Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Episode II Surpasses $116 Million at Box Office

CmdrTaco posted more than 12 years ago | from the that-kinda-cash-buys-a-lot-of-wookies dept.

Star Wars Prequels 529

Domasi writes "The Force is with George Lucas again as the fifth installment of the Star Wars saga, 'Attack of the Clones,' took in $116.3 million in its first four days and to become the second-fastest film behind only "Spider-Man"." Spider-man is better. But I plan to see both of them again.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

text here (-1, Redundant)

trollercoaster (250101) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550301)

'Clones' Surpasses $116 Million at Box Office

The Force is with George Lucas again as the fifth installment of the Star Wars saga, 'Attack of the Clones,' took in $116.3 million in its first four days and to become the second-fastest film behind only "Spider-Man" ($286.5 million in three weeks) to top $100 million. According to studio estimates issued today, the Richard Gere-Diane Lane adultery thriller "Unfaithful," ($10.3 million) remained strong behind the blockbusters at no. 3 ahead of the Hugh Grant film "About a Boy," ($8.4 million). April's top film "The Scorpion King" ($2.7 million) placed seventh this week.

Jennifer Lopez's "Enough," "Insomnia ," and "Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron" open nationwide in theatres on May 24.

WTF is Taco smoking? (1, Insightful)

Big_Ass_Spork (446856) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550405)

The first half of Spiderman is a redundant piece of shit to anyone who read the comic (or even watched the TV show). AotC, OTOH, is the best (by far) installment of the SW saga. Reevaluate thyself, then try again.

Star Wars just plain sucks! (-1, Flamebait)

hettb (569863) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550305)

And you do, too!

yay. Go George! (-1, Troll)

hplasm (576983) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550310)

OO. 1st post too! Sorry. Couldn't resist the kleen white page...... (kill me now)

Episode II (The greatest of all star wars) (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550317)

Im not sure how spider-man could have been a better movie considering this one was even better
than "empire".

Pocket change (0)

tmcmsail (302707) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550322)

Lucas took most of it. That ought to keep him in beer money for a week. Maybe next movie he can hire people that can actually act...

... Waiting for the DVD's of 4,5 and 6...

spider-man (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550323)

spider man was good, but the cheese factor is a little too much.

fp beotch (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550327)

I am elite ! TACO - gir !

i will wait (-1, Troll)

atari2600 (545988) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550328)

I finished downloading Lord of the rings - DVD Rip - 1.5GB big. Reckon these two movies will be there soon. What says?
/me says 4 cheers for p2p computing. :D.

Re:i will wait (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550399)


Re:i will wait (0)

$0 31337 (225572) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550417)

wtf was that post for? Did you want everyone to think your a l33t pirate because you can download *COUGH* DVD Rips? Woopty Fucking Doo. Who can't download DVD rips? They're everywhere! "Huhuhuh... I just downloaded some MP3s mofo! I'm soooo badass and l337. ph3@r m3!"

Get a fucking life.

Re:i will wait (-1)

Big_Ass_Spork (446856) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550455)

Acually I already have all three. Viva le Limewire!

No one saw this. (3, Insightful)

petree (16551) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550330)

I bet there was no one amongst this crowd who ever thought Spider-Man would out perform -ANY- episode of Star Wars at the box office. Ever.

I certainly didn't see it coming.

Re:No one saw this. (3, Informative)

the_2nd_coming (444906) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550346)

look is a 4 day total. for 3 days, it raked in 86 million.

Re:No one saw this. (1)

the_2nd_coming (444906) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550427)

oops...miss read your post :-P EOF

Re:No one saw this. (2)

thesolo (131008) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550363)

I bet there was no one amongst this crowd who ever thought Spider-Man would out perform -ANY- episode of Star Wars at the box office. Ever.

Actually, I saw it coming, and I couldn't be happier!! A friend of mine didn't believe me when I said that Spidey would beat Episode II, and so we placed a nice $50 bet on it.

I just called him up, and he answered the phone with "Fine, you fucker, you win!". I guess he just loaded slashdot too! ;)

Re:No one saw this. (3, Interesting)

rnb (471088) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550426)

But Spider-Man was on 1,500 more screens than Episode II because Lucas wanted to only show Episode II in theaters equipped with digital sound.

