All of The Dark Knight's Broken Records - Box Office Dominance!
As a final wrap up to all of our Dark Knight coverage, I thought I'd put together a quick list of all the records that the film has broken. Normally we don't discuss box office earnings unless they're truly significant and this time they are. If you haven't already heard, The Dark Knight just beat Spider-Man 3's opening weekend box office with a total of $158,400,000 (estimated). The film has gone on to break numerous other records and is likely to continue plowing its way through the box office for the next few months. With continual positive buzz, it's likely to end up being the biggest earner all year long anyway. We promise that this will be one of the last articles we write about The Dark Knight! But it's one final one you need to see…
Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight has officially set a new record in the following categories:
Theater Count - 4,366 theaters
Midnight Showings Total - $18.5 million
Midnight IMAX Total (94 Screens) - ~$640,000
Opening Day (Friday) Total - $67.8 million
Opening Day (Sunday) Total - $43 million
Opening Weekend IMAX Total (94 Screens) - $6.2 million
Opening Weekend Total - $158.4 million
Weekend Total (Combined Top 12 Films) - ~$250 million+
Tickets Sold Online in a Single Day (MovieTickets.com)
Tickets Sold Online in a Single Day (Fandango.com)
Fastest Ticket Sales (Fandango.com) - 15 Tickets Per Second
The $155 million weekend total is currently a studio estimate and not confirmed. We expect the total to go up later today once the tally has been finalized. We'll update this list with any changes and additions as they're announced over the next few weeks. Current statistics come from Box Office Mojo.
I can't even begin to tell you how big of a relief it is to see The Dark Knight kick Sider-Man's ass! I've been predicting all along that it would do this well, but no one believed me. Even before I saw it, I could sense that it was on its way to becoming a huge success. This masterpiece deserves this glory and I'm glad that it really shook up expectations and performed so damn well. Although Spider-Man 3 also did this good last year, The Dark Knight is actually an amazing movie, whereas the success of Spider-Man 3 was fueled purely by interest and not appreciation. The Dark Knight is not only an awesome film, but it's on its way to revolutionizing Hollywood and potentially going down in history next year at the Oscars.
Reader Feedback - 62 Comments
wow imagine if itwas 100-110 minutes, they could have squeezed in a few more showings
Jont on Jul 21, 2008
definitly not the best movie ever made
jon on Jul 21, 2008
this movie sucks bigtime !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
sammy on Jul 21, 2008
It's amazing how many people predicted that it would beat out SM3 and that NOBODY else believed them. Hmm.
Cinexcellence on Jul 21, 2008
Yeah, Alex, if a movie breaks pretty much every box office opening record and is being hailed as a masterpiece by EVERYBODY, then you must be on the take for talking positively about it. There's no other explanation...
Nick on Jul 21, 2008
Whoa Alex, I agreed with you. Did you ever read the article on my blog bro?
taybo20 on Jul 21, 2008
For those people that think this movie sucked without any reasonable explanantion, I have a pencil trick to show them.
Rodan8812 on Jul 21, 2008
The Dark Knight was phenomenal. It blew me away. Rodan8812- Yes, make it disappear. Would have loved to seen its opening weekend numbers compared to the ones it broke. Did it just break those records, or did it smash them?
Rick on Jul 21, 2008
I have to say that those who are saying this movie sucks, either didn't see it, or are into artsy fartsy films and shouldn't have taken a ticket away from someone who wanted to see it. or maybe their mommy wouldn't drive them to the theater to see it. This movie was amazing. The acting was incredible from Ledger, and the cinematography was inspirational! Nothing short of Bad Assery!
Frank on Jul 21, 2008
I won't take anything away from how well it did, but there is a asterisk to the those numbers. This movie was played at, I think, every IMAX theater in the country. The average price for a IMAX movie is between $12 and $18. So, although it made more money than Spiderman 3 it may have not been seen by more people. Also to #12, should we go back to SM 3, it made all that money opening weekend because of all the hype of Venom and the fanboys going out of the mind with the fact. Now all those same fanboys think it sucks, just saying. The real test comes next week when you check the numbers and see how much the average fell. No matter how good it was or wasn't it won't last at number one for very long, I mean number one movie of the week, because of the nature of the industry and the short attention span of viewers. Titanic was the last movie to do it, number one for five or six weeks I believe, and before that you have to go way back in time.
