The Dark Knight

[Castigator]

Originally Posted by All time worldwide grosses

Rank Title Studio Worldwide Domestic / % Overseas / % Year
1 Titanic Par. $1,842.9 $600.8 32.6% $1,242.1 67.4% 1997
2 The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King NL $1,119.3 $377.0 33.7% $742.2 66.3% 2003
3 Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest BV $1,066.2 $423.3 39.7% $642.9 60.3% 2006
4 Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone WB $976.5 $317.6 32.5% $658.9 67.5% 2001
5 Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End BV $961.0 $309.4 32.2% $651.6 67.8% 2007
6 Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix WB $938.5 $292.0 31.1% $646.5 68.9% 2007
7 The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers NL $926.3 $341.8 36.9% $584.5 63.1% 2002
8 Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace Fox $924.3 $431.1 46.6% $493.2 53.4% 1999
9 Shrek 2 DW $919.8 $441.2 48.0% $478.6 52.0% 2004
10 Jurassic Park Uni. $914.7 $357.1 39.0% $557.6 61.0% 1993

Dunno..

Titanic may not appeal to the geeky MMORPGs-Comics-Star Trek crowd, but if you don't see how it's a quality movie that pulled all the right strings, your delusional.

[Laedrun]

Titanic was a date movie, taking a girl to titanic meant getting to fuck the shit outta her afterwards, much cheaper than a fancy dinner or something that took effort. hence money

[Kaige]

Yeah, Titanic got a lot of girls going back numerous times. My sister and her friends I know for sure went back at least 3.


We should get a movement going to get everyone to go back again and again to Dark Knight so we take Titanic down.

[Castigator]

What's the point?

Does it change your enjoyment of a movie in any way whether it make 10, 100 or 100.000 billion $$$ or you're the only one who's ever seen it?

Besides, prospects getting laid is a much better incentive to go through the repetitive boredom of watching a movie you've seen before than .. well .. what would be the point to watch TDK more than once?

[Zerai]

Christian Bale 'flew off the handle after family begged for £100k' | Mail Online

Haha. They begged him for money. Classy.

[Mishima]

or open in a new tab

[Believe]

I have yet to see the movie (Was going to go opening weekend, even had a ticket), but just wanted to add, this is the first movie I've ever known anyone that wanted to go see it again in theaters.

[Lowk]

What's really kind of impressive about the titanic world gross is that it was released a decade ago when ticket prices were 2-4$ cheaper at most theaters. Even if Dark Knight manages to pass it by a small margin, titanic for it's place and time, is probably still more of a success $$$ wise.

[Rathgar]

Originally Posted by Castigator

What's the point?

Does it change your enjoyment of a movie in any way whether it make 10, 100 or 100.000 billion $$$ or you're the only one who's ever seen it?

No, I doubt it affects anyone's direct enjoyment of the actual film. But it affects their enjoyment of films, when you consider what is or isn't made is based on the success of a movie like the Dark Knight. I could be wrong, but I believe people want to see it break records because it deserves to and needs to. It's a good thing when movies like the Dark Knight destroy the box office, because it promotes the future production of (hopefully) similar quality films. It sucks when you think about how many films are compromised for the sake of the dollar, whether it's length, content, rating, whatever.

Obviously we don't have much to worry about at this point. I'd be delighted to see it surpass Titanic, but it's not something I've overly concerned about. As long as it stomps Spiderman 3, I'll be glad. That movie was a rotting pile of horse shit.

Besides, prospects getting laid is a much better incentive to go through the repetitive boredom of watching a movie you've seen before than .. well .. what would be the point to watch TDK more than once?

I have no idea, what a fucking mystery. Why would anyone ever want to see a movie they consider to be phenomenal more than once? That's a fucking ridiculous notion. Next you'll be suggesting people might actually want to purchase a film on some sort of home entertainment medium so that they might be able to watch it whenever they want.

[Dontauro]

I saw it three times, I was semi forced to the 3rd though.

Everytime I see trailers on TV for the movie I want to go back and see it.

[Araxen]

It is important on how much the film grosses because it'll spark or reinforce the more realistic/grittier/serious super hero movies are what will make the most cash. Hopefully it'll get rid of partially the spiderman 3's, fantastic fours type of super hero movies.

[Criminiminal]

Originally Posted by Mishima

or open in a new tab

Is that from Inside the Actors Studio? If it's not, I think he's about due.

[Faille]

Originally Posted by Lowk

What's really kind of impressive about the titanic world gross is that it was released a decade ago when ticket prices were 2-4$ cheaper at most theaters. Even if Dark Knight manages to pass it by a small margin, titanic for it's place and time, is probably still more of a success $$$ wise.

If you're going to bring inflation into it, then nothing comes close to Gone With the Wind.

[Bristlebane]

Here's an article talking some sense about IMDB's flawed ratings system.

Is The Dark Knight really the best film ever made? | Film | guardian.co.uk

So how does the Dark Knight fare on other barometers? Metacritic, which is based on "reviews from respected critics and publications", gives it a more sober 82% - not even in the top 200. Guy Maddin's latest, My Winnipeg, beats it with 85%, while only The Godfather gets a perfect 100. Rotten Tomatoes gives the Dark Knight a "Tomatometer" rating of 95% - very "fresh", but several hundred movies get a 100% rating (number 1 is Toy Story 2, The Godfather is number 7). To me, it's highly unlikely that The Dark Knight will turn up on slower lists like the American film institute's "100 Greatest Movies of All Time", Sight and Sound's Top Ten or any other.

[Fedor]

Metacritic, which is based on "reviews from respected critics and publications", gives it a more sober 82% - not even in the top 200.

Metacritic is just Rottentomatoes with fewer reviews.

Rotten Tomatoes gives the Dark Knight a "Tomatometer" rating of 95% - very "fresh", but several hundred movies get a 100% rating (number 1 is Toy Story 2, The Godfather is number 7).

"Several hundred?"...more like 35. Toy Story is also the only movie with a tomatometer of 100% while also having 100+ reviews. Reviews for films like The Godfather are mostly written decades after their release. Check the Rottentomatoes page for The Godfather. The oldest review on there is from 2000. Do you really think a critic would bother submitting a negative review for The Godfather at this point? I also guarantee you that if The Godfather were released today, it would not receive a 100% tomatometer after standing up to 200+ reviews.

TDK scoring a 95% tomatometer with an average rating of 8.5 is pretty damn impressive considering only three movies have done better.

I'm not saying that TDK is the best movie of all time. The person who wrote the article is fucking clueless though when it comes to how these ratings sites actually work.

edit: Bale's Batman voice sucked.