I blame the studios, just because there haven't been any 200 mil romcoms lately doesn't mean they couldn't be if they tried more instead of putting sooo much effort into turning Pan into the next Pirates of the Caribbean. They're not putting the big actor and marketing cheques into the genre. Even though romcoms don't have super franchise potential like Pan would be with the 5% chance it blew up, the thing is if a romcom took off you can cast the actress again in another romcom and benefit from it like a sequel. Plus there is financial value in Friends with Benefits making 150 mil WW off 55 mil budget even if it's a "single", compared to the alternative of shitting out Last Witch Hunter and Victor Frankenstein

I think the bigger problem is that OS grosses for these type of movies are still not upto the mark. Something like Twilight did attract a lot of females in OS markets but a straight-up romantic movie won't do more than $200m OS. The studios have shifted their focus to OS markets which is a big factor in overlooking the romantic genre overall.

ABOUT TIME was a blockbuster in South Korea..

Sweet Jesus, I just saw that Scream adjusts to $188 million, Scream 2 to $183 million and Scream 3 to $138 million.

No horror franchise could really hold a candle to the grosses of that triloogy (then, of course, came the fourth film). Neither Saw nor Paranormal Activity nor any Freddy/Jason/Michael movies ever got to these numbers. The first movie really was a phenomenon and tapped into the zeitgeist like only very few other horror movies have done.

The Firm adjusts to $319 million, A Time to Kill to $205 million, The Pelican Brief to $202 million and The Client to $184 million.

Audiences in the 90s must have loved loved loved John Grisham. No way any of these films would get close to these numbers nowadays.

Though it makes me wonder why the hell Hollywood stopped adapting his novels all of sudden. Nothing came after 2004.

Definitely. We'll see soon how Girl on the Train will perform.

Adult Thriller and Young Adult Adaptations aside I believe the Space themed adult movies have been on trend recently. I mean Gravity had other factors but I would never imagine The Martian doing this great otherwise.

Shrek 2 gets a lot of flack but its box office performance is just incredible. $593 m today.

To this day, Lion King is the only animated film that has more admissions post Disney 1960's era.

Imagine if it had 3D at the time? Probably would be at $650 or $700 m today.

Cuz it's shit.

When STAR TREK broke the all-time opening record in December 79 it did so with a per screen average of $13,916 - which adjusts to $46.387 today - not so shabby either...

Yay! Some people are using my psa adjustment! While it loses faith the closer you get the modern times, it still shows a solid idea of current releases

ROTJ opening adjusting to almost 260 brings new light to it

Scream had a something like a 17 multiplier. Insane. I remember seeing its OW numbers and thinking what a dud after all the hype. And then it really caught on.

A year later - Scream 2 smashed the December record 1 week before Titanic/Bond opened. It out opened both films. Interestingly, Miramax estimates were $39m and actuals came in at $33m - perhaps one of the biggest OW overstatements ever made.

The Grisham books were HUGE back then. So when you add Tom Cruise + The Firm - it was always going to be big. Pelican Brief also had big stars and a huge selling novel to go off.

A little anecdote from the Gez file: I was reading The Client in mid 1994 (after having seen The Firm/Pelican Brief at the cinemas). One day I went to watch a film - either Speed or Truel Lies and a trailer came on with the opening scene from the The Client (book). It was a bit of a shock because i had no idea they a film version existed and had just read that very scene a day before.

A Time to Kill was also MEGA. It made a star of MMc and had a great cast. It really was the only film to survive (and thrive) during the Atlanta Olympic BO deflation.

Though the next Grisham film tanked - The Chamber. The fall release and the dour subject matter didnt help its cause. It was Gene Hackman's 2nd of 3 Grisham adaptations he starred in.

Later Grisham books just dont have the same intense thriller feel of the earlier books. The Rainmaker (my favourite Grisham book) and Runaway Jury jury were modest success though.

The thing with Shrek 2....its performance looks impressive as hell even without adjustment.

I don't even like horror movies but I like Scream. The mystery of who is the killer aspect I think is the reason.

Always love the MadGez stories of life

Now looking at it from another side: for the phenomenons that they were, I am actually surprised that neither Spider-Man nor The Return of the King adjust to $600 million, meaning that Jurassic World actually was a bigger even than those films.

On the other hand seeing the supposed disappointment Terminator 3 adjust to $215 million is kinda bonkers. Paramount would kill for this kind of domestic gross for Terminator nowadays.

Yeah it's crazy to think that JP out grosses them adjusted. It certainly didnt feel as big of an event as either of those two films.

In fact, Jurassic World did better than the adjusted totals of Batman (1989), The Dark Knight, Independence Day, Home Alone, Superman (1978) and Forrest Gump.

That, to me, is officially crazy. People love dinosaurs.

Just not animated ones!!

I think people love the idea of dinosaur park open to public as in caged dinosaurs. Highly doubt JW sequel will do more unless they decide to open the park again elsewhere.

Land Before Time!

An example of how times change.

Lake Placid and Deep Blue Sea, both released in 1999, adjust to $54 million and $125 milion respectively. There is no way either would gross even half that nowadays.

Deep Blue Sea might, if advertised properly, with better effects.

Not after the gazillion of Z-grade shark films made the whole subgenre a joke.

Ehh... maybe. But you market Sam Jackson, LL Cool J and Thomas Jane with kind of a thriller vibe, it could've done well.