Lame is right. But more like another lame attempt to make “Avatar” look more successful than it actually is.

Re: rereleases. That’s mentioned in the piece. If you didn’t read it before commenting, that’s not my responsibility.

>>>>>>>>>>That means if your movie is re-released 5 or 10 years later, the amount of money earned per ticket is more (b/c of inflation), plus the movie gets credited additional dollars to it’s total with inflation calculated on top of that.

Yes, but you’re wrong anyhow. Box Office Mojo calculates the inflation-adjusted ticket costs for the year of the rerelease. Now, *that* you omitted from your tirade.

So, if “Snow White” made $100 million in 1970, that amount will be added to the film’s inflation-adjusted total as **1970** $100 million. That should be obvious. Else, “Snow White” would have made a couple of trillion dollars on that chart.

>>>>>>>>In fact, the only post 80’s movies on that list above Avatar are 1) The Empire Strikes back … 2) ET, & 3) Titanic (will be re-released in 2012).

That’s because more people went to the movies in the past. Four billion movie tickets were sold a year in the 1940s. (http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1817&dat=19770330&id=10YgAAAAIBAJ&sjid=850EAAAAIBAJ&pg=6763,5117412) Today they’re lucky if they sell 1.4 billion even though the population of the United States is more than twice what it was then.

>>>>>>>>>So in summary, to prove that Avatar is less successful, the author has needed to…

The author has needed to do only one thing. Come up with best possible approximation for the # of tickets the movie has sold (in current dollar terms). That’s what the inflation-adjusted chart is all about. That’s it.

>>>>>3) claim that downloads which weren’t available for any other film ahead of Avatar on the list had no impact which it most certainly would have, particularly for people afraid of 3D hurting their eyes,

C’mon, you must be able to come up with better arguments than this.

>>>>>>>>>4) the market has changed and today there are more big budget movies knocking Avatar out of cinemas such as Alice,

Clearly, you don’t understand the way the market worked 30 or 40 or 50 or 60 years ago if you believe big studio movies are something new. Take a look at the movies released in 1939 or 1940 or 1950 or 1960 or 1970 and you’ll find lots and lots of big, big movies that were very successful. (And some that weren’t.)

>>>>>>>>>5) today people also have to content with television, pay TV and DVDs which is an option but I suppose the author would discount this as not applying to Avatar

You should read the article before commenting.

“Most pre-1980 pictures achieved their totals through multiple releases, especially Disney animated features which made much of their totals in the past few decades belying their original release dates in terms of adjustment. For example, Snow White has made $118,328,683 of its unadjusted $184,925,486 total since 1983.”

That means if your movie is re-released 5 or 10 years later, the amount of money earned per ticket is more (b/c of inflation), plus the movie gets credited additional dollars to it’s total with inflation calculated on top of that.

In fact, the only post 80′s movies on that list above Avatar are 1) The Empire Strikes back (which is only $10M ahead of Avatar and will be caught, plus that was re-released in the 90s with extra scenes), 2) ET, & 3) Titanic (will be re-released in 2012).

So in summary, to prove that Avatar is less successful, the author has needed to: 1) rely on data that is adjusted for inflation in it’s release year when almost all the movies ahead were re-released years later, 2) discount Avatar’s 3D surcharge which is valid considering it is adding value the other movies aren’t, 3) claim that downloads which weren’t available for any other film ahead of Avatar on the list had no impact which it most certainly would have, particularly for people afraid of 3D hurting their eyes, 4) the market has changed and today there are more big budget movies knocking Avatar out of cinemas such as Alice, 5) today people also have to content with television, pay TV and DVDs which is an option but I suppose the author would discount this as not applying to Avatar, 6) excluded the fact that it hasn’t even been released for 100 days yet so this article is a bit pre-mature, 7) exclude the fact that it has earned more than twice that of any film in history worldwide.

In 7-10 days this article will be redundant anyway as Avatar is on track to take Ben Hur despite all the dodgy inflation accounting. Plus, like all the great movies on that list Avatar is set for re-release later this year with additional scenes. It may very well be re-released again decades later too when movie prices are $37 each and have it’s total figure adjusted from amounts of $7.61. That would really stuff the argument up (when it’s finally competing on the same field). What will Avatar haters use as evidence for how unsuccessful it is then?

1. $3,429,000,000 Gone With The Wind 51% domestic
2. $2,670,000,000 Avatar 27%
3. $2,476,600,000 Titanic 32%