AVENGERS ENDGAME | 1939.4 M overseas ● 2797.8 M worldwide

[Permanent Magnet]

39 minutes ago, Zatt was right said:

 

 

 

yes both directors showed respect towards the other , and took it professionally, while the fans of both sides at each other's throat

 

[Permanent Magnet]

6 minutes ago, infamous5445 said:

Where's that admissions count thread anyway?

 

[Nero]

3 minutes ago, Permanent Magnet said:

yes both directors showed respect towards the other , and took it professionally, while the fans of both sides at each other's throat

 

I think both are in Disney and that's why they have to show each other support. If it was still Fox separate from Disney I don't think you would find so many appreciation posts. Disney wants Marvel to have top spot since they have earned it and Disney also wants good relationship with Jim Cameron. So it's a tricky situation 

[EarlyDeadlinePredictions]

Article everyone's been waiting for....

 

 

[titanic2187]

3 minutes ago, Charlie Jatinder said:

I am not denying the market growth. Of course China has grown. That happened with weak 2010, that's it. 2015 had no big business film, doens't mean business on whole was down.

 

But to be fair, there was no Star Wars film in 2010 and 3 above TS4 will be MCU films. Outside that, its TLK and Frozen 2, which are far bigger film than TS in their own time.

 

You are missing the obvious fact I am stating, that is.

1. Its not only Avatar that was benefitted, every film released during that period. TS 3 at today ER will be at $875mn Approx or lower.

2. Avatar being weak is purely in context of scale of all time grosser. We had an All Time Grosser with less than 300mn people watching it. Endgame cleared that figure by 10mn even if I completely ignore China.

You are missing the point as well. All factor in, inflation, 3D, ex.rate, market size, and each factor cancelled out each other, it is quite empirically clear that it is easier for Endgame to achieve 2.8b than Avatars 2.8b 

 

We have the 1st film did half of the avatar 2 years after the avatar's run, i.e Avengers 1.5b. Yet, by end of this year, we could possibly have 2 movies, (TLK or TROS or Frozen), reaching half of the EG's gross. You can't claim ex.rate/market size factor to TLK or the rest because they all released  in the same year. 

 

Of course, EG had bigger admission by mile away but looked like EG is in the bigger pool than Avatar or any film. And i bet EG isn't the only film beating or come close to Avatar in post 2010 in term of admission but you will barely find any in 2000s  . 

 

   

[cdsacken]

45 minutes ago, Permanent Magnet said:

i don't understand really

is 1.6 a bad number?

 

i mean this number is for a EVENT movie, TLK is getting something near to JW and you know how huge that movie was back in 2015.

It's average imo for that big of an IP. Amazing is beating Titanic. Awful is @baumers number 

[cdsacken]

27 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

You are missing the point as well. All factor in, inflation, 3D, ex.rate, market size, and each factor cancelled out each other, it is quite empirically clear that it is easier for Endgame to achieve 2.8b than Avatars 2.8b 

 

We have the 1st film did half of the avatar 2 years after the avatar's run, i.e Avengers 1.5b. Yet, by end of this year, we could possibly have 2 movies, (TLK or TROS or Frozen), reaching half of the EG's gross. You can't claim ex.rate/market size factor to TLK or the rest because they all released  in the same year. 

 

Of course, EG had bigger admission by mile away but looked like EG is in the bigger pool than Avatar or any film. And i bet EG isn't the only film beating or come close to Avatar in post 2010 in term of admission but you will barely find any in 2000s  . 

 

   

 You can't have 25% less admissions with the same gross and it be harder.

 

If this is accurate Avatar 2 should do 4-5 billion. If it does 2.6 or something like that it will show the current state for EC.

 

Titanic imo would not do 4B right now. Box office runs are shorter, streaming kills or reduces multiple cinema viewing and technology has it made it harder for films to sustain long runs.

 

Ticket prices especially for Dolby and Imax have jumped so the opening weekends have went up a ton, legs are much worse.

 

Until EG nothing came within 700 million it Avatar a full decade after. China made it easier to get to 1 billion + as did South Korea and it didn't help for pushing past 2B. Look at TFA. Barely did 2B after almost hitting 1 billion domestically.

Edited July 22, 2019 by cdsacken

[TalismanRing]

13 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

You are missing the point as well. All factor in, inflation, 3D, ex.rate, market size, and each factor cancelled out each other, it is quite empirically clear that it is easier for Endgame to achieve 2.8b than Avatars 2.8b 

 

We have the 1st film did half of the avatar 2 years after the avatar's run, i.e Avengers 1.5b. Yet, by end of this year, we could possibly have 2 movies, (TLK or TROS or Frozen), reaching half of the EG's gross. You can't claim ex.rate/market size factor to TLK or the rest because they all released  in the same year. 