Anyone have the per-screen averages?

Re:No one saw this. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550521)

it won per screen also. sorry, lucas still loses and he knew it in advance...

Re:No one saw this. (2, Informative)

MrAl (21859) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550448)

Lucas himself saw this. He limited the number of theatres AOTC was playing in - something like 1,500 theatres less than Spider-Man. In an interview he said that he knew he wasn't going to break any records, but been-there-done-that. He just wanted it to play in theatres that were up to par technically.

mod fucker up.. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550468)

no hay texto..

Re:No one saw this. (1)

schwatoo (521485) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550465)

Actually everyone saw this. Spiderman was playing at almost every damn cinema in the country. AotC wasn't.

It didn't come down to how many bums on seats, it came down to how many seats were available

Wait a week or two, from what I hear the screens showing Spiderman are pretty much empty right now while Star Wars is still packed to the gills.

Empty is $46 million? Doubtful (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550551)

Starwars is old and tired. It was cool in the 70's now it's just pandering. Biggest letdown ever.

Re:No one saw this. (1)

cybrpnk2 (579066) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550484)

Check out the numbers [] - they are unbelievable. Spiderman made 40% of AOTC's gate recipts on AOTC's first three days, and it was Spidey's third weekend. That's what the AMAZING in Amazing Spider-Man means...

Re:No one saw this. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550554)

Anyone can say in hindsight that they saw it coming.

I saw the trailers for ep 2. It didn't look all that bad, but it looked like Titanic in Space.

I saw an ad for spidey. I was impressed by the fluidity of the way he ripped his mask on & off. I was impressed by the 3-d nature of the lines on his costume (I've read the comics, and never thought of them as 3-D). Some Comic book movies do amazingly well (Batman & Mask come to mind).

I'm looking forward to Spidey 2. More than I can say for Ep3 (or Ep2 for that matter).

Why $$$? (0)

DrBiscuit (575519) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550331)

A movie is supposed to impart human feelings via relationships and understanding. The way to measure the success of this is to ask people if they felt empathy for the characters and if they were moved by the plot.

The Star Wars() franchise is all about lasers, explosions and stepping in animal droppings. The success is measured in dollars.

Why am I not suprised that Slashdot prefers the latter?

Re:Why $$$? (3, Insightful)

necrognome (236545) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550459)

A film is a time sequence of images (not necessarily chronological) often intermixed with audio. "Impart[ing] human feelings via relationships and understanding" is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition of filmmaking. It's also a muddled notion of aesthetics. Some aestheticians have remarked that, "Art expresses human emotions," but this is a theory of beauty and certainly debatable. Furthermore, some films--concept films mostly--lack both characters and plot, and this is by design.

Distaste is not a reason for trolling.

Re:Why $$$? (3, Insightful)

ryszards (451448) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550522)

There's a lot to be said for using films as an escape and not taking much at all from them, purely using them as an escapist medium to escape reality.

Star Wars is arguably to most succesful human escapist work ever created, empowering generations to live in a world they could hardly imagine.

That its success is rated in dollars is purely a side effect of todays money biased society.

Who cares about the money and who cares if the film doesn't impart human feelings. If you enjoy it, that's all that matters. A movie isn't _supposed_ to _do_ anything, it's the viewer that interprets things, not the film forcing anything on you.


I completly Agree (1)

nervlord1 (529523) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550332)

With the review that says, boring first hour, much much better as it goes on.

This movie is no where near as good as the original starwars, but it makes up for the phantom menance. Go see it, You will probably like it.

Support your MPAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550333)

Invite all your friends, buy the movie, buy the action figures.

Its all to help starving artists and lobbying workers. They need your support to fight piracy, which will take away your soul and be civilization's downfall.

Every time you let a pirate copy a movie for his own use, God kills a Scientologist.

Screens (5, Informative)

lemonk (220326) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550334)

It is worthwhile to mention that Spider-Man is being shown on over 1000 screens more than AOTC, etc.

Re:Screens (5, Interesting)

StudMuffin (167171) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550376)

A large part of this was due to Lucas' condition that if a theater shows AOTC, that it show for a minimum of four weeks. Smaller theaters with only a few screens can't support this kind of commitment during the summer movie season. So, since Spider-Man had no such condition, it opened (and stayed) on more screens.

