« Today's News: Our Take
Box Office: Spidey Slips, But Still Outpacing 1 and 2
Spider-Man 3 topped the weekend box office with "just" $60 million — a second-week drop larger than the usual 50 percent for a hit, but more than expected for a film which shattered records with a $151.1 mil opening. Plus, the new sequel's 10-day tally ($242.1 mil) is still outpacing that of Nos. 1 and 2 ($223 and $225 mil, respectively). I still think these matters should be measured by numbers of tickets sold, but apparently I am an idiot.
Rounding out the weekend's top five were 28 Weeks Later (opening with $10 mil), Georgia Rule (debuting with $5.9 mil, about enough to cover La Lohan's late days), Disturbia ($4.8 mil) and Delta Farce ($3.5 mil).
|
TVGuide Links:
|
|
|
|
May 14, 2007 8:50 AM
|
|
they should measure by tickets sold, not price earned. I payed WAY more for my Spiderman 3 ticket than my Spiderman 2 ticket (and definitely way more than Spiderman 1).
|
|
May 14, 2007 10:05 AM
|
But.....was it more worth it than seeing a Lindsay Lohan movie? Think about it. ">
|
|
May 14, 2007 10:40 AM
|
|
I agree about the number of tickets sold. My theater (and I assume many others) bump up ticket prices just before the first anticipated summer blockbuster. I certainly wouldn't want to measure its quality by its success. I worked at a theater after high school during the summer of Jurassic Park, and that was an insane experience. Matt, do you ever have lists comparing adjusted ticket costs against certain movies made ten or twenty years ago? Maybe that's a question for Maitland. Being a huge fan of the first two Spiderman movies, I was quite disappointed with this one. At least I only contributed a matinee price to the total!
|
|
May 14, 2007 11:23 AM
|
Matt-I think they should measure by number of tickets too - they can't fairly compare the original Star Wars opening to Spider Man (or any other blockbuster) today when the tickets cost double or more that what they did then.
So i don't think you're an idiot at all!
|
|
May 14, 2007 1:09 PM
|
Quite some time ago I made a similar agruement as your number of tickets sold arguement. I took it a bit further and said the true success of a movie should be based on number of tickets sold divided by the population size (or estimated eize) at the time. Population size constantly grows so just a straight count of tickets sold while better then money, still isn't a fair comparison of how popular a movie is compared to past movies. Of course we'll never see anything other then money values, which means some day another Howard the Duck type movie will be viewed as more successful then the original Star Wars movie simply because it made more money due to $50 ticket prices.
BTW Spidey 3 was merely average as far as superhero movies go. I'd rate it way below Spidey 2 and a good bit below Spidey 1. The villian storylines seemed tossed in as an afterthought to the main story of Peter and Mary-Jane's relationship. Who knew you could cross action and chick flick genres? I'm not surprised by the big drop in ticket sales.
|
|
May 14, 2007 4:54 PM
|
|
You have to use number of tickets sold, as opposed to money made, to judge the success of a movie. GONE WITH THE WIND tickets were a quarter each. I paid $13.50 for IMAX tickets to SPIDER-MAN 3. I do think factoring in population growth may be a bit excessive though. If you get that technical then you have to factor in the people that see the same movie more than once. Basic number of tickets sold is more than enough to gauge a movie's true success.
|
|
May 15, 2007 6:28 AM
|