Moviegimp on Jul 21, 2008
I think Ledger nailed his role as the joker but I also think the reason this movie was so good and solid was because not one actor in this film was off in their performance they were all right on Q. It was an amazing thing to watch since most movies have just one performance that stands out but even though joker stood out everyone else would have in any other movie as well. Aaron Ekhart? really impressed me and Christian Bale is one of my favorite actors anyway and than the vets like Morgan and Micheal and solid performance from Maggie just stacked the deck behind the joker. this movie deserves every bit of its success unlike spidey.
Unseen on Jul 21, 2008
I wonder how good spider man 3 would have done if one of their actors died before the release...it might have done more than 155.3....just saying...the Dark Knight grew a whole new crowd with the unexpected death of ledger.
mason on Jul 21, 2008
"it's on its way to revolutionizing Hollywood and potentially going down in history next year" The person who wrote this is clearly in high school. Shame on all of you for being so mean to someone naive enough to think that an incredibly typical in almost every way Hollywood product is going to somehow revolutionize the business. I admit it was very entertaining but that is truly the extent of it. Get your head out of the clouds, kids.
andrew on Jul 21, 2008
I think that everyone needs to back off. TDK was an amazing movie. I thought it was the best Batman movie ever.I knew it was going to be good but It exceeded my expectations. Bale and Ledger's performances were the best I've seen in years.I don't think that any one can ever Play the joker again. Ledger did way to good of a job to have someone screw it up. His performance deserves any award he gets. i don,t think anyone could ever do as good of a job as him.I give this move an A+++
Briar-Rose on Jul 21, 2008
To be dismissive and say "Dark Knight sucked" after the kind of opening weekend it had would be pretty foolish in my opinion. Troll... go back to your little hobbit hole, ok?
Rob Oh on Jul 21, 2008
I think the only reason people are saying it's a bad movie whether it be critics or just dumb people on this website is because they want to be in the minority. Think about it the movie has 206 reviews on rottentomoatoes.com and 12 of them are bad reviews, whose names are people going to remember all the critics who gave it a good review or all the critics who gave it a bad one. The Dark Knight was an amazing movie, the only time I've ever clapped at the end of the movie!
Drew on Jul 21, 2008
The Dark Knight, FTW! 😀
Nettle on Jul 21, 2008
ha, yeah it got a standing ovation when I saw it. Excellent (x10) film, I hope Heath Ledger gets some sort of posthumous academy award.
Zach on Jul 21, 2008
"The Dark Knight is not only an awesome film, but it's on its way to revolutionizing Hollywood" How so? I loved the movie..it was excellent, but how is this movie going to revolutionize Hollywood?
ERivas on Jul 21, 2008
It was a great movie, no question. But I think a LOT of people (most) got so absorbed by the hype that it has clouded their judgement. There were a lot of things about this film that weren't fantastic, but nobody seems to see them. It's not because the issues aren't there, it's because everyone is so absorbed by the hype. One major thing is the feel of Gotham City itself. If you watch Batman Begins again (and I have twice since seeing TDK) the visual development of Gotham brings it too life as GOTHAM. it is dark, gritty, the lighting and camera work in Batman Begins simply brought it to life and made it a believable corrupt town. In TDK, it looks like Chicago, plain and simple. Everything from the interiors to exteriors lacked visual creative development compared to BB. I think the filmmakers became so absorbed in the idea of making this a realistic film that they forgot that this still roots in a fantasy-driven comic book world, which stylistically Nolan pulled off WAY better in BB. I promise, go back and watch BB, and without question it brings the world of Gotham to life in a more palpable fashion than TDK. And where was Wayne Tower in TDK? But hey, everyone will say I am crazy because everyone seems to be under some kind of spell. And that's my point. Like #14 said, get your head out of the clouds. Same thing with Iron Man. Everyone got so wrapped up in the hype. Now some of you may say don't compare TDK to Iron Man because they are different comic worlds. Bullsh*t. When IM and TDK are on DVD, watch them back to back. I think you will find that IM sucks in comparison. it is 2-dimensional, poorly paced and poorly filmed. But the hype really got everyone sucked in and brainwashed. Again, don't get me wrong. TDK is awesome. But it is by no means a perfect film. Every time I saw a negative critique on this film, hundreds of people would post negative comments about the writer as if they were an idiot. I mean, come on! That's so stupid. If you read every negative comment about TDK that's on the net, and you aren't biased, then you will see that regardless of TDK being a great movie, all of these writers are right. That doesn't mean the movie was bad, it just means these writers are pointing out existing flaws within the film. Everyone defends the film just for the sake of defending it. So for those who complain that there are critics out there who want to be part of the minority, you are part of the same problem. As much as some people say they don't like the movie just to say it, you are defending it just for the sake of defending it. Very sad indeed.