Re:Screens (1)

InnereNacht (529021) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550383)

No, it doesn't.

If they're showing Attack of the Clones where I'm from, on release day, I'm sure they can show it most OTHER accessible places for people who want to see movies.

Re:Screens (2, Informative)

peter_goathead (84986) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550456)

it isn't.
Spider-Man: 3615 Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones: 3161

from here [] [].
500 less screens.

Re:Screens (1)

kingpin2k (523489) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550573)

It's also worthwhile to note that the per-screen take was still higher for Spiderman.

Came in second, eh?... (1)

meringuoid (568297) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550337)

... Imagine Yoda there.

'Strong the Force is, but commercially more successful has Spider-Man been. Powerful is the Dark Side with this one...'

p.s... FP. w00t. Etc.

Spider Sense (0)

LordYUK (552359) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550339)

Spidey was a better movie, but my spider sense tells me that AotC will surpass it because Yoda's fight with Darth Tyrannus was simply awesome. It was worth sitting through the drivel of Anakin's raging rage and Amidala's sappy sap sap yet again.

Just for Yoda (3, Interesting)

underpaid (554774) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550345)

I'd see it again just to see yoda fight. I just wish there was a clear ending to the fight so everyone could have cheered for him.

Re:Just for Yoda (2, Insightful)

Ryan_Singer (114640) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550415)

There is an end, when he picks up his walking stick after stopping the falling pillar.

That's when everyone in my theater (12:01 showing, first showing for that theater) erupted into applause for Yoda.

Re:Just for Yoda (1)

thaigan (197773) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550492)

He didn't even hit Dooku once! It seems Dooku is invincible.

Re:Just for Yoda (2)

jjsoh (466262) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550510)

Thank God I didn't read anything about Ep. II prior to watching. That was one of the best surprises.

Best Lightsaber Duel. Ever.

Is this inflation-adjusted? (1, Insightful)

danger42 (302987) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550348)

Has anyone asked the question, are the box office draws inflation adjusted?

My guess would be they are not, because movie studios are desperate to create enough hype to get people into the theatres before word of mouth kills the flick.

What would be interesting would be to see NUMBER of ticket sales, not total dollar amounts. The price of movies is more than double what it was 15 years ago, so it looks like more than twice the number of people are seeing movies now.

I can say that in 1985, when I paid $4.00 to see The Empire Strikes Back, there was alot more interest in the Star Wars franchise than there is now. But the movie studios want you to think the opposite.

Re:Is this inflation-adjusted? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550369)

i was under the impression that spider man and star wars ep. 2 came out this year, so inflation differences would be.... minimal

Re:Is this inflation-adjusted? (2)

BoneFlower (107640) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550424)

I agree completely. Raw dollar amounts mean nothing... what matters is how many seats out of the total available were filled, and how long the movie kept filling those seats for.

Re:Is this inflation-adjusted? (1, Redundant)

Cire (96846) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550493)

A quick search on Google [] picks up a number of places that rank movies according with grosses adjusted for inflation: [] []


Home viewership skews such calculations (2)

MtViewGuy (197597) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550549)

Unfortunately, you can't really use the tally of numbers of tickets sold comparing pre-1950 movies to post-1950 movies.

With the advent of television on a wide scale in the late 1940's and the advent of home video playback in the late 1970's, that tends to really skew the issue of movie viewership drastically.

Remember, up until around 1950 the movie theater was the primary form of visual entertainment; that of course meant huge numbers of tickets sold for movies like Gone with the Wind and Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. Today, television and home video playback tends to create a huge audience for movies outside of movie theaters, so we have to contend with the issue of people seeing the movie well after its theatrical first run on DVD/VHS, pay-per-view channels and premium cable channels.

How is Spider-Man better than Star Wars? (1, Insightful)

Win-Developer (316016) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550353)

Both movies had lame dialogue and wooden acting. They both had a character that chewed up the scenery everytime the character was on screen(Jar Jar/ Willem Dafoe). Spider-Man had lame-o effects and a piss poor ending, while star wars had better effects and a piss poor ending.

