Wazootyman

I was curious about some box office takes, so I searched the internet and found this list on one site.

#1 Titanic, 600.7 Million
#2 A New Hope, 460. 9 Million
#3 E.T. 435.1 Million
#4 Episode 1, 431.0 Million
#5 Mr. Nanny, 408.9 Million
#6 Spider-Man, 403.7 Million
#7 Return of the King, 376.3 Million
#8 Passion, 364.3 million
#9 Jurrasic Park, 357.0 million
#10 Two Towers, 341.7 million

I can't really put my finger on it, but something just seems a little off. I mean did Episode 1 really make that much money? I thought it was pretty much universally hated, and I just don't see how it could pull in that much.

MasterCXtreme

I think there's something wrong with Mr. Nanny in the #5 slot...

Gdrlv

Mr. Nanny???

Where in the world did you find that list?

RyoHazuki

Yeah Mr. Nanny is wrong. It pulled in a whopping $4,247,162.

And Episode 1 made a buttload. $922,379,000 worldwide.

Here is imdb's list for all time worldwide (not adjusted):

1. Titanic (1997) $1,835,300,000
2. Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, The (2003) $1,066,700,000
3. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001) $968,600,000
4. Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999) $922,379,000
5. Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, The (2002) $921,600,000
6. Jurassic Park (1993) $919,700,000
7. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002) $866,300,000
8. Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) $860,700,000
9. Finding Nemo (2003) $853,200,000
10. Independence Day (1996) $811,200,000

nemein

I know it got a lot of negative reviews (esp by those comparing it to the original movies) but I know a lot of people also went to see it hoping it would be more in the style of the original movies Here's the somewhat official tally:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120915/business

Seeker

1 Titanic Par. $600,788,188 1997
2 Star Wars Fox $460,998,007 1977
3 E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial Uni. $435,110,554 1982
4 Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace Fox $431,088,301 1999
5 Spider-Man Sony $403,706,375 2002
6 The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King NL $376,337,432 2003
7 The Passion of the Christ NM $364,414,581 2004
8 Jurassic Park Uni. $357,067,947 1993
9 The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers NL $341,786,758 2002
10 Finding Nemo BV $339,714,978 20

Seeker

As long as you get rid of "Mr. Nanny" (huh) - then the figures UNADJUSTED FOR INFLATION are about right.

Get Me Coffee

Mr. Nanny

DonnachaOne

They should rerelease Jurassic Park and get the grosses up!

Of course, it's Spielberg, so I suppose I just have to wait for its twentieth anniversary.

Seeker

Here's the "real" domestic list (adjusted for inflation):

1 Gone With the Wind MGM $1,218,328,752 $198,655,278 1939
2 Star Wars Fox $1,074,061,157 $460,998,007 1977
3 The Sound of Music Fox $858,764,718 $158,671,368 1965
4 E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial Uni. $855,381,641 $434,974,579 1982
5 The Ten Commandments Par. $789,930,000 $65,500,000 1956
6 Titanic Par. $779,086,619 $600,788,188 1997
7 Jaws Uni. $772,315,273 $260,000,000 1975
8 Doctor Zhivago MGM $748,536,797 $111,721,910 1965
9 The Exorcist WB $666,729,078 $232,671,011 1973
10 Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs Dis. $657,270,000 $184,925,486 1937

jaeufraser

You know, I've seen this list before...these numbers...and it's a load of shit. For some reason lots of people REALLY don't want Titanic to be the number one movie. So they take Gone With the Wind's gross, which represents multiple releases over multiple decades, which would be fine...except they compare that to Titanic...but ignore 2/3rd of Titanic's grosses. Unadjusted Titanic made 1.8 billion...why does this list count multiple releases but not international? Of bigger concern is the fact this bothers me at all...alas, I must be a movie geek.

