Jump to content
Charlie Jatinder

The Admission Count - Avatar vs Avengers: Endgame

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, 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. 

 

Huh... your posts are always calm and collected, I'm not sure if you are joking or not, but I never claimed any differently. Endgame is coming for the $2.788B tho, don't worry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Justin4125 said:

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.

If I am the first one who wrote something that irritate you on this forum, then you probably haven't been here for long. I may not have a great number of posts but I've lurked along for years, and in fact, if you've paid attention, I think you would have noticed the  personal attacks that Cameron fans have collectively received for the past two months, not to mention the constant bans due to double standard, the mocking and the ridicules. Actually in this very thread, someone has personally attacked me in a disturbing way resulting in that post getting removed, if that doesn't get your blood pressure up and my calm and collected post does? That probably means you've  taken a side and has a one sided opinion and in that case, it matters little whether my post get your blood pressure up or not, however, in order to calm down your blood pressure, I think I will attempt to explain the situation in the way of commenting on your statements.

 

3 hours ago, Justin4125 said:

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.

Since you haven't provided very specific rebuttal here regarding Avatar's impressiveness or lack of, whether my defense is  one-sided or not, is precisely your judgement, and each to their own, other people may see it differently, as I certainly do. If you want to discuss Avatar vs Endgame's box office achievement, I welcome it anytime and can do it all day, been having this discussion numerous times for the last few months, I can back myself up. However, I am not hiding behind "level-headedness", nor am I taking some sort of box office moral high ground. The reason I tried my best to make the post level-headed, is because:

1). Discussion on this board (which I really enjoyed for the past few years) should remain civil, and my post need to start level-headed.

2). Literally for the past two months, being extremely civil and level-headless is one way for us Jim fans to even survive around here. In a place where MCU fans set the tone, outnumber us 10:1, and practically formed an echo chamber where only 1 fixed narrative is paraded, where insults were thrown and vicious personal attacks were directed toward us all the time, and that is totally OK. If we Jim fans even dare to defend Avatar, we get banned for inciting fan war. In order to prevent my effort from being deleted, my post had to be as calm and careful as possible, though it is also my preference to be level-headed, of course.

It's really easy to accuse anyone of "blatant bias", the thing is, I, as a part of Avatar defense force, will try my best to defend Avatar. It's not my job to defend EndGame since many more people are already doing so, and considering that I'm not the one involved in this "admission estimation exercise", there is absolutely no need for me to "mask blatant bias" because 1). I don't think I have blatant biases, I may have subjective opinions, but we all do. and 2). It is not me who started a thread doing admission comparisons. Those who are doing the work needs to be reminded of bias.

 

3 hours ago, Justin4125 said:

You start by questioning Charlies integrity!! You're not even discussing numbers here, you go in straight for the kill?

 

My post does look a little bit weird without a little history and context. I came in hard because I had to, since this forum is dominated by a singular voice, the few of us Jim fans have to be thorough and quick in expressing our ideas. Here is the context: I know this particular thread is going to be made about 1 month ago, we all did. Charlie has been touting that Endgame's admission surpasses Avatar by 30% and by 100M for a while now in order to downplay Avatar, he loves this game, we've had this exact conversation before, several times, to the point that I can go straight to my points without bothering with the old recycled discussion anymore, it's tiring. This thread may seem like it's just starting to you, but it has a conclusion that has already been pre-determined, which is Endgame (grossing less than Avatar after 10 years of global inflation) is somehow going to out-admission Avatar by 30%. Since me and all Jim fans know the end conclusion which this thread will inevitably lead to,  we can cut short the process because Charlie has clearly revealed what his results are going to be, many times over.

 

Charlie has contributed a great deal to this forum, for that I have lots of respect for. However, Charlie has also revealed himself as a die-hard MCU fan many times before, which is totally fine since these forums are fanboy driven and I'm a Cameron and Pixar fan.  When Charlie is providing extrapolation of real time box office data, accuracy is paramount and he's providing pretty much interpretation of objective data. However, the problem arises when this important figure of our community, who also happens to be a MCU fan, who has a history of giving vague and inaccurate admission numbers regarding Avatar and Wolf Warrior 2 regardless of whether its intentional or not, who has tried to downplay Avatar's box office success many times before, suddenly feel the need to take the task into his own hand in comparing Avatar vs Endgame admission to "Settle a debate" which is never a debate to him, I'm sorry but those of us who knows a little history knows too well what this post is all about.

