Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (USE SPOILER TAGS!)

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by WhySoBlu?

I can't agree. As I've pointed out, there are far too many variables at play besides inflation to make any sort of meaningful or accurate adjustment. At best, it's a piece of nerd trivia for guys like us to argue about incessantly (so I guess it has a little value, in that sense.)

It's not "nerd trivia." I've heard marketing people or lay people ask the same question. "Well, how many tickets were sold?"

Yes, there are other variables but, at the same time, how much are those variables even worth? Star Wars is a completely different situation because it was re-released every freakin' year...and then 1997. But, I would guess that, most re-releases added insignificantly to the initial box office gross.

[BluBonnet]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

Well, yes. So should we just dismiss the amount of tickets sold? I mean, that's what is REALLY impressive. If you look at how many people bought a ticket to, say, Star Wars and compare it to one of the other top 10 movies, THAT is what's amazing. You realize how entranced the public was with that particular movie. And how many people actually went to the movies back then.

Now? It's all dollars and cents. And you can't compare 1977 to now unless you adjust for inflation. And, if you do that, current movies get slaughtered.

That's why these records will fall constantly. Because ticket prices are going WAYYYYY up.

Exactly my point with the earlier posts.

Just because you recognize a financial reality doesn't mean you're pointing it out just to pour scorn on people who get super-excited about current B.O. results - and yet some people seem to be taking it rather personally...

It might seem odd to a few, but some of us can be happy with both the inflation-adjusted figures (which leave GWTW still at #1 and ANH at #2) and with the non-adjusted figures, which leave TFA at #1... For now!

[WhySoBlu?]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

It's not "nerd trivia." I've heard marketing people or lay people ask the same question. "Well, how many tickets were sold?"

Yes, there are other variables but, at the same time, how much are those variables even worth? Star Wars is a completely different situation because it was re-released every freakin' year...and then 1997. But, I would guess that, most re-releases added insignificantly to the initial box office gross.

It's impossible to account for anywhere close to all of the variables, which is my point. In 1939, the only way to watch a movie was at the theater. If you wanted to watch it more than once, you went while it was in its original run or you waited for a re-release, which may never happen. Today, you can watch movies in a variety of ways, sometimes before the film has even come out theatrically. (I have coworkers who bragged at length, to my disgust, about having seen The Hateful Eight before it was released in theaters - and one of these people is an older person who knows next to nothing about technology, but was given a Chromecast earlier in the year by his son.)

The vast difference in the number of opportunities to see a given film and rampant piracy are just two of the many variables not accounted for in the adjusted for inflation numbers. Like I said - it's a piece of trivia for nerds like us to argue about. It has no bearing on what happens in 2016.

[Nightrunner]

Originally Posted by romuald121

Man you took me off-guard; it's worse than

[Show spoiler] putting a giant yellow saber through me

I am a knight in shining armor

I am so glad you took it as it was intended...just some goofy response from some goofy person like me.



The last few pages in here have proved interesting though...




People are allowed to have an opinion. Remember to treat others as you wish to be treated. Also, remind yourself you are not running for any political office.


With that being said, as of January 6th 2016.



Worldwide: $1,570,398,252

[octagon]

Originally Posted by WhySoBlu?

I can't agree. As I've pointed out, there are far too many variables at play besides inflation to make any sort of meaningful or accurate adjustment. At best, it's a piece of nerd trivia for guys like us to argue about incessantly (so I guess it has a little value, in that sense.)


Indeed.

If accurate comparisons can't be made over time then people (and I don't know if you're one of these people or not) should stop saying 'of all time'.

That's the truly meaningless phrase here.

[dmollenauer]

I really wanted to like this one. My biggest gripe would be the complete rehash of parts 4 and 5. Droid has info, giant death machine with easily exploitable weak spot, searching for old retired Jedi, big baddie pulling the strings from behind the scenes etc. At least the prequels tried something different. I just didn't care about any of the new characters or what happened to them. I was not given enough to care about. Everything that happened didn't seem to happen organically. It was all just too convenient and contrived to please old fans and get old characters back in the story. The movie felt like a means to get to the next movie, spin offs, prequels, etc., rather than a movie that can stand on its own, which Episode 4 can. Driver and Ford were pretty good though with what they were given.

Ultimately it felt like a very calculated/made by committee movie. 6.5 out of 10. I still have hope the next movie will be better.

[WhySoBlu?]

Originally Posted by octagon

If accurate comparisons can't be made over time then people (and I don't know if you're one of these people or not) should stop saying 'of all time'.

That's the truly meaningless phrase here.

I'm not suggesting comparisons can't be made, it's the adjustments made to allow for some variables (in this case, inflation alone) while ignoring all the others that I take issue with. You can make a comparison in sheer dollars (which is the accepted standard, of course) or tickets sold, if known.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by WhySoBlu?

I'm not suggesting comparisons can't be made, it's the adjustments made to allow for some variables (in this case, inflation alone) while ignoring all the others that I take issue with. You can make a comparison in sheer dollars (which is the accepted standard, of course) or tickets sold, if known.