Ok, regardless of that, Phantom Menace was...a big hit. Sure, it opened huge, but for SOME reason it had good repeat business. Star Wars is huge, it's popular, and even though many cry foul about the sequels, they still make a LOT of money. Remember, AOTC still made over 300 million dollars itself (close to 700 worldwide), which is still a big number.

Jay G.

Maybe because it's for domestic box-office. International numbers are probably hard to come by for the older releases, since it wasn't tracked so much in the past.

BTW, it's not some "anti-Titanic" conspiracy that caused that list to be made. The adjusted domestic BO list existed before Titanic jumped to the top of the unadjusted list.

Qui Gon Jim

I think it is important to also show the unadjusted numbers because movie tickets are so much more expensive than they used to be. It is sort of unfair to compare The Passion or ROTK where the tickets cost around $10 apiece with GWTW or ET (keeping SW completely out of this argument) where the tickets were much cheaper, probably under $1 for GWTW and under $4 for ET. The unadjusted gross shows raw $$, but the adjusted shows total ticket sales.

In a sense, that Spider-man is so close to TPM on the unadjusted list is a bit decieving too. Even 3 years makes a difference in the adjusted gross, and Spider-man is not as close to TPM as it seems. And while ROTK was a blockbuster, it was no where near the blockbuster that SW or Titanic was. It is fairly close on the list though...

It really is all semantics, though. Both lists are valid, and both have their pros and cons. I am sure that many would point to the AFI top 10 as being the "Top 10 of all time."

How creepy is it that the Exorcist's adjusted gross is $666 million?

soxfandoug

I really hate the "adjusted for inflation" numbers. Until somebody figures out a way to adjust recent movies' grosses upward to compensate for the advent of home video, then there is no way to make accurate comparisons between eras. So if we can't make proper adjustments, we shouldn't make any adjustments at all.

Doug

marty888

Adjustements are something that should only be made if your jockey shorts are too tight. Otherwise, they should simply be counting the number of paid admissions.

soxfandoug

I think even paid admissions don't due the trick. I know quite a few people that skipped LOTR:ROTK in theaters because they would prefer to watch it in the comfort of their home theater. People that wanted to see Gone with the Wind had no such option.

Even if I do go see a movie in theaters, no matter how much I love it I most likely will only see it once, and wait for the DVD for my repeat viewings. If DVD didn't exist, I probably would have seen a movie like Memento 10 times in the theater, when I actually only saw it in theaters once.

Giles

hey now, let's not bash this cinematic work....

Wazootyman

Imagine what would happen if we adjusted Mr. Nanny's gross for inflation!

Seeker

An extra $50 !

DRG

Here's the real list:

#1 Rocky 3, 600.7 Million
#2 Mr. Nanny, 460. 9 Million
#3 Suburban Commando, 435.1 Million
#4 No Holds Barred, 431.0 Million
#5 Gremlins 2: The New Batch, 408.9 Million
#6 Santa With Muscles, 403.7 Million
#7 3 Ninjas: High Noon at Mega Mountain, 376.3 Million
#8 Spy Hard, 364.3 million
#9 Muppets From Space, 357.0 million
#10 Assault on Devil's Island, 341.7 million

Qui Gon Jim

Excellent point. If not for being able to see ROTK at home in a couple months, I would have definitely seen it more than twice.

As I said, there really is no solution.

tanman

The industry really should switch to this statistic.

There really is no way to adjust for the advent of home video. Times change and that is just something to keep in mind while looking at statistics.

BTW boxofficemojo.com seems to be a pretty reliable up to date site for these stats.

fumanstan

Totally agree with you.

Jeremy517

Not to mention that the number of movies being release into theaters nowadays is much higher. There are way more movies to split the bucks between.

Pants

You are so dead wrong it's not even funny. At the height of the studio system each studio turned out an average of one film a week. That means each studio released 50+ films a year. Multiply that by 6 major studios, then add in the few smaller studios. The output of films today is miniscule by comparison.