Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2017 22:18:47 GMT
Top 10 Grossing Superhero Films Ever: (as of right now) Superhero Movie Grosses: The Avengers: $1.519 billion Avengers: Age of Ultron: $1.405 billion Ironman 3: $1.215 billion Captain America: Civil War: $1.152 billion The Dark Knight Rises: $1.084 billion The Dark Knight: $1.005 billion Spider-Man 3: $981 million Batman v Superman: $873 million Spider-Man: $822 million Spider-Man 2: $784 million And Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2, according to Google, has $822 million, but since its not finished its run, it can be given no conclusive place on the list as of yet. It does however meant its matched Spider-Man (2002). Only about fifty mil to go and it'll dethrone BvS.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jun 13, 2017 1:31:53 GMT
Now, now... is this adjusted for inflation? Because otherwise...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2017 1:54:34 GMT
Now, now... is this adjusted for inflation? Because otherwise... Oh, yes, that lame old argument. The same one that ignores audience viewing habits from decades ago as well as the much, much lesser state of home video, and that the internet and piracy weren't things yet.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jun 13, 2017 2:00:22 GMT
Now, now... is this adjusted for inflation? Because otherwise... Oh, yes, that lame old argument. The same one that ignores audience viewing habits from decades ago as well as the much, much lesser state of home video, and that the internet and piracy weren't things yet. Dude, what are you on about? You're smarter than this. The adjustment is necessary for accuracy. Presumably all of those movies are still hugely successful with it.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jun 13, 2017 2:01:24 GMT
^like, I'm 98% sure that the list barely changes and that Avengers is still #1.
Edited to add: just checked BOM: it is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2017 2:16:25 GMT
Oh, yes, that lame old argument. The same one that ignores audience viewing habits from decades ago as well as the much, much lesser state of home video, and that the internet and piracy weren't things yet. Dude, what are you on about? You're smarter than this. The adjustment is necessary for accuracy. Presumably all of those movies are still hugely successful with it. No, it's an unnecessary step only people unwilling to accept the numbers take. Or to troll. Or to try knocking down films they feel are less deserving from a high position on a box office list. Many past films were made before home entertainment was anywhere near what it is now or before they was really home video at all. Plus, they also used to rerelease films on a regular basis. If we're going to adjust for inflation, then we might as well add in all the DVD/Blue-Ray sales and legal downloads. No, I'm using the unaltered numbers and that is final.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jun 13, 2017 2:23:42 GMT
Dude, what are you on about? You're smarter than this. The adjustment is necessary for accuracy. Presumably all of those movies are still hugely successful with it. No, it's an unnecessary step only people unwilling to accept the numbers take. Or to troll. Or to try knocking down films they feel are less deserving from a high position on a box office list. Many past films were made before home entertainment was anywhere near what it is now or before they was really home video at all. Plus, they also used to rerelease films on a regular basis. If we're going to adjust for inflation, then we might as well add in all the DVD/Blue-Ray sales and legal downloads. No, I'm using the unaltered numbers and that is final. But you don't see why it's actually a valuable tool for contextualizing stuff? I've literally never in my life before reading your post(s) heard anyone make these arguments about the legitimacy of inflation adjustment. When someone says, "So-and-so sold a million records and made three million dollars, which -- adjusted for inflation -- is forty million dollars today," they're merely putting that number in context in a way that gives it more weight and perspective. Nobody's inherently trolling anybody by using numbers adjusted for inflation. Willful ignorance of additional information isn't becoming of you(r arguments). It just comes off as though, if anything, you're isolating/cherry picking numbers, which I don't necessarily think you are. As for the rest of that: I really don't see how illegal or legal downloads, home video releases, etc., have anything to do with theatrical commercial success.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2017 2:42:45 GMT