Marty Martin - IMAGEN Films on Jul 21, 2008
The Dark Knight deserves all its going to get an amazing film deserves an amazing pay off, it will be on top for weeks to come.
Curtis on Jul 21, 2008
Here's one thing that TDK really proves though. A great character-driven story and fantastic acting rise above action and 2-dimensional popcorn flicks. I think this film proved you can have the best of everything wrapped into one package.
Marty Martin - IMAGEN Films on Jul 21, 2008
Me three: how, exactly, is this movie "on its way to revolutionizing Hollywood"? I think they've produced good, high-grossing movie before TDK. Get back to school, Alex.
Colin (brother of Mike) Hunt on Jul 21, 2008
Colin (brother of Mike) Hunt on Jul 21, 2008
Whether ledger was alive or dead. The result would be the same. Some are to cynical in todays world to just believe a death could create money. And no i am not being naive. Last year i thought that Bardem was the scariest guy in earth, now its someone else and I don't think the that spot will change anytime soon.
Buttons on Jul 21, 2008
Ledger's death created even more curiosity about his role in the film. His performance was already touted as amazing before he died, but after he passed away it made people want to see the film even more. Don't think the result would have been the same. it wouldn't have been. It's simple psychology.
Marty Martin - IMAGEN Films on Jul 21, 2008
If someone can write a negative review for this movie, then, I'm sure that they can never write a positive review for any movie.. :p As simple as that.. Yes, it may have flaws, but I haven't seen a better movie yet & so, I'm going to hail this movie as the greatest ever till something better is released. And for the Box-office records.. Finally, a movie worthy of the financial success.. 😀
Gdn | TD on Jul 21, 2008
"I've been predicting all along that it would do this well, but no one believed me. Even before I saw it, I could sense that it was on its way to becoming a huge success." I was a non believer. Alex is right. I ran into him on the street and we discussed an early Dark Knight trailer. He said it looked awesome. I agreed. He said it would definitely be among the summer blockbusters. He could sense it. I WAS APPALLED! No way could a Batman movie ever receive such attention. NEVER. I threw my Jamba Juice down (it was a Peach Pleasure) and after it splattered on the sidewalk in an explosion of nutrients, I pointed my psychic finger at him. It was trembling uncontrollably. "Do you know why my finger is shaking Alex?" "You're like that Katharine Hepburn chick," he shrugged. "NO ALEX...It's because my finger is NEVER WRONG. It's twitching because it KNOWS that your precious little Dark Knight won't make a penny over 50 G's opening weekend." He took a deep patient breath and shook his head sadly. "You're wrong man...and I'm going to let everyone know how wrong you are. IN FACT...I'm going to write a glowing Dark Knight article for every 50 grand it makes!!!!" Then he stormed off and...curious enough...my finger stopped twitching. I've been crying for days now. I had my finger removed and burned. Now the rest of my body shakes involuntarily...like Katherine Hepburn.
marty mcfly on Jul 21, 2008
IMHO the movie had some trash moments. I couldn't feel he was speeding on his car and bike for example.