At least star wars didn't have the oft repeated line "with great power comes great responsibility" :) But Star Wars did have a laughable love I guess they're about even.

But I think I've got Clones nailed down into a single comment..."Attack of the Clones is Pearl Harbor in Space". Both have lame love stories and bad acting, and in the end...everything goes boom!

Re:How is Spider-Man better than Star Wars? (2, Funny)

Malc (1751) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550473)

I agree with you about the acting. Lucas does a fabulous job with the technical details and CGI, but when it comes to acting, he seems completely clueless. Character development is poor, and his ability to draw on the skills of top actors and actresses is appalling.

The romance was supposed to be one of the key parts of the story, yet the scenes were jarringly bad. The whole scene towards the end where Natalie Portman was sprawling stunned on the sand then suddenly got up was right out of (no offense intended): "Dummies Guide to Winning Penalties and Freekicks Using the Acting Skills of South American and Italian Footballers"

What if no Thursday? (2)

bryan1945 (301828) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550359)

I'm just wondering if the Friday-Sunday numbers would (or could) have been higher if it didn't debut on Thursday, perhaps pushing it to the top of openings?

BTW, saw it on Saturday and it is way better than Phantom Menace. It's worth going to see just to see Yoda with a lightsaber and commanding troops! (Pulls a Neo pose)

Re:What if no Thursday? (1)

thaigan (197773) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550451)

It probably would've made it closer, but many of the people that saw it on Wednesday or Thursday probably saw it again during the weekend.

Also, I liked seeing Yoda with a lightsaber, too, but I can't understand why he wasn't even able to hit Dooku once! Dooku must be invincible to withstand that attack!

Re:What if no Thursday? (2)

swingkid (3585) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550532)

Yoda vs. Dooku - I think this is what's meant by "imbalance" in the force, in that the dark side of the force is stronger than the light side, for whatever reason, and that Anakin is destined to bring the two sides back into equilibrium. Hence, Evil Dooku is nearly as strong as Yoda, being all pumped up on Sithroids.

Re:What if no Thursday? (1)

the_2nd_coming (444906) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550530)

86 million

Spiderman Vs Star Wars (1)

gazuga (128955) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550364)

Spider-man is better

For me it really comes down to Mary Jane vs Queen Amidala. I haven't seen Star Wars yet, but Natalie Portman would have to be damn good to beat out Kirsten Dunst in that rain scene. ;)

Re:Spiderman Vs Star Wars (0)

vermicious (533005) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550472)

Mmmmmm bare-middrift - Amidala style. And she's no longer queen you see - apparently on Naboo, they hold elections for the Queen. Curious. She's merely a senator in AOTC. Besides, Portman beats Dunst any day in my book; Queen or not.

Re:Spiderman Vs Star Wars (-1)

Sexual Asspussy (453406) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550570)

Natalie Portman looks a lot better than she did in Episode 1. she no longer looks like a skinny teenage girl and has become a slim, hot young woman. there is a lot of nipple-poking-through-shirt action, and lots of flesh in general; i guess that's to be expected from a senator.

unfortunately the movie remains PG; i'm hoping atari2600 [] will p2p us an NC-17 cut soon.

"Spider-man is better." (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550365)

which means nothing. but i could come up with a lot of movies better than spiderman.

Spider-man is better? (5, Insightful)

schwatoo (521485) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550370)

Yeah I thought so too. I just loved that scene with the New Yorkers on the bridge throwing down junk at the Green Goblin to distract him from beating up Spidey. "You mess with him and you mess with us!".

As plot devices go that's up there with destroying an Alien battle fleet with a PowerMac and Word Macro Virus

While I don't like to whine... (2)

mblase (200735) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550375)

..."Episode II" did cheat slightly by opening on a Thursday, giving it an extra day to profit that Spider-Man lacked. (OTOH, it also opened on fewer screens, although I personally find that hard to believe as my local mega-theaters gave "Spider-Man" four screens opening weekend and "Episode II" got five.)

I personally think it will be more interesting to see how business is on the second weekend, which "Spider-Man" did extremely well on [] , after everyone's had a chance to hear and read reviews from their friends.