No, it's an unnecessary step only people unwilling to accept the numbers take. Or to troll. Or to try knocking down films they feel are less deserving from a high position on a box office list. Many past films were made before home entertainment was anywhere near what it is now or before they was really home video at all. Plus, they also used to rerelease films on a regular basis. If we're going to adjust for inflation, then we might as well add in all the DVD/Blue-Ray sales and legal downloads. No, I'm using the unaltered numbers and that is final. But you don't see why it's actually a valuable tool for contextualizing stuff? I've literally never in my life before reading your post(s) heard anyone make these arguments about the legitimacy of inflation adjustment. When someone says, "So-and-so sold a million records and made three million dollars, which -- adjusted for inflation -- is forty million dollars today," they're merely putting that number in context in a way that gives it more weight and perspective. Nobody's inherently trolling anybody by using numbers adjusted for inflation. Willful ignorance of additional information isn't becoming of you(r arguments). It just comes off as though, if anything, you're isolating/cherry picking numbers, which I don't necessarily think you are. As for the rest of that: I really don't see how illegal or legal downloads, home video releases, etc., have anything to do with theatrical commercial success. I'm reluctant to start adjusting numbers, even if it is for inflation, because I've never not had it turn into a legitimate shouting match that goes on for pages and pages and pages between various users. A film from decades ago, adjusted for inflation, can shoot past several films higher on the unadjusted list, for example. Trolls back on the original IMDb LOVED to try to lording that over fans of the films they'd overshoot to rustle feathers. Other people feel that specifically adjusting film grosses is moot because of the differences in the cinematic atmospheres, changing release practices, and technology. I agree that it is additional information, but it's still only a piece of additional information. If we're going to talk about Batman (1989)'s adjusted gross, there are other factors to consider, too (like the fact that it was probably the only option for scratching the comic book movie itch in 1989). But okay, I give in.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jun 13, 2017 3:41:33 GMT
But you don't see why it's actually a valuable tool for contextualizing stuff? I've literally never in my life before reading your post(s) heard anyone make these arguments about the legitimacy of inflation adjustment. When someone says, "So-and-so sold a million records and made three million dollars, which -- adjusted for inflation -- is forty million dollars today," they're merely putting that number in context in a way that gives it more weight and perspective. Nobody's inherently trolling anybody by using numbers adjusted for inflation. Willful ignorance of additional information isn't becoming of you(r arguments). It just comes off as though, if anything, you're isolating/cherry picking numbers, which I don't necessarily think you are. As for the rest of that: I really don't see how illegal or legal downloads, home video releases, etc., have anything to do with theatrical commercial success. I'm reluctant to start adjusting numbers, even if it is for inflation, because I've never not had it turn into a legitimate shouting match that goes on for pages and pages and pages between various users. A film from decades ago, adjusted for inflation, can shoot past several films higher on the unadjusted list, for example. Trolls back on the original IMDb LOVED to try to lord that over fans of the films they'd overshoot to rustle feathers. Other people feel that specifically adjusting film grosses is moot because of the differences in the cinematic atmospheres, changing release practices, and technology. I agree that it is additional information, but it's