MovieChat Forums > Avengers: Endgame (2019) Discussion > Is This Going To Beat Avatar?

Is This Going To Beat Avatar?


Its slowing down especially in US, would di$ney buy out theaters to beat their own record. With them building Avatar land , they may pull out from record

reply

Yes....

it Will beat Avatar....

and if by "slowing down" you mean having completely normal holds last week and ABOVE average hold this week and weekend...then ya its slowing down....

EG should be at a hold 2.540 Billion By Sunday...

By Next sunday it will pass 2.7 B

and Then for the rest of its run it will finish in The 2.8 + Billion Range

EG should Finish has the highest grossing movie ever World Wide

2nd highest Grossing movie ever domestically with IMO around 870 M+

We wont see another film do this for at least another decade...and Its very possible some of EG records Will never be broken...

I find it extremely hard to believe any film will ever have a 1.2 B+ global opening ever again.

I guarantee no film will ever TOP the previous opening Weekend record by 100 M...before EG the highest any film ever topped The opening weekend record was like 50 M...

IF another film ever does top EGs 357 M OW(which IMO it might take at least a Decade) Theres zero chance it will top by 101 M to break EGs record..

all in all...

EG literally exceeded all possible expectations

reply

exceeded all expectations besides domestic, right? it was suppose to at least challenge TFA. Now 900m domestic may be a challenge.

reply

@darkpast

Hell... 850 million may be a challenge.

reply

No one expected it to beat The Force Awakens. Before it was released the most optimistic expectations were that it would end up with about $800 million domestically, and around $2.5 billion globally, those were considered pie-in-the-sky nearly impossible best case scenario figures.

reply

This week and weekend have been "above average holds", Bill?

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Sunday to Monday drop was 76%. The normal Tuesday recovery "bump" was just 17%. That's "above average"?

Thursday's gross was 7.5 million...DOWN from 21.5 million the previous Thursday!!!!

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

THAT'S "above average holds", huh?

reply

What I find interesting is when you adjust for inflation nothing beats Gone With the Wind. Nothing probably ever will when factoring that in.

reply

Gone with the Wind is not the highest grossing worldwide release if you adjust for inflation, it is only the highest grossing US release. It's actually practically impossible to do inflation adjusted figures for worldwide totals. Also, I'm not sure how reliable those estimates are. According to Box Office Mojo, the Wizard of Oz only made 1/10 the BO of Gone with the Wind, which I find implausible.

The Gone with the Wind numbers are just fanciful estimates. Considering people used to go to the cinema much more often before TV existed, never mind the internet, I'm sure that if anyone bothered to really research the statistics properly, then all of the top 20 films in terms of number of tickets sold would be pre 1960.

reply

Inflation adjusted figures for worldwide totals are easy as you are looking at the total dollar value only. For the people who do not understand measurement: you have to define what you are looking for, first.
In this case it's monetary gains, in today's dollars. Because people can relate to dollar value! (And THAT'S what you are looking for when comparing movies this way) If you have the worldwide gross of a movie in dollars of that time then you can apply the inflation corrected amount in this this time.
Here endeth the lesson.

reply

They are easy to calculate if you calculate them incorrectly, yes.

reply

You are comparing dollar values from then with now. It's simple, really.

reply

Simple and wrong, yes.

reply

What is wrong about that? The totals were written in dollars. Dollars of their time. The inflation of the dollar is well known. What is wrong about that? We are talking about Hollywood movies, right?

reply

yes, you can do any calculation you want and rank films accordingly, but what is the point? What sense does it make to convert currencies into dollars in 1940, and then apply US inflation rates, ignoring exchange rates?

What you really want to know is how many tickets were sold. OK but all that would tell you is that Cinema was more popular when there was no television,Xbox or internet. Films like Starwars and ET played for YEARS at the cinema. Can you imagine that today, when within 6 months of release you can watch a film in HD in your home theater?

The number of dollars a movie made at the Box office is a hard number that everyone can agree on. Obviously with fluctuating inflation, exchange rates, increase in the overseas BO(especially in China), increasing competition from other forms of entertainment, comparing Box Office for films released a long time apart doesn't make much sense.

You CAN convert foreign currencies into dollars in 1940 and then apply US inflation rates, but it's arbitrary and dumb. Inflation adjusted figures make sense only for the US box office, which is why Boxofficemojo does not show worldwide inflation adjusted numbers.

There are two numbers that objective and don't require arbitrary tampering: The number of dollars grossed, and the number of tickets sold. Everything else is just making shit up.

reply

I want to know what a dollar bought in the past compared to what it buys today. So it makes perfect sense to attribute a dollar value to the total revenue of that time, then adjust that for inflation to the current dollar value. It's not rocket science and it gives a good and realistic comparison.

reply

you will find that what a dollar buys you is very different depending on which country you are in, and which year.

reply

Certainly. But for a meaningful comparison you have to compare the value in the USA only. Like when you want to determine if Rockefeller was richer than Bezos.

reply

alienzen is right. Just using inflation doesn’t really show you the true box office, because there are other things to consider. Not just how much more the dollar is worth now. Back when Gone With the Wind came out, you could go see a movie for roughly $0.25. If you try to convert that same price to today’s value, you come up with $4.48, according to https://www.calculator.net/inflation-calculator.htm Nowadays you’re looking at anywhere from $10-$16 or more for a regular ticket. And then there’s 3D and IMAX, which is even more expensive to see. The math doesn’t add up. The rate of inflation doesn’t apply to current theatre prices. It’s expensive as hell to see a movie nowadays, especially if you buy any food from the concession.

Also, if you live in a smaller town or city, you can likely see a movie far cheaper than someone in a bigger city with a larger population. There’s also discounts to take into consideration, as many places charge less for children and seniors, not to mention early shows before noon or discount days (like Tuesday specials, where I’m from where you get to see a movie for around $7 or $8 on Tuesdays. It used to be around $5 like 10 or less years ago).

The population also grew exponentially over the last several decades. Just imagine, the worldwide population back when Gone with the Wind came out, was roughly 2.3 billion people, give or take. In just 80 years, we more than tripled in population.

Really the best way to see how popular a movie is, is to forget about the dollar value all together, and just look at how many people bought tickets. That tells you how many people put their butts in seats to actually watch the movie, and does away with discount prices or IMAX ticket sales. TV and streaming uses viewer #’s. Interesting that movies don’t.

Here’s an interesting piece I read about how inaccurate it is to use inflation when discussing movies. https://www.usi.edu/media/3655032/How-the-MPA-Miscalculates.pdf

reply

I have just shown an easy way to obtain and compare an approximation of the gains some movies got in their own time, from the perspective of a current cultural reference standing point.

reply

But we have more than triple the population of people today - than in 1920s

reply

Most of the increase in the world population has been in third world countries, so how is this relevant to BO? How much did Africa and India contribute to the box office?

reply

So? The question is not how easy it has gotten to reach the amount.

reply

....aaannnd after this laughable post about Endgame having "above average holds" on it's third week and weekend billbrown has, predictably, disappeared.

It's like he realized..."Oh shit...I really stepped in it this time!". At least he left it as is this time and didn't delete/edit.

reply

Even if his predictions on this one fall flat, it will be no where close to your epic failures documented on this board. You realize that, right?

reply

Yes....

it Will beat Avatar....



This could be a huge fail, time will tell!

reply

its going to be close, if Di$ney cheats they will piss off Jim

reply

Omg, it was supposed to be a foregone conclusion, but Endgame dropping so bad with no 100m openers.

reply

Where did you ever read it was a foregone conclusion? All I've seen, before and after the opening, and leading up to today, is that it almost certainly won't pass Avatar globally. It will pass it on the list that matters more, the all-time domestic box office list, but globally we've known since before the movie even came out that it was very, very unlikely to top Avatar's total gross.

reply

https://www.forbes.com/sites/markhughes/2019/05/05/avengers-endgame-likely-to-top-avatar-as-biggest-film-of-all-time/#651ac1fb4f54

At this rate, expecting worst-case outcomes for Endgame is pointless. It's shown us it has the momentum and popularity to not just beat worst-case scenarios and even regular lower-end predictions, but to in fact score closer to higher-end potential.

