Pirates Hits the $1 Billion Mark
Source: Variety
September 7, 2006
Walt Disney Pictures' Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest should join Titanic and The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King Thursday as the only movies ever released to top $1 billion in worldwide grosses.
The "Pirates" sequel has been out of the domestic top 10 for the past two weekends, but still managed to bring in $4.9 million during the Labor Day weekend to lift the North American total past $414 million -- the sixth-highest on the all-time list.
It is mainly recent foreign business that's pushed "Dead Man's Chest" over the 10-figure mark. The film has remained dominant internationally with a nine-weekend winning streak and, as of Tuesday, had earned around $583 million overseas.
The top foreign markets have been the U.K. at $94 million and Japan with $78 million. "Chest" should add another significant chunk of business from Italy, where the final opening is set for Sept. 15.
There's no chance for "Dead Man's Chest" to catch Titanic, which stands at $1.83 billion, and it would need another $130 million to overtake "The Return of the King" at $1.13 billion.
The third installment, Pirates of the Caribbean: At Worlds End, hits theaters on May 25, 2007.
[Edit] forumcrew don't post links to other sites forums. That is consider spam.
Why would I have to tell you that? That's what it is.
Never did I say that marketing isn't necessary in movies, and that movies I like aren't marketed. I said this many times in my post, which you obviously skipped over.
There's a difference between these two things:
1) Catching onto what was a sleeper hit, way after its DVD release, then deciding to go and see the sequel long before they even had a script written.
and 2) Going to see a movie, quite literally, about Snakes on a Plane, based on nothing more than pure internet marketing.
You can continue to ignore this if you wish, but it was, is and always will be the base of my argument.
Snakes on a Plane was born out of marketing a shit idea and getting people to pay for it, which you fell into. I saw Pirates on DVD by pure chance, way after the release liked it and decided I would see the following if they made one.
If you like Snakes on a Plane, that's fine, but don't be so oblivious enough as to tell me I'm as much a victim of marketing because I paid to see a sequel based on me liking the first film, when you paid to see Snakes on a Plane based on media and internet hype.
It's very, very funny that you retort with the "Magical world of Disney!" retorts, no seriously, it is. You should have seen my sides. It's just got nothing to do with this debate.
If I had seen the first one due to massive hype (which it didn't have, really, even here) then you would have an argument. I didn't, so you don't.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriIf I had seen the first one due to massive hype (which it didn't have, really, even here) then you would have an argument. I didn't, so you don't.
-AC
Yeah, but you still saw the sequel which was TWICE as hyped as the first one. Thus, Disney's marketing ploy overpower you. As you can see your contribution really paid off for Disney. But the best of all this is that you enjoy the film. Just like I enjoyed SOaP. In the end we both got what we wanted....entertainmen. Thanks for stopping by 😊
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Yeah, but you still saw the sequel which was TWICE as hyped as the first one. Thus, Disney's marketing ploy overpower you. As you can see your contribution really paid off for Disney. But the best of all this is that you enjoy the film. Just like I enjoyed SOaP. In the end we both got what we wanted....entertainmen. Thanks for stopping by 😊
Don't make the logic leap if you can't land on both feet.
How can you be so ignorant even after I've explained things to you many times? I decided to see the sequel long before it was even written. I liked the first one so much that I knew I'd see the second one anyway.
It had loads of hype because lots of people thought the same. I didn't see it because of the hype. It having loads of hype wasn't my fault. Disney made a really good first movie and as a result, loads of people went to see the second one.
You cockily asked me to come back, I did, I subsequently blew your ignorant (willfully) argument out of the water and you still try to twist words.
-AC
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I'm just waiting for AC to come here and tell me Snakes On A Plane is marketing ploy to get your money.
I cant see how its not. Yeah we've all seen the jokes and funny pics and shit off the net, but when it actually came crunch time and they released the trailer, its just a shit flick. It showed crappy CGI, crappy story and crappy acting. "Get these mothaf*ckin' snakes off this mothaf*ckin' plane" is the only quote that movie will be remembered for, and it wouldnt have even been in there had they not seen how shit the movie originally looked and thought 'Well, nobody will watch it, we need something to get attention...I know! We'll give Sam J a cheesy line and overmarket that!'
