UKC

From Wikipedia.
What a profoundly depressing list (give or take about a 6 entries.)








Highest-grossing films
Rank Title Worldwide gross Year Ref
1 Avatar $2,782,275,172 2009 [# 1]
2 Titanic $2,186,772,302 1997 [# 2]
3 Marvel's The Avengers $1,511,757,910 2012 [# 3]
4 Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2 $1,341,511,219 2011 [# 4]
5 Iron Man 3 $1,215,439,994 2013 [# 5]
6 Transformers: Dark of the Moon $1,123,746,996 2011 [# 6]
7 The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King $1,119,929,521 2003 [# 7]
8 Skyfall $1,108,561,013 2012 [# 8]
9 The Dark Knight Rises $1,084,439,099 2012 [# 9]
10 Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest $1,066,179,725 2006 [# 10]
11 Toy Story 3 $1,063,171,911 2010 [# 11]
12 Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides $1,043,871,802 2011 [# 12]
13 Jurassic Park $1,029,153,882 1993 [# 13]
14 Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace $1,027,044,677 1999 [# 14]
15 Alice in Wonderland $1,024,299,904 2010 [# 15]
16 The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey $1,017,003,568 2012 [# 16]
17 The Dark Knight $1,004,558,444 2008 [# 17]
18 The Lion King $987,483,777 1994 [# 18]
19 Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone $974,755,371 2001 [# 19]
20 Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End $963,420,425 2007 [# 20]
21 Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1 $960,283,305 2010 [# 21]
22 Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix $939,885,929 2007 [# 22]
23 Finding Nemo $936,743,261 2003 [# 23]
24 Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince $934,416,487 2009 [# 24]
25 The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers $926,047,111 2002 [# 25]
26 Shrek 2 $919,838,758 2004 [# 26]
27 Despicable Me 2 $916,040,000 2013 [# 27]
28 Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire $896,911,078 2005 [# 28]
29 Spider-Man 3 $890,871,626 2007 [# 29]
30 Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs $886,686,817 2009 [# 30]
31 Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets $878,979,634 2002 [# 31]
32 Ice Age: Continental Drift $877,244,782 2012 [# 32]
33 The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring $871,530,324 2001 [# 33]
34 Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith $848,754,768 2005 [# 34]
35 Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen $836,303,693 2009 [# 35]
36 The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 2 $829,685,377 2012 [# 36]
37 Inception $825,532,764 2010 [# 37]
38 Spider-Man $821,708,551 2002 [# 38]
39 Independence Day $817,400,891 1996 [# 39]
40 Shrek the Third $798,958,162 2007 [# 40]
41 Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban $796,688,549 2004 [# 41]
42 E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial $792,910,554 1982 [# 42]
43 Fast & Furious 6 $788,679,850 2013 [# 43]
44 Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull $786,636,033 2008 [# 44]
45 Spider-Man 2 $783,766,341 2004 [# 45]
46 Star Wars $775,398,007 1977 [# 46]
47 2012 $769,679,473 2009 [# 47]
48 The Da Vinci Code $758,239,851 2006 [# 48]
49 Shrek Forever After $752,600,867 2010 [# 49]
50 The Amazing Spider-Man $752,216,557 2012 [# 50]
Highest-grossing films adjusted for inflation

In reply to Dispater:

ive seen 6 of them, and am happy with that, tho could have done without avatar.

In reply to Dispater: You can stick Gravity in amongst that lot after its done the rounds, it broke box office records for its opening week.

In reply to Dispater:

If you Look at the top 10 adjusted for inflation, its a much Better List, with gone with the wind number 1.

In reply to Dispater:

People want to be entertained, so that's what the entertainment industry delivers. I don't know why you find this depressing.

In reply to 999thAndy:


Me neither.

Maybe Dispater could tell us which 6 films were up to his standards. Personally none of them would enter my top 50 list but I don't find it depressing that people choose this list of escapism in the cinema.

In reply to Dispater:

If you could determine which should be the top ten money grossing films, which ones would you choose?

In reply to Dispater: it is depressing, where is 'Sharknado' ?

In reply to paul_in_cumbria:

It's shocking. I don't see Mega Shark vs Crocosaurus either.

In reply to Dispater:

Adjusting for inflation seems a strange thing to do when the things being compared - audiences - are already comparable. All this shows is that cinema ticket prices have risen way faster than inflation.

In reply to Dispater:

Would you really be happy if your favourite film was top of that list?

In reply to anonymouse:


That's just plain wrong. Cinema tickets are now one third cheaper than they were 2 generations ago. Relative to inflation and earnings.

In reply to estivoautumnal:

No way.

In reply to anonymouse:


Way! (sorry, homage to "Wayne's World" there)

I don't understand the comment about these highest grossing being adjusted for inflation. Then Choss states that 'Gone with the Wind' is #1 when adjusted for inflation. Which is it?

Also, in purely box office takings, what are the top 10 films of all time, accounting for inflation.

In reply to Fraser:




I think that, adjusted for inflation, it's bound to be Gone with the Wind. Such huge number saw it, before the days of television, when there was no other mass entertainment on remotely that scale.

In reply to Fraser:

Dispater's list is unadjusted for inflation.

