Jump to content
Charlie Jatinder

The Admission Count - Avatar vs Avengers: Endgame

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, A Panda of Ice and Fire said:

Isn’t it already getting a re-release this weekend though?

 

9 hours ago, Claudio said:

No , it’s not. The re-release with bonus content start on Friday 28 June. Don’t know if it released simultaneously worldwide or just Dom tho.

Then yes it is! Because the 28th IS this upcoming weekend!

Panda is right, because they were referring to the upcoming weekend (June 28th), not this past weekend (June 21st)!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@Shanks

Mexico is 24.55 (latest update, the previous number was probably typo mistake) so the whole LA: 68.5

Hongkong 1.7+

"As of May 13...

From news report, AEG made 204.46M hkd as of Monday, 1,524,722 admissions"

The projected finish...

"220-230M"

https://forums.boxofficetheory.com/topic/970-avengers-endgame-now-the-1-film-of-all-time-in-only-13-days/page/156/#comments

 

Vietnam 4.4

285.4B VND, ATP 65k 

https://e.vnexpress.net/news/life/culture/action-blockbuster-a-money-marvel-at-vietnam-box-office-3941913.html

 

Edited by PKMLover
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@Shawn maybe you can help? @RtheEnd you too? Please... At least @Charlie Jatinder  is providing some data but some Stan's of other movie think he is biased. Coz they are biased and don't want to admit the truth. Maybe you guys can clarify.... Thanks 

Edited by Nero
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At end of round 2, with majority of Europe and Latin America done;

In 27 markets set; Avatar stands at 244mn compared with 319mn Approx of Endgame.

 

If you think, need any correction in any market, you are most welcome, except for UK where data is estimated just like USA using Avatar and Endgame actual ATP in France compared with National ATP. You can see the calculation in Notes Sheet.

 

These 27 markets account for almost 70-75% of world box office. Rest will be updated soon.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, ZattMurdock said:

It already has the biggest theatrical original first run. Avatar had $2.749B in its original run. It added another $33m with its special edition re-release, and another few millions with its several re-releases throughout the years to a $2.788B finish.

Wake up!! Nobody cares to recognize the original run champion!

Endgame has only one goal!  $2,787,965,087! Wikipedia, BOM will still recognize AVatar as biggest film if EG failed to top that number. 

 

If wining original run alone can do the trick, disney will not the bother to release a bonus version in the 1st place. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Not Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, titanic2187 said:

Wake up!! Nobody cares to recognize the original run champion!

Endgame has only one goal!  $2,787,965,087! Wikipedia, BOM will still recognize AVatar as biggest film if EG failed to top that number. 

 

If wining original run alone can do the trick, disney will not the bother to release a bonus version in the 1st place. 

After seeing the content of the "longer" version.... it seems that they dont go all out to the record. They are more into fan tribute and PR Spiderman movie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Charlie Jatinder said:

At end of round 2, with majority of Europe and Latin America done;

In 27 markets set; Avatar stands at 244mn compared with 319mn Approx of Endgame.

 

If you think, need any correction in any market, you are most welcome, except for UK where data is estimated just like USA using Avatar and Endgame actual ATP in France compared with National ATP. You can see the calculation in Notes Sheet.

 

These 27 markets account for almost 70-75% of world box office. Rest will be updated soon.

Hongkong should be 1.7M+ 

"As of May 13...

From news report, AEG made 204.46M hkd as of Monday, 1,524,722 admissions"

The projected finish...

"220-230M"

https://forums.boxofficetheory.com/topic/970-avengers-endgame-now-the-1-film-of-all-time-in-only-13-days/page/156/#comments

 

Chile already passed 3M more than one week ago

Edited by PKMLover

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PKMLover said:

After seeing the content of the "longer" version.... it seems that they dont go all out to the record. They are more into fan tribute and PR Spiderman movie

Wining over Avatar as the top grossing film of all time is a fan tribute itself   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

Wining over Avatar as the top grossing film of all time is a fan tribute itself   

I know i know. But from what I just saw on Twitter about what will be appeared in the "longer version", it is not enough to pass Avatar (if they seriously want). They need to add some more things and remove something... to target to fan's interests much more effectively.( I am sure They know what fan need).

Edited by PKMLover

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ZattMurdock said:

It already has the biggest theatrical original first run. Avatar had $2.749B in its original run.