Comparing nominal dollars is worse than meaningless, it's misleading.

1935 dollars and 1950 dollars and 2015 dollars are not the same. They're just not.

Now, if people have issues with box office grosses themselves as meaningful measures that's one thing. But if people want to compare those grosses over time they have to use constant dollars for those comparisons to be even remotely valid. Otherwise you're using a ruler that shrinks a little bit each year.

Which is fine if all you're trying to do is determine who made the longest long jump this year or over the past couple years.

But if you're trying to determine whether somebody just made the longest long jump ever...

[WhySoBlu?]

Originally Posted by octagon

Comparing nominal dollars is worse than meaningless, it's misleading.

That's what the charts are. It is what it is. Focus on the adjusted for inflation numbers if you want, but the rest of the world will be discussing real numbers, not hypothetical ones derived from cherry-picking variables.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by WhySoBlu?

...but the rest of the world will be discussing real numbers,...

Interesting choice of words....

https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/inco...l/dollars.html

[Show spoiler]Constant or real dollars are terms describing income after adjustment for inflation. The Dictionary of Business and Economics defines constant dollar values and real income as shown below.

Constant-dollar value (also called real-dollar value) is a value expressed in dollars adjusted for purchasing power. Constant-dollar values represent an effort to remove the effects of price changes from statistical series reported in dollar terms. The result is a series as it would presumably exist if prices were the same throughout as they were in the base year-in other words, as if the dollar had constant purchasing power.

[WhySoBlu?]

Originally Posted by octagon

Interesting choice of words....

https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/inco...l/dollars.html

[Show spoiler]Constant or real dollars are terms describing income after adjustment for inflation. The Dictionary of Business and Economics defines constant dollar values and real income as shown below.

Constant-dollar value (also called real-dollar value) is a value expressed in dollars adjusted for purchasing power. Constant-dollar values represent an effort to remove the effects of price changes from statistical series reported in dollar terms. The result is a series as it would presumably exist if prices were the same throughout as they were in the base year-in other words, as if the dollar had constant purchasing power.

And yet you knew what I was talking about anyway...

[Rodney-2187]

Adjusted For Inflation

1 Gone with the Wind - $1,739,604,200 -1939
2 Star Wars Fox - $1,533,609,700 -1977
3 The Sound of Music - $1,226,196,400 -1965
4 E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial - $1,221,365,800 -1982
5 Titanic - $1,166,435,200 -1997
6 The Ten Commandments - $1,127,910,000 -1956
7 Jaws - $1,102,758,600 -1975
8 Doctor Zhivago - $1,068,806,300 -1965
9 The Exorcist - $952,258,800 -1973
10 Snow White - $938,490,000 -1937
11 101 Dalmatians - $860,287,500 -1961
12 The Empire Strikes Back - $845,335,300 -1980
13 Ben-Hur - $843,780,000 -1959
14 Avatar - $837,367,900 -2009
15 Return of the Jedi - $809,851,500 -1983
16 Jurassic Park - $791,448,000 -1993
17 The Phantom Menace - $777,587,000 -1999
18 The Lion King - $767,550,700 -1994
19 The Sting - $767,520,000 -1973
20 The Force Awakens - $764,408,700 -2015

Force Awakens already at #20. I think it can make it into the top 10. Definitely going to pass Avatar, even adjusted for inflation. Titanic pretty high on this list.

[romuald121]

Originally Posted by dmollenauer

I really wanted to like this one. My biggest gripe would be the complete rehash of parts 4 and 5. Droid has info, giant death machine with easily exploitable weak spot, searching for old retired Jedi, big baddie pulling the strings from behind the scenes etc. At least the prequels tried something different. I just didn't care about any of the new characters or what happened to them. I was not given enough to care about. Everything that happened didn't seem to happen organically. It was all just too convenient and contrived to please old fans and get old characters back in the story. The movie felt like a means to get to the next movie, spin offs, prequels, etc., rather than a movie that can stand on its own, which Episode 4 can. Driver and Ford were pretty good though with what they were given.

Ultimately it felt like a very calculated/made by committee movie. 6.5 out of 10. I still have hope the next movie will be better.

Good review! I agree 100%; it felt like a means to re-enter into the SW universe; just a sneak peek for a better movie that might come after. The problem is they already ran out of ideas for this movie so I say worse is yet to come...

[Rodney-2187]

Too similar to the OT? I'm waiting for you to say something bad about it! lol

It was enough like the OT that I enjoyed it without feeling like a reboot, I got to see what happened to some old favorite characters, and we introduced enough interesting new people that I can't wait to se what happens to them in the next one! Well done JJ!

I can handle a Hidden Fortress tribute ever few decades.

[Himmel]

Remember this guy...



