What will it take to beat Titanic's box office record?

[Dynasty]

Out of curiosity, I looked up The Top Grossing Movies of All Time at the Worldwide Box Office. I was surprised by just how big a margin Titanic has over the #2 movie on the list.

Is this record unbreakable for the forseeable future (assuming inflation stays under control)? If you don't think so, I'd like to invest in your script idea.

1 Titanic (1997) $1,835,300,000

2 Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001) $965,700,000

3 Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999) $922,300,000

4 Jurassic Park (1993) $919,700,000

5 Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) $860,200,000

6 Independence Day (1996) $811,200,000

7 Spider-Man (2002) $806,700,000

8 Star Wars (1977) $797,900,000

9 Lion King, The (1994) $767,700,000

10 E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982) $756,700,000

[Easy E]

those numbers! almost 2 BILLION dollars? And what are Star Wars numbers in 2002 dollars, I wonder?

Also, would the recent movie numbers ONLY be box office, not video sales?

[B-Man]

Dynasty,

Without commenting specifically on the accuracy of the data you provided, I'd like to point out the following:

1. That data is not inflation-adjusted. A movie ticket cost fifty cents when Gone with the Wind was originally released. If you factor in inflation, that would have a major effect.

2. Population growth is another factor to be considered. There are more people in the world each year, and there are more potential movie-goers. In addition, while I haven't researched the number of movie theatres over the years, I would suspect more people have access to movie theatres today than 5, 10, 20, 30... any number of years ago.

3. I've read that worldwide gross receipts data is not reliable, as there is no international agency which compiles this information (in the U.S., every theatre and studio participates in a tallying system--this is not the case in many other countries).

Points 1 and 2 above tend to favor newer movies. For example, on the list of top grossing movies in the U.S., 15 of the top 20 were first released in 1990 or later!

=====================================

All of that being said, it is shocking how much Titanic was able to gross. I guess it will not be beaten until another movie comes along which captures the imagination of that economic force, teenage girls, who go to see the movie over, and over, and over...

============================

Top 50+ All Time Highest Grossing Movies
(Domestic gross ticket receipts in $millions)


Total Year
Gross Movie Released
----------------------------------------------------------
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. $309 Return of the Jedi 1983
12. $307 * Star Wars: Attack of the Clones 2002
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
21. $251 Batman 1989
22. $250 Men in Black 1997
23. $246 Toy Story 2 1999
24. $242 Raiders of the Lost Ark 1981
25. $242 Twister 1996
26. $239 Ghostbusters 1984
27. $235 Beverly Hills Cop 1984
28. $234 Cast Away 2000
29. $229 The Lost World: Jurassic Park 1997
30. $226 Rush Hour 2 2001
31. $226 * Signs 2002
32. $219 Mrs. Doubtfire 1993
33. $218 Ghost 1990
34. $217 Aladdin 1992
35. $216 Saving Private Ryan 1998
36. $215 Mission: Impossible 2 2000
37. $213 Austin Powers in Goldmember 2002
38. $211 Back to the Future 1985
39. $205 Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me 1999
40. $204 Terminator 2: Judgement Day 1991
41. $204 The Exorcist 1973
42. $202 Armageddon 1998
43. $202 The Mummy Returns 2001
44. $200 Gone With the Wind 1939
45. $200 * My Big Fat Greek Wedding 2002
46. $199 Pearl Harbor 2001
47. $197 Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade 1989
48. $192 Toy Story 1995
49. $190 Men in Black II 2002
50. $189 Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs 1937
51. $188 Gladiator 2000
52. $184 Dances With Wolves 1990
53. $184 The Fugitive 1993
54. $184 Batman Forever 1995
55. $183 The Perfect Storm 2000
56. $183 What Women Want 2000
57. $183 Ocean's 11 2001
58. $182 Grease 1978
59. $181 Liar Liar 1997
60. $181 Mission: Impossible 1996
61. $181 Jurassic Park III 2001
62. $180 Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom 1984
63. $180 Planet of the Apes 2001
64. $178 Pretty Woman 1990
65. $177 Tootsie 1982
66. $177 Top Gun 1986
67. $176 There's Something About Mary 1998
68. $176 Ice Age 2002
69. $175 "Crocodile" Dundee 1986
70. $173 Home Alone 2: Lost in New York 1992
71. $173 Air Force One 1997
72. $172 Rain Man 1988
73. $172 Apollo 13 1995

[IrishHand]

Yep - those are the accurate numbers. The purported worldwide numbers up top are close to meaningless. Furthermore, as B-Man noted, even the 'real' top 50 he posted is basically worthless since it fails to take into effect inflation.