Why has no one called out this lie? A's OR was $2.755B - where are you getting your number from? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JamesCameronScholar said:

Why has no one called out this lie? A's OR was $2.755B - where are you getting your number from? 

According BOM, Avatar Special Edition did:

DOM: $10,741,486

OS: $22,469,358

WW: 33,210,844

 

So Avatar did during its initial run $2,754,754,243

 

Said this, I do not give a shit about initial runs. Gross is gross, whenever it has been done. In fact, I would love to see re-releases more usually.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, peludo said:

Said this, I do not give a shit about initial runs. Gross is gross, whenever it has been done. In fact, I would love to see re-releases more usually.

Agree 100%. It is interesting that people have become very interested in other metrics of all a sudden, when before original runs and admissions were mere trivialities of the business. The dollar is still king in my book. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, peludo said:

Said this, I do not give a shit about initial runs. Gross is gross, whenever it has been done. In fact, I would love to see re-releases more usually.

 

There is certainly a plus for a movie to be able sustain interest over time and re-release, it is different it is some strange drive-in affair a la Spectre/Wrinkle in time and a Dark Knight. I get the notion of an * if it is a different movie in some ways (3D added, different cut/supplement material), but if it is the exact same movie every big movie ever get them and it would be really bad otherwise.

Edited by Barnack
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, PKMLover said:

I know i know. But from what I just saw on Twitter about what will be appeared in the "longer version", it is not enough to pass Avatar (if they seriously want). They need to add some more things and remove something... to target to fan's interests much more effectively.( I am sure They know what fan need).

There's one big scene they filmed for the movie that they took out b/c they thought it didn't fit.  But that scene would have been far more of a pull than the reported one they're adding.  They also had extended footage of the end battle they could have used.  They could have even re-cut the CM end credits and put it back in EG.  As it stands it feels more like a promo for SM.  This isn't that much different than when they added the new SM trailer at the end of the movie a couple weeks after opening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JamesCameronScholar said:

Agree 100%. It is interesting that people have become very interested in other metrics of all a sudden, when before original runs and admissions were mere trivialities of the business. The dollar is still king in my book. 

I am more interested in admissions than in dollars ;)

 

But I do not get the need of split the runs (beyond my favorite film earns more than yours). If a film is good enough, it will be able to bring back people to theaters, no matters the gap of time since its initial release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Coming from someone who agrees that dollars and cents are what matters, I would say re-releases matter when comparing box office runs. I mean, it's pretty damn simple. You can't fairly compare a film with a normal theatrical run to that of one that had extra opportunities to add to its gross. Pretty straightforward. Avatar still gets credit for every single dollar it made obviously but if you're judging it against other films that had one theatrical run, use the original run of Avatar, which up to this point has vastly surpassed every other film's original run anyway. It seems normal that it would enter the discussion only now that a film (Endgame) is coming so close. Nobody is moving goal posts here.

Edited by JB33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

-Searching-

Edited by Shanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, JB33 said:

Coming from someone who agrees that dollars and cents are what matters, I would say re-releases matter when comparing box office runs. I mean, it's pretty damn simple. You can't fairly compare a film with a normal theatrical run to that of one that had extra opportunities to add to its gross. Pretty straightforward. Avatar still gets credit for every single dollar it made obviously but if you're judging it against other films that had one theatrical run, use the original run of Avatar, which up to this point has vastly surpassed every other film's original run anyway. It seems normal that it would enter the discussion only now that a film (Endgame) is coming so close, and in my mind the point is valid.

Before EG opened, no one thought it could come this close to avatar.

 

After the 1.25b worlwide opening, no one thought it could fall this close to avatar. 

 

avatar 30m+ re-release number is very smallish compared to its total gross, less than 1.5% of its total but that now become the gap that EG needs fight to til end to pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My blood pressure spiked when I read this NCsoft post. I didn't think I had a dog in this fight, but this just really rubbed me the wrong way. I am posting just the first sentence below. I think this is the first time someone wrote something that really irritated me on this forum (I invite you to comb through my posts). Congrats poster, you pulled it out of me

 

On 6/24/2019 at 3:29 PM, NCsoft said:

OK, as we're still in the first page, I do want to take the opportunity to discuss a few points. I do not want us Avatar/Jim stans to be painted as "flat-earthers", I think these points are worthy of noting

 

 

In this post you preach objectivity, yet you provide an incredibly one-sided defense of Avatar. You try to hide behind a veneer of level-headedness, but your tone fails to mask your blatant biases. Additionally, many of your points are circuitous and even approach contradiction. Now I could forgive all that, but you chose to attack the poster directly. You question his integrity and attempt undermine his legitimacy. This post, this very post, has pissed me off more than any other snide retort or insult, precisely because you attempt to take some kind of box office moral high ground. 