Diego on Jul 21, 2008
Taking into account that it only beat Spider Man 3 by a few million (not exactly 'ass kicking') the fact that ticket prices have gone up since last year, AND that The Dark Knight was in more 'theaters'...not exactly an overwhelming victory, really.
Robert on Jul 21, 2008
In keeping with the subject of this article, I think some people are forgetting how much of an earnings difference there was between TDK and Batman Begins. BB was a relative unknown. Most people knew Bale but he wasn't a proven box office draw by any means. A lot of non comic book fans didn't know what to think about it because the last two Batman films were complete dung. It ended up performing well - although nothing extraordinary. But from just under 50 million to more than triple that is something else. Sure, Ledger's death had a lot to do with bringing in non-comic fans but I think there there were also a ton of converts who saw BB on DVD and knew it was a completely different kind of film- a vast improvement over the previous Batmans. I'd guess without Ledger's death the film still would have done well over $100 million. Look at Spidey, then. The first film was a monster - over 400 million. The next set crazy records at the time and did 373 million. The third had the biggest opening in history - by a mile - but finished with only 336 million. Part of it is the hollywood trend - opening weekend means way more and most films have no legs. But the rest of it was negative buzz - a lot of people didn't like Spidey 3. Look at the drop between weekends 1 and 2 - over 61%. For a blockbuster, that's really significant - one can never overstate buzz. Ironman, for example, had great buzz and ended up having pretty good legs because of it. Otherwise no way it makes 300 million. As others here have stated, TDK had its amazing start - now we see if it has legs. Upcoming competition isn't really significant. If it has a lot of repeat viewings and hermits who never see films in theaters start checking it out - it certainly has a chance at 400 million.
bob jones on Jul 21, 2008
If you go to BoxOfficeMojo.com you will see that because of the difference in ticket prices, Spiderman 3 actually sold more tickets opening weekend than Batman. Big difference here is that TDK is a quality film and will surely last longer in theaters and will rake in way more cash because of it.
Marty Martin - IMAGEN Films on Jul 21, 2008
i actually love spiderman 3 despite its flaws. but dark knight is a superior film
Josh on Jul 21, 2008
*high five* to #7
Mr. Pockets on Jul 21, 2008
The biggest shock is that KNIGHT will make as much as BEGINS did in its whole run in KNIGHT'S opening week!
Ryan on Jul 21, 2008
But look Marty Martin, you have become very nit picky about this movie not saying you are wrong but you picking at things that to an average viewer and even at times an Award Voter never really acknowledges. Yes, the design had flaws but what everyone is amazed over is the entire plot and characters. How it all came together and created a story which could live on forever as one of the greats. And also are you really basing more ticket sales on a controversy? From the get-go more tickets were going to be sold and is that a bad thing? Lastly, Why are you defending Spiderman 3 so viciously as if it is your child?
Eric on Jul 21, 2008
Dude stop with the whole its gonna change Hollywood thing! You obviously don't know Hollywood very well. Yes it was a great movie, and I hope it wins best picture but don't think one movie is going to change anything. Did Lord of the Rings change anything? That was filmmaking at its best and hollywood still produced crap after it was made. They even tried to make these other crappy fantasy films none of them even close to LOTR. They all sucked ass. We are still going to get crappy hollywood films, we aare still going to get crappy superhero comic book movies, they still will not utilize IMAX. You don't understand that Hollywood is run by accountants not filmmakers. And accountants will keep doing what they are paid to do and thats to budget and find the best way to make a profit. Hollywood is not changing. Every once in a while we are going to see an amazing Film like Dark knight come around but it still wont happen very often. It is not going to revolutionize anything dude. Look at Hollywoods track record. They have been set in their ways for years and they aren't going to change a damn thing because of one successful superhero movie. maybe DC and Warner Bros. will wise up but that about it. This is how Hollywood thinks. If Bale and Nolan were to refuse to do a 3rd batman the WB will go out and make one anyway and it will be crap. Is that your revolutionized Hollywood? Do you honestly thing WB will leave well enough alone? Seriously what do you think?
JD on Jul 21, 2008
hate to say i told you so. but i fucking told you all!
