Jump to content
A Marvel Fanboy

China Box Office: General Discussion Thread | Wonder Woman - Dec 18, Soul - Dec 25

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, The Dark Samurai said:

This re-release stuff is terrible as a box-office fan.

 

Endgame sold more than a 100 million more admissions, it took 10 years and a perfectly build universe of films to take the number one spot, and a re-release of a film that has been re-released several times will become number 1 again. It was something special to become number one. This? Thoroughly anti-climactic and silly.

 

I don't care what anyone says, re-releases should not count on the All-Time lists. Otherwise there's absolutely no point in comparing films or follow a films run when it can be beaten by endless re-releases like in this case.

Technically, Avatar has not had a single global large scale re-release yet, this one is also China only. Some people are trying to spread the false impression that Avatar somehow achieved its box office from several rounds of release when in fact, its original run, not counting the one tagged at the end of its global one as a victory lap, still amounted to $2.74B+, surpassing Titanic's original $1.84B by $900M, becoming the undisputed champion of global box office in 2010, in fact, Endgame was the one that needed a expansion/re-release to squeak by Avatar's box office (by $7M) in a global market that was 40% bigger and a Chinese market that was at 2019 around 8 times bigger.

These days, re-release in any country barely makes any money, if a film is capable of becoming all time highest grosser by a few re-runs, thus rendering global crown "not special, and anti-climatic", then I suggest all films just re-release themselves and challenge this title from Avatar.

 

Global box office crown was and is still definitely special, especially when Titanic and Avatar snatched them in the fashion that they did (demolishing the previous record). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by NCsoft
  • Like 9
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NCsoft said:

in fact, Endgame was the one that needed a expansion/re-release to squeak by Avatar's box office (by $7M) in a global market that was 40% bigger and a Chinese market that was at 2019 around 8 times bigger.

 

Indeed. Couple individuals keep painting the picture that Avatar had it easier because exchange rates, 3d and whatnot when in fact it is indisputable fact that the global market expanded big time since Avatar came out, with movies grossing much more globally on average than in 2009.

 

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have any problem with adding re-releases. If a film is able to add box office numbers years after their release, that should be added to gross. Simple.

 

The genuine issue that impact the worldwide numbers over the years is the exchange rate fluctuation. In fact don't go far, Endgame release with current day exchange rates will be doing as follow with what it have now in bracket.

 

China - $659M ($630M) +$29M

Germany, France, Spain, Italy - $208M ($193M) +$15M

UK - $124M ($115M) +$9M

 

Total - $991M ($938M) +$53M

 

Same for Avatar.

 

China - $215M ($205M) +10M

G, F, S & I - $457M ($544M) -$87M

UK - $130M ($151M) -$21M

 

Total - $802M ($900M) - $98M

 

I have taken these countries, because they didn't had any sort of inflation which many object is cancelled out by Exchange rates. On the contrary, EG ATP was less than Avatar in all except Germany. The group which has almost same numbers in the gross i.e. ~$900M, but one is close to $1B at today's rate while other is $800M. This just based on exchange rates.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Elessar said:

 

Indeed. Couple individuals keep painting the picture that Avatar had it easier because exchange rates, 3d and whatnot when in fact it is indisputable fact that the global market expanded big time since Avatar came out, with movies grossing much more globally on average than in 2009.

 

Yes, what I found interesting is the fact that 2009 (~$29B global market) and 2019 (~$42.5B global market) were both the most obvious thing yet somehow simultaneously the most difficult/puzzling thing to comprehend to a lot of people. 

 

Edited by NCsoft
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Global box office has grown, but that doesn't mean Hollywood box office has grown. China local films are now doing $6B a year compared to less than $0.5B 10 years ago. India had terrible 2009, and has gained $1B for local films, Hollywood round about same.

 

Besides, its MCU and Disney that has grown, rest of Hollywood is round about same. and let's pretend box office is zero sum game, if I dont get to see MCU film this year, I will go see a Peter Rabbit 2 opening in May.

 

image.png

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, charlie Jatinder said:

The genuine issue that impact the worldwide numbers over the years is the exchange rate fluctuation.

The exchange rate issue is absolutely a factor, but the impact of exchange rates is dwarfed massively by the impact of box office market growth—especially with China in the last decade—which heavily favours more recent films.

 

Almost everyone's aware that China has expanded by a factor of roughly 800-850% in admissions since 2009, but outside of the US, Europe, Japan and Australia (the established markets), almost every single box office market has seen significant growth in the last decade, including:

 

Russia (roughly +60% in admissions from 2009 to 2019);

South Korea (roughly +45% in admissions from 2009 to 2019);

Mexico (+90% from 2009 to 2017);

Brazil (+60% from 2009 to 2017); and

Colombia (+125% from 2009 to 2017), to name just a few.