Not that I'm bedrudging "Episode II", mind you. I have yet to see it, but everyone seems suitably pleased with it. I just like to keep everything in perspective, and remember Mark Twain's warning about statistics as the third basic kind of lie.

Re:While I don't like to whine... (1)

Cheeko (165493) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550463)

From what I've read the fewer screens isn't so much from the mega-plexes with like 20 screens, but rather the indipendent theaters. Lucas and 20th Century put some pretty big demands on theaters in regard to how long it had to stay on their biggest screen and revenue sharing, etc. All of which made it much more difficult for the smaller theaters with only like 4-5 screens to show the movie, and still operate normally.

This is at least what I gathered from an article that was on CNN a week ago. A quick scan didn't find the article, and I haven't had my coffee yet, so I'm too lazy to hunt. If I find it, I'll post it here.

You suck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550377)

Spiderman is not better. LOL.

I'd go see it again (2)

dmuth (14143) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550378)

And probally will, just to see Yoda in action.

I don't know how to describe it. It was like...Kermit the Frog on crack!

Re:I'd go see it again (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550490)

I thought Yoda looked more like a Mexican Jumping Bean with a tooth pick stuck in it :)

Re:I'd go see it again (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550496)

I did not come up with this I found it somewhere in the last few days(the origin eludes me I'm afraid) but I think this sums up the whole Yoda thing:

'Yoda is like Bruce Lee, Mister Myagi, and Kermit the Frog all rolled into one!!'

Spider Man was better.... (1)

neilb78 (557698) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550382)

I'm a pretty hardcore starwars freak, but I thought Spider Man was better than AOTC. I think we should all go see them both again :)

$183M International (3, Informative)

rosewood (99925) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550389)

Reuters [] says:
Ticket sales for the new "Star Wars" movie were out of this world, racking up
$183 million at box offices worldwide in the first four days of release. According to studio estimates issued on Sunday, "Star Wars: Episode II -- Attack of the Clones," grossed an estimated $116.3 million across the United States and Canada.

See it again. (2, Interesting)

techwolf (26278) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550392)

I found myself watching it the first time for "what happens next". I went again this weekend and enjoyed it WAY more because I watched what was happening. The subtle detail in each scene put a smile on my face more often than not. had a good thread [] running about "the little things" in the film.

I think the repeat business will keep Clones going for a little bit.


stop the starwars bashing here (1)

the_2nd_coming (444906) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550394)

hello....Episodes 1-3 are the begining of the saga.

if the entire starwars saga was in a 2 hour film, 1-3 would be the first 45 min to hour.....that is always the worst part of a movie, but does it hurt your total experience? no.

4-6 are the climax, and 7-9......well, in book form.....are the resolution.

oh, and an entertainment reporter today on the radio siad that Lucas has told her that E3 will be the Darkest episode of all Starwars films.....I assume the bad guy totaly destroys the good guy and it will leave us with a bad taste, is supose to happen that way folks....any way...back to replaying the yoda fight in my head :-)

Only about 86 million when compared to Spider-Man (3, Informative)

thaigan (197773) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550410)

Spider-Man did it in three days without a mid-night opening.

Here's a snippet from 20th Century Fox and Lucasfilm's PG rated franchise installment Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones exploded in first place with an ESTIMATED $86.15 million at 3,161 theaters ($27,254 per theater).

After opening to $30,141,417 for Wednesday midnight screenings and Thursday, its four day cume is approximately $116.29 million. By comparison, Spider-Man's record setting opening was $114.8 million for a normal three day weekend (May 3-5).

Star Wars' average per theater was the highest for any film playing this weekend.

Directed by George Lucas, it stars Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman and Hayden Christensen.

"That's the third best three day regular weekend opening ever after Spider-Man's $114 million and $90 million for Harry Potter," Fox distribution president Bruce Snyder said Sunday morning.

"It's the second fastest to $100 million. Of course, Spider-Man did it in three days and this is four. The previous record was Star Wars: Episode I in five days. It opened on a Wednesday (May 19, 1999). Its five day number was $105.659 million. So we've kind of blown past that in four days with $116.291 million on this one. It's just terrific and we're delighted."

