Slashdot Mirror

Box Office Mojo beats the socks off of IMDB in terms of useless box office data. Daily ... Weekend ... Yearly ... All Time ...

Like IMDb, Box Office Mojo seems to be cross-referenced out the wazoo.

Box Office Mojo beats the socks off of IMDB in terms of useless box office data. Daily ... Weekend ... Yearly ... All Time ...

Like IMDb, Box Office Mojo seems to be cross-referenced out the wazoo.

Box Office Mojo beats the socks off of IMDB in terms of useless box office data. Daily ... Weekend ... Yearly ... All Time ...

Like IMDb, Box Office Mojo seems to be cross-referenced out the wazoo.

Box Office Mojo beats the socks off of IMDB in terms of useless box office data. Daily ... Weekend ... Yearly ... All Time ...

Like IMDb, Box Office Mojo seems to be cross-referenced out the wazoo.

Since IMDb is more for reference, I personally prefer rottentomatoes.com for my "scoop" on movies.

I also like boxofficemojo.com to track a particular movie's progress at the box office.

I think the only thing that I use IMDb for is to look what movies a particular actor starred in and vice versa.

According to Box Office Mojo, The Polar Express did end up taking in $163 million in the U.S. and ended up grossing $283 million when you include the foreign box office, so while it wasn't nearly as popular as The Incredibles it wasn't a huge flop. The blog entry you cited was written in November of 2004 when it was thought the film was going to bomb like the Final Fantasy but the film mangaged to have legs and continue to make money in the following weeks. Personally I think the term "uncanny valley" is way overused.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

There is your adjusted income based on ticket prices.

Without commenting on how much or how little effect the leakage had on the box office, note that according to Box Office Mojo's "adjusted for inflation" list, ROTS is only #55 all-time. See http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm to see the adjusted list. The unadjusted list is at http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/, which has ROTS #11. Techvet

Without commenting on how much or how little effect the leakage had on the box office, note that according to Box Office Mojo's "adjusted for inflation" list, ROTS is only #55 all-time. See http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm to see the adjusted list. The unadjusted list is at http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/, which has ROTS #11. Techvet

Actually, if you adjust for inflation, it comes in a little lower. Still, $380 million is absurd; that movie didn't deserve to make more than about a buck fifty.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A268 77-2005Mar11.html This article is a bit outdated but it was the first one I came across. The release time between theatrical release and the DVD release is growing shorter and shorter. The primary reason seems to be to save money on the huge marketing costs for theatrical release and DVD releases. $30 million seems to be average for big budget movies. If you look at http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=island05.h tm The Island's costs and performance you can see they lost a lot of money. The studio/distributor gets about 50% of the gross box office sharing the rest with the theater chain. The studio gets something like 80% of the opening weekend revenue and the percentage slides down each following week. But you've got to figure with all of the commercials you saw for this movie that the marketing cost at least $30 million. Stealth was another example of a poor performer. Both are likely candidates for a quick DVD release so that the studio can capitalize on people's memory and spend less on DVD marketing.

So, to make a long story short, expect a lot more movies on DVD in three months time.

75 million dollar indie style film that no one has heard of?

Maybe not always but frequently indies are budget productions yet they make a lot in the theatre. Like the "Blair Witch Project", it was made on a budget of $60,000 and the advertizing was $25M and it made more than $200M. Another movie is "Kissing Jessica Stein", it had a budget of $1,000,000 and grossed more than $10,000,000.

Quite simply it doesn't takes millions and millions of dollars to make a good movie, indies prove this.

75 million dollar indie style film that no one has heard of?

Maybe not always but frequently indies are budget productions yet they make a lot in the theatre. Like the "Blair Witch Project", it was made on a budget of $60,000 and the advertizing was $25M and it made more than $200M. Another movie is "Kissing Jessica Stein", it had a budget of $1,000,000 and grossed more than $10,000,000.

Quite simply it doesn't takes millions and millions of dollars to make a good movie, indies prove this.

Sorry for replying to my own message but look at http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/ and the number of those movies that were 'made' because of star power...

Mod parent up. Movies really don't make as much as they used to.

Here's a link to the top 100 films, by domestic gross, adjusted for inflation. It tells a very different story. Titanic isn't even in the top 5.

It's no wonder Hollywood is considering alternatives, they've just experienced their worst box-office slump in 20 years. Ticket sales are down nearly 8% compared with 2004.

