"The Avengers" Opens to Record-Breaking $200.3 Million

[Hawkeyeps]

As a dyed in the wool Marvel zombie I must say I am expierencing extreme schadenfreude, DC better hope Anne Hathway drops dead a week before Dark Knight comes out and that still might not do it.

Particularly satisying as when I went to see the Avengers preimier the guy next to me was wearing a JLA shirt and Green Latern belt buckle (eye-roll), I was wearing a SHIELD shirt and eye patch (hell yeah). He was all smug before the movie started and then just kind of slumped out of the theater totally defeated after the movie was over. Oh well, he can go home and watch Green Latern again...HA HA!

I said "see you at the Justice League movie"

[J. Robb]

Not only that the 3-D issue needs to be factored in as well.

A lot of people have pointed out that some recent films have been 'hits' but probably wouldn't have been a few years back because the extra $$$$ some people shell out for the 3-D allows the films to earn more money on ticket prices rather than volume of ticket sales.

Like I said back when Avatar came out- if you can get people to pay extra for your product, more power to you. That shouldn't be adjusted against you like inflation.

That why concert tours are listed by total sales, not individual tickets- some acts can charge $200+ a seat and people will pay.

[The Nuke]

I'm just happy for Whedon. He has two highly praised movies out now, one of which made huge. Avengers was a really great movie, and it deserves the money it made and the critical praise.

A lot of us seem to forget that a movie like this should have been impossible to pull off. Hell, Whedon said so himself, but here we are and Avengers is a success.

Whedon deserves his rest.

[kmeyers]

As a dyed in the wool Marvel zombie I must say I am expierencing extreme schadenfreude, DC better hope Anne Hathway drops dead a week before Dark Knight comes out and that still might not do it.

Particularly satisying as when I went to see the Avengers preimier the guy next to me was wearing a JLA shirt and Green Latern belt buckle (eye-roll), I was wearing a SHIELD shirt and eye patch (hell yeah). He was all smug before the movie started and then just kind of slumped out of the theater totally defeated after the movie was over. Oh well, he can go home and watch Green Latern again...HA HA!

I said "see you at the Justice League movie"

That's funny. There was a guy wearing a Batman cape at one of the showings I went to see. I wanted to ask him if he was in the right place, or forgot the date or something...

[Stressfactor]

As a dyed in the wool Marvel zombie I must say I am expierencing extreme schadenfreude, DC better hope Anne Hathway drops dead a week before Dark Knight comes out and that still might not do it.

Particularly satisying as when I went to see the Avengers preimier the guy next to me was wearing a JLA shirt and Green Latern belt buckle (eye-roll), I was wearing a SHIELD shirt and eye patch (hell yeah). He was all smug before the movie started and then just kind of slumped out of the theater totally defeated after the movie was over. Oh well, he can go home and watch Green Latern again...HA HA!

I said "see you at the Justice League movie"

Dude, that's kinda.... not cool.

No one should be hoping/wishing/praying for the death of ANYONE over a bunch of freaking comic book movies.

Even as a joke -- it's not really funny.

[Joecooler2u]

Marvel's planning with the movies is genius. Iron-Man, Iron-Man 2, Thor & Captain America and nothing really promising these films would be a success but they took the chance and it paid off and then leading into a movie combining the characters into the team format. They did it with 2 mediocre Hulk films and introducing a 3rd Bruce Banner/Hulk in this film. Now it's simple to say DC/Warner Bros should do the same. Nolan's Batman trilogy is wrapping up and a new Superman film on the way they need to take that and follow Marvel's path but DC/Warners has too much red tape. They have to argue things out within the SAME company! DC has to answer to their marketing department etc. It's a mess. It needs to be a unified vision. Marvel has their own in-house studio. Dc should do the same. Make it a sub-division of Warners. They have one good movie franchise currently. No promise Superman will be good again after Superman Returns. Even if they try it now they will be following Marvel's path so looking 2nd rate in comparison.

Maybe do Superman and then do a JL movie and reintroduce Batman there. They can play up the mystery of the character because we don't know exactly where they will be coming from with the history of the character. Then lead back into a new Batman franchise, reboot Green Lantern, Do a Flash movie, maybe Wonder Woman (though I got that feeling like with Hulk that she needs the other characters to be interesting in a film setting look how Hulk got the rub from being with other interesting characters whereas his solo films have been mediocre box-office-wise.) Marvel rolled the dice and it came up winning. Good for them! Good for us fans as well!

[Alex]

Please, Avatar 2 is laughing at this number.

I'm 99 percent sure Avatar 2 will make less than 1 because of two reasons.
1. Avatar was a shit movie.
2. 3D isn't as much of a gimmick as it was when Avatar came out.