Looking back at Episode I -- The Phantom Menace, Snyder noted, "Its Wednesday, the opening day, was $28.5 million. That was the high water mark for the run. The next best day was $24.4 million on Saturday (of weekend one). In this case, we opened to $30.1 million, went to $25.2 million on Friday and Saturday looks like $32.25 million, so it's actually above the opening day and the opening day, remember, had the Midnight shows (from Wednesday) folded in. So this is really a spectacular performance."

Phantom Menace wound up grossing $431.1 million in domestic theaters. Its worldwide total (domestic plus international) was $923 million. Asked about reports that Clones' Wednesday midnight shows had ticket sales of approximately $6 million, Snyder replied, "Something in that area. It depends on how they got folded into (the total for Thursday), but I think that's a fair estimate."

Here's the breakdown of box office report []

Re:Only about 86 million when compared to Spider-M (1)

JEDi_ERiAN (79402) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550599)

ok, let's just keep in mind that many SW fans (freaks?) had a bad taste in their mouth from Episode I. yes, spider-man made more money the first weekend, but this is the first spider-man movie ever. fans have been waiting 30+ (?) years for it. let's see if spider-man 5 makes as much money as episode II, that would be a fair comparison. i dunno if spider-man can make 5 great movies, i keep having flashbacks of Batman & Robin (4th in the series, probably the last).

don't get me wrong, spider-man was a great movie.


AOTC: Starcraft monster? (1)

RabidMonkey (30447) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550411)

Did anyone else notice that one of the monsters in the 'arena' scene looked a lot like a Hydralisk, with the front legs of a Zergling? Maybe even a lurker?

I just saw it last night and laughed when I saw that one ...

The thing I enjoyed most was the subtle changing of the background theme towards the Imperial March ... it was so subtle that it was cool ...

Anyways, ok movie. I have to see it again to cast a better judgement.

inflation (1, Redundant)

austad (22163) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550414)

They obviously aren't figuring inflation into this number. Wouldn't it be a little more accurate to list how many tickets were sold instead? Then the numbers could be compared against movies from years ago when it only cost $2-$4 for a ticket.

I think it's BS to say that "Movie X" is the biggest money maker of all time when movies used to cost 30% of what they do now.

Re:inflation (2)

mshiltonj (220311) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550470)

They obviously aren't figuring inflation into this number. Wouldn't it be a little more accurate to list how many tickets were sold instead?

The inflation-adjusted top movies of all time list for viewing pleasure... []

Re:inflation (2)

jspey (183976) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550511)

The movie industry doesn't adjust for inflation on purpose. Not adjusting for inflation means that movies will keep bringing in more and more money, allowing studios to say that such-and-such a movie broke lots of box office records in all their ads.

Mr. Spey

Re:inflation (1)

azadrozny (576352) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550598)

Adjusting for inflation is better, but counting tickets is just as problematic. There are more people today than there was 25 or even 50 years ago. The most accurate indicator would be what percentage of the viewing population saw the movie. That would even account for people like me who will go see the movie more than once. This is how TV ratings are calculated.

Totally Predictable (1)

GeckoX (259575) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550457)

Look, the fact that Spiderman beat out SWep2 on their respective opening weekends was pretty much written in stone a couple of weeks ago.

Here's the bottom line:

Spiderman was released into close to HALF of all the theatres in north america, partially because there was nothing else out at the time to compete at all. (The 3 or 4 Mega-Theatre complexes near me had it playing in at LEAST half of their theatres).

Two weeks later, SWep2 is released, but has to be stuffed in alongside Spidey.

In other words, it comes down to simple basic supply-demand. SWep2 just wasn't in enough theaters to generate the same amount of revenue on opening weekend as spiderman. That's it folks.

Really has very little to do with which is better.
They're both great flicks and both have high demand. If SWep2 and spidey's release had been reversed, you could likely just swap their opening weekend revenues dollar for dollar.

So, don't get your panties in a bundle that SWep2 didn't make as much as spidey on opening weekend because there was ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that it could have. Physically impossible, period.

Attack Of The Clones.. (1)

Chicane-UK (455253) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550464)

Finally went to see that this weekend - and was surprised to see people queueing still at 12:20am to watch the film even though it had been out for a few days already.

I wonder what its gonna be like for Spiderman, when they finally release it over here in a month or so?

