Jump to content

Talk:List of highest-grossing films/Archive 20

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15←Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20

Godzilla tracker

As godizlla is near the list here is a tracker of the franchise. Fan Of Lion King 🦁 (talk) 11:49, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Highest-grossing franchises and film series[§] (The films in each franchise can be viewed by selecting "show".)

We already have the data here (we only need to add the last two movies), and this is from another page--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 12:26, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Now we have the right one--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 12:47, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

† Background shading indicates that at least one film in the series is playing in the week commencing 12 April 2024 in theaters around the world.

Consider that eg a James Bond film is showing at https://princecharlescinema.com/PrinceCharlesCinema.dll/Seasons?e=29205568 - seems that this may never be totally accurate. 90.251.159.52 (talk) 09:10, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

The highlighting is mainly functional. It lets readers know that a total hasn't been finalised, and it helps editors keep track of what needs to be updated. It's very unlikely that a box-office tracker will track a one-off screening, but if these are treated as films in release by Box Office Mojo or the Numbers or some other tracker then we will highlight them accordingly. Betty Logan (talk) 14:50, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Titanic Numbers

There are no sources given for the notes on the "incorrect" numbers for Titanic. Without any kind of source, the entire thing is Original Research and should be removed. 128.151.71.8 (talk) 17:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

I am counting six sources. Please can you be a bit more specific? Betty Logan (talk) 00:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Phantom Menace rerelease

The Phantom Menace has a rerelease currently in theaters, so it needs the highlighting. 2601:249:9301:D570:A913:9C3F:F125:1840 (talk) 21:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

 Done Thank you for letting us know, I will take care of it. May the 4th be with you. Betty Logan (talk) 22:20, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Spider-Man rerelease

The page should probably make note of the original trilogy rerelease for Columbia’s 100th anniversary. The other live action films are also having upcoming rereleases. 66.99.15.163 (talk) 14:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

 Done Betty Logan (talk) 22:14, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
In the $3,7 million gross "The Amazing Spider-Man" is included, is not only the Raimi films--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 22:23, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Indeed, the source now shows that. I believe it's one film per week. 98.228.137.44 (talk) 22:42, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Yes, one film per week, 8 movies in total--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 23:24, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
The entry in the section should be changed, given those facts. 98.228.137.44 (talk) 06:17, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 Done--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 11:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
I don't know if this would be too much hassle, but The Numbers have posted the gross of each individual film released as it says in the schedule from the link above, and it does corespond with each daily gross from BOM's "Columbia 100th Anniversary Series", so with that I would suggest the new grosses be added to each individual film, especially now that they are re-releasing the Tom Holland trilogy and that would have to be updated in the MCU tab also. DCF94 (talk) 20:53, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Agreed, that would probably be better. 98.228.137.44 (talk) 12:54, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
Do you have the link for The Numbers data, please? Betty Logan (talk) 21:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
It's on each individual film's Numbers page, but I'm not saying we should use the links from The Numbers, cause the BOM "Columbia 100" page shows how every week there's a high bump in the earnings that correlates with the release dates from the article above and with The Numbers' own posts, that's why I brought that up. But if you think we should use a more explicit source, then we can use the links from The Numbers. DCF94 (talk) 13:43, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

inflation expansion

Could we expand the inflation chart to a top 15?

Highest-grossing films as of 2023 adjusted for inflation[1][Inf]
Rank Title Worldwide gross
(2023 $) 		Year
11 Jaws $2,557,000,000 1975
12 Avengers: Infinity War $2,583,000,000 2018
13 Avatar: The Way of Water $2,392,000,000 2022
14 Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs $2,294,000,000 1937
15 The Exorcist $2,263,000,000 1973

References

  1. ^ Records, Guinness World (2014). Guinness World Records. Vol. 60 (2015 ed.). pp. 160–161. ISBN 9781908843708.