SMY on Jul 21, 2008
I definitely could nit-pick this movie a lot, but I really don't want to and I'm glad I loved it. It was definitely in the top 3 movies I have ever seen on screen. I don't care how much cash it made, but I do know this. I loved it and I feel sorry for people who didn't and that's what matters
L on Jul 21, 2008
#36 My nitpicking is form a filmmaker's perspective. But let me say this. You are completely right in saying that the plot and characters are what made the film great and that's what the audience focused on. But there's also something to be said about having taken the time in Batman Begins to establish a certain aesthetic, then not following up with the same aesthetic for the Dark Knight. Why is this important? Because the city itself and how it looks and feels is almost a character unto its own. It is part of the reality Nolan created starting with the first film, and it is surprising to me (given his typical attention to detail and his consistency) that he didn't follow through visually into the second film while maintaining the story and characters as he did. As for Spiderman 3, why do you say I am defending it viciously? I think Sam Raimi is a terribly director and I HATED Spiderman 3 and I hated Spiderman 2. I was simply pointing out that if you consider the change in ticket pricing, Spiderman 3 actually sold more tickets. But now that the estimated weekend total has been upped to 158M, this is no longer the case. Dark Knight totally blew Spiderman 3 ticket sales out of the water!
Marty Martin - IMAGEN Films on Jul 21, 2008
TDK fanboy fever has reached its peak and reality will begin to reassert itself soon. TDK ws great, no question, but it has a lot of flaws (as great as Leger's performance was, Maggie Gyllenhaal's awfulness almost eclipses Leger, Batman's voice effect flopped this time around, way way way too many notable actors in small roles (did this movie provide every actor with a SAG membership card a cheque? Is Morgan Freeman in every fanboy movie? I love Anthony Michael Hall but why stuff a notable actor in every role possible? Any no name actor coiuld have done the role, and done so without generating a "Oh, there's the guy from 16 Candles". And some of these cops, sheesh, how many dozens of cop roles have they been in? It's just distracting and of no positive contribution in the least. Poor choices abound in this film). When holding TDK up as the greates film of all time, you have to ask yourself if you had your choice to NOT see TDK or any of a hundred other great movies would you pick any of those not ot see over TDK? Not a chance. I saw it, it's great, but I wouldn't miss any of my favorites in order to add TDK.
RandyG on Jul 21, 2008
To Rob Oh number 8 That makes no sense, Spiderman made tons of money, but sucked
Coolness on Jul 21, 2008
Batman's voice effect?
DCompose on Jul 21, 2008
DCompose: Batman's voice effect? I could be wrong but as I recall in Batman Begins Batman 'growled' his lines just a few times but to very strong effect. In TDK he screws up his lips in this tortured rictus and yammers on and on, and pretty soon my attention is on his pained expression and the silliness of the delivery instead of what he was saying. The "I am scary" voice worked well in very small doses but just didn't work for a five minute speech.
RandyG on Jul 22, 2008
Marty Martin - IMAGEN Films on Jul 22, 2008
interl0per on Jul 22, 2008
This movie sucked, no doubt about it! The madness that is TDK craze because one unfortunate death will soon burn out just as quickly as this movie will be forgotten. Deny...deny...deny it all you want, the ONLY reason it fared well in the theaters is because of Ledger's character or more so Ledger's exploited death. I remember when no one gave to shits when they found out he would be the one taking over the Joker role. In fact, everyone was against it believing he was going to screw up the character. *Then BOOM!* He goes and overdoses/kills himself/who knows how the fuck he died? and now everyone can't wait to see this raggedy ass film. Give me a break. The acting, other than maybe Heath was bland and emotionless. Bale, please don't get me started on that asswipe and his flip-flopping voice. You couldn't understand what he was saying half the time. Maggie "Barf" Gyllenhaal was just as much an annoying aspect in this film. It was too long, had many plot holes, the action sequence was limited to the same shit that was in BB. It was too over-hyped, not worth the $11 my friends paid because there was no way in hell I would've paid to watch this smut. As for the weekend opening, just because it sold as many tickets as it did does not qualify as an awesome movie. Everyone does have to purchase a ticket beforehand to find out how much suckage is in the movie. Box office money does not a great film make. Wonder what WB will do about the next sequel. I mean, unless they can find another actor who'll be willing to kill himself as well so moronic fanboys and media dolts everywhere will hype the next shitty movie. And idiots who post these, "OMFG! givez heaths da oscarz fur dis moveeeeieee! hes da bestest jokerz eva! 4 lifez!" messages deserve the most gruesome death imaginable. I never knew they trained monkeys to use computers but apparently there are many Batman fanatics out there, so it must be true.
