Page 1 of 1

How close did TMP come?

Posted: 2002-12-24 12:54am
by Shrykull
Was wondering how close TPM came to beating Titanic, not sure if it was George Lucas but I saw some review where they said Lucasfilm or someone expected to take the #1 grossing movie title away from them, I wish it happened, close but no cigar. Think maybe the Matrix reloaded next year will beat it? And wasn't that supposed to come out this year, but it didn't because of Aaliyah's death or something.

Posted: 2002-12-24 01:29am
by Darth Wong
It didn't even come close. Domestic gross for Titanic was $600 million, and domestic gross for TPM was $431 million. Not a bad haul by any means, but Titanic was an anomaly. You had teenagers LITERALLY seeing it more than 30 times.

Posted: 2002-12-24 01:31am
by Jason von Evil
Which shows how perverted our youth is. :wink: :P

Posted: 2002-12-24 01:32am
by Spanky The Dolphin
First of all, slow down and separate your thoughts. You sound like you're rambling.

The Matrix really didn't gross that much compared to either Titanic or TPM, so I don't see its sequels even coming close.

Posted: 2002-12-24 01:37am
by Jason von Evil
I have The Maxtrix on DVD and I've watched it twice, to be honest, I don't see what's so super great about it, I mean yeah, it has kickass effects and such, but eh, it's not LOTR or TWOK. :D

Posted: 2002-12-24 01:47am
by Spanky The Dolphin
Personally, the movie pisses me off. To me it seems like a mish-mash rip-off of a lot of anime and HK films, with flashy advertisement effects.

And the whole idea of the Matrix itself pisses me off for some reason.

No offence to anyone, but I kind of hate The Matrix.

Posted: 2002-12-24 03:24am
by Enforcer Talen
really? I enjoyed it the first couple dozen times.

dont watch it much now tho.

hm.

Posted: 2002-12-24 10:01am
by ArmorPierce
What was the titianic rated?

Posted: 2002-12-24 10:02am
by ArmorPierce
and how close did spiderman come?

Posted: 2002-12-24 10:04am
by Vympel
Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Personally, the movie pisses me off. To me it seems like a mish-mash rip-off of a lot of anime and HK films, with flashy advertisement effects.

And the whole idea of the Matrix itself pisses me off for some reason.

No offence to anyone, but I kind of hate The Matrix.
I partly agree with you. While I don't HATE the Matrix, what really pisses me off is when some cinematic ignoramus sees some slow-mo, some martial arts, some eccentric gunplay, and automatically dubs it 'matrix' style.

Ignorant retards ... Hong Kong action has been doing this shit for years.

Incidentally, people who think Crouching Tiger was some sort of revolution should be slapped upside of the head. It was a fun movie, but fuck learn something about the genre for fucks sake.

I enjoy both films.

Posted: 2002-12-24 11:29am
by Crown
I think Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, might eventually beat it in the whole spectrum (video & DVD), but even that didn't come close in the cinema :(

Posted: 2002-12-24 01:51pm
by Grand Admiral Thrawn
I don't understand how Titanic made like 1 billion dollars. It sucked shit.

Posted: 2002-12-24 03:20pm
by Glocksman
I don't understand how Titanic made like 1 billion dollars. It sucked shit.
Teenage girls just adored Leonardo diCaprio.. :roll:

Posted: 2002-12-24 03:54pm
by Cpt_Frank
Glocksman wrote:
I don't understand how Titanic made like 1 billion dollars. It sucked shit.
Teenage girls just adored Leonardo diCaprio.. :roll:
Well, adored.

Hell if I could I would wipe Titanic form existance.
It also ruined my apreciation for Cameron who I thought before to be qa good director who could make really cool movies.

Posted: 2002-12-24 08:23pm
by Sidious
According to MovieWeb this is how the top 20 goes, not sure how current it is though.



1. $601 Titanic 1997
2. $461 Star Wars 1977
3. $435 E.T. 1982
4. $431 Star Wars: The Phantom Menace 1999
5. $404 Spider-Man 2002
6. $357 Jurassic Park 1993
7. $330 Forrest Gump 1994
8. $318 Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone 2001
9. $313 The Lord of the Rings:The Fellowship of the Ring 2001
10. $313 The Lion King 1994
11. $310 * Star Wars: Attack of the Clones 2002
11. $309 Return of the Jedi 1983
12. $306 Independence Day 1996
14. $293 The Sixth Sense 1999
15. $290 The Empire Strikes Back 1980
16. $285 Home Alone 1990
17. $268 Shrek 2001
18. $260 Jaws 1975
19. $260 How the Grinch Stole Christmas 2000
20. $256 Monsters, Inc. 2001

Posted: 2002-12-24 08:24pm
by Sidious
Yes the above figures are in millions of dollars. :)

Posted: 2002-12-24 08:54pm
by Arthur_Tuxedo
One point a lot of people miss, though, is that if you converted 1977 dollars into 1997 dollars, Star Wars would have made a whole hell of a lot more than Titanic (so would E.T. and Gone With The Wind, I suspect).

Posted: 2002-12-24 09:28pm
by HemlockGrey
No offence to anyone, but I kind of hate The Matrix.
I loved the Matrix. It is one of my top five movies of all time. The action was cool, the villians kicked ass, the symbolism was deep and it was generally a cool film.

Other four would be Gladiator, A Beautiful Mind, The Milagro Beanfield War, and The Man Who Would be King.

Posted: 2002-12-24 09:54pm
by Gerard_Paloma
According to the-movie-times.com, the top 5 grossing movies of all time (adjusted for inflation) are: (in millions of dollars)

1. Gone With the Wind $1187.7
2. Star Wars: ANH $1026.7
3. The Sound of Music $824.1
4. E.T. $815.0
5. The Ten Commandments $758.1

Titanic comes in 6th, Empire is 14th, Jedi is 15th, TPM is 20th, Spiderman is 29th, and Harry Potter, Fellowship, and AotC are past 50. Oh yeah, and Jaws is 7th.

Posted: 2002-12-25 01:02am
by Darth Yoshi
I don't see how Titanic could have done so well. I hated the movie. It ruined my opinion of Leo DiCaprio. Granted, I didn't have an opinion beforehand, but still.

Posted: 2002-12-25 03:43pm
by willburns84
Sidious wrote:According to MovieWeb this is how the top 20 goes, not sure how current it is though.



1. $601 Titanic 1997
2. $461 Star Wars 1977
3. $435 E.T. 1982
4. $431 Star Wars: The Phantom Menace 1999
5. $404 Spider-Man 2002
6. $357 Jurassic Park 1993
7. $330 Forrest Gump 1994
8. $318 Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone 2001
9. $313 The Lord of the Rings:The Fellowship of the Ring 2001
10. $313 The Lion King 1994
11. $310 * Star Wars: Attack of the Clones 2002
11. $309 Return of the Jedi 1983
12. $306 Independence Day 1996
14. $293 The Sixth Sense 1999
15. $290 The Empire Strikes Back 1980
16. $285 Home Alone 1990
17. $268 Shrek 2001
18. $260 Jaws 1975
19. $260 How the Grinch Stole Christmas 2000
20. $256 Monsters, Inc. 2001


Have these figures been adjusted for inflation? If not, then I'm willing to bet that Star Wars in 1977 still kicked the crap out of Titanic.

Posted: 2002-12-25 04:29pm
by Durandal
Titanic was enjoyable the first time around, mostly because of the scenery more than anything, which was extravagant and well-done. The film itself, however, was sappy shit. Both the Lord of the Rings films kick its ass in terms of quality and enjoyability.

Posted: 2002-12-27 03:36am
by Uraniun235
The Matrix is a fun movie for the cool action sequences, and the story is OK for the first or second time through.

Actually, what irritated me the most about that movie was the whole concept of "if you get shot in the matrix your body acts accordingly IRL".
the symbolism was deep
Really? Would you care to discuss any of this symbolism with us?

Posted: 2002-12-27 07:27am
by Tsyroc
I wish they counted ticket sales instead of how much money it brought in. Even then that doesn't accurately gauge how many or how often people saw a movie in the theater. It used to be you could buy one ticket and pretty much stay all day. At least that's what I routinely read being stated by people who were kids when the original King Kong came out in the 1930s.


Currently I think too many people are obsessed with box office and even worse, opening weekend box office. Too many mediocre actors are paid huge amounts of money because their movies open well, or used to open well. Even worse, movies that don't open well tend to get dumped from the theaters rather quickly so immediately popular movies can be shown on more screens.

In a way some of this can be good because it means that some decent movies may get to video quicker because of a poor opening but it is tougher to get good sequels made from movies that poorly in theaters but well in the rental/sales market.