Fanoflionking3 (talk) 09:59, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

I disagree, 15 is a "weird" number, the top 10 is perfect for this table--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 10:37, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Regardless of the merit of the proposal the numbers are slightly out anyway. I have been tracking the top 15 here in the hope of expanding the table eventually. My plan was to do it when we had a enough data for a top 20. As Luke Stark says, a top 15 is a rather arbitrary number, although I don't have strong feelings either way. At the moment though we can't go beyond The Exorcist, so we have to wait for films to enter above (most likely the Avatar sequels, because there doesn't seem to be anything else on the horizon with the capability of cracking $2 billion). Betty Logan (talk) 14:12, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Under Highest-grossing franchises and film series section

This bit should be removed

"If ancillary income from merchandise is included, then Star Wars is the most lucrative property; it holds the Guinness world record for the "most successful film merchandising franchise" and was valued at £19.51 billion (about $31 billion) in 2012"

We simply don't know the merch numbers for the Marvel Cinematic Universe (it's its own brand) because at this point it probably surpassed Star Wars. Timur9008 (talk) 08:38, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

User:Betty Logan what do you think? Timur9008 (talk) 16:50, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
I have no objections to removing it. It is out of date and isn't all that relevant to the topic of the article. Betty Logan (talk) 20:14, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
I agree,  Done--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 22:10, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
If we get up-to-date figures at some point in the future, I think we should add it back. The second paragraph of the article's body points out that theatrical revenue is only part of the story, after all. TompaDompa (talk) 22:14, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
I don't have a problem with that. I'm almost certain I was the editor who added that information in the first place when I overhauled this article back in 2011/12 or whenever it was, because I felt it was helpful to have some further context there, that there were other forms of revenue. It's just that it wasn't really telling us anything factual at this point. Betty Logan (talk) 11:56, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 June 2024

Avengers: Endgame = 2 799 439 100 $ Goldo Shilba (talk) 17:46, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. - FlightTime (open channel) 18:32, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 July 2024

+High-grossing films by year of release

change from this:

{ Oriho (talk) 13:29, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Charliehdb (talk) 14:12, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Deadpool & Wolverine

Deadpool and Wolverine question. Since Wolverine receives equal billing in the title alongside Deadpool, (the movie is called "Deadpool and Wolverine", not 'Deadpool 3') shouldn't the movie be included under both the "Deadpool" and "Wolverine" film series under the X-men franchise umbrella? I'm not saying to count the movie's box office number twice when calculating the X-men franchise total, only that the movie should be included within both the Deadpool movie list as well as the Wolverine movie list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.43.37.190 (talk) 15:31, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

I would have the fox x men films (x-men till new mutants) and mcu x men films (starting with deadpool & Wolverine) as two different sub series (within the x men franchise).
And sub entries for each fox series having original trilogy, Wolverine trilogy, prequel films series, Deadpool series and the new mutants standalone Fanoflionking3 (talk) 18:42, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
I think the logic is that the Deadpool & Wolverine takes place in the Deadpool continuity and is not part of the Wolverine series, although I daresay you could argue that goes against the spirit of WP:INUNIVERSE. Your alternative suggestion of listing it under both entries but only counting the gross once in the X-Men total is also a sensible alternative. Ultimately, the casual reader will be interested in how much the Wolverine films have grossed and won't really care about different versions of Wolverine, so it does seem like an omission to not include it under the Wolverine entry. I think there is a WP:RS case for this approach too per The Numbers. Betty Logan (talk) 20:48, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
This movie was called Deadpool 3 before changing the title, so I think we should keep it only in the Deadpool series, or we have to create the Fox section and the MCU section inside the X-Men franchise--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 21:57, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 August 2024

Inside Out 2 has passed The Avengers to be in the top 10 69.72.28.161 (talk) 17:14, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – macaddct1984 (talk | contribs) 19:37, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 August 2024

Add a "IMDb rating" column to the tables in this wiki page. Sanjiban22393 (talk) 10:51, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Declined. see WP:RS/IMDB. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Betty Logan (talk • contribs) 13:17, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 August 2024

Dipanshu Sarkar (talk) 12:29, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 13:10, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Highest grossing for 1918