still only a piece of additional information. If we're going to talk about Batman (1989)'s adjusted gross, there are other factors to consider, too (like the fact that it was probably the only option for scratching the comic book movie itch in 1989). But okay, I give in. FWIW, I genuinely suggested it in the interest of offering a different perspective, not to start flame wars. Here's the top twenty-two comic book movies in terms of domestic box office , adjusted for inflation, taken from Box Office Mojo here: 01. Marvel's The Avengers $679,629,900 / $623,357,910 / 2012 02. The Dark Knight $658,257,400 / $534,858,444 / 2008 03. Spider-Man $614,245,200 / $403,706,375 / 2002 04. Batman $556,518,800 / $251,188,924 / 1989 05. Spider-Man 2 $531,803,300 / $373,585,825 / 2004 06. The Dark Knight Rises $509,023,200 / $448,139,099 / 2012 07. Superman $507,045,800 / $134,218,018 / 1978 08. Men in Black $482,811,400 / $250,690,539 / 1997 09. Avengers: Age of Ultron $473,177,900 / $459,005,868 / 2015 10. Spider-Man 3 $432,402,300 / $336,530,303 / 2007 11. Iron Man 3 $431,465,800 / $409,013,994 / 2013 12. Captain America: Civil War $413,316,300 / $408,084,349 / 2016 13. Iron Man $392,017,400 / $318,412,101 / 2008 14. Batman Forever $373,985,100 / $184,031,112 / 1995 15. Deadpool $373,869,900 / $363,070,709 / 2016 16. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 $366,431,539 / 2017 17. Guardians of the Galaxy $364,009,700 / $333,176,600 / 2014 18. Iron Man 2 $347,410,100 / $312,433,331 / 2010 19. Batman Returns $346,851,100 / $162,831,698 / 1992 20. Superman II $344,015,000 / $108,185,706 / 1981 21. Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice $338,224,000 / $330,360,194 / 2016 22. Suicide Squad $337,503,000 / $325,100,054 / 2016 --- Some observations: 9 of the 22 are DC movies, of which 2 are DCEU movies. 12 of the 22 are Marvel movies, of which: 8 are MCU movies, 3 are (Sony) Spider-Man movies, and 1 is, well, Deadpool. None of the X-Men movies are in the top 22, unless you count Deadpool (see above). Batman appears in 3 of the bottom 4 movies as well as 3 of the top 6. The only "contemporary" Batman films not ranked above are Batman and Robin and Batman Begins. All 3 Iron Man movies and all 3 Spider-Man movies are ranked; these are the only sequential "trilogies" on the list, unless you include Batman/Returns/Forever and/or Avengers/Ultron/Civil War. Then it could be as many as four. Superman (1978) is the oldest movie on the list. Guardians 2 (2017) is the newest. Surprised to see Men in Black on the list? It's based on this comic book series. Basically goes without saying, but Guardians 2 is still playing and could conceivably wind up much higher on the list. The highest ranked DCEU movie is #21; the highest ranked MCU movie is #1. Thoughts on the list?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2017 3:54:07 GMT
I'm reluctant to start adjusting numbers, even if it is for inflation, because I've never not had it turn into a legitimate shouting match that goes on for pages and pages and pages between various users. A film from decades ago, adjusted for inflation, can shoot past several films higher on the unadjusted list, for example. Trolls back on the original IMDb LOVED to try to lord that over fans of the films they'd overshoot to rustle feathers. Other people feel that specifically adjusting film grosses is moot because of the differences in the cinematic atmospheres, changing release practices, and technology. I agree that it is additional information, but it's still only a piece of additional information. If we're going to talk about Batman (1989)'s adjusted gross, there are other factors to consider, too (like the fact that it was probably the only option for scratching the comic book movie itch in 1989). But okay, I give in. FWIW, I genuinely suggested it in the interest of offering a different perspective, not to start flame wars. Here's the top twenty-two comic book movies in terms of domestic box office , adjusted for inflation, taken from Box Office Mojo here: 01. Marvel's The Avengers $679,629,900 / $623,357,910 / 2012 02. The Dark Knight $658,257,400 / $534,858,444 / 2008 03. Spider-Man $614,245,200 / $403,706,375 / 2002 04. Batman $556,518,800 / $251,188,924 / 1989 05. Spider-Man 2 $531,803,300 / $373,585,825 / 2004 06. The Dark Knight Rises $509,023,200 / $448,139,099 / 2012 07. Superman $507,045,800 / $134,218,018 / 1978 08. Men in Black $482,811,400 / $250,690,539 / 1997 09. Avengers: Age of Ultron $473,177,900 / $459,005,868 / 2015 10. Spider-Man 3 $432,402,300 / $336,530,303 / 2007 11. Iron Man 3 $431,465,800 / $409,013,994 / 2013 12. Captain America: Civil War $413,316,300 / $408,084,349 / 2016 13. Iron Man $392,017,400 / $318,412,101 / 2008 14. Batman Forever $373,985,100 / $184,031,112 / 1995 15. Deadpool $373,869,900 / $363,070,709 / 2016 16. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 $366,431,539 / 2017 17. Guardians of the Galaxy $364,009,700 / $333,176,600 / 2014 18. Iron Man 2 $347,410,100 / $312,433,331 / 2010 19. Batman Returns $346,851,100 / $162,831,698 / 1992 20. Superman II $344,015,000 / $108,185,706 / 1981 21. Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice $338,224,000 / $330,360,194 / 2016 22. Suicide Squad $337,503,000 / $325,100,054 / 2016 --- Some observations: 9 of the 22 are DC movies, of which 2 are DCEU movies. 12 of the 22 are Marvel movies, of which: 8 are MCU movies, 3 are (Sony) Spider-Man movies, and 1 is, well, Deadpool. None of the X-Men movies are in the top 22, unless you count Deadpool (see above). Batman appears in 3 of the bottom 4 movies as well as 3 of the top 6. The only "contemporary" Batman films not ranked above are Batman and Robin and Batman Begins. All 3 Iron Man movies and all 3 Spider-Man movies are ranked; these are the only sequential "trilogies" on the list, unless you include Batman/Returns/Forever and/or Avengers/Ultron/Civil War. Then it could be as many as four. Superman (1978) is the oldest movie on the list. Guardians 2 (2017) is the newest. Surprised to see Men in Black on the list? It's based on this comic book series. Basically goes without saying, but Guardians 2 is still playing and could conceivably wind up much higher on the list. The highest ranked DCEU movie is #21; the highest ranked MCU movie is #1. Thoughts on the list? Not surprised to see the classics like Superman: The Movie and Batman '89 on there. Disappointed to see The Dark Knight Rises, Spider-Man 3, and Batman Forever either make their way on there or stay on there. Knew Spider-Man would be high up. Actually, I'm not surprised to see Men in Black. I know of the comic books it's based on, but I've never had the chance to read them. Fun movie, though. Now if only the sequels had lived up to it, but that's another discussion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2017 4:21:27 GMT
I'm reluctant to start adjusting numbers, even if it is for inflation, because I've never not had it turn into a legitimate shouting match that goes on for pages and pages and pages between various users. A film from decades ago, adjusted for inflation, can shoot past several films higher on the unadjusted list, for example. Trolls back on the original IMDb LOVED to try to lord that over fans of the films they'd overshoot to rustle feathers. Other people feel that specifically adjusting film grosses is moot because of the differences in the cinematic atmospheres, changing release practices, and technology. I agree that it is additional information, but it's still only a piece of additional information. If we're going to talk about Batman (1989)'s adjusted gross, there are other factors to consider, too (like the fact that it was probably the only option for scratching the comic book movie itch in 1989). But okay, I give in. FWIW, I genuinely suggested it in the interest of offering a different perspective, not to start flame wars. Here's the top twenty-two comic book movies in terms of domestic box office , adjusted for inflation, taken from Box Office Mojo here: 01. Marvel's The Avengers $679,629,900 / $623,357,910 / 2012 02. The Dark Knight $658,257,400 / $534,858,444 / 2008 03. Spider-Man $614,245,200 / $403,706,375 / 2002 04. Batman $556,518,800 / $251,188,924 / 1989 05. Spider-Man 2 $531,803,300 / $373,585,825 / 2004 06. The Dark Knight Rises $509,023,200 / $448,139,099 / 2012 07. Superman $507,045,800 / $134,218,018 / 1978 08. Men in Black $482,811,400 / $250,690,539 / 1997 09. Avengers: Age of Ultron $473,177,900 / $459,005,868 / 2015 10. Spider-Man 3 $432,402,300 / $336,530,303 / 2007 11. Iron Man 3 $431,465,800 / $409,013,994 / 2013 12. Captain America: Civil War $413,316,300 / $408,084,349 / 2016 13. Iron Man $392,017,400 / $318,412,101 / 2008 14. Batman Forever $373,985,100 / $184,031,112 / 1995 15. Deadpool $373,869,900 / $363,070,709 / 2016 16. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 $366,431,539 / 2017 17. Guardians of the Galaxy $364,009,700 / $333,176,600 / 2014 18. Iron Man 2 $347,410,100 / $312,433,331 / 2010 19. Batman Returns $346,851,100 / $162,831,698 / 1992 20. Superman II $344,015,000 / $108,185,706 / 1981 21. Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice $338,224,000 / $330,360,194 / 2016 22. Suicide Squad $337,503,000 / $325,100,054 / 2016 --- Some observations: 9 of the 22 are DC movies, of which 2 are DCEU movies. 12 of the 22 are Marvel movies, of which: 8 are MCU movies, 3 are (Sony) Spider-Man movies, and 1 is, well, Deadpool. None of the X-Men movies are in the top 22, unless you count Deadpool (see above). Batman appears in 3 of the bottom 4 movies as well as 3 of the top 6. The only "contemporary" Batman films not ranked above are Batman and Robin and Batman Begins. All 3 Iron Man movies and all 3 Spider-Man movies are ranked; these are the only sequential "trilogies" on the list, unless you include Batman/Returns/Forever and/or Avengers/Ultron/Civil War. Then it could be as many as four. Superman (1978) is the oldest movie on the list. Guardians 2 (2017) is the newest. Surprised to see Men in Black on the list? It's based on this comic book series. Basically goes without saying, but Guardians 2 is still playing and could conceivably wind up much higher on the list. The highest ranked DCEU movie is #21; the highest ranked MCU movie is #1. Thoughts on the list? Thia list only covers the US. Like the reat of the world doesnt count. Thats why this list is not correct.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jun 13, 2017 4:26:25 GMT
Enh. This is the data I had readily available. And besides, they're all American movies, so it's certainly at least worth looking at their relative success with, you know, American audiences.
But I get what you're saying and would've used a worldwide adjusted list were it available.
|
|
NormanClature
Junior Member
"Anyone would think tin-pot-dictatorship is a bad thing???!?"
@armyofone
Posts: 2,108
Likes: 1,196
|
Post by NormanClature on Oct 15, 2018 21:31:39 GMT
Top 10 Grossing Superhero Films Ever: (as of right now) Superhero Movie Grosses: The Avengers: $1.519 billion Avengers: Age of Ultron: $1.405 billion Ironman 3: $1.215 billion Captain America: Civil War: $1.152 billion The Dark Knight Rises: $1.084 billion The Dark Knight: $1.005 billion Spider-Man 3: $981 million Batman v Superman: $873 million Spider-Man: $822 million Spider-Man 2: $784 million And Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2, according to Google, has $822 million, but since its not finished its run, it can be given no conclusive place on the list as of yet. It does however meant its matched Spider-Man (2002). Only about fifty mil to go and it'll dethrone BvS.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2018 22:29:23 GMT
Top 10 Grossing Superhero Films Ever: (as of right now) Superhero Movie Grosses: The Avengers: $1.519 billion Avengers: Age of Ultron: $1.405 billion Ironman 3: $1.215 billion Captain America: Civil War: $1.152 billion The Dark Knight Rises: $1.084 billion The Dark Knight: $1.005 billion Spider-Man 3: $981 million Batman v Superman: $873 million Spider-Man: $822 million Spider-Man 2: $784 million And Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2, according to Google, has $822 million, but since its not finished its run, it can be given no conclusive place on the list as of yet. It does however meant its matched Spider-Man (2002). Only about fifty mil to go and it'll dethrone BvS. It doesn't really matter, but I guess it's who you ask.
I like a good deal of the MCU movies but I don't think any of them are as good as The Dark Knight, and The Dark Knight isn't even my favorite Batman movie. The Captain America movies will probably do the best at standing the test of time, but The Dark Knight Rises outsold The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises was the weakest entry of a really strong trilogy.
Batman vs Superman was cringe worthy bad the entire step of the way. It doesn't matter to me that it's Superman and Batman and Wonder Woman, that movie's at the bottom of the barrel of all Superhero movies. 873 million means nothing to me in that regard.
