Harry Potter 7 Part 2 destroys records in ONE day!

[Rayder]

I really wish they would go by tickets sold and not money made. Ticket prices are through the roof compared to when a movie like the original Star Wars or E.T. come out. It's not really a fair comparison to use the amount of money made to judge success compared to movies of the past. Of course the money made is going to sound impressive by breaking records when they are charging 10X the amount for a ticket than they used to and ticket prices are rising on a regular basis.

It's just another way industry skews the facts. If they went by tickets sold, I bet it wouldn't have broke any records.

 

[Fear Zoa]

They go by whats important to them, it is the movie industry after all their only in it for the money..

 

[SamAsh07]

Ticket prices will keep rising so there's no need to compare current gen with those old gen 90's movies grosses, 4-5 years from now, $1bn will become a normal thing, movies will hit more than $3bn with time...and I know it'll be James Cameron again to hit the $3bn mark lol, with Avatar 2 most probably.

 

[FAST6191]

They go by whats important to them, it is the movie industry after all their only in it for the money..

No argument with the logic but why then consider cinemas at all- DVD sales along with streaming and rentals (and possibly merchandising and other ancillary things) presumably play far more into that (certainly I do not doubt such things are considered when funding is sought and a finance type that skipped over such things probably will not last long). As I would rather not leave it unsaid I can sit behind a statement of "cinemas are enjoyable but antiquated".

As for prices vs time I do see "adjusted for inflation" graphs in places but I can not for a moment consider that an all that accurate method- percentages of sales and I will query as to whether prices are in line with inflation.

As I have to work it in there somewhere "3d= fad regardless of chosen method, current post production methods even more so".

 

[Shinigami357]

I really wish they would go by tickets sold and not money made. Ticket prices are through the roof compared to when a movie like the original Star Wars or E.T. come out. It's not really a fair comparison to use the amount of money made to judge success compared to movies of the past. Of course the money made is going to sound impressive by breaking records when they are charging 10X the amount for a ticket than they used to and ticket prices are rising on a regular basis.

It's just another way industry skews the facts. If they went by tickets sold, I bet it wouldn't have broke any records.

Back then, movies aren't as widely distributed as they are now. I'm sure I can find at least a dozen movie theaters showing the movie within our neighboring cities, but back in the day, it wasn't so. So factoring in the fact that the movie is probably translated to God-only-knows how many languages and distributed into a lot of territories, it might sell more tickets, just from the availability alone.

 

[bsfmtl123]

Sorry I posted it twice.......the real post is below:

 

[bsfmtl123]

Avatar was on theaters from December 2009 to August 2010 (got this from the boxoffice site), of course not in US through-out, foreign gross of Avatar is $2bn alone..it had a massively long run.

I certainly think that Harry Potter would make it to that mark.Everyone's gonna watch this last film to the franchise and how can anyone ignore the Epic Conclusion.
Me gonna watch it soon but I am confused should I go for 3d or 2d.

 

[AlanJohn]

Avatar was on theaters from December 2009 to August 2010 (got this from the boxoffice site), of course not in US through-out, foreign gross of Avatar is $2bn alone..it had a massively long run.

I certainly think that Harry Potter would make it to that mark.Everyone's gonna watch this last film to the franchise and how can anyone ignore the Epic Conclusion.
Me gonna watch it soon but I am confused should I go for 3d or 2d.

Go watch it in 3D.
The 3D in the movie was great.

 

[bsfmtl123]

Avatar was on theaters from December 2009 to August 2010 (got this from the boxoffice site), of course not in US through-out, foreign gross of Avatar is $2bn alone..it had a massively long run.

I certainly think that Harry Potter would make it to that mark.Everyone's gonna watch this last film to the franchise and how can anyone ignore the Epic Conclusion.
Me gonna watch it soon but I am confused should I go for 3d or 2d.

Go watch it in 3D.
The 3D in the movie was great.

Thanx Alan I will surely watch it in 3D now

 

[iggloovortex]

i saw it midnight release imax 3d. was a good movie, better than 5 and 6, although in this one there were several inaccuracies compared to the books, the only big one being the last fight. it was SOOOO Hollywood

 

[SamAsh07]

As of today, Harry Potter 7 Part 2 Worldwide Gross has reached a further jaw dropping $475m!!!

And it dethroned Dark Knight, off the best opening weekend ever, grossing $168m in the US (Dark Knight was $158m)

I must say, this movie is running, very very swiftly.

 

[machomuu]

As of today, Harry Potter 7 Part 2 Worldwide Gross has reached a further jaw dropping $475m!!!

And it dethroned Dark Knight, off the best opening weekend ever, grossing $168m in the US (Dark Knight was $158m)

I must say, this movie is running, very very swiftly.

I wonder why

 

[FAST6191]

They go by whats important to them, it is the movie industry after all their only in it for the money..

No argument with the logic but why then consider cinemas at all- DVD sales along with streaming and rentals (and possibly merchandising and other ancillary things) presumably play far more into that (certainly I do not doubt such things are considered when funding is sought and a finance type that skipped over such things probably will not last long). As I would rather not leave it unsaid I can sit behind a statement of "cinemas are enjoyable but antiquated".

As for prices vs time I do see "adjusted for inflation" graphs in places but I can not for a moment consider that an all that accurate method- percentages of sales and I will query as to whether prices are in line with inflation.

Above quote edited a bit.

Upon further consideration I am going to openly wonder if studios and co ultimately even price things per film (we are all familiar with terms like oscar bait if nothing else but here I am thinking proper accounting) these days.

Also people seem to be making a thing of it being a massive in universe story/franchise- actors aside does anybody that grew up with 90's cartoons (or I guess some anime), some stuff in the TV world these days and possessing a less than a great appreciation of the sums of money involved see it as that big a feat?

 

[Shinigami357]

Money is money. No on argues with that, I think.

However, saying that modern film franchises are all about money seems a bit slanted as an opinion, IMHO. Surely there's a reason it earns the money in the first place? You can say I'm biased, and yes, I am, but as long as people who followed the whole series are satisfied with how things worked out as a whole, I say, screw the cash, it'll all get suckered by corrupt people if we don't use it anyways. So better spend it on something that you at least will enjoy, amirite?

 

[FAST6191]

@Shinigami357 that did not seem especially directed at me and I certainly do not doubt there are those working in such industries if not entirely for the love of it but in them despite being able to earn more/more reliably/more easily in other industries. This to say nothing of various aspects of corporation law requiring you to go after profits (or allowing investors some say) unless it is in your mission statement or similar documents.

If I am going slanted/cynical the fact films are prescreened/focus tested and other things gamed to increase returns a couple of percentage points along with there actually being a whole directors/alternative cut scene (although this depends in many ways on who you think drives a film- is or indeed should the director be all powerful?) and that if you can then making a "good" film is in and of itself plain good business sense.

I am sure there are several people out the that get paid to investigate accounting models of this and other industries but I do enjoy wondering about such things.

 

[machomuu]

I just hope they don't make another movie. This has nothing to do with my hate for HP, but rather if they made another movie the it would probably break canon and kill the audience. It's possible.

 

[Shinigami357]

Nah... They would alienate the very people who put them in the pedestal they are in now - too big a risk. Would love to see an adaptation of "The tales of Beedle the Bard" though - think about it, new cast, new storylines, same universe. Of course, the tale of the Deathly Hallows has already been told in HP7 part 1, but that was animated, so... I'd especially love the, erm, The warlock's hairy heart, IIRC... There's almost a horror-vibe to it, haha.

 

[FAST6191]

I forgot to address this earlier

re:"inaccuracies compared to the books"

I know this comes up with every time a story crosses a medium/format/convention (or gets an abridged version I guess- thinking stuff like Evangelion or possibly even TV episodes cut for time) but do such things need to even be an exact retelling of the books?

Granted I have never read the books (there are several hundred fantasy/fiction books ahead of them to read and others to reread before I get to Harry Potter books) and what I have seen on the matter it appears as though it did not help that the books we not all that finished when the films started appearing.

 

[SamAsh07]

Of course there won't be any more Harry Potter, unless JK Rowling writes a new book on adventures of Harry's son

 

[machomuu]

Of course there won't be any more Harry Potter, unless JK Rowling writes a new book on adventures of Harry's son

I dunno, it's happened before. It's not unheard of for directors to want to turn a series based off of a book into a standalone movie for the money.