So I'm ready to commit -- Avengers: Endgame will top Avatar as the highest-grossing movie in film history by the end of its run. Even in the face of strong consistent competition in the coming weeks and months, I see no realistic scenario in which Endgame suddenly falls of a cliff around the world and "comes up short" to the tune of "only" $2.5-2.6 billion. Even if the next couple of weeks see it dropping to the tune of 70% or so, it will eventually start holding better again and slowly inch its way toward the #1 position on box office charts.

reply

Ah, I see. You've found a random guy online who got hyped up and predicted Endgame would smash all records. That clearly means the consensus opinion all along has been that the improbable would definitely happen. Thanks for the clarification. I'd been under the impression all along that when the vast, vast majority hold one opinion, and only a smattering of fringe extremists believe otherwise, that the the general consensus was in fact the majority belief, but now I know better. The earth must be flat, 911 was an inside job, and dinosaurs definitely coexisted with humans in the recent past.

reply

Ok guys...enough time has passed to assess just where this is going to finish globally.

Unfortunately and UNBELIEVABLY this is going to fall short of Avatar. After a 1.2 billion opening weekend!!!!!!!!

reply

Looks like you need some help translating again. What you meant to say was this:

It's pretty clear that Endgame will finish 2nd to Avatar on the all-time worldwide box office list, which is not even slightly unbelievable at all. Before it opened, most thought it would finish somewhere between 3rd and 6th on the list. After its huge opening weekend, nearly everyone agreed it would finish 2nd. Virtually no one, at any point in time, ever believed it would finish first.

reply

what do you mean unbelievably ? you talk as if its flopped

reply

It had a 1.2 billion global opening but won't make 2.8 billion in the end. That's a poor multiplier.

reply

are you fucking kidding me, are you deluded, a film that's made 2.5 billion is a poor multiplier, good god your stupid

reply

"are you fucking kidding me, are you deluded, a film that's made 2.5 billion is a poor multiplier, good god your stupid"


You meant "you're" right?

reply

You're never right, you just cant take the fact that your precious WB gets beat down each year by Disney

reply

You mean it might *only* be the second highest grossing movie of all time? WHAT A FAILURE lol

reply

"You mean it might *only* be the second highest grossing movie of all time? WHAT A FAILURE lol"


Yeah...with the biggest opening weekend in history BY FAR...it ends up in second place.

reply

Most likely, yes and I'd love for it too...I'm sick of that extremely mediocre overly-CGI overload overrated piece of trash film being the highest grossing film of all time when it doesn't even deserve it.

Plus, it will be cool to finally have a superhero/comic book film get to be the highest grossing film of all time even it isn't even the greatest film in the genre or even the best Marvel film for that matter.

reply

Sorry...it ain't gonna happen this time.

This was Marvel's one shot and It's not gonna do it.

reply

Why and what are YOU sorry for?

We are all curious. Are you gleeful at the suggestion that YOU are the person that is needed to inform the delusional masses that their precious film absolutely won't be the #1 Movie of All time or are you saddened that Marvel's hard work and talent will go both unrecognized and unrewarded?

Which is it?

reply

after making 2 billion in 2 weeks, it will come 20m short, lol, no stamina

reply

You might want to just park that for a moment considering its being released with additional footage.

reply

but its too soon for a re-release, it never left theaters

reply

Avatar still reigns. It is amazing.

Endgame had a lot going for it. 10 years of MCU buildup and a popular comic book brand and it could not beat Avatar who had to become number one on it’s own merits.

I know it is cool and woke to hate on Avatar, but it has an undeniable magic. It needed it to become the highest grossing film of all time. No established franchise, no popular brandname and a director that hadn’t made a film in over a decade. Plus the cast where unknowns or people past their primes.

Avatar is special.

reply

You are special.

reply

>and a director that hadn’t made a film in over a decade.

Its pretty hard to play down Jim Cameron but you managed.

Dont forget Avatar had the 3D gimmick.

reply