Babe made 3 times more overseas than domestically at a time when that never really happened. The UK and Australia totals combined actually came within a few million of the domestic. (It was an Australian film based on a British book, so it's not too surprising that it was a big hit in those countries.)

Also, I don't know how much of the financing for the $30-35 million budget came from Universal, and how much came from George Miller's company. It was a passion project of Miller's.



As I said earlier in the thread, if you ask anyone who still remembers Congo, they would probably assume it was a flop. Even I assumed it was a flop - and I was surprised to find out that it wasn't.

Also, Babe was a risky film, its performance was quite a surprise at the time.

And coming back to General's Daughter - I don't remember that being considered a flop at all. Also, looking back it does indeed seem like CBS and TNT essentially killed the procedural/adult thriller theatricals. I brought this up earlier when discussing why we didn't have films like Double Jeopardy doing big business like back in the 90s. (Gone Girl does feel like a throwback in that regard.)

similar to Congo, two other films I assumed bombed but were actually hits were Anaconda and I Know What You Did Last Summer (a film I really enjoyed so was pleased to see it did well)

does that mean other films from 1999 like Phantom Menace, Matrix, The Mummy, Sixth Sense etc also actually cost less than BOM budgets? Also when did they stop adding the marketing costs on BOM?

I Know What You Did Last Summer basically played like a follow-up to Scream. It was a big hit for the kind of film it was. (Also, it had a modest budget of $17 million.)

I don't remember anymore, but I know they used to have a disclaimer about it around 2002/2003 and them they dropped it.

actually I think BOM just dropped the marketing budget but the production budgets have always been the same

I doubt they went back and revised the numbers from the time when they included the marketing budget. They have never listed them separately, so they would have had to revise every single figure from many years. IMDB is not the most reliable source, but it lists $60 milion as the film's budget, which plays well with the marketing budget inclusion argument.

For some reason I feel like I have distinct memory of BOM having a separate entry for marketing cost on the individual film pages...

I don't think that even today it's clear if the reported budget includes marketing costs or not. They just go with the number they can find a source for.

Stuart Little- 215 million
Scary Movie- 235 million, Scary Movie 5- 32 million (Even Scary Movie 2's opening adjusts to almost that)

So the adjuster on BOM no longer works? Anyone know what the story behind this is?

This doesn't surprise me. Subers is a fucktard. Have you read the latest article? I spotted many mistakes.

Subers is a retard, but the adjuster still works for me.

When the site came back from its brief absence, the adjuster started redirecting incorrectly in quite a few places. It directs you to adjuster.php, which gives a Forbidden error. What it's supposed to do is insert the string "&adjust_yr=(whatever)" into the URL. For the adjuster to work in situations where actually using the widget gives you a Forbidden, you have to manually type "&adjust_yr=(whatever year)" into the URL before "&p=.htm" and go to that URL. (For raw tickets, use "&adjust_yr=1") Kind of tedious, but several people have asked BOM to fix the redirects when using the list of years, and they never have.

Ok TServo thanks for that. It only started doing that for me recently so much appreciated.

Do you know how to get to the YTD month section?

Once you click into the month itself, say January 2012, the page refuses to load the charts.

I messaged them but they're fuckers and didn't bother to reply or fix it.

The Village now adjusts to over $150 million, which I consider mighty impressive given the mixed-to-bad WoM it has received and the fact that, unlike Signs, Unbreakable or The Sixth Sense, it did not have major star power. Even more impressive: its opening weekend adjusts to almost $68 million. Damn, Shyamalan's name was such a huge draw a decade ago...

Yeah the Village's OW was never in question. Its all about the WOM. Yet it still had a strong overall gross - it did beat out Unbreakable after all.

On that note -- Signs adjusts to $326m.

2002 BO tracking was the best.

Yes 2002 was a monster. I'm pretty sure we were predicting much less for Signs based on Unbreakable.

Staying Alive adjusts to $170m. Jesus.

Look Who's Talking adjusts to $25 mil OW, with a $285 mil Total.

Can you imagine Twins making $225m these days? That's what it adjusts to. And Batman & Robin is a $200m grosser too.

Yeah, although these days, just passing 200 million is enough to kill a franchise.