Episode I (2)

debrain (29228) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550466)

Could someone explain to me how it is possible that Episode I, which turned so many people off to Star Wars, grossed less than its successor? If you didn't see Episode I, what are the odds that you would see Episode II?

I know that our theatre, in the interim, had a $2 hike in prices. I wonder if it is related to the monotonic increasing revenues.

Anyone else find it odd that Episode II garnered more money than Episode I, though?

Re:Episode I (3, Insightful)

the_2nd_coming (444906) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550597)

no, becasue Episode I was not that bad. was the begining of the entire saga, not a stand alone movie.....saying episode I was a bad movie is about a brilient as the folks who complained about the ending of Felloship of the rings.

Paid for One, Sneaked in to the other.. (1)

cOdEgUru (181536) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550479)

My only qualm was I ended up adding to Lucas's coffers instead of giving it to Raimi. I think he deserved it more that Lucas.

If I had a gun I would first shoot that Hayden kid. I cant convey enough the fact that he sucked so bad. "I killed them all, I slaughtered them like animals"... booo..booo. Dude, you need a lesson in emotions. The only emotion he had was his head tilted sideways when he drives, a smug expression on his face.

Natalie, get a life. Get out of Starwars while you still can. You are better off with just hot grits poured over you.

Kenobi and Yoda and Sam Jackson kicked ass. Period. Kenobi, however was the best.

Direction was as bad as a b-grade movie. The way the movie switched between Kenobi and Hayden was done badly. I was more interested in what Kenobi does and I had to close my eyes when Hayden and Natalie were frolicking in grass. I have seen Bollywood movies which are better than this.

Spiderman was awesome. The movie could have had more action to it, but the character portrayals were real neat. Toby really put all his effort in to it and it showed. Watching him morph in to spiderman and learning his new skills were as exhilarating as if I were doing it myself.

Lucas could take a course in directing from Sam Raimi himself.

And better of all. LOTR still reigns supreme as the movie of the year. Peter jackson and his army of hobbits and wizards and orcs could whip the Clone army back to medieval era.

I think you've been smoking to much dreck. (1)

spoot (104183) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550495)

Clones was no Bergman film...but good God, Spiderman was so lame and predictable that I literally laughed thru half of the dialogue. At least SW's didn't have Skywalker reaching for a Dr. Pepper! With all of the hatred of the corporate media here at slashdot, you would think that you could see thru the hype of this kind of Hollywood drivel. Spiderman was just a kiddy ride and a commercial masquerading as a movie.

My reasons for liking Spider-man better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550498)

I can't remember where, but there was a review that starts "George, hire a real director and good writers for the next installment, please."

Spider-man was better because it didn't have near the amount of crappy love story. Also, the future Darth Vader can't be a whiner!

Two cents worth, please (1, Flamebait)

blankmange (571591) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550499)

Here it is, my summation of AotC: dreadful, simply dreadful. Comparing it to Spider-Man is comparing apples and oranges, but I did have a much better time watching Spider-man. I must qualify this statement with the fact that I have been a Star Wars fan from the beginning, but this installment was appalling. Why would a 2 & 1/2 hour movie need a hour's worth of a teen angst/love story that seemingly has no plot, especially when we know that Anakin will eventually turn his back on the Jedi in the end? Why are there no truly evil villains? Sure Count Dooku and Darth Sidius want to overthrow the Federation and create the Empire.... big deal. I miss the taut story lines and highly-defined characters of Episodes 4 - 6. Episode 1 had Darth Maul, but for far too short of time -- we need a bad guy. Granted, rumors of Episode 3 say that a bad guy will emerge (let me guess.... Vader?) but that is 2 episodes too late...

So ends my rant, please begin the flames.....

Lucas borrowing from other hit movies? (2, Interesting)

delphin42 (556929) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550504)

I loved Episode 2, but there were a few things that seemed a little too familiar...

Count Dooko's speech about "The Dark Lord" and his pleas of "Join me!" caused a little too much deja vu, since it has only been months since watching Lord of the Rings.

The clone factory on Kamino where 'humans are no longer born, they're grown' seemed to be borrowed directly from the matrix.