Christopher Derek on Jul 23, 2008
#47 I actually could care less that the man died tragic yes but oh well it happens and I believe that was already a oscar worthy performance the only diffference is he wont be the picking it up. This are the people we should be sending to #7.
Darknight on Jul 23, 2008
I still think this would have been as big a movie with heath alive. And if we account for higher ticket prices than we should account for higher cost for production elements, even though i believe TDK cost less even in a time of higher gas ext ext. Now ofcourse my tongue is firmly in my cheek as i say this. 😛
buttons on Jul 23, 2008
Heath Ledger's Role as the Joker was Outstanding! So good in fact made Jack Nicholson not wanna show his face... Nuff Said
Gabe on Jul 23, 2008
Heath Ledger's Role as the Joker was Outstanding! So good in fact it made Jack Nicholson not wanna show his face... LOL By Far the Best Joker there ever was and will always be Nuff said.
Gabe on Jul 23, 2008
Another troll that should be shown a magic trick...
Darknight on Jul 23, 2008
And said trolls comment is gone.
Darknight on Jul 23, 2008
To #47 Christopher Derek, Negative people like you are the reason why we might need an actual real-life vigilante protecting our streets. Just because there is a "TDK Craze" as you call it, doesn't mean that the reason the movie sold so many tickets is because of the over-hype it receives. Look at the box office numbers it just passed the 200 million dollar mark on Tuesday, July 22, 5 days after it opened. meaning, if the movie really did suck as much as you claimed, then people would not have watched the movie and people would not have recommended it to other people. The hype it receives is very much well-deserved. That's not just MY opinion, that's an opinion of over $200 million dollars worth of people watching it. I'm not saying that you're wrong and you should love this movie, because you have every right to your opinion. But don't criticize and put down others because they love this film so much. With all the negative things going on in this world such as rising cost of gas, the economy, the war in Iraq, etc...people need an escape out of their world and movies provide that escape for many of them. That's one of the major roles of film, to entertain people. Basically, I'm just saying quit being the Ebenezer Scrooge of The Dark Knight. Thank you very much and I approve this message!!!
Lex on Jul 23, 2008
After #40 a post is pointless.
Dustyman1505 on Jul 23, 2008
this movie just blew me away it was completely fantastic. I have friends who went to see it not expecting much and they loved it. And sure the Imax cost more and maybe that helped in ticket sales... but spiderman 3 couldnt have sold out almost 4,366 theatres for three showings.. thats about 13,098 showings sold out. And it has been almost a week and theatres at least where i live are still filling up and selling out. This movie will for sure be on the top for a while. I dont know if it will beet ET's 16 weekends at #1 but it will still be up there for a while. The had perfect marketing stratagies. And the tragity of Heath Ledgers death increases the need to see this movie. I know thats a horrible reason to want to see a movie or even to gain profit from, but it is a fact that is helping this movie gain its popuatirty. Also the performance done by heath is nothing short of genius. He Took that role and made it into something no one will ever beable to portray again. He is the ultimate Joker. Horrible speller by the way and i dont really care. =]] I LOVE BATMAN =]
Rachel on Jul 24, 2008
just seen the dark knight. just as i expected . i hated batman begins and dark knight is so over rated. not complete shit . is some bits i like but over all. shit. i still hate christian bale . bring on michael keaton. heath ledger was over rated aswell. i didnt c anything psychotic or menacing . or fear about him. he had good dialogue and i liked the voice he had for the joker charachter .and he was funny but thats it. he did play the character well. but a jack nicholson beater. NNNOOOO. and that ugly bint who replaced katie holmes. . brin back katie.she was best thing about batman begins. were was the action in dark knight i sure as hell didnt c anthing that was ACTION. for all the money they poured in2 this film. certanly wasnt 2 b screen on screen. just because its made money at box office dosent mean its any good. its just cause of heath ledger dying. the hype and people who realy easly please or amused in seeing ceratin films.
keith on Jul 25, 2008
You lost all credability when u said katie holmes was the best part about batman begins. and so the fight scenes with scarecrow and the mob, the mob in hong kong, the party scene, the chase scene, and the climax wasnt action...