Can you really blame me for questioning his objectivity when he said statement such as : "MCU fans unite, we all know which is the more impressive run"  "We know it's bigger than Avatar" and "The dream of catching Avatar is unfortunately dead, however long the dream lasted" and then proceed to blame China not giving Endgame an extension for not passing Avatar? I'm paraphrasing here, can't remember the exact quotes.

So we're got

1). Die-hard MCU Fan   

2). "authority" poster people trust   

3).Has a history of downplaying Avatar   

4). has a history of giving really questionable admission numbers that's been corrected by others before. 

You do realize it is important for someone who doesn't have a pre-determined narrative to do this right? Is it really a problem if I question this objectivity when I've seen way too many of Charlie's quote and know that he was waiting in sheer anticipating to make this thread to justify endgame's "superiority". While you spend the time to brag to me about "Master in Economics", could you please also think about the impact of biases between "authority" and "common man", it is not as problematic for the common man to be intrinsically biased, because few would believe him/her anyway. It is far more problematic for those who are trusted and has power to actually have a narrative to push, and that is the exact situation here. You've heard of "greater power means greater responsibility", right?

 

3 hours ago, Justin4125 said:

You suggest admissions number are irrelevant for a movie's success, 

NO I DIDN'T, please try not put words in other people's mouth. This "admission" part is actually the most important part of my post and in the midst of defending dear Charlie, I think you missed my point almost entirely. Admissions is a very important measure, that's what adjusting for inflation is for, so obviously it is the metric that makes Titanic or GWTW so impressive. I was stressing that 1). Global admission is very hard to estimate, reports are vague/inaccurate, and sometimes can be subjected to narrative manipulation, and 2). admissions is not a "Be all end all" measurement because it fails to capture market change, therefore it's not a proportional measure.

As a part of Cameron defense league, you might think I completely reject the notion that Endgame might have higher admission than Avatar, I don't. I think it is possible, Endgame has the advantage of cheaper tickers in developing markets, the exchange rate disadvantage while Avatar has higher admission in Europe, and 10 years of price inflation. I think it's probably really close, and I wouldn't be surprised if Endgame edges Avatar out.

HOWEVER, I'm arguing that it doesn't really matter. It is not a proportional measure, the global box office has increased by 40% over the last ten years, while average Hollywood top grosser increased by 42%, Global admission likely increased by more than 40% (due to cheaper ticket!), and especially with China (closing in on being the largest box office market) expanding by 8 times since 2009. It is not a level playing field. Comparing two films released over 10 years apart in terms of global admission is useful as a discussion parameter, perhaps, but ultimately has limited use in measuring success because the baseline is completely different. Endgame almost grossed as much as Avatar 10 years later in a global market that's at least 40% bigger. That's a fact that no one can deny.

What would be a more appropriate measure of film's success proportionally? Here are some examples. 

How does the film compare to film grosses released in the same year/era?

What proportion of yearly global gross did said film take? What proportion of admissions?

How much did the film made compare to other biggest films of its time?

How much did said film beat the record by, what percentage?

How many countries did the said film achieve highest grossing film of all time?

In which countries did said film break the all time record, and by how much in how many countries?

 

Do you know why no one wants to talk about a more proportionate measure? you guess is as good as mine;)

3 hours ago, Justin4125 said:

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

I don't disagree here, the admissions numbers would not indicate which film was more successful, it is a parameter to look at and a component of discussion. However, I wish it was that simple and the purpose of this thread is to count numbers. Charlie has been  brewing this post to "settle the debate" for a while now, these are the exact words in the FP. You assessment of me "front-loading" the discussion is not entirely wrong per se, but I hope you'll understand why I felt this was necessary, amidst months of gloating, silencing around here, I have to put a word in, even if just neutralize the narrative for a little. This discussion is fine if it started with genuine intentions, but I think you'll notice box office fanboy-ism is far more toxic than you think. Since there's no way to get around Avatar grossing more than Endgame 10 years ago in a much smaller market, Avatar almost taking 10% of 2009's global box office, Avatar beat previous crown by 50%, Avatar was the all time highest grossing film in USA, China, Overseas and worldwide etc, now with Avatar's worldwide record in doubt, then one way to justify Endgame's success (as if its huge success needs justification), is to use "admissions" which may be advantageous to endgame and also vague enough to manipulate. 

So the purpose of my post was to remind people to keep this exercise objective to the best of ability, to remind people that there are problems with using admission numbers , and most importantly, to remind people these numbers are not often accurate and can be subjected to manipulations.

 

3 hours ago, Justin4125 said:

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.

Because I'm not the one making a thread doing admission tabulation despite unclear/unreported data, and possibly questionable methodology? And the people who attempt to do this should be held to an extremely high standard of "objectivity"? You may have misunderstood why I question his objectivity in the first place.

 

 

 

Edited by NCsoft
  • Like 9
  • Thanks 4
  • Astonished 1
  • Disbelief 1
  • Not Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Justin4125 said:

The purpose of this thread is to count numbers. 

No it's not. That would be using evidence of admission. The purpose of the thread is to count where possible, and calculate the rest. Don't try and obfuscate more than already has been.  

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, NCsoft said:

If I am the first one who wrote something that irritate you on this forum, then you probably haven't been here for long. I may not have a great number of posts but I've lurked along for years, and in fact, if you've paid attention, I think you would have noticed the  personal attacks that Cameron fans have collectively received for the past two months, not to mention the constant bans due to double standard, the mocking and the ridicules. Actually in this very thread, someone has personally attacked me in a disturbing way resulting in that post getting removed, if that doesn't get your blood pressure up and my calm and collected post does? That probably means you've  taken a side and has a one sided opinion and in that case, it matters little whether my post get your blood pressure up or not, however, in order to calm down your blood pressure, I think I will attempt to explain the situation in the way of commenting on your statements.

 

Since you haven't provided very specific rebuttal here regarding Avatar's impressiveness or lack of, whether my defense is  one-sided or not, is precisely your judgement, and each to their own, other people may see it differently, as I certainly do. If you want to discuss Avatar vs Endgame's box office achievement, I welcome it anytime and can do it all day, been having this discussion numerous times for the last few months, I can back myself up. However, I am not hiding behind "level-headedness", nor am I taking some sort of box office moral high ground. The reason I tried my best to make the post level-headed, is because:

1). Discussion on this board (which I really enjoyed for the past few years) should remain civil, and my post need to start level-headed.

2). Literally for the past two months, being extremely civil and level-headless is one way for us Jim fans to even survive around here. In a place where MCU fans set the tone, outnumber us 10:1, and practically formed an echo chamber where only 1 fixed narrative is paraded, where insults were thrown and vicious personal attacks were directed toward us all the time, and that is totally OK. If we Jim fans even dare to defend Avatar, we get banned for inciting fan war. In order to prevent my effort from being deleted, my post had to be as calm and careful as possible, though it is also my preference to be level-headed, of course.

It's really easy to accuse anyone of "blatant bias", the thing is, I, as a part of Avatar defense force, will try my best to defend Avatar. It's not my job to defend EndGame since many more people are already doing so, and considering that I'm not the one involved in this "admission estimation exercise", there is absolutely no need for me to "mask blatant bias" because 1). I don't think I have blatant biases, I may have subjective opinions, but we all do. and 2). It is not me who started a thread doing admission comparisons. Those who are doing the work needs to be reminded of bias.

 

 

My post does look a little bit weird without a little history and context. I came in hard because I had to, since this forum is dominated by a singular voice, the few of us Jim fans have to be thorough and quick in expressing our ideas. Here is the context: I know this particular thread is going to be made about 1 month ago, we all did. Charlie has been touting that Endgame's admission surpasses Avatar by 30% and by 100M for a while now in order to downplay Avatar, he loves this game, we've had this exact conversation before, several times, to the point that I can go straight to my points without bothering with the old recycled discussion anymore, it's tiring. This thread may seem like it's just starting to you, but it has a conclusion that has already been pre-determined, which is Endgame (grossing less than Avatar after 10 years of global inflation) is somehow going to out-admission Avatar by 30%. Since me and all Jim fans know the end conclusion which this thread will inevitably lead to,  we can cut short the process because Charlie has clearly revealed what his results are going to be, many times over.

 

Charlie has contributed a great deal to this forum, for that I have lots of respect for. However, Charlie has also revealed himself as a die-hard MCU fan many times before, which is totally fine since these forums are fanboy driven and I'm a Cameron and Pixar fan.  When Charlie is providing extrapolation of real time box office data, accuracy is paramount and he's providing pretty much interpretation of objective data. However, the problem arises when this important figure of our community, who also happens to be a MCU fan, who has a history of giving vague and inaccurate admission numbers regarding Avatar and Wolf Warrior 2 regardless of whether its intentional or not, who has tried to downplay Avatar's box office success many times before, suddenly feel the need to take the task into his own hand in comparing Avatar vs Endgame admission to "Settle a debate" which is never a debate to him, I'm sorry but those of us who knows a little history knows too well what this post is all about.

Can you really blame me for questioning his objectivity when he said statement such as : "MCU fans unite, we all know which is the more impressive run"  "We know it's bigger than Avatar" and "The dream of catching Avatar is unfortunately dead, however long the dream lasted" and then proceed to blame China not giving Endgame an extension for not passing Avatar? I'm paraphrasing here, can't remember the exact quotes.

So we're got

1). Die-hard MCU Fan   

2). "authority" poster people trust   

3).Has a history of downplaying Avatar   

4). has a history of giving really questionable admission numbers that's been corrected by others before. 

You do realize it is important for someone who doesn't have a pre-determined narrative to do this right? Is it really a problem if I question this objectivity when I've seen way too many of Charlie's quote and know that he was waiting in sheer anticipating to make this thread to justify endgame's "superiority". While you spend the time to brag to me about "Master in Economics", could you please also think about the impact of biases between "authority" and "common man", it is not as problematic for the common man to be intrinsically biased, because few would believe him/her anyway. It is far more problematic for those who are trusted and has power to actually have a narrative to push, and that is the exact situation here. You've heard of "greater power means greater responsibility", right?

 

NO I DIDN'T, please try not put words in other people's mouth. This "admission" part is actually the most important part of my post and in the midst of defending dear Charlie, I think you missed my point almost entirely. Admissions is a very important measure, that's what adjusting for inflation is for, so obviously it is the metric that makes Titanic or GWTW so impressive. I was stressing that 1). Global admission is very hard to estimate, reports are vague/inaccurate, and sometimes can be subjected to narrative manipulation, and 2). admissions is not a "Be all end all" measurement because it fails to capture market change, therefore it's not a proportional measure.

As a part of Cameron defense league, you might think I completely reject the notion that Endgame might have higher admission than Avatar, I don't. I think it is possible, Endgame has the advantage of cheaper tickers in developing markets, the exchange rate disadvantage while Avatar has higher admission in Europe, and 10 years of price inflation. I think it's probably really close, and I wouldn't be surprised if Endgame edges Avatar out.

HOWEVER, I'm arguing that it doesn't really matter. It is not a proportional measure, the global box office has increased by 40% over the last ten years, while average Hollywood top grosser increased by 42%, Global admission likely increased by more than 40% (due to cheaper ticket!), and especially with China (closing in on being the largest box office market) expanding by 8 times since 2009. It is not a level playing field. Comparing two films released over 10 years apart in terms of global admission is useful as a discussion parameter, perhaps, but ultimately has limited use in measuring success because the baseline is completely different. Endgame almost grossed as much as Avatar 10 years later in a global market that's at least 40% bigger. That's a fact that no one can deny.

What would be a more appropriate measure of film's success proportionally? Here are some examples. 

How does the film compare to film grosses released in the same year/era?

What proportion of yearly global gross did said film take? What proportion of admissions?

How much did the film made compare to other biggest films of its time?

How much did said film beat the record by, what percentage?

How many countries did the said film achieve highest grossing film of all time?

In which countries did said film break the all time record, and by how much in how many countries?

 

Do you know why no one wants to talk about a more proportionate measure? you guess is as good as mine;)

I don't disagree here, the admissions numbers would not indicate which film was more successful, it is a parameter to look at and a component of discussion. However, I wish it was that simple and the purpose of this thread is to count numbers. Charlie has been  brewing this post to "settle the debate" for a while now, these are the exact words in the FP. You assessment of me "front-loading" the discussion is not entirely wrong per se, but I hope you'll understand why I felt this was necessary, amidst months of gloating, silencing around here, I have to put a word in, even if just neutralize the narrative for a little. This discussion is fine if it started with genuine intentions, but I think you'll notice box office fanboy-ism is far more toxic than you think. Since there's no way to get around Avatar grossing more than Endgame 10 years ago in a much smaller market, Avatar almost taking 10% of 2009's global box office, Avatar beat previous crown by 50%, Avatar was the all time highest grossing film in USA, China, Overseas and worldwide etc, now with Avatar's worldwide record in doubt, then one way to justify Endgame's success (as if its huge success needs justification), is to use "admissions" which may be advantageous to endgame and also vague enough to manipulate. 

