#1 Edited by TDSOTMFLTA94 (34 posts) - - Show Bio

I think it did.

While TDKR did make a lot of money and managed to beat TDK's box office numbers worldwide...$1,084,439,099 really isn't great compared to what The Avengers, Harry Potter, and Iron Man have done at the box-office in the last few years.

Its obvious the Aurora shooting had a huge effect on the box office numbers, so not many people went to go see it on the first weekend. This ended up effect the publicity for TDKR and the overall box-office of the film.

It also was wasn't released in 3D, which would have help TDKR bring in much bigger numbers than it did.

I just think if it hadn't been for the shooting, it performed MUCH BETTER considering it was the finale to Nolan's Batman and was really hyped and anticipated months before the release.

#2 Edited by Fallschirmjager (18391 posts) - - Show Bio

No.

3D movie tickets cost like 50% more than regular ones.

Even if you take 25% of TDKR ticket sales and boost them by 50%, its effectively another 100-200 million.

And frankly. 3D sucks ass anyway. I never seen a 3D movie I felt was worth the extra money. In fact, the three movies you listed are actually better in non-3D because the post-production 3D effects are so lame.

I'm glad they didn't release TDKR in 3D. Because I love going to IMAX, but you're forced to see IMAX movies in 3D if there is an option. 2D Imax movies > 3D IMAX movies.

The opening sequence in TDKR is still to date, one of the best experiences ever in my life of going to movies.

#3 Posted by thedarkknight9283 (61 posts) - - Show Bio

Since when is $1,084,439,099 a failure???

#4 Posted by TerryBogard2014 (480 posts) - - Show Bio

a billion dollars is now considered under performing?

**** me

#5 Posted by NorrinBoltagonPrime21 (6096 posts) - - Show Bio

Seriously!?

#6 Edited by AweSam (7375 posts) - - Show Bio

No. TDKR is arguably as good or better than TDK. It outperformed TDK. If it were to under-perform, then it would have to substantially make less than TDK. Depending on who you ask, it either made as much as it was expected to or more than it was expected to. In my opinion, any movie that hits the billion dollar mark over-performed. Just because it made less than the Avengers does not mean it under-performed. I guess the Avengers under-performed since it made less than Avatar, right?

#7 Posted by kyrees (5407 posts) - - Show Bio

a billion dollars is now considered under performing?

**** me

#8 Edited by Fallschirmjager (18391 posts) - - Show Bio

@awesam: It didn't outperform TDK, because TDKR costed alot more to make.

But it didn't under perform. Nothing that makes 1 billion is under performing.

#9 Edited by AweSam (7375 posts) - - Show Bio

@fallschirmjager said:

@awesam: It didn't outperform TDK, because TDKR costed alot more to make.

But it didn't under perform. Nothing that makes 1 billion is under performing.

It made more money at the box office, therefore it out-performed it at the box office as stated in the title. Your second point is pretty much restating what I said.

#10 Posted by Fallschirmjager (18391 posts) - - Show Bio

@awesam: the production cost differences (if we assume marketing was the same, which it probably wasn't) essentially mean they brought in relatively the same amount of money for the studio, which is what the goal is in the first place though.

#11 Posted by AweSam (7375 posts) - - Show Bio
#12 Posted by RogueShadow (11102 posts) - - Show Bio

...

#13 Posted by The Stegman (25021 posts) - - Show Bio

It cost roughly 300 million to make and took in over a billion, I'd call that a success.

Online
#14 Posted by Fallschirmjager (18391 posts) - - Show Bio

@awesam: well...whatever

but 1 billion dollars without 3D price inflation is never under preforming so i guess we'll just leave it that since we've said it a couple times now =P

#15 Posted by mikex20 (2771 posts) - - Show Bio

It over-performed, considering how terrible of a movie it is.

#16 Posted by opelfl9201 (55 posts) - - Show Bio

In no way in freaking hell, is $1,084,439,099 "underperforming."

#17 Posted by AllStarSuperman (22201 posts) - - Show Bio

I could have done better without the shooting. It's tragic for the people. And for the movie itself.

#18 Posted by RulerOfThisUniverse (6358 posts) - - Show Bio

Lol no.

#19 Posted by Dragonborn_CT (23202 posts) - - Show Bio

a billion dollars is now considered under performing?

**** me

lol this

#20 Edited by Havenless (1375 posts) - - Show Bio

@tdsotmflta94:

No, fans like you are simply extraordinarily spoiler, in a good way.

Avengers being wildly, unbelievably, out of this world successful in know way hinders what TDKR did. It cost over 250M$ to make, and it raked in 4 times its budget in worldwide gross. A 250M$ breaks even right around 450m$ ww (depending on domestic gross because the studio keeps a larger cut of that, and not counting blu-rays/tv rights etc), so to outright double that is fantastic.

#21 Posted by Havenless (1375 posts) - - Show Bio

I could have done better without the shooting. It's tragic for the people. And for the movie itself.

I don't think that impacted it much. People weren't avoiding theatres because they were afraid to get shot, it made a billion dollars. Nobody was thinking, "I had better respect the lives of the lost and never see this movie", because that's ridiculous.

Aurora may have lost some money because the theatre was closed for a few days, but that's it.

#22 Posted by Tyrus (1116 posts) - - Show Bio

Even if Aurora affected TDKR, it didn't do so that much. The fact that it wasn't released in 3D and made it to #9 is a huge success. Last year people called it a failure because it didn't surpass Avengers or Harry Potter :P

#23 Edited by Fallschirmjager (18391 posts) - - Show Bio

@havenless said:

@tdsotmflta94:

No, fans like you are simply extraordinarily spoiler, in a good way.

Avengers being wildly, unbelievably, out of this world successful in know way hinders what TDKR did. It cost over 250M$ to make, and it raked in 4 times its budget in worldwide gross. A 250M$ breaks even right around 450m$ ww (depending on domestic gross because the studio keeps a larger cut of that, and not counting blu-rays/tv rights etc), so to outright double that is fantastic.

Avengers production budget was 220m. TDKR was 230.

No idea what the market budgets for each were (that info is rarely released). But I'd guess anywhere from 25-75m, easily. Maybe even 100m.

But yeah, it made tons of bank. Especially without 3D inflation.

#24 Posted by ArturoCalaKayVee (12014 posts) - - Show Bio

You all just fell for this guys troll.

#25 Posted by Dabee (2399 posts) - - Show Bio

$1,084,439,099 really isn't great

HKADSJFHAS*@&*#!!!!