Gone with the Wind set the standard for blockbusters, and will remain the standard for years and years. Modern moviegoers generally have no idea of how big that movie was relative to what we consider a 'hit' nowadays. Titanic isn't even in the top 10, as it falls short of Gone with the Wind, as well as Star Wars, Empire, Jaws, et al. - basically, any movie still on that list which was released before the mid-80s is underrated since movie tickets have far more than doubled in price since then (and by far larger factors for things like Star Wars and Jaws). For an easy example, no fewer than THREE James Bond movies rate higher than Titanic in inflation-adjusted dollars: Thunderball ('65, $807M), Goldfinger ('64, $726M) and You Only Live Twice ('67, $603M).

Irish

[John Cole]

Perhaps a more interesting question: "Why is Titanic the top grossing film of all time?"

John

[John Cole]

D.W. Griffith's Birth of a Nation, released in 1915, earned 18 million at the box office; however, that total probably is inacccurate. (Still with 18 million, Birth was the highest grossing film until Snow White in 1937.) Since distribution methods were quite different, in some states,
the rights to the film were held outright, and the film may have earned 50 million or more during its initial run. In
1946, it was estimated that 200 million people had seen the
movie. Today that figure might approach 500 million.

Also, the country's population has changed significantly since 1915 when Birth opened. During its first run, it is estimated 1 in 9 Americans saw the film, and surely that figure would have been higher had viewings been open to all during that time. In Boston, 250 Blacks who showed up to buy tickets were denied admission. At the end of the film, stink bombs were tossed, and the ensuing riot spilled outside and involved those who had been denied admission and were cordoned off by the police. Eleven people were arrested, and Mayor James Curley cancelled the showing for the next day.

John

Where's Forrest Gump on that list?? Regardless of how inflation, population and distribution factors affected Titanic's gross it is still impressive.

I think Dynasty was getting at what type of movie could achieve that type of success. I first saw Titanic on the Saturday of opening weekend. I told everyone that I didn't think that somebody could see it and not like it. It was visually impressive, had excellent dialogue writing, a riveting storyline, and played to many different emotions. It was such a huge blockbuster because of word of mouth, and then because of hype (nobody wanted to say that they didn't see Titanic).

A movie to be even close to that successful has to appeal to ALL audiences. Both sexes, adults, teens and even kids. Thus it can't be too offensive, too sappy, or too macho. It's risky to make that kind of movie.

[IrishHand]

It's not that interesting a question since it's only the top grossing film if you ignore basic realities like inflation.

It would sort of be like saying that modern-day Canada is more powerful than 1940 Germany because they have a higher GDP.

[Six_of_One]

I'm not sure where you are getting those numbers from...

According to what I found, when adjusted for inflation, Titanic is #5 all-time domestically, with 639.83 million. Above it on the list, in order, are Gone with the Wind (1 billion), Star Wars (865 million), The Sound of Music (695 million), and ET (687 million).

There are no James Bond films listed in the top 100.

Here is a link to where i found the list:
http://www.fundraising-information.com/other/movies.htm

[IrishHand]

The Bond numbers come from this week's edition of Time magazine. Their omission on your list makes it look pretty useless to me, since by any reasonable calculation involving inflation, both Thunderball and Goldfinger are in the top 100 of all time.

At any rate, I just did a search for top grossing movies of all time, adjusted for inflation, and I got a half dozen rankings which each differed pretty significantly. So...in the absence of one authoritative measure, I'll end my part in this discussion since if nothing else, it's clear that Titanic clearly isn't in the top 4 - which makes this thread pretty pointless. (The ranks I saw had Titanic anywhere from 5 to 9.)