[An Ear In The Fireplace]

One thing that doesn't help DC is that it's big heroes come from fictional hometowns. Gotham isn't real. Don't chime in with "they mean it to be New York or Chicago"...they call it "Gotham" and Gotham it isn't a real place. Batman never leaves Gotham in his movies for any length of time. Metropolis? Not real. Isn't New York. They don't call it New York, they call it "Metropolis." Superman does get around, though, so that's a plus. [But next year's movie will be the 6th incarnation/reboot of Superman in 30 years (I'm counting at least 3 live-action TV series since the late 1980s)...and I'm not sure if people will want any more...especially since there hasn't been an actor since Christopher Reeve that anyone will truly accept in the role.] And what's this Central City, Coast City garbage?

I really don't think it matters to audiences. There are just as many movies that take place in fictional places as actual locations. In some respects, the fictional cities allow the directors a lot more freedom in the world they create.

Also Batman Begins had Bruce outside Gotham for a significant chunk of the movie. Those were some of my favourite scenes.

[Infestor]

What are the chances of them getting the film rights back for Spidey, X-Men… etc and doing a company wide crossover movie?

Slim to none.

[littlenomad]

I really don't think it matters to audiences. There are just as many movies that take place in fictional places as actual locations. In some respects, the fictional cities allow the directors a lot more freedom in the world they create.

Also Batman Begins had Bruce outside Gotham for a significant chunk of the movie. Those were some of my favourite scenes.

Yes, but mainstream audiences often have trouble relating to these properties in the first place...if you can establish verisimilitude--that these incredible things are happening to real people in a real place--that can only help.

[littlenomad]

I'm 99 percent sure Avatar 2 will make less than 1 because of two reasons.
1. Avatar was a shit movie.
2. 3D isn't as much of a gimmick as it was when Avatar came out.

James Cameron can't write dialogue to save his life. And I'm not sure if he's that great with actors...unless those actors are practically dripping with talent. And he's a jerk and a total control freak. So it's his turn for a flop. Schadenfreude on my part, of course.

[pl2000]

Need to figure in Inflation prices from previous films (Dark Knight was 4 years ago) and adjust to see how it compares.

It is annoying. They should immediately just say the number of people who watched it. That is the true measurement in which they already have the DATA. Like how many people saw star wars, just use that number.

[Night Swordsman]

We all knew that "The Avengers" movie was going to do well at the box office this weekend. The real story comes in how it holds up several weeks from now. If it continues to do well, probably emerge as the first major box office success story of the summer.
Yeah, it's made a ton of $$$ but, exactly how much will it take for it to be officially declared a financial "success" that has re-couped money? It's selling tickets now and we already can figure out that its' bound to be a blockbuster in terms of Dvd sales this holiday season. I've heard stories of movies that did very well and ~ yet, the studios have gone on record as declaring them to be "losses" nonetheless. As a buddy of mine who used to work in the studios would say, "Hollywood accounting is a whole different system."

Are you kidding? Seriously? To even suggest this movie, in it's opening record shattering weekend, is not a major success seems idiotic. There is no way this movie will not be considered a huge success, finacially and critically, that even if it does not become the highest grossing movie this year, it will certainly be among the most praised and considered a triumph.

[jpbl1976]

Not much: inflation has been manageable the past 4 years and the gap, in terms of tickets sold, is so big (3+ million) that even adjusted for inflation, the real revenue is at a record.

From AP's (via Yahoo) story:

"As admission prices rise, Hollywood's record-breakers often take in more money but sell fewer tickets than previous blockbusters. But "The Avengers" took in so much money that it's the undisputed champ among debuts.

Based on average admission prices the years they were released, "The Dark Knight" and "Spider-Man 3" had led with about 22 million tickets sold each over opening weekend. Today's average prices put "The Avengers" tally at around 25.6 million tickets sold."

Very impressive. I'm pretty sure that non-Freelance guys like Quesada are looking at a nice little bonus come 2013.

[jpbl1976]

Are you kidding? Seriously? To even suggest this movie, in it's opening record shattering weekend, is not a major success seems idiotic. There is no way this movie will not be considered a huge success, finacially and critically, that even if it does not become the highest grossing movie this year, it will certainly be among the most praised and considered a triumph.

Actually, I think he has a point: a lot of movies, even the Titanic, which was the top grossing film of all time back then, didn't make money in the strict accounting sense. If I recall correctly, there was even this story about someone involved with Titanic getting screwed out of money because his contract stipulated a pay-out tied to the loosely-defined "Net Income" from the movie. The moral of that story is that, apparently, you're supposed to base contracts off the Gross money made by the movie rather than the Net.

The way I see it is that the way that Hollywood accounts for its earnings is closer to real cash income "accounting" than typical GAAP accounting and is more akin to a liquidation per film. So, technically-speaking, a film might not "make money" but actually, the studios and everyone else already got paid (their portions being defined as part of the Gross and paid as commissions and fees) before the typical Net Income line is drawn.