This was actually helpful when it came to brainstorming, as because Wan and Whannell had low bank accounts and a contained storyline in one location, they had to think creatively.

 

Wan pitched Whannell the basic idea of the film, and as Whannell pondered over the idea, he opened his diary and wrote the word “Saw” in blood-red ink. The idea was good, the title was perfect, and they were ready to make their mark, with Wan as the director and Whannell as the writer and star. But it wasn’t very easy. Initially the duo had $30,000 to spend on the film, but as the scripting process went on, the duo realized they needed more money. So they optioned the script to several Australian producers from 2001 to 2002, with no luck. They were then urged to sell the script to Los Angeles, and while the duo were reluctant to pay for travel when they already had little money, they obliged, since they had to get this movie out eventually.

 

But before they went off, Wan felt just a script wasn’t enough to convince producers. So he decided to direct a $5,000 short film based on the script’s jaw trap scene, with Whannell wearing the trap. The short was shot on a 16mm camera for two days, and was turned into a DVD that would be shipped along with the script. This was very important, because it showcased Wan’s talents and vision, as well as show off that Wan and Whannell were a director-actor team.

 

In early 2003, the short was sent to producer Gregg Hoffman, who was jaw-dropped by the footage on display, and after reading the script with his partners Mark Burg and Oren Koules, they offered Wan and Whannell to work with them. While the duo had garnered offers from Dreamworks and Gold Circle Films, Hoffman and company gave them complete creative control, 25% of the net profits, and allowed Wan to direct and Whannell to star. This was their passion project, and if they said yes to Dreamworks or Gold Circle, there was a chance they would lose their input and fail to make the movie they always wanted to make. And thus, Wan and Whannell were granted $1.2 million to produce the movie. Elwes and Tobin Bell, the actor playing Jigsaw, also joined thanks to the short and screenplay.

 

Because of the tight funds, they had only 18 days to shoot the movie. This meant Wan had to do very little takes and shots for the movie to be finished before the shooting deadline. While a hindrance, Wan mentioned he felt that benefited the movie, because the lack of time and money gave a gritty, rough around the edges look to the film, becoming an aesthetic that defined the series forward. But while he was editing the film, he realized he didn’t have enough good footage or takes, with a lot of missing gaps. This meant Wan and editor Kevin Greutert had to improvise, meaning they created shots to help mend the movie together, like making a bad-looking shot look like a surveillance camera feed or cutting to still photography. Says Wan in an AV Club interview, "We did a lot of things to fill in gaps throughout the film. Whatever we cut to newspaper clippings and stuff like that, or we cut to surveillance cameras, or we cut to still photography within the film, which now people say, 'Wow, that's such a cool experimental style of filmmaking', we really did that out of necessity to fill in gaps we did not get during the filming".

 

 

Saw was picked up by Lions Gate just days before its Sundance 2004 premiere. Initially the film was going to be a direct-to-DVD feature, but after the positive reception from festival goers, it was decided the film would be theatrically released on October 29, two days before Halloween. Despite competition from fellow horror hit The Grudge, the film saw a very impressive third place debut with $18.5 million, making it Lions Gate’s second biggest debut ever, only behind Fahrenheit 9/11.

 

And while Saw’s legs obviously weren’t anywhere near what The Ring had, WOM was pretty positive. People loved the concept and Wan’s vision, which resulted in the movie earning three times its opening to $55.2 million domestic and $103.1 million worldwide. This may not seem like a whole lot, especially in the horror movie boom we now live in, but for a while, thanks to its low budget, Saw became the most profitable horror movie since Scream, and its success turned a lot of heads.

 

Of course the big thing is a lot of sequels. Lions Gate, which was still a bit of a fledgling company with a few notable successes, knew they had a hit franchise on their hands. Sure enough, Saw saw a yearly release, with Saw II earning $32.1 million its opening weekend, becoming the second-biggest Halloween debut ever at that time, and with six other sequels since then, Saw has generated about $976.3 million, becoming one of the biggest horror franchises in history.

 

And with Saw’s success was a massive boost in films titled “torture porn”, which combine elements from splatter and slasher films, and utilize gore, violence, mutilation, sadism, etc. The release of films like Eli Roth’s Hostel, Wolf Creek, The Collector, and The Human Centipede, among others. These films were cheap to make, have plenty of money shots, and a decent fanbase in the horror community to make people invested. And since then, torture porn has been the most polarizing subgenre of horror. Some find it exciting, bloody, and entertaining, while others find them to be too graphic, too offensive, and too brainless. Even George Romero mentioned he doesn’t get their appeal.

 

But they have their place, and it’s clear that this became so popular because Saw was able to do it so well. Since then, Wan and Whannell have become gods in the film and horror industry. The two would reunite in 2011 with Insidious, which became one of the biggest horror series of the 2010s and helped Blumhouse become a household name. Since then, Wan would direct blockbuster hits like The Conjuring, Furious 7, and Aquaman, all of which we’ll definitely talk about in the future, and Leigh Whannell recently saw success with last February’s The Invisible Man, which has become one of the de facto biggest hits of 2020.

 

Saw is set to return in 2021 with Spiral, starring Chris Rock and Samuel L. Jackson.