Insightful?? Um, no. This guy pulled these figures out of his ass. Why don't you try these figures which show 2005 as being right about where it should be considering the year is just a little over half over and the Holidays aren't here yet. 2004 also had the most movies ever.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/

So let's go watch Constantine.. Wait, it's not listed. Okay, let's go watch Hellboy..wait. No, wait, the only have bottom-of-the box office barrel movies available.

You mean like Constantine and Hellboy?

So let's go watch Constantine.. Wait, it's not listed. Okay, let's go watch Hellboy..wait. No, wait, the only have bottom-of-the box office barrel movies available.

You mean like Constantine and Hellboy?

Somewhat of a different issue, but I disagree with boxofficemojo's choice to exclude any "Reality TV movie" from the documentary category. Otherwise Jackass would be #2.

Somewhat of a different issue, but I disagree with boxofficemojo's choice to exclude any "Reality TV movie" from the documentary category. Otherwise Jackass would be #2.

PinxXao: "Intellectual property" is not real property.

Yes it is.

Why would Hollywood invest $100 million plus for a reel of exposed motion picture film. For example, the film negative to T2 is intrinsically worth about $115,000,000.00 as that is the total production cost that went into creating the final product: a motion picture film negative. That negative was turn into motion picture prints that were exhibited back in 1991 to the tune of over $200,000,000.00 in box office receipts.

On the software front there is Microsoft--a very real corporate empire built on intangible, magnetically and optically encoded ones and zeroes since the late 1970s.

Sorry PinxXao, there is *BIG* money in "Intellectual property" which is truly a license to print money for wildly successful (usually 'branded') IP....

Let's see, according to imdb, here are the billed screenplay writers:
John Rogers (screenplay) and
Roberto Orci (screenplay)
Tom DeSanto story
Alex Kurtzman screenplay

Googling around, it seems like John Rogers will be the head writer. His creidts? Catwoman and The Core.
(Budget/US Box Office)
Catwoman: $100 million/$40 million
The Core: $60 million/$30 million

Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman? Episodes of Alias, the Island, MI3, Zorro sequel. I highly doubt the Island will be good, and sequels just for money usually don't have stellar stories, so not looking too great.

The only possible saving grace in the bunch is Tom DeSanto who is credited for the story in X-Men. Hollywood must seriously be about the connections. I just don't know how anyone would be willing to invest money in the guy who wrote Catwoman or The Core.

Let's see, according to imdb, here are the billed screenplay writers:
John Rogers (screenplay) and
Roberto Orci (screenplay)
Tom DeSanto story
Alex Kurtzman screenplay

Googling around, it seems like John Rogers will be the head writer. His creidts? Catwoman and The Core.
(Budget/US Box Office)
Catwoman: $100 million/$40 million
The Core: $60 million/$30 million

Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman? Episodes of Alias, the Island, MI3, Zorro sequel. I highly doubt the Island will be good, and sequels just for money usually don't have stellar stories, so not looking too great.

The only possible saving grace in the bunch is Tom DeSanto who is credited for the story in X-Men. Hollywood must seriously be about the connections. I just don't know how anyone would be willing to invest money in the guy who wrote Catwoman or The Core.

Fuck, it'll hit a billion in a few months probably.
Probably not. It's dropping very fast, according to Box Office Mojo

Not at all. If you follow the story's links for those movies, you'd see that 57.4% voters on that sight gave Treasure Planet a "grade" of A or B, and 61% gave Atlantis an A or B. However, both movies were financial failures in large part due to their sky-high production and (ineffective) marketing costs.

The story's submitter described those movies as a "pathetic failure" and an "epic disaster." He was probably just describing their box office performance. If not, then he's an "epic, pathetic moron."

Not at all. If you follow the story's links for those movies, you'd see that 57.4% voters on that sight gave Treasure Planet a "grade" of A or B, and 61% gave Atlantis an A or B. However, both movies were financial failures in large part due to their sky-high production and (ineffective) marketing costs.

The story's submitter described those movies as a "pathetic failure" and an "epic disaster." He was probably just describing their box office performance. If not, then he's an "epic, pathetic moron."

I'm not sure about box office results, but on Disney's primary portal http://disneyvideos.disney.go.com/ for DVD & video sales Miyazaki movies don't even touch their other franchises. By far the most popular are the princess movies http://disney.go.com/princess/, Winnie the Pooh, and Kim Possible. Eisner opened the floodgates for making sequels to their older movies so there's been a lot of straight to video movies that have been successful relying on the older franchises (Lion King, Mulan, Tarzan) that can make up for lost profits on flops. It should also be noted that Disney has had a certain amount of success over the last couple years with 2003's Home On The Range likelastyear'sHomeOntheRange and last year's Brother Bear http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=brotherbear.ht m which were pretty entertaining. So maybe its fair to say they've learned from Atlantis and Treasure Planet, although I'm not sure if the criticism leveled Disney calling these films disasters is merited. Most movies from all the major studios are lucky if they break even at the box office, once Disney decided to start releasing around an animated movie a year, they've ceased to be an exception to that rule.

Which is why, if you check out the Box Office Adjusted for Inflation you'll find that Gone with the Wind is number 1.

your wish may become true.
Boxofficemojo is showing that on Friday ROTS was beaten out by "The longest yard".
Way to go Sandler and Kid Rock.

You know, I stood in the lines for both of the previous sequels for both tickets and seats, but I don't think I'm gonna see this one.
And no, I won't torrent it either. I'm just not that interested in it, and know that Lucas couldn't present a believable story about the origins of Darth Vader...

hopefully it'll be #2 this weekend and some lesson will be learned

heh, funny that you mention that... turns out ROTS did fall to #2 this weekend.
http://boxofficemojo.com/daily/chart/?sortdate=200 5-05-27&p=.htm

Give me a break. That movie has made $158 million dollars since it opened. BitTorrent had no effect on it.

Three official releases of ANH

See
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=releases &id=starwars4.htm

For ESB see
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=releases &id=starwars5.htm

and for ROJ see
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=releases &id=starwars6.htm

Three official releases of ANH

See
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=releases &id=starwars4.htm

For ESB see
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=releases &id=starwars5.htm

and for ROJ see
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=releases &id=starwars6.htm

Three official releases of ANH

See
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=releases &id=starwars4.htm

For ESB see
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=releases &id=starwars5.htm

and for ROJ see
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=releases &id=starwars6.htm

Private Parts lost money?! You must be stoned. According to this, Private Parts cost $28 million to make. The domestic box office was $41 million, which is pretty respectable for is essentially a bio-pic. And this does not include any VHS/DVD sales and rentals.

Title, studio, adjusted amount, year of release

1. Gone with the Wind MGM $1,262,778,900 1939^
2. Star Wars Fox $1,113,247,500 1977^
3. The Sound of Music Fox $890,096,100 1965
4. E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial Uni. $886,589,600 1982^
5. The Ten Commandments Par. $818,750,000 1956
6. Titanic Par. $802,161,800 1997
7. Jaws Uni. $800,492,600 1975
8. Doctor Zhivago MGM $775,846,600 1965
9. The Exorcist WB $691,054,200 1973^
10. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs Dis. $681,250,000 1937^
11. 101 Dalmatians Dis. $624,482,800 1961^
12. The Empire Strikes Back Fox $613,629,000 1980^
13. Ben-Hur MGM $612,500,000 1959
14. Return of the Jedi Fox $587,871,300 1983^
15. The Sting Uni. $557,142,900 1973
16. Raiders of the Lost Ark Par. $550,886,600 1981^
17. Jurassic Park Uni. $538,786,500 1993
18. The Graduate AVCO $534,468,200 1967
19. Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace Fox $530,138,300 1999
20. Fantasia Dis. $519,021,700 $76,408,097 1941^

21. Source: Box Office Mojo

In the top 20, there are 2.

Finding Nemo and Lion King.

(and on an intersting side note, both movies involved show the horrific and traumatic death of a parent!)

According to one of the industry's leading insider websites, the movie has grossed almost 450 million dollars worldwide. That means...

It's number 60 on the ALL-TIME domestic takes, and number FIFTY-TWO all-time worldwide.

But you read on rotten tomatoes that it was a bomb, and you're sticking to it.

From boxofficemojo.com this is the breakdown:

Pearl Harbor:
Production Budget: $140 million
Est. Marketing Costs: $70 million

Domestic gross: $198,542,554 (44.2%)
+ Overseas gross: $250,678,391 (55.8%)
-----------------
= Worldwide gross: $449,220,945

So... it cost $210 million to make and market the film, it took in $450 million from the box office ALONE (not including the millions that selling tv rights brings, DVD/VHS sales, pay-per-view spots), and I'm sure the producers are really crying about this "bomb" - crying all the way to the bank...

the largest use of graphics in movies is kids movies

$67M gross worldwide, with a $60M production budget and $33M marketing. Now that, folks, is a bomb. (I wasn't even interested in downloading it.

