Guess the Top 25 franchises of all time in 2020?
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Box Office
SophieSlut — 9 years ago(June 27, 2016 05:32 PM)
We probably all know that awesome Top 25 franchises of all time list that Wikipedia keeps on the "List of Highest Grossing Films" page. If not, here's the link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films#Highest-grossing_franchises_and_film_series
How do you think this list will be in the beginning of 2020? This requires a whole lot of speculation, because we're guessing 3 and a half years into the future.- MCU (17 billion)
- Star Wars (12 billion)
- Harry Potter (9.5 billion)
- James Bond (8 billion) (Maybe they'll be another Bond film and it'll do Spectre numbers?)
- DCEU (6.4 billion)
- Transformers (6.3 billion)
- X-Men (6.2 billion) (I don't know what they have up their sleeves exactly but I'm sure they can make about 500-600 million a year)
- The Fast and The Furious (6 billion)
- Middle Earth (5.9 billion)
- Avengers (5.7 billion)
- Batman (5 billion)
- Spider-Man (4.9 billion)
- Jurassic Park (4.7 billion)
- Despicable Me (4.6 billion) (assuming they make 2 new movies before 2020)
- Pirates of the Caribbean (4.4 billion)
- Avatar (4.2 billion)
- Star Trek (3.9 billion) (assuming Star Trek 4 comes out in 2019)
- Shrek (3.5 billion)
- Ice Age (3.4 billion) (depending on whether Ice Age 6 comes out in 2019)
- Twilight (3.3 billion)
- Toy Story (3.1 billion)
- The Hunger Games (3 billion)
- Mission Impossible (2.8 billion) (I'm guessing the 6th film won't be out til next decade)
- Indiana Jones (2.7 billion)
- Superman (2.6 billion)
-
SophieSlut — 9 years ago(October 06, 2016 12:46 PM)
It's a lot more meaningful than adjusting, which is many cases arbitrary guess work, especially when taking into account countries that aren't the United States.
With an ever-sliding emphasis on recent movies, it kinda helps to phase out older films that no longer have any place in modern culture.
Also, I think you'll find that most franchise movies are recent regardless. -
L0GAN5 — 9 years ago(October 06, 2016 03:18 PM)
Adjusting for inflation isn't "arbitrary guesswork", it's a sound economic concept. I doubt you will find any serious financial comparison over a period of decades that doesn't do it. You can hardly argue that James Bond and Star Wars films don't have a place in modern culture anymore, either. A few years ago The Economist published an adjusted franchise list and it gives a far better overall picture of the most successful franchises:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/07/film-franchises -
SophieSlut — 9 years ago(October 06, 2016 10:05 PM)
Adjusting for inflation isn't "arbitrary guesswork", it's a sound economic concept.
Sure, if you're looking at something like a carton of eggs and in the United States only. With tickets, there's a little more complications involved.
Adjusting for inflation in countries where limited historical information is available is certainly guess work.
What I don't understand is, why would we be adjusting for inflation, and not adjusting for all the other factors that affect the gross of a film. The population, overseas shares, exchange rate, market expansion, competition, longevity, etc.
What I mean by diminishing cultural presence is that a movie that's 10 years old won't necessarily have as much of an impact on the list as a movie that was released 1 year ago, just like it probably won't have as much of a cultural presence. -
L0GAN5 — 9 years ago(October 07, 2016 02:34 AM)
By adjusting for inflation you are formulating a concept of value in today's terms. What the exchange rates were, what the population size was, market expansion etc doesn't really come into it: sure, those things
affect the business
that the film did but we are not really trying to guess how successful the film would be today (tastes have changed and I doubt the world would be clamoring for Gone with the Wind now). You wouldn't adjust those factors if the industry simply counted admissions for instance. -
cornnetto — 9 years ago(October 07, 2016 07:07 AM)
What I don't understand is, why would we be adjusting for inflation, and not adjusting for all the other factors that affect the gross of a film.
It make sense when the list are in dollar sign to use the same dollar, it is almost an equivalent of not using yen and Euro face value when ranking or comparing them, but converting them in the same currency, comparing US dollar from different year is about as invalid as directly comparing euro ands dollar without any ratio and no one ever do that.
If the list was a success or cultural impact score and not in dollar, all the factor you named would be taken into account.
That said for a trivia game like you did, I don't have any issue with it, the rules are clear, and it is only about trying to predict what will happen in the next 4 year's (so inflation should not be a big factor at all anyway and still a valid part of the game) -
cornnetto — 9 years ago(October 06, 2016 01:18 PM)
Sure, for almost anyone on this board Top 25 franchises in 2020 will mean nothing any way you put it (tickets, adjusted, unadjusted, etc), it is only a trivia game.
And adjusting worldwide result is so difficult (it is already difficult domestic), that it make the trivia game usually just too hard to play.