 

As pointed out above, it's convenient that this huge factor is glossed over or simply ignored or not mentioned when Avatar's gross is discussed, in stark contrast to the exchange rates issue which is often brought up at the first opportunity in order to qualify Avatar's success. You'd expect people on here of all places to consider all factors that affect a movie's gross, but all too often the factors are picked and chosen in order to fit the narrative that someone wants to create (sometimes to hilarious results - Endgame on par with Titanic, anyone?)

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, charlie Jatinder said:

Yes Global box office has grown, but that doesn't mean Hollywood box office has grown.

It did get a boost from 2009 to 2014 or so at least.

 

If you look at the all time highest international box office:

https://www.the-numbers.com/box-office-records/international/all-movies/cumulative/all-time

 

You need to go for number #39 in that list to find the first non Cameron movie not in the 2010s, there is no non Cameron pre 2015 in the top 10.

 

The mental exercice released in 2009 Furious 7 do not make 1.16 billion international, nor do Lion King do 1.11.

 

The Hobbit battle of the five armies do not get that close to Return of the Kings intl if it is released in 2009.

 

Hollywood box office grew less than the global intl growth, but still grew, someone did graph of just the main 6 hollywood studio alone intl box office and you saw a clear progression until at least 2013-2014 from memory.

  • Like 3
  • Astonished 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

People like to highlight the effect of FX, but avatar isn't the only film that enjoy the FX advantage, all films released during 2009-2014, all enjoyed certain level of FX advantage before us dollar spike a like a gold in late-2014.

 

Yet we only see Avatar hitting 2.7b+ , barely any movie released during this period managed to reach half of the avatar gross although they received the same FX bump like avatar, that including the finale of harry potter series, iron man 3, frozen and first avengers. This alone can clearly tell people just how massive Avatar was given the market size.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, hw64 said:

As pointed out above, it's convenient that this huge factor is glossed over or simply ignored or not mentioned when Avatar's gross is discussed, in stark contrast to the exchange rates issue which is often brought up at the first opportunity in order to qualify Avatar's success. You'd expect people on here of all places to consider all factors that affect a movie's gross, but all too often the factors are picked and chosen in order to fit the narrative that someone wants to create (sometimes to hilarious results - Endgame on par with Titanic, anyone?)

Back in 2019 I commented on the film that I thought Endgame's run was probably the most comparable to - Jurassic Park (1993), and that idea was ridiculed thoroughly, but while I realize it's a pointless exercise to compare global box office runs of completely different era, if we were to compare endgame to another worldwide historical record holder, I stand by the judgement that JP is the best comparison.

 

The resemblance is definitely there, JP didn't win the domestic crown (against ET and TFA in Endgame's case) and won the worldwide crown without actually tapping into the potential of all the market (Titanic proved 4 years later what great potential is there). Endgame squeaked into the worldwide crown though not reaching what a Avatar/Titanic like run could have reached in global market in 2019, doing so without reaching TFA domestic, Wolf Warrior2/Wandering Earth China, or Avatar overseas, it's clear what type of global run it was closest to. 

Of course this doesn't change the fact that Endgame had an exceptional run, the second best of the century, and the second best I've ever followed, obviously. 

Edited by NCsoft
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Barnack said:

nor do Lion King do 1.11.

Except that TLK will do more if not less being Europe heavy and will be getting that sweet 3D money in those Western markets. FF7 well agreed it is pretty much Asia and LATAM franchise.

 

Sure Asia and LATAM did increase, no one's denying that but then there's the decrease in the developed markets and the shortening of box office due to digitisation of content. 

13 minutes ago, Barnack said:

The Hobbit battle of the five armies do not get that close to Return of the Kings intl if it is released in 2009.

To be fair, first Hobbit in 2012 did more and, Hobbit being Europe heavy will again get benefit of Euro being $1.42 of instead of $1.21 in 2014 Dec or $1.31 in 2012 Dec. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, hw64 said:

The exchange rate issue is absolutely a factor, but the impact of exchange rates is dwarfed massively by the impact of box office market growth—especially with China in the last decade—which heavily favours more recent films.

 

Almost everyone's aware that China has expanded by a factor of roughly 800-850% in admissions since 2009, but outside of the US, Europe, Japan and Australia (the established markets), almost every single box office market has seen significant growth in the last decade, including:

 

Russia (roughly +60% in admissions from 2009 to 2019);

South Korea (roughly +45% in admissions from 2009 to 2019);

Mexico (+90% from 2009 to 2017);

Brazil (+60% from 2009 to 2017); and

Colombia (+125% from 2009 to 2017), to name just a few.

 

As pointed out above, it's convenient that this huge factor is glossed over or simply ignored or not mentioned when Avatar's gross is discussed, in stark contrast to the exchange rates issue which is often brought up at the first opportunity in order to qualify Avatar's success. You'd expect people on here of all places to consider all factors that affect a movie's gross, but all too often the factors are picked and chosen in order to fit the narrative that someone wants to create (sometimes to hilarious results - Endgame on par with Titanic, anyone?)