Well it seems he has a name, and a backstory which is connected to Finn..

http://www.starwars.com/news/meet-fn...inkId=20173367

[Himmel]

All New Backstory and Details on The Force Awakens from the Visual Dictionary.

http://www.starwarsnewsnet.com/2016/...ictionary.html

[octagon]

Originally Posted by rodneyfaile

Too similar to the OT? I'm waiting for you to say something bad about it! lol

It was enough like the OT that I enjoyed it without feeling like a reboot, I got to see what happened to some old favorite characters, and we introduced enough interesting new people that I can't wait to se what happens to them in the next one! Well done JJ!

I can handle a Hidden Fortress tribute ever few decades.

This is pretty much where I'm at right now too. Who knows how I'll feel if/when the afterglow wears off but I can't wait to see it again, I can't wait to snag the BD (and probably a ton of toys and figures and whatnot too) and I can't wait to see where they go next.

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by rodneyfaile

Adjusted For Inflation

1 Gone with the Wind - $1,739,604,200 -1939
2 Star Wars Fox - $1,533,609,700 -1977
3 The Sound of Music - $1,226,196,400 -1965
4 E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial - $1,221,365,800 -1982
5 Titanic - $1,166,435,200 -1997
6 The Ten Commandments - $1,127,910,000 -1956
7 Jaws - $1,102,758,600 -1975
8 Doctor Zhivago - $1,068,806,300 -1965
9 The Exorcist - $952,258,800 -1973
10 Snow White - $938,490,000 -1937
11 101 Dalmatians - $860,287,500 -1961
12 The Empire Strikes Back - $845,335,300 -1980
13 Ben-Hur - $843,780,000 -1959
14 Avatar - $837,367,900 -2009
15 Return of the Jedi - $809,851,500 -1983
16 Jurassic Park - $791,448,000 -1993
17 The Phantom Menace - $777,587,000 -1999
18 The Lion King - $767,550,700 -1994
19 The Sting - $767,520,000 -1973
20 The Force Awakens - $764,408,700 -2015

Force Awakens already at #20. I think it can make it into the top 10. Definitely going to pass Avatar, even adjusted for inflation. Titanic pretty high on this list.

Now THAT is what the list SHOULD look like.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by MechaGodzilla

I agree, but at the same time it goes both ways when it comes to the advantages and disadvantages films of the different eras had. The world population was much smaller back in the day, for the first half of the 20th century the US population for example was around a third of the size it is today so it's still pretty impressive how well films like Gone with the Wind did back then.

Who was saying it wasn't impressive what they did? Even without the multiple re-releases those films would still be high if not highest on that list, but what are we gauging performance by now, how much of a % of a population went to see something? How does that apply to the re-releases years later when the population had expanded, should those dollars be downgraded in importance? It's all starting to get a bit finicky in here.

Which leads me to:

Originally Posted by rodneyfaile

Adjusted For Inflation

[Show spoiler]1 Gone with the Wind - $1,739,604,200 -1939
2 Star Wars Fox - $1,533,609,700 -1977
3 The Sound of Music - $1,226,196,400 -1965
4 E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial - $1,221,365,800 -1982
5 Titanic - $1,166,435,200 -1997
6 The Ten Commandments - $1,127,910,000 -1956
7 Jaws - $1,102,758,600 -1975
8 Doctor Zhivago - $1,068,806,300 -1965
9 The Exorcist - $952,258,800 -1973
10 Snow White - $938,490,000 -1937
11 101 Dalmatians - $860,287,500 -1961
12 The Empire Strikes Back - $845,335,300 -1980
13 Ben-Hur - $843,780,000 -1959
14 Avatar - $837,367,900 -2009
15 Return of the Jedi - $809,851,500 -1983
16 Jurassic Park - $791,448,000 -1993
17 The Phantom Menace - $777,587,000 -1999
18 The Lion King - $767,550,700 -1994
19 The Sting - $767,520,000 -1973
20 The Force Awakens - $764,408,700 -2015

Force Awakens already at #20. I think it can make it into the top 10. Definitely going to pass Avatar, even adjusted for inflation. Titanic pretty high on this list.

That's why I keep saying it's mightily impressive in its own right! If TFA sneaks into the adjusted top 10 alongside a bunch of movies that have had plenty of theatrical re-releases (even Titanic had that stellar 3D run) then I fail to see how that can be downplayed. Yeah, it's got a Disney 3D premium as someone mentioned above but let's not pretend that Lucasfilm alone would've been angels about it, they themselves have negotiated some VERY hard deals over the years (wasn't it Sith where they kept the entirety of the first one or two weeks of box office takings?). How about we call that premium equivalent to one re-release (if it were old-school) then call it quits?

[Rodney-2187]

Originally Posted by octagon

This is pretty much where I'm at right now too. Who knows how I'll feel if/when the afterglow wears off but I can't wait to see it again, I can't wait to snag the BD (and probably a ton of toys and figures and whatnot too) and I can't wait to see where they go next.

The afterglow will never wear off! The Force will be with you, always.

When I first saw the prequels, I felt like Obi Wan after Alderan blew up, but now the dark times are over.