Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="barsoomcore" data-source="post: 2098293" data-attributes="member: 812">It's a very difficult assertion for you to support (that movies without good stories never succeed financially), AMG, because ANY instance of a movie without a story that is successful financially disproves it, while no number of movies with stories that are successful financially (nor any number of movies without stories that are NOT successful financially) will ever prove it.So it was kind of unfair of me to ask. But then, you're the one who made the assertion in the first place, so I figure it's your job to support it.<a href="http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm" target="_blank">Here are inflation-adjusted figures.</a>Let us note that Episode I comes in at 19th overall, below the original three. Episode II comes in at 80th overall. So there's certainly evidence for an ongoing decline in the quality of these pictures. I think one could also make a pretty compelling argument that Episode I benefitted from a fantastic amount of demand that had built up over the years, thus inflating its figures by a great degree. It's pretty clear that the kind of audience impact of the original films is not being maintained by the second trilogy.Let us further note that just below Episode I, at 20th, is Fantasia.A film noted for many things, but not, perhaps, having an excellent STORY.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="barsoomcore, post: 2098293, member: 812"] It's a very difficult assertion for you to support (that movies without good stories never succeed financially), AMG, because ANY instance of a movie without a story that is successful financially disproves it, while no number of movies with stories that are successful financially (nor any number of movies without stories that are NOT successful financially) will ever prove it. So it was kind of unfair of me to ask. But then, you're the one who made the assertion in the first place, so I figure it's your job to support it. [url=http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm]Here are inflation-adjusted figures.[/url] Let us note that Episode I comes in at 19th overall, below the original three. Episode II comes in at 80th overall. So there's certainly evidence for an ongoing decline in the quality of these pictures. I think one could also make a pretty compelling argument that Episode I benefitted from a fantastic amount of demand that had built up over the years, thus inflating its figures by a great degree. It's pretty clear that the kind of audience impact of the original films is not being maintained by the second trilogy. Let us further note that just below Episode I, at 20th, is [i]Fantasia[/i]. A film noted for many things, but not, perhaps, having an excellent STORY. ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification