Jump to content
PyroclasticFlow

MCUniverse: Phase Four and Beyond(er) **maybe spoilers**

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said:

Yeah the rerelease was the directors cut, which um, I don't even remember what was added.

If it was the director's cut, then I think it was just some stuff in the beginning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Corvinus said:

Avatar had 2 releases, too, even if the second brought in only a small percentage of the initial. 

The Avatar re-release made about $32 Million globally, so in a true one release only head to head comparison Endgame is already virtually guaranteed to end ahead of Avatar. I think it's about $10 million off getting there, and people seem to think it's got at least that much gas left in the tank.

With extra scenes, I'm pretty likely to go back for another look.

I think Feige wants $2.8 billion, and it can't get there without an extra boost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2019 at 2:14 PM, red snow said:

dirty cheats, the pair of them

All box office grosses include the original theatrical releases and re-releases as a single figure. Like Star Wars had a re-release in 1982, and then had the Special Edition release in 1997, and all of those are included as the single gross total.

Same for Gone With the Wind, which has had numerous re-releases.

I'm curious as to whether box office totals adjusted for inflation take into account the re-releases when they're calculating inflation.

And, since its release was only a decade ago, Avatar is still the (nominal) box office champ, as its $2.8 billion gross translates to a worldwide box office total of $3.3 billion in 2019 dollars.

Adjusted for inflation, the highest 5 worldwide grosses are:

1. Gone With the Wind @ ~$3.6 billion

2. Titanic - ~$3.4 billion

3. Avatar - $3.3 billion

4. Star Wars - ~$3.0 billion

5. Avengers: Endgame - $2.7 billion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adjusting for inflation is not as equitable a comparison as people might think. You have to consider what other entertainment competition existed at the time. Put TV, DVD, streaming services and cat videos on Youtube into the mix and can people really claim that Gone with the Wind (filmed using modern movie making technology) would perfom how it did in 1939, even if that style of movie still had significant audience appeal? I doubt it.

The world's consumption of entertainment has even changed between Avatar and Endgame.

Sure, in today's dollars those movies did better. But would they do better in today's market?

On a different note: Spider Man far from home social media reviews are looking very good. Seems like Sony is 3 for 3 with Spider Man (Into the Spiderverse included). I do wonder if for the PP Spidey they can actually achieve a trilogy with all 3 movies being well regarded and successful? Hasn't been done with Spider Man yet. Being part of a wider MCU is a big assist. Even assuming no actual Avengers show up, the MCU still looms large in the movie, not least because Nick Fury looks like playing a significant role.

Edited by The Anti-Targ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Adjusting for inflation is not as equitable a comparison as people might think. You have to consider what other entertainment competition existed at the time. Put TV, DVD, streaming services and cat videos on Youtube into the mix and can people really claim that Gone with the Wind (filmed using modern movie making technology) would perfom how it did in 1939, even if that style of movie still had significant audience appeal? I doubt it.

The world's consumption of entertainment has even changed between Avatar and Endgame.

Sure, in today's dollars those movies did better. But would they do better in today's market?

I think this is why titanic and avatar did so well. Titanic was released just before DVD took off meaning the cinema was far better quality thsn watching the video release. Avatar had the 3d gimmick. Avengers had the gimmick of 20 films build-up. It will be interesting to see what the next gimmick will be. Like you say it's getting tougher to compete with other media especially with the size and quality of home entertainment systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, red snow said:

I think this is why titanic and avatar did so well. Titanic was released just before DVD took off meaning the cinema was far better quality thsn watching the video release. Avatar had the 3d gimmick. Avengers had the gimmick of 20 films build-up. It will be interesting to see what the next gimmick will be. Like you say it's getting tougher to compete with other media especially with the size and quality of home entertainment systems.

I like to think that in today's market Avatar would have bombed as hard as Mortal Engines did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Adjusting for inflation is not as equitable a comparison as people might think. You have to consider what other entertainment competition existed at the time. Put TV, DVD, streaming services and cat videos on Youtube into the mix and can people really claim that Gone with the Wind (filmed using modern movie making technology) would perfom how it did in 1939, even if that style of movie still had significant audience appeal? I doubt it.

The world's consumption of entertainment has even changed between Avatar and Endgame.

Sure, in today's dollars those movies did better. But would they do better in today's market?

It's a fair point about the different entertainment options, but on the other side I think it would also be fair to take into account the population differences. If Gone With The Wind had the extra 200 million potential customers that Avengers has in the US how much more money might it have made?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, williamjm said:

It's a fair point about the different entertainment options, but on the other side I think it would also be fair to take into account the population differences. If Gone With The Wind had the extra 200 million potential customers that Avengers has in the US how much more money might it have made?

This was the point I was coming to make, along with taking into account the thousands of extra screens on which to show today's movies, and how modern tentpole movies run in theaters on practically a 24/7 loop for at least the first week or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I like to think that in today's market Avatar would have bombed as hard as Mortal Engines did.

The performance of Avatar 2 at the Box Office will be interesting to see. “Sequel a decade in the making” will only carry it so far, especially when the first film coasted by mainly on the 3d and visuals gimmick, the actual film being pretty naff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HelenaExMachina said:

The performance of Avatar 2 at the Box Office will be interesting to see. “Sequel a decade in the making” will only carry it so far, especially when the first film coasted by mainly on the 3d and visuals gimmick, the actual film being pretty naff

This is kinda why I want Endgame to beat Avatar, it’s more anti-Avatar sentiment than pro-Endgame. The film was so average, minus the visuals. Even now, very few people have a decent 3D television so that was all it really was - see these awesome visuals now, or never.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DaveSumm said:

This is kinda why I want Endgame to beat Avatar, it’s more anti-Avatar sentiment than pro-Endgame. The film was so average, minus the visuals. Even now, very few people have a decent 3D television so that was all it really was - see these awesome visuals now, or never.

The thing is Cameron might have new levels of eye candy to enjoy. Although the three sequels may actually harm it this time around in the sense it's not a "once in a lifetime" deal, its a "once every 2 years" deal and you can ve confident you could attend a "four films in a row" omnibus in 7 years time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this is irrelevant coz Endgame may or may not beat Avatar and Avatar 2 may or may not beat both but all of them are going to get crushed by Hobbes & Shaw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cameron did do very well with making an excellent sequel years after the original with T2. But with Avatar 2 he's starting from a very low base. The original Terminator was brilliant and T2 built on it. What does Avatar 2 have to build on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Cameron did do very well with making an excellent sequel years after the original with T2. But with Avatar 2 he's starting from a very low base. The original Terminator was brilliant and T2 built on it. What does Avatar 2 have to build on?

The world, since Cameron, I think, cares more about that than a strong story. But maybe the story will be good, too. One can only hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Avatar is such a strange phenomenon. Persoanlly, I am a massive fan of made-for-3D stuff, ignoring the upconverted garbage. Every MCU movie is dumb for 3D except the mindbender scenes in Dr. Strange. I have a projector and a nice screen, and in my opinion (and all my guests) the best 3D stuff - almost always animated like Pixar films - pops more than in the theaters. It's a great experience. I also can watch some dumbass movie for the visual entertainment more than most people. Thus, Avatar is perfectly in my wheelbase as a really stupid movie that looks simply gorgeous on my big TV. Finally, I will forever have a crush on Oona Chaplin, who is probably going to be some blue alien in it.

All that said, I'm someone whom Avatar 2 should be completely marketable toward. And yet I'm thoroughly uninterested. Saying "Okay, sure they're silly but, just wait, it's going to look really, really cool this time!" will probably get me in the theater, but I imagine it'll be far closer to Battle Angel Alita earnings rather than Avatar 1. 

On the topic of the MCU: I'm kind of surprised I haven't been exposed to much of a marketing blitz for Far From Home. I'm sure it'll make great money, but I feel like I haven't seen nearly the amount of random crap (Captain Marvel and Air Force ads, Endgame plugs seemingly everywhere etc).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Avatar 2 gets more into what has happened on Earth and less about Pandora, I'd be way more interested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for tangents, but can we please stop talking about Avatar in the MCU thread?  I don't give a shit about Avatar 2 or 3 or 4 or 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw Endgame for the 2nd time today.  During the final battle, Spidey is swinging across the battlefield on his webs...but I have no idea what he was attaching them to. 

Also, it got me thinking about the Black Widow standalone movie.  If Cap went back in time and replaced all the stones at the moment they were taken...I wonder if they're going to use that to bring Widow back to life.  Like...I can see the whole movie being a prequel, and then the post-credit scene being Cap (if they can get Evans to do a cameo) showing up to Vormir and undoing Widow's death. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, DMC said:

I'm all for tangents, but can we please stop talking about Avatar in the MCU thread?  I don't give a shit about Avatar 2 or 3 or 4 or 5.

Dude, I just have to ask:  why are you so convinced that your thoughts on things matter so much?  Never seen anything like it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×