Jump to content

sfran43

Weekend Thread: Weekend Actuals - John Wick: Chapter 3 $56.82M | Avengers Endgame $29.97M | Detective Pikachu $25.10M

Recommended Posts

I can't see where the next 300m+ opener is going to come from (let alone snatching the record) until we accrue quite a few more years of inflation. EG is far from being a "new normal" of any kind regarding blockbusters.

 

That said, my personal and completely unscientific benchmark for "blockbusterness" is whatever figure makes you almost certain to land in the Top 5 of a given year (obviously some years will be stronger than others), and it's true that 300m doesn't seem to cut it anymore (it won't this year and it hasn't since 2014). The new benchmark since to be around 350-400.

Edited by Celedhring
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites



5 minutes ago, Mulder said:

If anything I think 'hit' is more relative to budget. Pikachu was a disappointment at 54 while John Wick is a massive success at 57.

Every film's verdict is unique case. What I was trying to point out is that in the age when we are getting $500mn plus films frequently now, $300mn is no longer the BLOCKBUSTER gross number which it was in 2010.

Edited by Charlie Jatinder
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Charlie Jatinder said:

Every film's verdict is unique case. What I was trying to point out is that in the age when we are getting $500mn plus films frequently now, $300mn is no longer the BLOCKBUSTER gross number which it was in 2010.

Fair enough I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Just now, ElsaRoc said:

What's the definition of a blockbuster, then?

Blockbuster film and Blockbuster Gross are too separate things.

 

A 500mn is Blockbuster Gross but couldn't be Blockbuster film for something like Endgame. 300 is Blockbuster film for something like IT but not a Blockbuster Gross.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



1 minute ago, Charlie Jatinder said:

Blockbuster film and Blockbuster Gross are too separate things.

 

A 500mn is Blockbuster Gross but couldn't be Blockbuster film for something like Endgame. 300 is Blockbuster film for something like IT but not a Blockbuster Gross.

 

Well, that doesn't make any sense.

 

I'll agree that it's contextual based on the film, but not that there are two separate metrics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Since folks were throwing out 2012, here are some reverse adj numbers for $300m movies adj'ed back to 2012 ticket prices:

 

2018:

Quote
Rank Movie Title (click to view) Studio
Adj. Total Gross / Theaters Adj. Opening / Theaters Open Close
1 Black Panther BV $607,127,600 4,084 $175,540,600 4,020 2/16 8/9
2 Avengers: Infinity War BV $576,461,100 4,474 $218,686,300 4,474 4/27 9/13
3 Incredibles 2 BV $527,742,000 4,410 $155,031,500 4,410 6/15 12/13
4 Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom Uni. $365,716,200 4,485 $125,615,800 4,475 6/22 10/4
5 Aquaman WB $295,746,700 4,184 $59,830,900 4,125 12/21 4/4
6 Deadpool 2 Fox $270,888,900 4,349 $106,507,100 4,349 5/18 10/18

2017:

Quote
Rank Movie Title (click to view) Studio
Adj. Total Gross / Theaters Adj. Opening / Theaters Open Close
1 Star Wars: The Last Jedi BV $538,052,100 4,232 $190,770,800 4,232 12/15 4/19
2 Beauty and the Beast (2017) BV $452,113,700 4,210 $157,354,600 4,210 3/17 7/13
3 Wonder Woman WB $367,079,600 4,165 $91,830,400 4,165 6/2 11/9
4 Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle Sony $351,247,600 3,849 $31,362,500 3,765 12/20 5/31
5 Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 BV $346,710,000 4,347 $130,304,000 4,347 5/5 9/21
6 Spider-Man: Homecoming Sony $297,848,800 4,348 $104,315,700 4,348 7/7 11/30
7 It WB (NL) $290,608,400 4,148 $109,999,000 4,103 9/8 12/14
8 Thor: Ragnarok BV $273,196,700 4,080 $106,432,500 4,080 11/3 3/15

 

2016:

Quote
Rank Movie Title (click to view) Studio
Adj. Total Gross / Theaters Adj. Opening / Theaters Open Close
1 Rogue One: A Star Wars Story BV $481,115,300 4,157 $140,438,000 4,157 12/16 5/4
2 Finding Dory BV $447,018,400 4,305 $123,147,700 4,305 6/17 12/8
3 Captain America: Civil War BV $372,171,700 4,226 $163,338,800 4,226 5/6 9/22
4 The Secret Life of Pets Uni. $344,459,600 4,381 $97,608,600 4,370 7/8 12/29
5 Deadpool Fox $336,652,100 3,856 $122,864,800 3,558 2/12 6/16
6 The Jungle Book (2016) BV $332,017,400 4,144 $94,153,600 4,028 4/15 9/29
7 Zootopia BV $315,264,500 3,959 $69,639,200 3,827 3/4 8/4
8 Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice WB $304,554,600 4,256 $154,011,500 4,242 3/25 6/16
9 Suicide Squad WB $303,905,400 4,255 $125,042,400 4,255 8/5 11/10