 

 

No way, Titanic is way bigger than EG all factor considered, Titanic doubled JP's gross but EG didn't doubled up from JW.

 

Titanic was the all time grossing film in almost all markets, yet EG got problem even claiming year 2019 number 1 in many European countries or in Japan.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Astonished 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, hw64 said:

As pointed out above, it's convenient that this huge factor is glossed over or simply ignored or not mentioned when Avatar's gross is discussed, in stark contrast to the exchange rates issue which is often brought up at the first

It is much easier to look at a table of exchange rate over time than market by market box office evolution, so convenient is also quite literal here and the logic also around it is strong and litteral, unlike ticket price change a exchange rate effect is certain and be calculated.

 

But yes =, you are making 3 time and Harry Potter movie, almost 3.5 a giant transformer movie, that Avatar, that not titanic specially domestic, but that not that far either, it is in similar tier worldwide and how you can transfer between era, what do the equivalent of the biggest franchise in the world do now, like a well received potteror transformer still in is prime, multiply by 3, 3.5 that what Avatar gross look like, Sherlock Holmes was a giant world success, it did 1/5.5 of Avatar, Twilight was an all-time world phenom, it did 1/4 .

 

 

6 minutes ago, Borobudur said:

Titanic was the all time grossing film in almost all markets,

Québec (province in Canada) got known for a local film (Les Boys) to be one of the extremely few place in the world to have a different number 1, not sure how true it was.

 

 

Edited by Barnack
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, charlie Jatinder said:

Except that TLK will do more if not less being Europe heavy and will be getting that sweet 3D money in those Western markets. FF7 well agreed it is pretty much Asia and LATAM franchise.

Yes popularity in which market would play, but I feel live Avatar was popular enough in new market a la China to fully have benefit of the doubt that it would have fully took advantage of the bresil, China, korea type of growth.

 

13 minutes ago, charlie Jatinder said:

To be fair, first Hobbit in 2012 did more and, Hobbit being Europe heavy will again get benefit of Euro being $1.42 of instead of $1.21 in 2014 Dec or $1.31 in 2012 Dec. 

I took the third of that franchise, because unlike the first Hobbit that was fully on the train of goodwill, by the third one of that series the box office would have been really "low" before that international boost, that would have possibly be a under 700m WW movie in 2008-2009, that 112m in China, 21m from S. Korea, 20m from Brazil, 30 m from Russia.

 

What you are saying could be truer for a Holmes, Bond, Potter than something doing blockbuster destroying record in China like Avatar (or titanic if we spec re-release success)

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

I hope all of you are preparing your essays for Endgame's re-release because Disney will keep milking this "battle" for a loooong time. 

Actually I am surprised Disney haven't let avengers 1 get a re-release, I doubt EG would have much re-release potential , at least here in China but avengers 1 sure have some load to explore. It did less than 90m in 2012, way way way lesser than EG

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, expensiveho said:

I hope all of you are preparing your essays for Endgame's re-release because Disney will keep milking this "battle" for a loooong time. 

Not before Avatar 2.

 

They will use this record to market the sequel. MCU with 3 movies per year and now 4-5 shows, doesn't need this marketing.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Barnack said:

that would have possibly be a under 700m WW movie in 2008-2009, that 112m in China, 21m from S. Korea, 20m from Brazil, 30 m from Russia.

It was barely over $700M, so under $700M was almost certain due to China. In 2009, we would probably have $30M of China. The other 3 you mentioned wouldn't have that much of an impact also did well in the three.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, i really don't care that much about exchange rates.

 

To me is way more simpler, EndGame make those huge numbers coming from the most incredible and well done serialized franchise ever created, which of course is phenomenal in every way. But to me an original movie doing that will always be more impressive.

 

Avatar not only break the record by almost 1B, but did this without a franchise. 

Edited by ThomasNicole
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

avatar re-release Saturday pass Friday's total, the rest of the day is all the growth, should have no problem hitting 50m.

 

I wonder if the headline of avatar reclaim all-time top spot thanks to china will help avatar re-release buzz in any way, thereby softening the 2nd week drop  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ThomasNicole said:

EndGame make those huge numbers coming from the most incredible and well done serialized franchise ever created, which of course is phenomenal in every way. But to me an original movie doing that will always be more impressive.

Yes but almost all serialised franchise have drops going forward the sequels. There is finale bump but almost all popular serialised franchise had dropped a lot from the original movie by the time they ended.

 

Harry Potter for example, Deathly Hallow Part 1 was the weakest Potter film in EU with 33M admits compared to original Potter having 58M admits. Part 2 had a bump at 37M Approx. Similarly Japan, original Potter had 16M admits, by the time of final it was just 6.9M.

 

It is just a coincidence that first few Potter films released with absolute worst exchange rates, which kept improving over the decade, giving the films sense of consistency.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
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.