So the purpose of my post was to remind people to keep this exercise objective to the best of ability, to remind people that there are problems with using admission numbers , and most importantly, to remind people these numbers are not often accurate and can be subjected to manipulations.

 

Because I'm not the one making a thread doing admission tabulation despite unclear/unreported data, and possibly questionable methodology? And the people who attempt to do this should be held to an extremely high standard of "objectivity"? You may have misunderstood why I question his objectivity in the first place.

 

 

 

 

@NCsoft

 

giphy.gif

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 3
  • Astonished 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Justin4125 said:

big wall of nonsense

>created his account on the weekend EG came out

>claims to be defending objectivity

>says nothing in a wall of text

>tries to dick swing with muh economics masters

cringe.jpg

 

d8676447196c8af99a01b24c38866c61.gif

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3
  • Astonished 1
  • Not Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow @NCsoft

That post is legendary.

 

I suggest everyone reads it, especially if you like the post from the master of economics and apprentice of actually making a single point.

 

 

 

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I was looking through the boxofficemojo record list for Endgame and I couldn't find "global admissions" unfortunately:

 

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=marvel2019.htm

 

I was, however, able to find it when I googled for the definition of COPE. I'm glad Charlie created this thread to provide another stomping ground for Jim Gang to dab on Marvelstans. Keep doing God's work Charlie.

 

As far as admissions go, my gut tells me Endgame is probably a solid second, third, or fourth place with Titanic as number #1, and GwtW/Avatar as the other two possible contenders. But who knows, it's not a record anyone tracks because there's no prestige, because if it had prestige it could be easily gamed. It's like saying "Company Y sold the most shares of stock in its IPO of all time." Yes, and? Nobody cares! You can sell stock shares as cheaply as you want to juice up that number. Fortunately, the almighty $DOLLAR is king and settles all disputes as to which company is more valuable than another. That's why there's hundreds of records related to the $DOLLAR and zero records related to admissions, except in places where admissions is a direct proxy for $DOLLAR.

 

The methods used in this thread to compare admissions numbers are dubious, because as boxofficemojo so eloquently said in 2009 in an article about Avatar becoming the highest grossing movie of all time:

 

"Absent proper admissions tracking, estimated admissions are determined by dividing the grosses by the average ticket prices, but this method is certainly iffy and should not be seen as definitive."

 

However, I am willing to "concede" this record, for the sake of reducing the unnecessary sales of products produced by psychopharmacological companies. Endgame wins first place in the record entitled "probably not third place but actually second in admissions but nobody tracked it until now". Please tweet at Feige so he can focus on Phase 4 instead of being haunted by $2,787,965,087. Also let Feige know that this week Endgame also took first place in "the biggest initial unadjusted run before a re-release but we aren't 100% sure". Of course, Feige may be in his crying room so don't wait around for him to reply right away.

 

Now, go on, and stop fighting. It's time for Marvel Stans and Jim Gang to put aside our differences, and finally admit that Endgame and Avatar both made a lot of money for their respective corporations even though Avatar was art and Endgame was corporate trash. Thank you for reading.

Edited by Pure Spirit
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3
  • Not Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is possible to put all of the fandom stuff aside, this would really be interesting information.  The two biggest movies dollarwise of all-time compared in terms of admissions.  Also broken down regionally.  One of the big reasons I have lurked here for years is I see box office numbers as a window (albeit a small one) into what people find compelling on a national and global scale.  Seeing how two massive event films compare in both dollars and admissions is really interesting.

 

If you're worried about bias, make a point of fact checking and offering alternative hypotheses.  I doubt anyone is going to be able to pull a fast one over this whole community and slant the numbers.  Maybe I am beyond naive here, but... Why can't this be fun?

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

Wait a second?

 

Is this thread an attempt to show that Endgame was more succesful than Avatar? Lmao it's not even close. Endgame in a 2009 sized market doesnt even make 2 billies.