 

You start by questioning Charlies integrity!! You're not even discussing numbers here, you go in straight for the kill? What the hell are you doing. FIrst of all, Charlie wouldnt be dictating numbers to us. We would be working as a community to find these admissions numbers, and if you've been on this thread any length of time, you would know that every number will be cross examined. Charlie's own objectivity is immaterial for the purposes of this thread, which, just to repeat one more time, is to collectively gather and verify admissions numbers. These comments were completely unnecessary and simply mean-spirited. Was it really worth it to you? Charlie has contributed so much to this forum, and you, simply over the prospect of an admissions count, attempt to drag his integrity through the mud. Even your grounds for doing so are dubious.

 

Ok, so, someone wants to start counting admissions to Endgame and Avatar, you start by doing your best to undermine that person's integrity, what's your second move?

 

You suggest admissions number are irrelevant for a movie's success, yet you follow that up with a laundry list of every possible disadvantage Avatar faced and why, in fact, it was far more successful than Endgame despite what the admissions numbers may suggest. This paragraph is rife with issues. In essence you're saying the following: admissions numbers don't matter, especially if Endgame has higher admissions than Avatar, BUT admissions do matter, and Avatar was way more successful because we should be implicitly discounting all of Endgame's admission numbers. 

 

The purpose of this thread is to count numbers. These numbers would not in themselves tell us which film was more successful. Once we have the numbers, we can perhaps have such a discussion, but you're trying to frontload the discussion, nay the gathering process itself, with the forgone conclusion that Avatar was more successful. I have a Master's degree in Economics and I work in investment management. As a result I have a strong appreciation for metrics. You gather data first, which should be untainted with the biases you seem to want to bake in. Then, once you have reliable numbers, you use them as tools in more qualitative discussions. These numbers would NOT tell us which film is more successful. Their interpretation and their significance relies on context and all the factors you mentioned (and all the factors in Endgame's favor which are conspicuously absent from your comments) would adorn the numbers. The numbers are just numbers. They are pure and unbiased. For someone seeking an objective data gathering process, you are fervently arguing for biases to taint the numbers themselves. You, my friend, are completely undermining the very objectivity you claim to want.

 

For someone who wishes the "people involved in this exercise has a history of objectivity" you certainly seem to fail your own criterion more so than most others on this thread.

On 6/24/2019 at 3:29 PM, NCsoft said:

So in summary, I wish the people who are involved in this exercise has a history of objectivity, as I wish global admission reporting is more accurate and is less prone to manipulation, on that, I remain ambivalent. Global admission count comparison is not fair for movies released 10 years apart, because the total yearly admission may have increased by 40%+ and the about-to-be largest market in the world increased yearly admission by 8 times, which Endgame fully took advantage of. Finally, high 3D showing ratio is not a crime and shows audience confidence in a film's ability to deliver a visual spectacle, admission treats 2D and premium tickets the same, thus not necessarily a be all end all measure, like many claims it is.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 8
  • Haha 1
  • Not Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Source 1: In addition to the 800 US screenings in the US, Avatar: Special Edition will open on more than 1,000 screens in 14 countries, including the UK, Russia and Taiwan this week, and Japan in October. It should add millions to the all-time biggest $2.74 billion worldwide blockbuster. Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/avatar-special-edition-dvd-adds-16-minutes-of-footage-2062087.html

 

Source 2: With moviegoers paying a record $2.74 billion worldwide over the winter to see "Avatar," filmmaker James Cameron believes there are those who just aren't satisfied by the original two-hour, 40-minute runtime of the original release. https://www.thewrap.com/cameron-set-supersize-avatar-20332/

 

I checked Deadline too but it just said 2.7B 

 

These articles were written during the week of 22-24th before 27th Aug, 2010- when Avatar SE released. Avatar was making only a few thousand in theatres during these weeks, no way it would reach 2.755B before Avatar SE would release.

 

Worldwide, 2010:

Aug. 6–8 $24,056 4
Aug. 13–15 $47,735 5
Aug. 20–22 $66,821 7

 

Edited by Shanks
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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