This is the inflation-adjusted top ten:

1 Gone with the Wind $3,301,400,000 1939
2 Avatar $2,782,300,000 2009
3 Star Wars $2,710,800,000 1977
4 Titanic $2,413,800,000T 1997
5 The Sound of Music $2,269,800,000 1965
6 E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial $2,216,800,000 1982
7 The Ten Commandments $2,098,600,000 1956
8 Doctor Zhivago $1,988,600,000 1965
9 Jaws $1,945,100,000 1975
10 Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs $1,746,100,000 1937

In reply to Bob Hughes:

The confusion arises from the way he copied it, accidentally adding the "adjusted" phrase to the bottom of his list when it's actually the title of the next list.

In reply to Fraser:
Was gone with the wind really that good of a film that it deserves top spot?

The list above doesn't surprise me other than Ironman 3 and Transformers the rest are entertaining enough films.

In reply to Dispater:
That is a sad list.

In reply to Dispater: I have seen all of them but only went to the cinema for 6-7 of them

In reply to Dispater:

Nothing depressing about the list at all. apart form around 6 I've seen and enjoyed most although i haven;'t contributed greatly to the box office takings.
nothing at all wrong with folks going to see entertaining movies. it would be a sad world indeed if people only went to see the depressing art house movies that get mentioned time and time again by the UKC willy wavers

In reply to Dispater:

I bet none of them have made a profit either.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/09/how-hollywood-accountin...

In reply to Dispater: I really enjoyed Avatar & Titanic. Nice to see them do well.

In reply to graeme jackson:


How true. It's only a sad list if you are a sad person.

In reply to Dispater:

Would be very interested in seeing this list ordered by gross box office takings divided by advertising spend.

They do seem to predominantly be films from 2000 onwards when the studios seem to have focused their efforts a lot more on a single (or a few) "blockbuster" films per year, in fact teh only ones I could see prior to 2000 were LIon King, Independance Day, Starwars and ET.

There is also (understandably) a bias towards kids films - especially animations, and as a result there aren't many on there I would want to see that I haven't already

In reply to Bob Hughes:

Shit, I've only seen two of those, and one of them was under duress.

In reply to Dispater:


My favourite kind of UKC thread.

E

In reply to Dispater:

Why depressing?

If a list of films makes you depressed you need to get out more.

for most people, UKC navel gazers and pseuds excepted, work bloody hard in dull jobs, doing dull day to day shit and perhaps, just perhaps, enjoy an escapist, easy on the brain film.

In reply to graeme jackson:

I find that enjoying blockbusters like "Gravity" and appreciating more cerebral films like "The Lives of Others" are not mutually exclusive activities.

In reply to 999thAndy:


The confusion comes in that very few, if any, on that listing entertain (me at least).

The general theme seems to be they all have a "happy ending", or even if the story ends sadly there is still a sense of redemption, glory, a more cheerful sequel in the pipeline or some other Hollywood twaddle. Can't stand that crap. Nothing there alludes to life "like teardrops in the rain", no healthy dose of realism or trauma.

Escapism appears to be what the masses want.

In reply to Nevis-the-cat:

I in one of those jobs you describe and get more satisfaction in seeing a film which matches my own experience (perhaps I'd enjoy Hellraiser?) rather than watching something that requires my brain to be force-ably shut down.

Exhibit A: Quantaum of Solace. Every few minutes my brain would scream at me in incredulity. It was exhausting constantly telling myself to "be calm", "accept it", "move on" after every preposterous scene. But everyone seems to love this stuff.

In reply to David Martin:

There's some good stuff there - Toy Story, Finding Nemo, Shrek, Titanic, Independence Day, Pirates of the Caribbean, Indiana Jones - these are extraordinary films, with wit, plot, irony, self reflection. Love 'em.

In reply to David Martin:


Utter tommyrot. I am no Nolan fanboy but his three films in the list in the OP are infused with trauma and despite being fantasy films, there is realism in the characterisation. Ditto the three Spider Man films there. Why do people insist on putting BladeRunner on such a pedestal anyway? It's just a film noir with flying cars


Toy Story 3 and E.T. The Extra Terrestrial should be worthy of your critical faculties too.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Without the industry supported by the blockbusters the independents and such wouldn't have any platform at all. Suck it up.

The Harry potter films are surprisingly good as is The Lord of the rings films - and I've been reading the books since primary school actually before anyone pipes up about them. I read the trilogy once every 2 years at most and can still enjoy the films.

In reply to estivoautumnal:


Well the question that raises is whether, when adjusting inflation, you use a general measure of inflation (like RPI) or a context-specific one (I wouldn't be surprised if the ONS produce a cinema ticket specific inflation index).

And while we're at it, how do you get both accurate box office takings and year on year inflation figures for every country I the world? And what exchange rate do you use? Market rates, purchasing power parities?

In reply to Milesy:

Why is that post directed at me? I completely agree with your first statement and have been "sucking it up" for 20 years. I can't comment on Harry Potter movies or books and I never have commented on them.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

yhm

In reply to David Martin:
>[...] Can't stand that crap. Nothing there alludes to life "like teardrops in the rain", no healthy dose of realism or trauma.


If they want a healthy dose of realism, they can stay at home, or at work or go to the pub. If they want a 'healthy dose' of trauma they could become an ambulance driver or a fireman or a social worker or ... you get the idea ...

In reply to Blue Straggler:


Your post was the last one in the list to click the reply button

In reply to Milesy:

Have you got "New Forum Layout Blues"?

In reply to victim of mathematics:

Context specific? Like, the cost of a ticket? Why not count tickets sold?

how about a profit / cost ratio top 10 that'd be interesting ..

In reply to myth:


No, but I would rather watch it than the two James Cameron offerings that follow it.

In reply to lithos:


Deep Throat isn't it?

In reply to The New NickB:

i'll take your word for that !