 

And that was just the big stories of 2004, but as always, there’s a lot more to talk about. I, Robot was yet another hit for Will Smith, based on Isaac Asimov. 50 First Dates became the biggest President’s Day debut ever and continued Adam Sandler’s hit streak. A Series of Unfortunate Events pissed off fans of the book, but still got over $100 million. The Village saw a polarizing response, signaling the beginning of Shyamalan’s decline. The Aviator was Leo and Scorsese’s second collaboration, in what were many to come. Million Dollar Baby sneaked by $100 million with controversy over its ending. The Spongebob Squarepants Movie was set to be the show’s finale, but was so successful, the series went on to become one of the longest-running cartoons  in history. 

 

Anchorman continued Will Ferrell’s hit streak and became a major cult classic. Scooby-Doo 2 dropped like a rock from its predecessor. Bill Murray wound up trapped in a Garfield movie nobody liked. Alien vs. Predator was a fanboy’s dream come true despite being panned by critics. Ray and Collateral made Jamie Foxx a household name. White Chicks became everybody’s favorite guilty pleasure. Hellboy was pulled from some theaters due its sacreligious title. Dawn of the Dead kickstarted Zack Snyder’s career. King Arthur was a colossal misstep when it came to Bruckheimer’s hit streak. Phantom of the Opera was given a film adaptation to mixed results. Hero became the first Chinese-language film ever to hit #1 in the US. 

 

Napoleon Dynamite became a cult phenomenon. Catwoman was an infamous disaster that started Halle Berry’s career downfall. Sky Captain’s backgrounds were entirely produced digitally via bluescreen, but nobody really cared. Shaun of the Dead put Edgar Wright on the map. Team America: World Police had puppet sex. Home on the Range was Disney’s last hurrah for 2D animation, until about 6 years later. Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle was the beginning of a stoner favorite series. Super Size Me was another documentary phenomenon. Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2 was a film that somebody decided to make for some reason, and we all let it happen. Soul Plane was another film that somebody decided to make for some reason, and we all let it happen. And finally Raising Helen...came out I guess.

 

This was 2004

[Daxtreme]

Amazing, thank you for the great, informed and detailed posts. Gonna catch up slowly on earlier years.

[Eric Atreides]

I should mention that the Passion picture I used was the only one I could find that was not bloody and uncomfortable to look at.  

[baumer]

I'm kind of speechless and flabbergasted. I don't even know what to say right now. First I will start with your write-up on Saw. with some of the gaps that they filled in it kind of reminds me a bit of Jaws. when Spielberg did not show the shark for the first half of the movie it was done out of necessity because the mechanical shark was not working. This made Jaws into what we know and love today and as James Wan said they're tight shooting schedule made them improvise with a lot of things. I didn't know any of that so thanks for bringing that up.

 

I remember when Shrek 2 came out and this is not a word of a lie I'm not trying to cause any controversy here but anyone who was around mojo in 2004 will remember that all the pics are loonies and Disney luniz lost their fucking minds when Shrek 2 came out. The amount of money it made pissed so many people off and Shrek became the poster child for no talent, money-grabbing, greedy, evil DreamWorks. The fact that it surpassed every Pixar film just made people lose their minds. I remember in 2004 not even really enjoying the movie Shrek 2 but loving the fact that it created so many meltdowns with Pixar loonies. 

 

It's funny now that I peruse your read up on Spider-Man 2, yeah it did well in North America but it didn't make nearly as much worldwide as I thought it did for some reason. It still did incredibly well but the price tag was massive at the same time.

 

I thought oceans 12 was it pretty good step down from Ocean's 11 so the box office for that one doesn't surprise me either.

 

Once again Eric just a fantastic job on this and I salute you.

[charlie Jatinder]

One thing I noticed, the thread when started was basically from personal viewpoint of Baumer.

 

Now its basically Eric, doing great job without any doubt, I can't even think of doing anything as such,  doing a write-up on say how was that year in a manner of broad viewpoint which is basically found in archive articles or say a wiki page.

 

Would have loved the first, that is poster's own real life witness of that year in this thread, as we have wiki and archive articles to look on how that year was, but how it was from your own experience.

Edited June 27, 2020 by charlie Jatinder

[Eric Atreides]

1 hour ago, charlie Jatinder said:

One thing I noticed, the thread when started was basically from personal viewpoint of Baumer.

 

Now its basically Eric, doing great job without any doubt, I can't even think of doing anything as such,  doing a write-up on say how was that year in a manner of broad viewpoint which is basically found in archive articles or say a wiki page.

 

Would have loved the first, that is poster's own real life witness of that year in this thread, as we have wiki and archive articles to look on how that year was, but how it was from your own experience.

I understand that. However, I wanted to deviate from Baumer, because I feel like me copying him would just make the project inferior. Also, l like doing this kind of historical writing. It lets people contextualize and look at things from what happened in the moment and why it became successful or a failure.

 

And in 2004, I was only about six years old. I can't bring my viewpoint about The Passion of the Christ or Fahrenheit 9/11 because I was too young to even know what those movies were.

[charlie Jatinder]

15 minutes ago, Eric in Boots said:

And in 2004, I was only about six years old. I can't bring my viewpoint about The Passion of the Christ or Fahrenheit 9/11 because I was too young to even know what those movies were.

Didn't realise you are younger than me. Its rare meeting younger people than me on internet especially on box office forum.

 

I get your point, and really appreciate what you are doing, still will be expecting to get your own experience/pov when you come of age.

 

Once again Thanks for doing this.

[Daxtreme]

You mean you weren't projecting DOM totals and calculating average weekly drops at 6 years old?

 

Unbelievable