(LOTR) American filmgoers and LOTR

Edena_of_Neith

First Post
To all of you non-Americans on these boards ... did you know that very few in my country have actually gone and seen FOTR?
Fewer than 1 out of 10 who could have gone.

There are nearly 300 million people in the United States.
Of that 300 million, perhaps 30% of the population are either too young, or too infirm, to have gone and seen FOTR.
That leaves around 200 million filmgoers.

The price of a ticket for a film in the United States varies greatly, ranging from $4 to $12 (or more!) depending where you live and what time of day you choose to see the film.
I am guessing the average for FOTR was around $7 a ticket.

Thus, if all 200 million possible filmgoers in the US had gone to see FOTR, and each had paid an average of $7, then FOTR would have grossed 1.4 billion dollars.
It would be the all time top grossing film in American history, by far, even adjusted for inflation.
Instead, it has grossed only 250 million dollars so far (it is expected to end it's run with 300 million.)

If you divide 250 million by 7, you get approximately 36 million.
36 million people, then, out of 200 million possible filmgoers, have gone to see the film.

But wait ...

According to various polls, most of those who have gone to see FOTR in the United States, have gone to see it more than once.
For example, one poll shows the following:

Once: 17%
Twice: 32%
Thrice: 23%
Four times: 12%
Five times: 6%
Six Times: 2.5%
Seven Times or More: 7%

Well then ... nearly everyone who has gone to see the film, has gone twice or more.
This halves the number of people who have seen the film (at least!) from the 36 million mentioned above, to ... maybe ... 18 million.

So, out of 200 million possible filmgoers, in a country with nearly 300 million people total, 18 million have bestirred themselves to go and see FOTR.

In other words, almost nobody in the United States has seen the film.

- - -

It is not due to a lack of critical acclaim; FOTR has received great critical acclaim.
Polls taken show the majority of those who have gone to see FOTR think either highly or very highly of it.

- - -

According to the Movie Times, the top grossing film of all time, adjusted for inflation, in the US was Gone with the Wind.
It grossed 198.60 million dollars.
Equivalent to 1,001.69 billion dollars today.

The film has had several rereleases, so I cannot say it made 198 million in 1939, when it premiered, but consider this:

Had it done so, it would have made 198 million at a time when there were only 180 million Americans, and the price of a movie ticket was 50 cents (if my parents are correct.)
Thus, there would have had to have been nearly 400 million tickets sold, to have made that 198 million.
On average, every person in the United States would have had to have gone and seen the film twice, to have accomplished that.

Now, the film has had rereleases, and I am sure every American alive at that time did not go and see Gone with the Wind twice at it's premiere.
However, Gone with the Wind is a household name in the US, and most older Americans have seen it at the box office.

- - -

The polls show that the critics think FOTR is one of the great films, a potential classic.
The polls show that the average American who has seen the film thinks of it very highly.

So, why is it that only 18 million Americans have gone to see this much acclaimed (and, more to the point, good enough to be worth the time and trouble of getting in your vehicle, driving to the movie theater, waiting in line, racing to get a good seat, then sitting for 3 hours in a seat 2 sizes too small) film?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Once again, I'm not quite seeing the point Edena.

Rework the statistics, and you will find similar results for Titanic, Saving Private Ryan, etc. Sure, the numbers will be some higher, but the film has a broader appeal.

Lets face it, no matter how good the film is, fantasy as a whole only appeals to certain people. Others cant stand it.
 

Well many people just can't afford to go to a lot of movies or can't arrange to go. I know I take my entire family to the theatre maybe once or twice a year (there are 6 of us). If me and the wife want to go on our own we have to find a baby sitter to watch four kids for three hours (4-5 hours in case of LotR ), usually on short notice. In fact for LotR I had to go see it without her and then sent her to go see it on her own and then managed to go see it together when my mom stopped by for a visit. But we made a special effort for this movie - its far more practical for us to wait for a movie to be released to video and watch it after the kids are in bed. I suspect a lot of people are the same way.
 

Hhmmm interesting numbers...

In Brazil considering that of the 270 million half are barely literate and only around 10% have resources to afford going to the movies. Poor country. :( The expected number of viewers I would guess at 3-4 + million... 500,000 first weekend.

3-4 million in 27 million is much better than the American average... but then I would have to count the multiple view spectators... which includes every RPGer and fantasy fanatic in the country. I saw it only twice... my friends thrice...

It should be noted that most of the films showing now are pretty weak... LOTR isnt having much competition at all. The age 12 limit was a problem thou....

What the age limit in the US for the movie ?
 

None.

It was a PG or PG13 movie. All the PG-series movies mean is that it's SUGGESTED the parents acompany the child... but I've rarely known a parent to care about it for the most part. A 10 year old could buy a ticket with no problem... I sure did often enough back when I was 10.

On the other hand, America is notorius for not really caring about the age limits anyhow... I got into several "R" rated movies (17 or over only theoreticly) movies when I was 12-13 without a parent even giving me a note.
 

Well, both Tsyr and Wicht above have made good points.

Did you know all our theater chains are going broke, or have gone broke?
I have that from my brother, who was a theater manager, and in the know.
He says the theater chains lose money with almost every film shown, even the blockbusters, and that theaters are kept around for purposes other than making a profit off of films (I'm serious! But I will not go further on what he said concerning why theaters are kept around.)

If FOTR is a blockbuster, and blockbuster films pull in only 1 out of every 10 possible filmgoer, then what does that say concerning the attendance paid to the average film released today?

There was a time when people flocked in droves to see blockbuster films, and large numbers went to see even the so-called average film.

Not anymore.
 

The point is, Tsyr, is that people simply do not go to see films at the theater, in the United States, anymore.

The theater is a dying industry.
Or, at the least, in the midst of a drastic and permanent downsizing.

As you have pointed out, Titanic, Saving Private Ryan, and the other blockbusters were the same way.
Only a small proportion of the American population went to see the film in question.
 

Don't take this the wrong way Edena... But do you live in Whitewolf's World of Darkness or something? I ask because almost every post you make Re: the real world is full of 'gloom and doom' type stuff.

If the America movie-going public is jaded, it's Hollywood's own darn fault for making so many crummy movies.

But you have an error in your assumption. Not all of america (even discounting that 30% number you threw in) is "potential moviegoers"... I know a lot of people who just don't enjoy theaters, and will not go... hence, they aren't "potential".

I also really question the theory that theaters are going bankrupt.

I'm actualy fairly close friends with the owners of a theater chain localy, having worked there for two years... which was I think the record for "longest working employee" at the time I quit... Going broke? Not likely. They actualy live very well. And are opening new theaters to boot.
 

a sign of the times...

I guess it is because most of the american public are ignorant and wouldnt know quality cinema if it bit them on the A$% :)

Also i dont think there was TV in 1939 could explain why
every man and his dog went to the cinema back then ;)

These days with TV and the internet and cable people
would rather sit on thier fat ahem than get out and enjoy
a cool flick with friends etc

Oh well, put me down for 4 times anyway :)


Harlequin
 

You're both basing your opinions about how theatres are doing economically upon your own personal experiences--Edena's is negative, Tsyr's is positive.

What we really need is some good, hard, objective facts. :D I'll see if I can find some.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top