People will go and see it because they think 'May as well see what the fuss is...', and laugh at the cheesiness, not the actual humour in it.
Come off it, comparing Pirates of the Caribeean to Snakes on a Plane is ridiculous, POTC has a bunch of good actors, a good story, good special effects, good humour and appeals to a broad audience. SoaP has one good actor (would you even see the movie had SJ not been cast?), shit effects, shit story (snakes run loose on a plane and kill people....?) and shit humour.
If they made a movie called Watching Grass Grow, and cast Chuck Norris as the main character, and had him say one cheesy memorable line, people would still flock to it, not because its a good movie, but because its got good ol' Chuck Norris, and the internet just loves him.
He's driven himself into the rut of upholding the argument of:
"AC believes Snakes on a Plane is a marketing ploy, but Pirates is marketed so he can't say anything.".
Despite that not having anything to do with anything I've said. I've explained it multiple times and he probably still won't recognise the factual difference.
-AC
Originally posted by SnakeEyes
I enjoyed POTC 2 immensely. It was definitely the best movie I've seen all year.
Never got around to seeing it,well have to wait till its out on video but thats how I felt about the first one.This one I have heard a lot of bad reviews on it and it doesnt look good from the previews so I'll just wait till its out on video and rent it for free.
No, AC if I recall what you said....it was something about you not wanting to see SOaP because it was a marketing ploy and everyone who went to see it was "sucker" into seen the movie. All I did was to point out that you went to see POTC 2 which is an even BIGGER marketing ploy than SOaP. So if we use your logic of people being "sucker" into a marketing ploy then by all means you're an bigger "sucker" for going to see the even BIGGER marketing ploy from Disney. I'm not twisting your words. You're twisting your own self with those assumptions.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
No, AC if I recall what you said....it was something about you not wanting to see SOaP because it was a marketing ploy and everyone who went to see it was "sucker" into seen the movie. All I did was to point out that you went to see POTC 2 which is an even BIGGER marketing ploy than SOaP.
How on Earth is Pirates a bigger marketing ploy? You tell me that with any kind of realism and I will mail you a medal.
Bearing in mind that the first Pirates was considered a sleeper hit, just another movie coming out with Johnny Depp in it, and reached massive success AFTER people had seen it, thus generating hype off opinion also.
Snakes on a Plane didn't. It was pure internet hype, pure media hype.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
So if we use your logic of people being "sucker" into a marketing ploy then by all means you're an bigger "sucker" for going to see the even BIGGER marketing ploy from Disney. I'm not twisting your words. You're twisting your own self with those assumptions.
You're backpedalling.
A) It's not a bigger marketing ploy.
B) You would have to be referring to Pirates 2, as I didn't go to see the first. As said previously, I didn't get suckered into seeing Pirates 2 via media hype. I saw the first, ages after it came out on DVD and decided that I'd see the sequel when and if they made one.
You went to see Snakes based on nothing but pure, unadulterated hype. Stop ignoring this fact.
Ok, maybe you're not a "sucker", maybe you went to see Snakes of your own accord, cool. I can accept that.
Yet, to deny that it's any more of a marketing ploy just because other movies are marketed is just stupid.
-AC
I don't need a medal. And your point A) it's utterly ignorant of the fact that this film made so much money out of a marketing ploy. In my neck of the woods this film had more advertising and had more tv spots than SOaP ever had. The fact this film made this gross amount of money is a factor of the marketing ploy of Disney. Something you're just ignoring on purpose. But rather than point out this gigantic fact you chose to pick on a B-movie and call it a marketing ploy. Which I haven't deny..but you yet chose to concetrate all your energy on the B-movie rather than the big movie studio.
"It was pure internet hype, pure media hype."
On a side note...what's with bringing the internet advertising point? Don't tell me SOaP was the only one promoting itself on the net. I saw far more banners and pop ups for POTC 2 than SOaP.