Irish

[John Cole]

You're not thinking carefully enough. Consider why Titanic, perhaps a decent film but nothing special, acheived the success it did. Following your line of reasoning, films released after Titanic should have grossed more.

John

[IrishHand]

Films released after Titanic are GUARANTEED to gross more if you don't factor in inflation. Maybe not this year, maybe not 2010, but it's only a matter of time.

[John Cole]

I agree entirely. Now, why was Titanic, which didn't receive one vote in the Sight and Sound Poll from either critics or directors, so successful? C'mon, this is not an impossible question to speculate about. Keep in mind that the film, like many films, could have flopped, but it didn't. Why were so many people drawn to it?

John

[IrishHand]

Critics and directors could find a hit movie if it slapped them upside the head. They tend to like movies like "Monster's Ball" or "Mulholland Drive" - both critically acclaimed, both box-office flops (in raw numbers, not profitability), and both, to my mind, mind-numbingly unentertaining.

The average moviegoer, as it turns out, is a lot more like me than like Ebert or David Lynch or any other critic or director. The average moviegoer wants to drop some bucks and spend a couple hours being entertained.

If you look at the list of recent successes (eg. non-inflation adjusted top movies), few of them really have redeeming social value. They're pure entertainment. Titanic is the epitome of this. Contrary to the opinion asserted by you and others, it's a phenomenal movie. Did I think it was the greatest movie ever made? No - but a ton of other people did. I thought it was an excellent movie and enjoyed it almost as much the 2nd time through.

Some of the modern movies at the top of the list are, if you look at them critically, atrocious movies. Home Alone? Twister? Independance Day? Rush Hour 2? Armageddon? Mummy Returns? They are all characterized by simple, predictable plots which an 8-year old will understand. They all have acting which can generously be described as mediocre. However, they're entertaining. They have actors who, for a variety of reasons, people enjoy watching, and the previews make them look sufficiently exciting, so people see them. (This raises the related point that the best actors and the most popular actors rarely, if ever, coincide. Tom Cruise has improved from awful to mediocre and that gets him $20M+ per and Oscar consideration on a good day.)

Titanic was an incredibly entertaining love story, set on a historical background that people know enough about to be intruiged, but not enough about to be disinterested.

That's my take, at least...
Irish

[eMarkM]

FWIW, I found this (http://www.the-movie-times.com/thrsdir/alltime.mv?adjusted+ByAG) list of top 100 all time movies inflation adjusted. This kind of analysis has many holes to come up with an accurate number, but it's better than all saying all the top movies came out in the 90s.

Gone with the Wind is #1, Star Wars, Sound of Music, ET, 10 Commandments and Titanic is 6th. So still way up there and will probably climb in re-releases.

[John Cole]

So, Titanic becomes a backdrop for a love story, an impossible love story, of course, but that's a good start in explaining its appeal. I think you misunderstand me a bit; I am interested in understanding why Titanic was popular, and I think it goes beyond an entertaining love story and some special effects. The better we understand why Titanic was popular, the closer we can come to answering Dynasty's question: What will it take to outdo Titanic? (And forget about adjusting for inflation and the like because, without a doubt, it was a popular success.)

Quite frankly, I saw only minutes of the movie on video and thought it so preposterous that I didn't bother to watch. I did, though, like A Night to Remember very much, and I think that the story of the Titanic holds tremendous mythic appeal for our civilization, which, in part, should account for the film's success. That is, it might be difficult to make a bad Titanic movie. If you want to make a successful film, you need to tap into that part of our collective unconscious that links us to the mythic appeal of the story. For example, it's not hard to see why a movie like Home Alone did so well. It played into both the primal fears of parents and children, but more important, it showed how those fears were surmounted. Increasingly, though, with so much attention given in the past few years to child abduction stories, I doubt the movie would succeed in quite the same way it did before.

In much the same way as the Greeks turned out to see the ways in which their playwrights worked out myth through drama, we will turn out to see how film works out our own myths, and I think the story of the Titanic might have the greatest sort of mythic appeal for modern audiences. That's all. But, I'd like to hear other interpretations.

John

[MCS]

Maybe some of you are looking at worldwide numbers and some are looking at U.S. numbers.