Spider-Man: Far From Home is the first Spidey film to make over $1 billion

[A Maze Thing]

The adjusting for inflation thing is mostly nonsense.

It ignores the fact that the entire culture has changed over time.

People went to the movies in much greater numbers in, say, 1939 because there was nothing else for entertainment.

Movies weren't competing with TV, or video games, or streaming, or DVDs or DVRs or any of the other modern distractions that fragment the entertainment dollar today.

And adjusting for inflation also assumes that somehow Gone with the Wind or whatever would have sold the same amount of tickets at today's prices.

It's ridiculous. People just need to stop trying to insert that "when not adjusted for inflation" asterisk when mentioning that a movies crosses a box milestone.

Congrats to Far From Home. Loved it, glad to see it meet with such success.

Ridiculous to say there was nothing else for entertainment in 1939. I'm sure there were a lot of theaters, night clubs and stuff. Gone with the Wind wasn't exactly aimed at teenagers as most blockbusters are today.

[A Maze Thing]

Making a billion dollars seems to happen far more now than it did before. It was a big unattainable thing when Titanic did it in the 90s. None of the Star Wars hit that number in the '70s. But A New Hope is still the biggest of those films. But then all sorts of movies hit that mark these days...freaking Aquaman, the Pirates of the Caribbean movies nobody remembers, Minions, two of the Transformers movies, and so on. I wonder if that means a billion dollars means less than it did once, even if it still means more than any of us here can fathom.

At best it means highest grossing movie of a given year or year after doesn't mean anything inherently.

Also remember that Far From Home's US box-office sales is $329mn and more. As a rule, any Hollywood production rises and thrives on its US Sales. Foreign and international sales count for less because grosses there go into all kinds of fees, international distributors and so on. Like Age of Ultron made a billion dollars but disney executives and so on considered it a failure because it didn't make enough in US.

''

The international market is much bigger today. Just look at China. Western movies were banned from the country for decades until 1994. And it was a small market for some time. It's only the past ten years or so China has seen a massive growth. China had less then 5000 screens in 2009. Today they have over 66000. And that is probably the biggest reason (even bigger than inflation of ticket prices) I personally think comparing the money movies released today makes with movies older than ten years is really pointless and a waste of time

[Revolutionary_Jack]

''

The international market is much bigger today. Just look at China. Western movies were banned from the country for decades until 1994. And it was a small market for some time. It's only the past ten years or so China has seen a massive growth. China had less then 5000 screens in 2009. Today they have over 66000. And that is probably the biggest reason (even bigger than inflation of ticket prices) I personally think comparing the money movies released today makes with movies older than ten years is really pointless and a waste of time

China actually keeps the lion’s share of Chinese market grosses. In those markets, Hollywood works for them and not vice versa. As per the deal, Hollywood gets 25% of grosses. In other countries it’s 50% and maybe more.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lat...%3F_amp%3Dtrue

[CrimsonEchidna]

China actually keeps the lion’s share of Chinese market grosses. In those markets, Hollywood works for them and not vice versa. As per the deal, Hollywood gets 25% of grosses. In other countries it’s 50% and maybe more.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lat...%3F_amp%3Dtrue

I think in some cases studios will work out deals with China, like how Iron Man 3 had a scene recorded exclusively for the Chinese Market, or how the last Michael Bay Transformers movie was a straight up Chinese Co-Production.

[boots]

I think in some cases studios will work out deals with China, like how Iron Man 3 had a scene recorded exclusively for the Chinese Market, or how the last Michael Bay Transformers movie was a straight up Chinese Co-Production.

yeah, i have no china figures on this, but it wouldn't surprise me. disney have worked out better % ticket sales elsewhere than other studios, china might be the same

[Frontier]

I think in some cases studios will work out deals with China, like how Iron Man 3 had a scene recorded exclusively for the Chinese Market, or how the last Michael Bay Transformers movie was a straight up Chinese Co-Production.

Honest Trailers had a lot of fun with this .

[Mister Mets]

And it's going to top Skyfall as Sony's biggest hit.

https://deadline.com/2019/08/spider-...ll-1202670412/

[Jman27]

And it's going to top Skyfall as Sony's biggest hit.

https://deadline.com/2019/08/spider-...ll-1202670412/

the power of the mcu

[WebSlingWonder]

Looks like Sony is going to re-release Spider-Man: Far From Home in theaters with deleted scenes for...reasons? Either way, I may see it again.
https://www.cbr.com/spider-man-far-f...eleted-scenes/

[WebLurker]

Looks like Sony is going to re-release Spider-Man: Far From Home in theaters with deleted scenes for...reasons? Either way, I may see it again.
https://www.cbr.com/spider-man-far-f...eleted-scenes/

Okay, sounds like fun. Will have to mark my calendar.

[Jokerz79]

Ridiculous to say there was nothing else for entertainment in 1939. I'm sure there were a lot of theaters, night clubs and stuff. Gone with the Wind wasn't exactly aimed at teenagers as most blockbusters are today.

But in 1939 there was no TV I know it was invented but not mass produced to the masses yet so outside of some releases every few years once a film left theaters chances were you might not see it again. We see films within months of release now even sooner if someone pirates so yeah making money now is more impressive IMO.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

But in 1939 there was no TV I know it was invented but not mass produced to the masses yet so outside of some releases every few years once a film left theaters chances were you might not see it again. We see films within months of release now even sooner if someone pirates so yeah making money now is more impressive IMO.

In the '30s you had Radio, you had theatre, you had dances, and while sports was still not as big today it was developing. After all one of the biggest figures of the '30s was Babe Ruth. So it's not a media wasteland where cinema was all people had that some are making things out to be.

Also remember that Hollywood made more movies per year back then, than they did today. So competition was fiercer as opposed to today where so much is banked on a few tentpole releases. In the case of Disney, almost exclusively.

In any case adjusted for inflation isn't about alternative entertainment competing for much today. IT's the comparative ratio of dollar-per-ticket prices then and now.

[Jokerz79]

In the '30s you had Radio, you had theatre, you had dances, and while sports was still not as big today it was developing. After all one of the biggest figures of the '30s was Babe Ruth. So it's not a media wasteland where cinema was all people had that some are making things out to be.

Also remember that Hollywood made more movies per year back then, than they did today. So competition was fiercer as opposed to today where so much is banked on a few tentpole releases. In the case of Disney, almost exclusively.

In any case adjusted for inflation isn't about alternative entertainment competing for much today. IT's the comparative ratio of dollar-per-ticket prices then and now.

Yes you had other options but if you liked a film once it left theaters the mind set would be unless a release down the road you wouldn't see it again.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Yes you had other options but if you liked a film once it left theaters the mind set would be unless a release down the road you wouldn't see it again.

In the classic period, the first release of a movie depending on its success could last for years. Gone with the Wind didn't have a short release window and skedaddled. It actually stayed on screen for years and so on, depending on theaters and so on. That also applied to all movies. You also had repertory theatres where you could see films after their first release ended. This practice continued until the mid-60s or so.

Heck why do you think it's possible that so many classic comics characters are influenced by silent films. Silent films, surviving ones (only 25% of all total productions, some estimates make it lower) were obscure stuff in the '30s and yet young writers and artists like Siegel and Shuster, Bill Finger and Jerry Robinson were all inspired by silent films for stuff like Superman (Metropolis is named after the silent epic), and The Man Who Laughs and a lot of other films. Steve Ditko was also inspired by silent films and his biographer Blake Bell noted he was known for regularly visiting repertory theaters to see older films.

So again this argument that older releases had special advantages does not hold up.

[WebSlingWonder]

According to CBR and Sony Pictures, the re-release will include four additional minutes of a "never before seen action sequence."

https://www.cbr.com/spider-man-far-f...heatrical-cut/

I'm betting that it'll be the fight against the Manfredi Family that was shown in the trailer, but cut from the film. Why cut that scene in the first place? It looked cool.