Spiderman 3 I thought was pretty bad. In my opinion, Spiderman 2 is the strongest Spiderman movie and it had the weakest box office in its own trilogy. Spiderman 2 (to me) is as better than Spiderman as Spiderman is better than Spiderman 3. Spiderman was fine, but I thought Spiderman 2 was on a different plane and is the best of its character, including the MCU Spiderman and the two Andrew Garfield ones.
Iron Man 3 is not the best of its genre (Iron Man probably is) but it's actually my preferred favorite and even then, that's a pretty high box office.
I thought Winter Soldier was better than Civil War but that doesn't show through the box office.
The nice thing about these numbers is if you're used to society shitting on superhero movies, these numbers are validating. They're validating to the crowd for whom numbers is more important than quality, which is way too big a crowd. BUT it's a crowd you have to contend with. It's what you cite to show skeptical people that superhero movies and comic book movies have a place in the pop cultural pantheon and these numbers indicate more than children and niche fans. Surprise, these superheroes, for better or worse, are mainstream now. These are mainstream box office numbers; this ain't no Indie scene anymore.
But if you want to go by quality then box office is not your takeaway. Case in point (in my opinion) Batman v Superman. Or really any blockbuster popcorn flicks that dominate the box office. Venom sold large at the box office. On the one hand, I'm glad for its success, but as a movie is it really likely to be better than A Star is Born opening the same week?
I'd rather watch The Dark Knight than How Green was my Valley, which won best picture in 1941 over Citizen Kane. And I'd definitely rather watch Citizen Kane instead of Batman vs Superman.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2018 4:29:41 GMT
Top 10 Grossing Superhero Films Ever: (as of right now) Superhero Movie Grosses: The Avengers: $1.519 billion Avengers: Age of Ultron: $1.405 billion Ironman 3: $1.215 billion Captain America: Civil War: $1.152 billion The Dark Knight Rises: $1.084 billion The Dark Knight: $1.005 billion Spider-Man 3: $981 million Batman v Superman: $873 million Spider-Man: $822 million Spider-Man 2: $784 million And Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2, according to Google, has $822 million, but since its not finished its run, it can be given no conclusive place on the list as of yet. It does however meant its matched Spider-Man (2002). Only about fifty mil to go and it'll dethrone BvS. It doesn't really matter, but I guess it's who you ask.
I like a good deal of the MCU movies but I don't think any of them are as good as The Dark Knight, and The Dark Knight isn't even my favorite Batman movie. The Captain America movies will probably do the best at standing the test of time, but The Dark Knight Rises outsold The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises was the weakest entry of a really strong trilogy.
Batman vs Superman was cringe worthy bad the entire step of the way. It doesn't matter to me that it's Superman and Batman and Wonder Woman, that movie's at the bottom of the barrel of all Superhero movies. 873 million means nothing to me in that regard.
Spiderman 3 I thought was pretty bad. In my opinion, Spiderman 2 is the strongest Spiderman movie and it had the weakest box office in its own trilogy. Spiderman 2 (to me) is as better than Spiderman as Spiderman is better than Spiderman 3. Spiderman was fine, but I thought Spiderman 2 was on a different plane and is the best of its character, including the MCU Spiderman and the two Andrew Garfield ones.
Iron Man 3 is not the best of its genre (Iron Man probably is) but it's actually my preferred favorite and even then, that's a pretty high box office.
I thought Winter Soldier was better than Civil War but that doesn't show through the box office.
The nice thing about these numbers is if you're used to society shitting on superhero movies, these numbers are validating. They're validating to the crowd for whom numbers is more important than quality, which is way too big a crowd. BUT it's a crowd you have to contend with. It's what you cite to show skeptical people that superhero movies and comic book movies have a place in the pop cultural pantheon and these numbers indicate more than children and niche fans. Surprise, these superheroes, for better or worse, are mainstream now. These are mainstream box office numbers; this ain't no Indie scene anymore.