The citation for 1918's "Mickey" having grossed $8,000,000 is an article from a gossip rag from 1939 stating that producer Mack Sennett once said this was the case, without a source. The only primary source I can find attesting to any box office figure is the book "King of Comedy", which was put together from transcriptions of interviews the producer gave. He states twice that "Mickey" grossed $18,000,000 (once spelled out as eighteen), but also says that he lost all documentation to back this up. I've removed this film from the wiki page "1918 in film", which now lists "Tarzan of the Apes" as the highest grossing film for 1918. I haven't independently verified Tarzan, as accurate box office figures from the early 20th century are difficult to come by, but I can't find any reliable info to justify Mickey's spot here. Nicharis (talk) 23:28, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Box-office data for the silent era is very patchy, and prior to Variety is often dependent on what studios and producers released to the trade press. The higher $18 million is unlikely to be correct (as this would have made it bigger than The Birth of a Nation at the time), so as an WP:EXCEPTIONAL claim would require high level sourcing if we were to re-write history regarding the highest-grossing film of the era. At the end of the day, though, the primary function of Wikipedia is to source facts to secondary sources, not to undertake our own detective work. We have a reliable source citing a figure that is reasonable for a hit film of that era, and nothing (besides the film's own producer) to contradict that. We can't go around removing sourced facts just because we can't find independent corroboration. By all accounts, it seems to have been a hit film, so it seems to be reasonable to include it here, in the absence of a source providing a contradictory figure or a convincing case for another film. Betty Logan (talk) 01:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Lion king 19

The lion king 19 went form $1,656.9M to $1,663.1M this weekend see https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt6105098/?ref_=bo_se_r_2 Fanoflionking3 (talk) 10:02, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

It is an issue, see WP:BOXOFFICE--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 10:18, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 August 2024

Inside out 2 collection not accurate in highest grossing films yearly list 183.87.191.149 (talk) 17:03, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done Jamedeus (talk) 19:50, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 September 2024

Highest Grossing Movie Is Avatar Dipanshu Sarkar (talk) 06:14, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Betty Logan (talk) 08:23, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Return of the King's total

I originally wanted to put it here in June that there has been a re-release for the film listed on Box Office Mojo. I know that they are notorious for having been plagued with issues; I myself have gone on here to point out errors in past years, but I think in this case it's legitimate. The only issue that's here is Norway's gross, which seems to have artificially added $8M. With the total for Norway subtracted, the re-release's total should be $2,450,927, and if I am correct in assuming the total on this page hasn't been updated, the corrected overall total should be $1,150,448,334.

However, when I went to write this again I noticed that the film's gross is now suddenly lower by several millions, from $1,151,462,071 to $1,138,027,091. After looking at the grosses for individual releases, it looks like the original release's total has been lowered from $1,140,703,091 to $1,118,887,224, a reduction of $22M. Looking at the grosses for individual countries, it looks like the culprits for this are the grosses for Italy and New Zealand, with Italy going from $35,837,796 to $540,246, while New Zealand had its gross change from $8,986,127 to $9,479. Both seem to have had a 2024 gross erroneously added to the weekend totals that, somehow, overwrote the overall grosses entirely.

I did notice is that the original gross's total is identical to the total from 2019, which I thought it was worth pointing it out considering that I recall them increasing the gross from $1.118bn to $1.14bn in 2020 that prompted a discussion here. In addition, while comparing the totals from before and after they changed New Zealand's gross, the $8,986,127 from before the most recent revision is actually listed as being from 2019 as opposed to 2003/2004.

Now, while I could've made an edit a long time ago, I know that these kinds of things aren't so cut-and-dry as they seem and I wanted input on how others might feel regarding it. I know this is already listed on the film finance task force page, so while I might not be mentioning anything new, maybe in all of this there's something of note that will help. AverageLogic (talk) 19:58, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

The discussion can be found here. You've done some good detective work, but it's always best to raise an incorrect BOM figure here, first. What is interesting is that if you add up the foreign grosses now (with the deflated numbers for Italy and New Zealand) the original foreign gross comes to $719,380,488, which is $22,479411 lower than the actual figure they have down as the original foreign gross ($741,859,899). So there is a clear disconnect between the country grosses and the total. I'm inclined to believe that the the 36 mil figure for Italy and 9 mil for New Zealand are correct, which then takes you back up $1.140 billion. What a shit show. I am now inclined to believe that the $1.140 billion was in fact correct (despite my reservations in the original discussion), and I think the other reissue grosses up to 2021 look ok, and then errors creep in in 2023 & 2024. That 8 mil for Norway is taking the piss. This is going to be a friggin nightmare to correct and explain. I suggest we leave it a few days and see if BOM fix the errors in the original figure first, and then that just leaves us with the reissues to sort out. Betty Logan (talk) 06:05, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Spider-Man: No Way Home's Total

The total for Spider-Man: No Way Home has been updated. $1,952,723,719. It's close to $2 billion. Ggianoli (talk) 17:41, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

It is not the correct gross, it is an issue from the site, see WP:BOXOFFICE--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 18:08, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Highest grossing movie of 1922

Resolved

On the article "1922 in film" the highest grossing movie of 1922 is listed as "The Ten Commandments" with a source cited. Is there a reason why in this article the highest grossing movie is "The Covered Wagon" for that year? 78.11.222.121 (talk) 07:01, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

I think you mean 1923 in film. The sources used here state that The Covered Wagon grossed $5 million and The Ten Commandments $4.2 million. I think the other list is conflating domestic and worldwide rentals. According to this list of film rentals, The Covered Wagon was the top film domestically with $3.5 million, beating the $2.5 million grossed by The Ten Commandments, and it seems both films took a further $1.5 million overseas. Betty Logan (talk) 09:00, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Okay, now i know. The article "1923 in film" lists only revenue in the U.S. and this article lists revenue worldwide. I think this topic can be closed. Thanks. 78.11.222.121 (talk) 11:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Inside Out 2 and Deadpool and Wolverine is no longer in theaters

The 2 movies, Inside Out 2 + Deadpool and Wolverine is no longer playing in theaters. You can take off the green icon on them now. 72.68.168.237 (talk) 22:20, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

 Not done Maybe in the US, but they are still playing in other countries, per Box Office Mojo--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 22:31, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Ah, I stand corrected. Thank you for telling me. 108.46.71.246 (talk) 08:28, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Inside out 2

Acrodding to Disney Inside Out 2 has gross 1.703B (653 million domestic and $1.05 billion international)[1] Fanoflionking3 (talk) 11:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

The source says 1.7 billion, not 1.703, in the source the gross is just rounded. Per BOM, the gross is 652,980,194 + 1,045,792,791 = 1,698,772,985, but Disney rounded the numbers to 653 + 1.05 = 1.7, so it means the gross from BOM is correct, and we always use BOM as source in the top 50--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 12:57, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/walt-disney-studios-2024-box-office/

Harry Potter

Does anyone have the 2024 Chinese release box office for the harry porter series back in October Fanoflionking3 (talk) 10:19, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

There is nothing about it on BOM--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 13:35, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Inflation table

Should the inflation table be updated? I checked the IMF graph and it has a 2.2 for 2024, unless that number still needs time to be updated? I don't fully understand this side of the page. DCF94 (talk) 17:19, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

I tend to always leave the inflation adjustment until about halfway through the year because the price index is unstable throughout the first quarter. It's not like there is a new film waiting to enter the chart so there's no hurry to update it. Betty Logan (talk) 19:06, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Iron Man 3

  • What I think should be changed (format using {{textdiff}}):
−
! scope="row" | ''[[Iron Man 3]]'' | $1,214,811,252 | data-sort-value="2013-04" | 2013 | <ref name="iron man 3" group="#">{{Cite web |title=Iron Man 3 (2013) |url=https://www.boxofficemojo.com/release/rl1532659201/ |access-date=October 28, 2013 |website=[[Box Office Mojo]] |archive-date=December 15, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171215142914/http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=ironman3.htm |url-status=live }}</ref><ref group="#" name="iron man 3 peak">{{cite web |title=All Time Worldwide Box Office |website=[[Box Office Mojo]] |url=https://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140221101228/http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/ |archive-date=February 21, 2014}}</ref>
+
! scope="row" | ''[[Iron Man 3]]'' | $1,266,152,644 | data-sort-value="2013-04" | 2013 | <ref name="iron man 3" group="#">{{Cite web |title=Iron Man 3 (2013) |url=https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt1300854/ |website=[[Box Office Mojo]] |url-status=live }}</ref><ref group="#" name="iron man 3 peak">{{cite web |title=All Time Worldwide Box Office |website=[[Box Office Mojo]] |url=https://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140221101228/http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/ |archive-date=February 21, 2014}}</ref>
  • Why it should be changed:

Iron Man 3 re-released in 2024

  • References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):

[1] GUT412454 (talk) 07:00, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt1300854/
 Not done: See WP:BOXOFFICE#Box Office Mojo— Preceding unsigned comment added by Betty Logan (talk • contribs) 11:23, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Frozen (2013) box office numbers need to be updated

Frozen numbers are out of date - the article lists $1,290,000,000 but the Box Office Mojo website states $1,306,450,154 MisterZed (talk) 14:02, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

There are well documented problems with the figures BOM has down for Frozen. See Talk:List_of_highest-grossing_animated_films#Frozen_why?. Betty Logan (talk) 20:52, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
Maybe so, but it was re-released last year, and the figures in the article don't reflect that. MisterZed (talk) 05:54, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
I have just looked it up and Box Office Mojo has no record of a re-release from last year. The figure at Box Office Mojo is derived from the original release and four re-releases between 2021–2023. The errors with those grosses are addressed at the other discussion. Betty Logan (talk) 15:35, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 February 2025

Ne Zha 2 $1,546,970,000 --> $1,611,760,000

Note: No need to actually add the reference as the current reference will most likely auto-update after an amount of hours & the fact the reference provided here is based on a specific date.

[# 1] DRWiki1102 (talk) 08:12, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

 Done--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 18:21, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 February 2025

Ne Zha 2 $1,631,940,000 --> $1,692,100,000 Steven Sun (talk) 08:07, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

 Not done per source, that is not correct--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 16:59, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Chinese Grosses

Any idea on what is the best way to get the gross for Chinese movies? At the moment, Entgroup is the source used for Ne Zha 2. However, the problem with Entgroup is that they use a specific exchange rate to obtain the dollar value for movies. So, the box office gross for Ne Zha 2 could suddenly decrease if the Yuan depreciates quickly against the dollar and Entgroup also updates the exchange rate. Box Office Mojo isn't reliable for non-Hollywood movies from what I have seen. Any other ideas? - Rajan51 (talk) 18:31, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

My suggestion is to just stick with the Entgroup source for now and keep archiving it at Wayback. If it starts going down as a result of conversion rates then we can use the archived source. It's a difficult situation to deal with, and we'll just have to manage it the best we can in lieu of a better source. The bigger problem for us right now is this, which BOM claims $1.073 billion. I am assuming this is a mistake? Unfortunately basic competence at Box Office Mojo appears to be too much to ask for these days. I can understand the gross for some obscure film being wrong, but you'd think they could at least put some effort into keeping the top 200 chart accurate... Betty Logan (talk) 19:02, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
We could do that if the gross goes down once it has finished its run. However, if the exchange rate falls suddenly when it is still making significant amounts of money every day, then our archived source won't have the additional money it makes. As unreliable as Box Office Mojo is with regard to just its Chinese gross, I think it is unlikely that the worldwide gross will go down. As far as BOM's current figure of 1.073 billion is concerned, I think that number was obtained from Entgroup earlier today. Entgroup keeps updating the numbers multiple times everyday. I think BO Mojo only gets updated once a day. That is probably it. I've even seen other outlets like Deadline do that for this movie. -Rajan51 (talk) 19:11, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
I just noticed that the link you posted from BOM was the page for The First Slam Dunk. In that case, BOM is utterly useless. They don't even have a page for Ne Zha 2. The Numbers has it at 1.046 billion, and they seem to be updating it once a day as well. If Entgroup fails due to exchange rate fluctuations, The Numbers looks like our only choice. -Rajan51 (talk) 19:25, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
Jfyi, BOM has changed the box office of The First Slam Dunk from 1.046B to 246.88M. Previously, BOM marked the movie’s box office in China to be 0.9B USD, which is almost 10 times of its real box office. 209.170.75.0 (talk) 23:56, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
By the way, Entgroup's Weekly Box Office uses incorrect exchange rate (US$1 ≈ CNY 6.2305 RMB), while their Daily Box Office is correct (US$1 ≈ CNY 7.2540 RMB). Steven Sun (talk) 00:47, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Entgroup source is titled "Daily Box Office > China". I think it may not include international gross. DTPro says they include international gross, but they do not provide the exchange rate they use. Steven Sun (talk) 04:17, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
I've been waiting to see if The Numbers update the China gross, but they've seem yet to do so while still added and updating the NA, Australia, and New Zealand, maybe they eventually will, but I wanted to start adding the other grosses using a table like with Frozen while still using entgroup for the chinese gross in the meantime. DCF94 (talk) 19:56, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Films that have only wide releases in one market should not be counted

As this is the worldwide list, I petition that Ne Zha 2 should not be counted unless it has a wide release in one other country. As it stands, it made the vast majority of its money in only one market, and should be mostly confined to the single territory list. Better yet, it needs to reach a benchmark of, say, 100M overseas to be on this list.

This list should be about films with worldwide appeal. If you look at the list based on admissions, Chinese and Indian films aren't counted either, so neither should this. 124.197.66.230 (talk) 19:55, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

That goes against WP:WORLDVIEW. If a film grosses $1.6 billion anywhere in cinemas anywhere in the world then it meets the criteria. Betty Logan (talk) 20:06, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
Your argument backs me up instead because this is now catering to only 1 market, just like how that article just complains about "White Anglo-Americans". Every film on this list has made more overseas, even films like Skyfall have multiple markets competing against the UK share of the box office. Who cares about this film aside from 1 country and box office enthusiasts, who are mostly still never going to watch this film anyway? 124.197.66.230 (talk) 20:18, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
In the top 50 there are two movies (Black Panther and Rogue One) that made more money in NA than overseas, and Ne Zha 2 was released also in Australia, New Zealand and US, with $8.3 million grossed in the first weekend, so it is not only one market--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 20:48, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
It's a "worldwide"[1] list, it's all encompassing. every single movie on this list has a amalgamation of box office earnings from different markets all over, large and small, why is this even an issue I don't understand? DCF94 (talk) 21:04, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
As an aside, the link you posted goes to an error page. 66.99.15.163 (talk) 16:23, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
 Fixed I double pasted it, but it didn't really matter.DCF94 (talk) 00:38, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/worldwide

Sortable table

I’m curious, why was the sortability removed from the highest grossing film table? 66.99.15.163 (talk) 17:16, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Tables that are not specifically designed to be sorted in different ways are typically better unsortable. TompaDompa (talk) 17:42, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Not sure, but I restored the sortability. I think it's useful to be able to sort by year of release, for example. MisterZed (talk) 13:08, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
I think certainly for the year chart and the timeline there is no value at all in making them sortable, but the peak ranks in the top table do offer an alternative ranking system, so sortability does offer useful functionality in this case. Either way, if you are going to alter the functionality of the table it is helpful to provide an edit summary to explain why you don't think the functionality is necessary. Betty Logan (talk) 15:44, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 February 2025

"#7!!! please update the list" 172.56.42.105 (talk) 13:06, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Sophisticatedevening (talk) 13:35, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Spider-man:No Way Home

Hi @DCF94! I noticed that the box office data for Spider-Man: No Way Home is inconsistent with its sources. You mentioned that "It's a double counting error with the Spain re-release figure" as the reason. However, without further explanation, readers may find it confusing. Could you please add a note to clarify this? Nebulatria (talk) 03:03, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

 Done Betty Logan (talk) 03:22, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, my mistake.
DCF94 (talk) 10:33, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 March 2025

Please update The Dark Knight Rises; its box office is $1,114,976,407 according to the source. Nebulatria (talk) 05:37, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

 Not done:: Appears to be another BOM double-counting issue. I have disabled the original url so the source should be clearer now. Betty Logan (talk) 06:35, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
OK, maybe we need another footnote to clarify this? Nebulatria (talk) 06:37, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
 Done Betty Logan (talk) 15:29, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Ne Zha 2 HK Macau

Why BOM and The numbers not updating HK & Macau figures for the movie? It's been more than a week but no update I see. Some media reported the numbers for the first four days in HK however no update regarding the matter until now.

Are there no other source to rely on than these two ?

And do anyone knows how much the movie has gross after more than a week of its debut in HK & Macau? How do we get those numbers if the BOM and The numbers don't update? Arorapriyansh333 (talk) 08:33, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

There is WP:NODEADLINE. The HK and Macau figures will be incorporated once they are published and we can source them. Betty Logan (talk) 13:57, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 March 2025 (2)

Broken 2 billion already!!! Please update thanks 50.229.42.118 (talk) 23:54, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

 Not done per sources--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 01:17, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
What is this in regards to...? - \\'cԼF 18:35, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
He/She was talking about Ne Zha 2--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 19:22, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
Was it ESP? Did you intuit that? Or learn it off-line? Just curious... - \\'cԼF 23:37, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
That film is currently in release and at the time the editor wrote the above it was listed as having grossed slightly below US$2 billion. Seems like a reasonable deduction. TompaDompa (talk) 23:47, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
And also half of the discussions in this page (7 of 14) are about that movie, see discussions above and below--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 00:07, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
But that'd require a bunch of original research, so I asked the source instead. ;) - \\'cԼF 04:40, 4 March 2025 (UTC)


Cite error: There are <ref group=#> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=#}} template (see the help page).

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_highest-grossing_films/Archive_20&oldid=1283752443"