Darknight on Jul 26, 2008
#58 Yes, it's action, but it's sort of dull and stagey. For me, other than a very few 2-3 second moments, it wasn't that exciting. That's just me, though, maybe I've seen too much of this stuff.
RandyG on Jul 26, 2008
this movie is surely a masterpiece.the ones saying the movie sucks themself sucks. i had to fight with my parents to watch the movie twice and i got too.
Nishant on Aug 4, 2008
#60 You're declaring TDK a masterpiece? And you had to fight with your parents to see it twice? Okay.
RandyG on Aug 4, 2008
That actually brings up a very valid point about box office sales. The revenue from box office sales, is not on a 1 ticket, 1 person basis. if 100 million dollars are made, it isn't 100 million dollars of individual people seeing the movie, it's about 50 million dollars of individual people seeing it, and then half of them seeing it a second, or third, or as some fanboi's will do, see it every showing for 24 hours. This repeat business is what brings in the bucks. Not just the hype, but the repeat viewers, are what account for box office success. And this is what creates a #1 for more than just 2 or 3 weeks running. Do I think it will continue to do well? Well, I have no clue, but from this amount of hype, whether from the drama surrounding the late actor, or just simply cause it's a good movie, yes. I think it will do resoundingly well for weeks and weeks to come. Beating ET's 16 weeks? Not likely, however, I think that it will certainly beat out total box office income charts. And all of this from someone who... oh my god... hasn't even seen the movie yet! I'm headed there this Friday with my wife, and I think it'll be nice if it's not terribly crowded at this point, but do I expect it to be empty? Not one bit! From everything I've heard about the movie, it will continue to be a Hollywood success for a long time. But nonetheless, as with most productions these days, it'll hit DVD/BluRay quickly, so they can keep on the hype of the theatrical release with their video release, and it's going to make them more money than they know what to waste on... Expect a slew of terrible releases coming soon to a theater near you. Cause Hollywood has money, and they don't know what to do with it. Now, on the subject of amazing movies. Pan's Labyrinth... That was a truly phoenominal movie in my opinion. Though it was horribly morbid, it was as many of our favorites were originally intended to be portrayed. Alice in Wonderland? Let me tell ya somethin, that wasn't supposed to be a kids story, at least not by today's standards! But this went to the roots of old school storytelling, and delivered! So it's no suprise to me that the director is at it again with Hellboy II, which again, I haven't yet seen. But from all I've "heard" and I use hearsay heavily in this... You overlook the weak storyline of the movie, to revel in the director's creative genius visually, and find yourself unable to do anything but. And in doing so, the director is still telling his story, through visual art, instead of script. So how this relates to the movie at hand? Well, imagine if it did truly become "The Perfect Movie". Then what would we have to look forward to? Pff. There's my reasoning behind it. I'm gunna go enjoy TDK soon, and I think even in light of the spoilers, I'll still enjoy the hell out of it. Because storytelling is what's important for this movie, and is often too overlooked for a pretty background. And just to contradict myself... I think I'll also go see Hellboy II at some point, because it's still fun to just drool at the background when it's good enough visual candy to make you completely forget that there even IS a storyline. 🙂 That's just my take. I may get around to writing a review of my own after I've seen it a few times. No sense in reviewing something the first time it's seen, or my time would be wasted nitpicking instead of just enjoying what's likely to be a damn good movie. Agree, disagree, or even flame if you like. I enjoyed writing it, so my fun is had. Have yours. 🙂 - DNied -
DNied on Aug 6, 2008
Sorry, no commenting is allowed at this time.