But if you want to go by quality then box office is not your takeaway. Case in point (in my opinion) Batman v Superman. Or really any blockbuster popcorn flicks that dominate the box office. Venom sold large at the box office. On the one hand, I'm glad for its success, but as a movie is it really likely to be better than A Star is Born opening the same week?
I'd rather watch The Dark Knight than How Green was my Valley, which won best picture in 1941 over Citizen Kane. And I'd definitely rather watch Citizen Kane instead of Batman vs Superman.
Fair enough, and you hit the nail right on the head for why I used the numbers. Anyway, hi, how are you?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2018 6:51:28 GMT
It doesn't really matter, but I guess it's who you ask.
I like a good deal of the MCU movies but I don't think any of them are as good as The Dark Knight, and The Dark Knight isn't even my favorite Batman movie. The Captain America movies will probably do the best at standing the test of time, but The Dark Knight Rises outsold The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises was the weakest entry of a really strong trilogy.
Batman vs Superman was cringe worthy bad the entire step of the way. It doesn't matter to me that it's Superman and Batman and Wonder Woman, that movie's at the bottom of the barrel of all Superhero movies. 873 million means nothing to me in that regard.
Spiderman 3 I thought was pretty bad. In my opinion, Spiderman 2 is the strongest Spiderman movie and it had the weakest box office in its own trilogy. Spiderman 2 (to me) is as better than Spiderman as Spiderman is better than Spiderman 3. Spiderman was fine, but I thought Spiderman 2 was on a different plane and is the best of its character, including the MCU Spiderman and the two Andrew Garfield ones.
Iron Man 3 is not the best of its genre (Iron Man probably is) but it's actually my preferred favorite and even then, that's a pretty high box office.
I thought Winter Soldier was better than Civil War but that doesn't show through the box office.
The nice thing about these numbers is if you're used to society shitting on superhero movies, these numbers are validating. They're validating to the crowd for whom numbers is more important than quality, which is way too big a crowd. BUT it's a crowd you have to contend with. It's what you cite to show skeptical people that superhero movies and comic book movies have a place in the pop cultural pantheon and these numbers indicate more than children and niche fans. Surprise, these superheroes, for better or worse, are mainstream now. These are mainstream box office numbers; this ain't no Indie scene anymore.
But if you want to go by quality then box office is not your takeaway. Case in point (in my opinion) Batman v Superman. Or really any blockbuster popcorn flicks that dominate the box office. Venom sold large at the box office. On the one hand, I'm glad for its success, but as a movie is it really likely to be better than A Star is Born opening the same week?
I'd rather watch The Dark Knight than How Green was my Valley, which won best picture in 1941 over Citizen Kane. And I'd definitely rather watch Citizen Kane instead of Batman vs Superman.
Fair enough, and you hit the nail right on the head for why I used the numbers. Anyway, hi, how are you? I'm great. How are you?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2018 7:02:54 GMT
Fair enough, and you hit the nail right on the head for why I used the numbers. Anyway, hi, how are you? I'm great. How are you? I'm great, too. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Oct 17, 2018 3:56:52 GMT
I don't worry about these things. It always turns around.
It'll be like this soon enough...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2018 6:01:23 GMT
I don't worry about these things. It always turns around.
It'll be like this soon enough...
It doesn't matter. The DCEU tried to beat the MCU at their own game and failed. Nothing will ever change that fact. And I doubt "Worlds of DC" will ever make $4 billion dollars off just three movies in one year like Marvel did this year. Even if it's all downhill from here, the MCU reached some of the highest heights possible and it'll be very difficult for anyone to top that.
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Oct 17, 2018 14:22:02 GMT
I don't worry about these things. It always turns around.
It'll be like this soon enough...
It doesn't matter. The DCEU tried to beat the MCU at their own game and failed. Nothing will ever change that fact. And I doubt "Worlds of DC" will ever make $4 billion dollars off just three movies in one year like Marvel did this year. Even if it's all downhill from here, the MCU reached some of the highest heights possible and it'll be very difficult for anyone to top that. A favorite saying of mine is "Never say never".
|
|