Converting Titanic to 3D cost 18M..and filming is costlier than post converting
I am searching for some info of 3D filming on big budget movies..will tell you when I find one
Shortsighted shortcut again, but I'll gladly stand corrected if you can find some credible informations. Anyways I don't see how this would help your point at all.
Because the Original Casino Royale film released in 1967 and the original first star trek in 1979
And I dont need to tell you the difference between 40 years or 30 years and 10 years
1967 Casino Royale was a James Bond parody not an origin movie and isn't related in any way except for the title to 2006 Casino Royale. Still comparing apple and oranges.
Because it was the first time the origin of Batman was being told in a definite way..it wasnt shown before.
While TASM was walking on the same ground as the 02 movie
Precisely. One of the many problems of the movie.
But there nothing else to blame for this but the film itself.
Yes. Otherwise it wouldn't have taken 7 years to WB to relaunch the franchise.
And TASM isnt compared to SM1?
In similar ways. But TASM wasn't handicaped by a terrible previous installment.
The budget is also 35% lower
And if you think that it should have bettered the earnings with a 35% lower budget and being a new series..then I dont know what to say
Budget on TASM is 23,3% lower than on SM3 (budget adjusted for inflation). Point is it should have come closer with ticket price inflation and 3D prices.
But let's put adjusted earnings out of the equation for a moment (since, we've adressed it in the last few pages, it's too hard to get fully accurate adjusted numbers on overseas gross).
TASM's pb is indeed lower than SM3's but only by 10,8% while its final gross (let's assume that its final WW numbers will be 740M) will be around 16,85% lower compared to SM3's unadjusted numbers.
So no in no way is TASM a more successfull movie financially than SM3. It doesn't even come close to its numbers. No one was ever talking about topping those numbers but coming closer with the benefit of ticket price inflation and 3D wasn't exactly a big hurdle to overcome.
If you think grossing 700M plus when releasing between two superhero heavy weights who had multiple movies before them and a LOT LOT more hype and anticipation than TASM is a disappointment then I dont want to even have this debate anymore since your bias is out of the world
You're free to leave if my views doesn't suit you.
2011 had 2 billion dollar making movies (Transformers 4 and Harry Potter 7-2) released two weeks apart. That's 2011, last year, not adjusted numbers from the 70's.
If TASM couldn't benefit from the necessary hype and anticipation to reach average figures for its franchise maybe it's because it was early perceived, rightfully or not, as an unnecessary rehash lacking novelty and a fresh/interesting enough angle on the character's mythos. Not because of some extrenal factors.
Compared to competing with The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises,Batman Begins had to deal with Elektra and Fantastic Four,the comic book movies released that year and yet it ended up with half the money TASM will make
As Stan the man says-Nuf Said
Still comparing apple and oranges always bringing in Batman Begins because it suits your views. Pathetic.
225M is not low
SM3 had 273 in its first 17 days
How convenient, still using unadjusted numbers. And wrong raw numbers as well.
Maybe you should try adjusting SM3's number to get an ACTUAL comparision between the two movie.
Just let me do it for you.
In it's first 17 days (so just before Aurora & TDKR) The Amazing Spider-Man had $217,724,314 (not 225M, don't know where you got that number, you can check here:
http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=daily&id=spiderman4.htm)
In it's first 17 days Spider-Man 3 made $282,379,655 (so not 273M either you can check here:
http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=daily&id=spiderman3.htm) that would translate into 328,96M with ticket price inflation.
That makes for a 111M (-33,8%) difference between the two movies wich is significant.
Because the Investment is also 35% greater.
Are you too stupid to understand that bigger investment means bigger profit?
Hence we are taking the ratio since there is a big difference in the budget
And you're obvisouly too stupid to understand that the ratios you showed and think that were close because only separated by a few decimals are actually miles away from each other once translated into ACTUAL profits. So no TASM's profit ratio is in no way comparable to SM3's. The bigger the investment, the bigger the profit is true ONLY if both films indeed follow the same profit ratio. Wich is not the case.
After adjusting for inflation
Daredevil had 238M
And Ghost rider had 265M and 134M from its 2 movies and if you are comparing those numbers to 725M then you should get yourself checked
If I recall correctly, you were the one calling Spider-Man an underdog. But you brilliantly proved my point. Thanks !
It will get to that overseas number after releasing in China..And no,nobody expected 475M overseas..just check the Box office posts before its release
People were saying 400M Overseas and 300M Domestic so it will fall short of its domestic expectations by about 40M and overshoot its overseas expectations by 75M so taking the Average it has exceeded the expectations by 35M
Were that actual expectation based on the production budget and the popularity of the character or lowballed numbers to make the movie look better than it actually does ?
Then again I've read few days ago that Total Recall's OE exceeded expectation despite it's terrible figures.
No your numbers would've made it overshoot SM3's profit ratio and if you believe it should have done that then you are being incredibly stupid
I keep on wondering when/where you actually learned to count.
A 775M WW total on a 230M production budget makes for a 3.36 profit ratio while SM3's is 3.45. TASM should have made 800M WW to get a similar profit ratio.
Do the maths.
Yet they earned truck loads with SM3..going by your logic they should have shut down the franchise after SM2
Shortsighted shortcuts all over again.
t:
