Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - Part 8

[DarthSkywalker]

Especially considering that the biggest movie of all time (adjusted for inflation) came out during the depression.

Didn't the top 2 come out during depressions?

 

[Doctor Jones]

I have never had the inclination to read any of the boxoffice sites. For me, there is no need. I personally do not care if a movie makes billions or a buck ninety-eight. They will not make me start liking nor start disliking a movie. I have loved many a movie that made next to nothing, and hated some box office kings. Whether or not someone can prove that one film has made more money than one made years before is simply a matter of mathematics...and depending upon if all of the variable were properly inputted, you can get any answer.....so it means nothing to me. I liked it no matter the amount it made.

The point of my post was....it's a pity that in the way of so many things in this day and age....the news that an an amount that was extremely high in anyone's reconning, is deemed not good enough by some. They can't simply say - wow, a lot of people liked this.....but instead say - meh, not as many as before.


The glass....is it half empty....half filled....or slightly cracked......

I agree with this. People just want to look at how it didn't achieve something instead of what it did achieve. It's been happening for a long time now.

 

[hammerhedd11]

I have never had the inclination to read any of the boxoffice sites. For me, there is no need. I personally do not care if a movie makes billions or a buck ninety-eight. They will not make me start liking nor start disliking a movie. I have loved many a movie that made next to nothing, and hated some box office kings. Whether or not someone can prove that one film has made more money than one made years before is simply a matter of mathematics...and depending upon if all of the variable were properly inputted, you can get any answer.....so it means nothing to me. I liked it no matter the amount it made.

The point of my post was....it's a pity that in the way of so many things in this day and age....the news that an an amount that was extremely high in anyone's reconning, is deemed not good enough by some. They can't simply say - wow, a lot of people liked this.....but instead say - meh, not as many as before.


The glass....is it half empty....half filled....or slightly cracked......

You're exactly right, but that's not really the reason many people follow the numbers including me (god knows some do think it determines quality). For most, box office is interesting because it determines what gets made, and I think many like to see that the movies they enjoy do well.

 

[Ultimatehero]

LotR release dates.

FotR- Dec. 19
TTT- Dec. 18
RotK- Dec. 17



Did you check before you wrote that comment? I knew you had to be wrong, I still remember going for each opening day, or in RotK case, EE trilogy night.

And the economy stuff can't really apply when you look at how well a lot of the big films have done this year.

Alright, those are the UK premieres mostly. Google didn't go into that part of it.

Avengers (first of its kind), Dark Knight (last Batman film ever), Hunger Games is sort of a unknown variable (how it beat the last Twilight film I'll never know). And is looking to probably beat Twilight at the box office when all is said and done and may or may not surpass Skyfall becoming the forth or fifth highest grossing movie of the year. Only THREE movies all year got into the 400 range - and one was an "event" (bringing all characters together) and one was a "finale" (of the most beloved recent trilogy) - not exactly what I'd call 'a lot.' When all is said and done it will probably beat "a lot." So, 3 or 4 is 'a lot' now?

 

[hammerhedd11]

Didn't the top 2 come out during depressions?

If you're referring to Star Wars, that would be considered more of a recession but you're correct, the point still stands.

 

[hammerhedd11]

Alright, those are the UK premieres mostly. Google didn't go into that part of it.

Avengers (first of its kind), Dark Knight (last Batman film ever), Hunger Games is sort of a unknown variable (how it beat the last Twilight film I'll never know). And is looking to probably beat Twilight at the box office when all is said and done and may or may not surpass Skyfall becoming the forth or fifth highest grossing movie of the year. Only THREE movies all year got into the 400 range - and one was an "event" (bringing all characters together) and one was a "finale" (of the most beloved recent trilogy) - not exactly what I'd call 'a lot.'

No, those are also the US release dates. So you're wrong in that the films all came after this Hobbit film.

 

[Ultimatehero]

No, those are also the US release dates.

The ones I named. It's the first dates that come up - google it.

 

[hammerhedd11]

What? Those are the US dates. Darth is correct.

 

[Ultimatehero]

What? Those are the US dates. Darth is correct.

Dude, what are you smoking? I said the ones that I... lets repeat for those who skip ahead without reading... I... I.... I... in your head now? Good. Listed are the premieres for other places which google lists first. As I said, google it.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

If you're referring to Star Wars, that would be considered more of a recession but you're correct, the point still stands.

Me, refer to Star Wars? Nevah.

Alright, those are the UK premieres mostly. Google didn't go into that part of it.

Avengers (first of its kind), Dark Knight (last Batman film ever), Hunger Games is sort of a unknown variable (how it beat the last Twilight film I'll never know). And is looking to probably beat Twilight at the box office when all is said and done and may or may not surpass Skyfall becoming the forth or fifth highest grossing movie of the year. Only THREE movies all year got into the 400 range - and one was an "event" (bringing all characters together) and one was a "finale" (of the most beloved recent trilogy) - not exactly what I'd call 'a lot.' When all is said and done it will probably beat "a lot." So, 3 or 4 is 'a lot' now?

Look at the business Bond is doing. It is big business for that franchise in the US and around the world. Ice Age destroyed across the world. Brave and TASM both did well respectively, but are consider disappointments. Movies like Lincoln and Taken 2 have done great considering their genres. Twilight is doing strong business.

 

[Poeman]

Balin was my favorite dwarf too...Thorin was good, but Balin stole the show I thought

 

[jacobed]

How the hell is ASM considered a disappointment

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Dude, what are you smoking? I said the ones that I... lets repeat for those who skip ahead without reading... I... I.... I... in your head now? Good. Listed are the premieres for other places which google lists first. As I said, google it.

Considering you are the one that got it initially wrong during your rant, I find this post rich.

But we should get off this topic.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Yeah, thanks for proving MY point Darth. Bond opened with 87 mil, an opening with a lot less money than Twilight's 144 and is right now looking to exceed Twilight at the box office. Just 7 mil more than the Hobbit. So, as I said, how is looking to be possibly forth or fifth of the year at box office deemed "it did poorly than 'a lot' of movies" - a lot means many, or at least the last time I checked - I thought it did...

And I just stated that Darth, unless you too didn't read where I corrected and said I got those wrong?

 

[hammerhedd11]

Dude, what are you smoking? I said the ones that I... lets repeat for those who skip ahead without reading... I... I.... I... in your head now? Good. Listed are the premieres for other places which google lists first. As I said, google it.

I didn't skip a single thing that you said. It's just nonsensical. Whatever you are googling, you are misinterpreting. The premiere dates are Premieres, but not when they open for business. We are talking about the US box office, so we are comparing the US dates. Which all of the LOTR films opened later in the US compared to the Hobbit, contrary to what you said.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

How the hell is ASM considered a disappointment

Because it is all about comparisons. I didn't find the numbers disappointing, but that seems to be the general feel.

 

[Ultimatehero]

I didn't skip a single thing that you said. It's just nonsensical. Whatever you are googling, you are misinterpreting. The premiere dates are Premieres, but not when they open for business. We are talking about the US box office, so we are comparing the US dates. Which all of the LOTR films opened later in the US compared to the Hobbit, contrary to what you said.

And I already said I got it wrong in the first post because of how google lists "fellowship opening" "two towers opening" return of the king opening" - so what exactly is your point exactly? Is there even one? Or is this all just rambling now? As I said, google it for yourself - the first dates that pop up automatically are the ones I listed which turned out to not be as accurate as I thought. All you're doing is making a needless circle go round of you saying you got it wrong, me saying I did, then you saying I got it wrong again - is there a point here dude?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Yeah, thanks for proving MY point Darth. Bond opened with 87 mil, an opening with a lot less money than Twilight's 144 and is right now looking to exceed Twilight at the box office. Just 7 mil more than the Hobbit. So, as I said, how is looking to be possibly forth or fifth of the year at box office deemed "it did poorly than 'a lot' of movies" - a lot means many, or at least the last time I checked - I thought it did...

And I just stated that Darth, unless you too didn't read where I corrected and said I got those wrong?

Your sarcasm is funny considering you seem to be missing the point. Or perhaps you are not and I simply can't read your post.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Your sarcasm is funny considering you seem to be missing the point. Or perhaps you are not and I simply can't read your post.

The point that you're saying "a lot" of this year's films did better?

As I said, how is that the case?

How is ending up forth or fifth at the year's box office doing "worse than a lot?"

You still haven't answered how being in the top five constitutes it as "doing worse than a lot."

A lot means many, it doesn't mean three or four.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

The point that you're saying "a lot" of this year's films did better?

As I said, how is that the case?

How is ending up forth or fifth at the year's box office doing "worse than a lot?"

You still haven't answered how being in the top five constitutes it as "doing worse than a lot."

No, you clearly missed my point. It isn't about other films this years doing better this year. The vast majority won't. It is about the standing of The Hobbit and comparing it to its predecessors. It is why I brought up Bond and how it compares to past films in the franchise or why TASM was considered a disappointment by more then a few. Heck if not for the WW numbers and the incident, the same would probably apply to TDKR.

I bring up the success of other films this year only to show that the economy hasn't effected films that people truly want to see. Why people wanted to see the Avengers, Skyfall, Hunger Games or TDKR is irrelevant. Just that people wanted to see them.

 

[jacobed]

Because it is all about comparisons. I didn't find the numbers disappointing, but that seems to be the general feel.

It made what 700 ww in no way should anyone find that disappointing.

 

[C. Lee]

See that bus.....see them wheels.....they are a going round and round....yes siree they are.....

 

[Tony Stark]

I just love the selective memories of these entertainment journalist, calling something "dissapointing". Was the Dark Knight Rises opeing "dissapointing" as Stubers predicted 215M opening and it only came in over 160M.

Stubers will once again make himself look like an idiot when the Hobbit pulls in 70M or better this weekend.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Allright, now Bond is more understandable.

Your second paragraph makes no sense, "hasn't effected films that people truly do want to see." I'm still at a loss of how this film could possibly become forth of fifth of the year's total box office and people would say "people didn't want to see it." And it's fairly common sense why out of the three films to cross 400 mil this year, one of them was a first-ever event and the other was the finale of a beloved trilogy. The only other one was a wild card. And all the others are a hundred mil below that line.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

It made what 700 ww in no way should anyone find that disappointing.

It is easily the lowest grossing film in the series.

I just love the selective memories of these entertainment journalist, calling something "dissapointing". Was the Dark Knight Rises opeing "dissapointing" as Stubers predicted 215M opening and it only came in over 160M.

Stubers will once again make himself look like an idiot when the Hobbit pulls in 70M or better this weekend.

TDKR opening was considered disappointing, but consider the circumstances, that narrative wasn't really on the table.