2015:

Quote
Rank Movie Title (click to view) Studio
Adj. Total Gross / Theaters Adj. Opening / Theaters Open Close
1 Star Wars: The Force Awakens BV $860,596,200 4,134 $226,875,300 4,134 12/18 6/2
2 Jurassic World Uni. $629,231,600 4,291 $201,466,400 4,274 6/12 11/19
3 Avengers: Age of Ultron BV $426,074,200 4,276 $176,831,400 4,276 5/1 10/8
4 Inside Out BV $343,765,300 4,158 $87,261,200 3,946 6/19 12/10
5 Furious 7 Uni. $326,549,400 4,022 $136,075,400 4,004 4/3 7/24
6 Minions Uni. $324,085,400 4,311 $111,650,700 4,301 7/10 12/17

In 2018, Aquaman and Deadpool 2 fall off the list (Aqua just barely).  2017, Homecoming (just barely), IT, and Thor: Ragnarok all fall off the list.  2016 and 2015 doesn't have any fall off the list.

 

Since Aquaman barely falls off the list, I think putting the line at 340m or 350m right now is pretty acceptable, if we were using 300m in 2012 as a guideline.

Edited by Porthos
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



1 minute ago, aabattery said:

Blockbuster is obviously an arbitrary term but it's nuts to say something that grosses 300m domestic isn't a blockbuster. Hell, I'd call anything over 200m a blockbuster.

To quote some famous villain - if everything is blockbuster then nothing is :redcapes:

Now, I'm not saying that every movie is hitting $200m, but it has become increasingly easy to hit it

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



My arbitrary definition for blockbuster is any film that makes 150M+.  Not sure why it needs to be such a strict definition.  The definition on Wikipedia is "highly popular and financially successful" and if something's making 150M then you can bet that it's pretty damn popular (and unless the budget is way too high it's also probably a financial success)

Edited by That One Guy
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In India we followed ROI method to give verdicts. As in, if a film do 3x its Investment by Distributor its Blockbuster. With time the verdict start getting leniant for big films as it's impossible to give 3x return to the high distribution rights that films are sold on.

 

Currently, the most famous box office tracking site Boxofficeindia.com use GROSS to give verdicts for the film. Approximately 25mn admits mark is considered BLOCKBUSTER level for tentpole films. Baahubali 2 (Hindi) had 52.5mn Approx admits, so barely 50% of the biggest HIT is considered BLOCKBUSTER.

 

If we were to apply the same to US, that will be around 50mn admits or $450-500mn Approx.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



7 minutes ago, JimiQ said:

To quote some famous villain - if everything is blockbuster then nothing is :redcapes:

Now, I'm not saying that every movie is hitting $200m, but it has become increasingly easy to hit it

 

Each year there's like one hundred wide releases or something (haven't checked the numbers but it sounds right lmao). At this stage we're getting around fifteen above 200m. I think it's fair to call the top fifteen percent of movies blockbusters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



At 20, I should not be saying “that makes me feel old” yet. Not by a long shot. But talking about 2012, the defining year that got me into movies and box office (and a year that shaped me in a lot of other ways too basically meeting a lot of my friends today and sorta turning into the person I was throughout high school and college) as a “past/historical benchmark” makes me feel OLD

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites







28 minutes ago, DAJK said:

At 20, I should not be saying “that makes me feel old” yet. Not by a long shot. But talking about 2012, the defining year that got me into movies and box office (and a year that shaped me in a lot of other ways too basically meeting a lot of my friends today and sorta turning into the person I was throughout high school and college) as a “past/historical benchmark” makes me feel OLD

Wait until you're 50...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



500m DOM as a benchmark to declare a film a "blockbuster"? No way. I agree 300m is the magic number if there was such a thing

 

Lets just say I am at least twice DAJK's age. You guys seem to be operating under the assumption that 300m dom was the previous benchmark. I can say quite confidently that this was not the case. If you go back 10 years anything over 200m was great, over 250m (a la Star Trek 2009) was considered a big blockbuster domestically

 

Jurassic World is the only non-Disney film to cross the 500m barrier in the past 9 years 

 

500m is rarefied ground, 400m is quite spectacular, and 300m dom+ is a blockbuster

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites







  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.