 

Of course, EG had bigger admission by mile away but looked like EG is in the bigger pool than Avatar or any film. And i bet EG isn't the only film beating or come close to Avatar in post 2010 in term of admission but you will barely find any in 2000s  . 

 

   

This is an enormous year for Disney where they are releasing their big guns to set up Disney+.   It's not because the marketplace is easier.  How are other studios faring?  Will next year all of a sudden become harder when maybe not one film will hit $1B?    No.  

[Hemo memo]

So EG was watched by more people against strong competition from other massive releases in also the era of streaming services and many other viewing options?

Edited July 22, 2019 by Hemo memo

[titanic2187]

2 minutes ago, cdsacken said:

 You can't have 25% less admissions with the same gross and it be harder.

 

If this is accurate Avatar 2 should do 4-5 billion. If it does 2.6 or something like that.

You can if you can convince more than 200m people pay extra and see your film in 3D or IMAX.

[Hemo memo]

35 minutes ago, EarlyDeadlinePredictions said:

Article everyone's been waiting for....

 

 

lol this is hilarious. It’s like he lost a big bet or something. Just live with it Scott.

[titanic2187]

4 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

This is an enormous year for Disney where they are releasing their big guns to set up Disney+.   It's not because the marketplace is easier.  How are other studios faring?  Will next year all of a sudden become harder when maybe not one film will hit $1B?    No.  

Movie industry is a zero sum game. When Disney rise, other studio fall. MGM collapse didn't cost the entire industry. When Disney rise, other studio struggle, when disney retreat from the peak, other studio rise.

 

That is the norm of the business to evolve. The Nokia fall doesn't mean that people stop using mobile phone. When gameboy fade doesn't mean people stop playing PC game. You all underestimate how capitalist adapt and evolve under different circumstances.  

[cdsacken]

8 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

You can if you can convince more than 200m people pay extra and see your film in 3D or IMAX.

Which will never happen again because 3d is all but dead in the US. As for Imax that is not the only reason Avatar did what it did.

 

Again if Avatar 2 does 4B I will admit you are right. I see zero films other than one even sniffing 2.5B. Zero 2B films for years otherwise and no guarantee for Avatar 2.

Edited July 22, 2019 by cdsacken

[Permanent Magnet]

17 minutes ago, cdsacken said:

Amazing is beating Titanic

come one who actually thought about titanic (aside from venom club) , did you really think TLK had a chance to beat TFA and IW, i just couldn't see it, the animated was a classic and one of the highest grossing animated movies, but that is still a remake shot by shot with some added scenes .hence will not have too much replay value.

 

my prediction was max around JW numbers, 1.4-1.5 as conservative guess

[Saul Goodman]

25 minutes ago, Hemo memo said:

lol this is hilarious. It’s like he lost a big bet or something. Just live with it Scott.

He's a pathetic troll at this point lol.

[Jiffy]

It's not surprising that a film which broke the previous record by 50% would retain the title for so long.

 

There is no context in which a film that reached #1 all-time in so many major markets is relatively weak.

[cdsacken]

32 minutes ago, Permanent Magnet said:

come one who actually thought about titanic (aside from venom club) , did you really think TLK had a chance to beat TFA and IW, i just couldn't see it, the animated was a classic and one of the highest grossing animated movies, but that is still a remake shot by shot with some added scenes .hence will not have too much replay value.

 

my prediction was max around JW numbers, 1.4-1.5 as conservative guess

I thought it could definitely beat Titanic's original run. I mean it's just a decent/good film and it will do 1.5ish. Imagine if it was amazing.

[john2000]

2 minutes ago, cdsacken said:

I thought it could definitely beat Titanic's original run. I mean it's just a decent/good film and it will do 1.5ish. Imagine if it was amazing.

based from what ? we should be realistic here, no remake came close to that, remakes arent big in china, and they just do decen.big buisness in dom/asia/europe but not that big to the point 2 billion is possible, plus lion king is looking to make 1,5-1,7 how isnt that huge ?

[Claudio]

I have a weird feeling that all this discussions will mean only one goddamn thing....

 

Thread’s getting locked for 14,000,605 times.

[Alexdube]

10 minutes ago, Jiffy said:

It's not surprising that a film which broke the previous record by 50% would retain the title for so long.

 

There is no context in which a film that reached #1 all-time in so many major markets is relatively weak.

crazy thing is James Cameron was ahead of any other non-James Cameron movie by 1.67 billion when Avatar had finished its run. That's being ahead by more than the entire gross of the first Avengers movie. But yeah "weak"