  

Could be under Titanic if released in 2009, China grosses about $85M or so or in that range, in 2019 it got $630M.

Edited by NCsoft
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

If it is possible to put all of the fandom stuff aside, this would really be interesting information.  The two biggest movies dollarwise of all-time compared in terms of admissions.  Also broken down regionally.  One of the big reasons I have lurked here for years is I see box office numbers as a window (albeit a small one) into what people find compelling on a national and global scale.  Seeing how two massive event films compare in both dollars and admissions is really interesting.

 

If you're worried about bias, make a point of fact checking and offering alternative hypotheses.  I doubt anyone is going to be able to pull a fast one over this whole community and slant the numbers.  Maybe I am beyond naive here, but... Why can't this be fun?

Dollars are the only objective measure. Adjusted dollars is a close second. Admissions isn’t even measured because you might as well count how many memes were shared or upvotes on Reddit a movie got at that point, the price of a movie can be set arbitrarily low to maximize admissions, and globally, admissions aren’t even tracked.

 

Charlie has made the claim so it’s up to him to support the claim. I haven’t been able to find a source for Charlie’s global admission claims except “3D”, “exchange rates”, but mostly “dude trust me”. My gut tells me Endgame has sold more because it’s putting a lot of butts in seats in countries where tickets are <$1. Good for Endgame, I guess? If you’re trying to measure “zeitgeist” it’s not even close, Titanic crushes Avatar which crushes Endgame... but that’s not the purpose of this thread. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Nero said:

@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 

Which part specifically are you asking about? Which film sold more estimated tickets globally?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Pure Spirit said:

Dollars are the only objective measure. Adjusted dollars is a close second. Admissions isn’t even measured because you might as well count how many memes were shared or upvotes on Reddit a movie got at that point, the price of a movie can be set arbitrarily low to maximize admissions, and globally, admissions aren’t even tracked.

 Charlie has made the claim so it’s up to him to support the claim. I haven’t been able to find a source for Charlie’s global admission claims except “3D”, “exchange rates”, but mostly “dude trust me”. My gut tells me Endgame has sold more because it’s putting a lot of butts in seats in countries where tickets are <$1. Good for Endgame, I guess? If you’re trying to measure “zeitgeist” it’s not even close, Titanic crushes Avatar which crushes Endgame... but that’s not the purpose of this thread. 

Unadjusted gross is the best non-hassle measure, perhaps.

I think the overall best system of estimating "success" is actually using the proportion of the yearly global box office the film took (of the year of said film's release), the average top grossing films worldwide at the year of release (like the one @IronJimbo and I did), and maybe single market highest grossing records if available. These would be concrete undeniable data unlike personal estimation of global admission.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merging with Fanboys Thread in

 

3

 

2

 

1

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moderation 

 

This thread is under review.  Lots of very long-winded posts signifying nothing are likely to vanish.

 

Regards

BOT Staff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love that at the time of Avatar's release I created a thread at the BOM forums detailing the admissions for GWTW showing that it took until the late 1940's until GWTW got anywhere near Avatar in Domestic admissions and now I have to deal with this.

  • Haha 4
  • Astonished 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I don't even have the words right now.

 

You know when @Shawn makes an appearance, shit just got real.

  • Haha 2
  • Astonished 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moderation 

 

Seriously!  Be civil and respectful. Accept that this is a thread for Endgame admissions. 

 

If you have nothing constructive to post DON’T post. 

 

There’s probably a thread somewhere to discuss admissions vs box office. 

 

There’s a GWTW Thread. 

 

There’s Avatar Threads. 

 

DON’T GET TRIGGERED!

 

If I wake up tomorrow and this thread has gone to crap points and threadbans will be issued. 

 

You have been warned. 

 

Regards

BOT Staff 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, for Vietnam, admission is definitely 4M+.

The trades are reporting 285B final gross, however i think it should be a little bit higher, like 300B. Something weird was going on.

 

Still, now the ATP. CGV hold 50-60% of market shares and my rough calculations give a 75k ATP. Other chains' prices are ~15% cheaper than CGV, let's say 60k. That points to 65-70k national ATP. However, Endgame was released during a holiday weekend and made most of its money there, so ATP should land on the higher side, close to 70k.

 

That means 4.1-4.3M admission depending on which final you take.

  • Thanks 2

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.