Check out boxofficemojo. It is not the US release alone that makes money. Most of the movies esp. big hits and even some abysmal failures such as Troy or King Arthur are making good money abroad. Forget MPAA; these movies are big revenue generators for the local economy abroad. Foreign govt/police will be happy to shut down for two reasons -
make sure local theater owners are happy
take advantage of any opp. to brown nose MPAA

Freedom of speech - screw it - it didnt work for the Americans - it will never work here.

(Here in the US, there are open discussions in the media of the lengths that producers sometimes go to in order to get an R rating, which is the minimum that will bring in most adults. Sometimes they have to add a nude/sex scene that has nothing to do with the plot, just to get that all-important rating. ;-)

What? Movie producers never want a movie to be "barely R" - Look how few R-rated films are on the box office charts. http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

Movie producers are usually cutting things out to get an lower rating (either R->PG13 or NC-17->R) to broaden the potential audience.

-Isaac

You will be just as surpised as I when you read this:

Alien vs Predator Domestic Total as of Oct. 5, 2004: $79,690,462, Worldwide total $101,614,954

They've already gone into profit territory on this and in fact it's being called a success: The studio also saw success this year with Regency's "Man on Fire" and "Alien vs. Predator."

So stop all the hate and learn the facts.

"Sky Captain and the World of Tommorow" is an excellent example of the basic Hollywood problem today.

It didn't make any money.

In fact it lost a ton of money.

Box Office Mojo website reports that this product costs $78 million US to produce and $28 million US to advertise and promote. Yet in the critical first two weeks of theatrical release, it has brought back only $25 million. Generally Hollywood movies now must bring in 1/2 of their production costs in the first weekend of release in order to be considered profitable in the long run.

This product was well-made and certainly has appeal to a segment of the audience, but it was essensially a vanity project between the star Jude Law and the art director.

The real problem here is that someone in the studio framework who should know better allowed a $100 million vanity project to get made. This seems to indicate that Hollywood is running out of ideas for product and are beginning to throw money at anything that has a star's enthusiasm.

Studios are supposed to the star's bullshit filters, not bullshit enablers.

This is just one sign that Hollywood is on the verge of a product crisis not unlike those that hit it both in the 1950's from television and the early 1970's from the counter-culture.

Fact about Fahrenheit 9/11: It has been extraordinarily successful, grossing a fifth of a billion dollars on a $6 million investment.

--
Bush: Borrowing money to try to make his administration look good. Are you getting some of the $?

If anybody is on drugs here it is you. You opinion doesn't seem to count for much, sorry.


It's the 5th highest grossing box office film of all time. That hardly classifies as universally reviled.


It just goes to show that most here at /. have no concept of reality.


Sorry to shatter your universal perception.

I should add that I agree that Michael Moore is very imperfect as a filmmaker. However Fahrenheit 9/11 has already grossed $203,561,908 on a $6 million investment. It is by far the most popular documentary of all time, in the entire world.

Even the 35 books reviewed in Unprecedented Corruption: A guide to conflict of interest in the U.S. government don't discuss all the corruption. Michael Moore did a far from perfect job, but it is very difficult to present all that he did in just 2 hours.

--
Bush's education improvements were partly fraud

While it did debut at #1 (which isn't surprising when you look at what else is out there), it only made 16.2 million dollars. Viewer ship will probably drop off 50 - 60 percent next weekend. It will be lucky to make 35 million domestically.

According to Box Office Mojo The thing cost around 70 million to make and it's estimated that Paramount spent 35 million in marketing. That brings the total cost of this movie to around 105 million. If the movie pulls in 35 million domestically and the same overseas, you're looking at 70 million in profits at best. Mony will be made on DVD sales, but if few people go and see it, few people will probably buy it on DVD. Plus there will be additional marketing costs associated with the DVD release. Basically, at the very best it will only break even. It'll probably end up losing money. It's a failure.

OK, agreed, with those more complete numbers it looks pretty clear that it did lose some money. Nonetheless, still not a megaflop like Gigli or Waterworld. Damn, never mind, I just looked up Waterworld on that site and even though it bombed here in the US it looks like it actually netted almost 100 million dollars worldwide due to amazing success in overseas showings. Weird, I always remember that as the example of one of the biggest big budget (175 million dollars) bombs ever.