HappySqurriel said:
You can argue multiple releases for Gone with the Wind, but movies like Jurrassic Park still grossed more when factoring in for inflation than Avatar and had a single theatrical release. The $15 ticket price was a Canadian figure. By the way, how can it be impressive to gross more money than another movie unless you factor in for inflation ... If the United States had hyper-inflation like Zimbabwe and a coffee cost $10,000,000,000,000 would a movie that grossed the most money ever be all that impressive if it didn't make the adjusted for inflation list? |
And again, there were different factors involved. Completely ignoring the fact that Avatar hasn't finished its theatrical run (and could still gross a lot more), you also have to consider that since the tickets are so expensive ($50 for the average family or group of friends), that that cuts off the movie's potential viewership as well. And you also have to consider competition, again. When Gone With the Wind came out, movies weren't nearly as large of a medium, and competition was a lot more sparse. Whereas 2009 was the highest grossing year for movies ever, and there were several films that grossed in the 700 million to billion range. Jurassic's Park biggest competition in 1993 was Mrs. Doubtfire (which by all means was a great movie and was very popular, but it wasn't a blockbuster like Jurassic Park is). And in your hypothetical Zimbabwe-U.S., who would buy that coffee? Who would see a movie with a ridiculous price if they could barely afford essentials (assuming the country is ripe with inflation and is in an economic crisis like Zimbabwe). The economic conditions are different. Gone With The Wind might have been released during the Great Depression (1939), but then it got re-released several times. Same for many other movies. Not as many people are going to see a movie if the tickets cost $15 (as you mentioned), so it evens out. There's also the issue of currency conversion, but I'm tired and I'll stop for now.