The gladiatorial style execution seemed to be inspired by another recent film. Besides that, the crab-like monster looked, sounded, and moved a lot like the aliens from Starship Troopers.

Yoda, Anakin, and the other Jedi borrowed quite a few martial arts moves from the characters in the matrix. They didn't fight that way in Episode One.

The cityscape of Corusant and the opening chase sequence was a little too reminiscent of the Fifth Element.

Just a few things I noticed! Hopefully $116M is just the beginning. It may be too optimistic to hope that it unseats Titanic as the box office record holder, but one can hope...

Box Office (2)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550506)

I can't fanthom why in this age people still hang around that "Box Office" thing ?

I mean, 40 years ago, it didn't cost an arm and a leg to purchase a movie ticket, ahhh... those are the drive-ins day.

Today, how much does it cost for a ticket to a first-run movie ? $10 ? $ 25 ? $ 40 ?????

Who knows ?

I mean, the "Box Office" figure should have been retired many years ago, since it really DOES NOT REFLECT HOW MANY PEOPLE GO TO SEE THE MOVIE !

Let's say ...

If the Box Office figure for Episode II is 5 times the amount for Jaws (back in the '70s), do you think Episode II attracts FIVE TIME MORE PEOPLE to see it, than Jaws back in the '70s ?

I really hope that one day we will see the figure for "Box Office" in terms of HOW MANY PEOPLE PURCHASING THE TICKETS, instead of HOW MUCH $$$$.

Why Spidey Beat the Jedis (3, Interesting)

Dwiggy (180327) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550507)

Because Spiderman is pure and simple popular story-telling, while AOTC was full of histrionics and exposition, much of which would probably be useless and/or confusing if you hadn't seen all of the other films.

I know this is going to sound strange, but as far as ease of digestion goes, it's almost as if AOTC is the art house gourmet movie and Spiderman is the summer popcorn movie.

new headline name suggested (2)

josh crawley (537561) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550508)

We all know about or . These are for sections that pertain for the articles. Have you ever thought about creating one called ??? That's what this place is turning out to be.

Mississippi (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550509)

A professor at the University of Mississippi is giving a
lecture on the supernatural. To get a feel for his
audience, he asks: "How many people here believe in
ghosts?" About 90 students raise their hands.

"Well, that's a good start. Out of those of you who
believe in ghosts, do any of you think you've ever seen
a ghost?" About 40 students raise their hands.

"That's really good. Has anyone here ever talked to a
ghost?" 15 students raise their hands.

"That's great. Has anyone here ever touched a ghost?" 3
students raise their hands.

"That's fantastic. But let me ask you one question
further... Have any of you ever made love to a ghost?"
One student way in the back raises his hand.

The professor is astonished and says, "Son, all the
years I've been giving this lecture, no one has ever
claimed to have slept with a ghost. You've got to come
up here and tell us about your experience."

The redneck student replies with a nod and a grin, and
begins to make his way up to the podium. The professor
says, "Well, tell us what it's like to have sex with

The student replies, "Ghost?!? From way back there ah
thought ya said "goats."

So who would win in a fight? (2)

Dark Paladin (116525) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550516)

The contendors:

Anakin Skywalker
Strengths: Superfast reflexes, ability to move objects with the Force, ESP like reflexes, can jump really high.
Has a lightsaber.

While he's suppose to be a Jedi, he's as celibate as a Catholic Priest at a nude alter boy convention. Also, tends to get angry, then say really bad lines.

Strengths: Superfast reflexes, really strong, ESP like reflexes, can jump really high. Able to climb walls and shoot web from his wrists.

Weaknesses: Can't seem to make a decent business case, hangs around stupidly while people shoot "sleeping gas" into his face. Has a cute girl hot after his body, but can't seem to make the mind-penis connection and "go for the MJ".

Personally, I think Spider-Man could win it, but only if he got "The Rage" when Anakin threatens MJ. Seeing how Anakin has his own love muffin to worry about (unless he decides he likes women who actually have a chest), I think that we'll see Anakin just barely eek out a win.

Or, since Anakin is E-vile, Spider-Man should win, since Good always truimphs over Evil (just ask the folks who used to work for Enron.)

Very Impressive. (2, Interesting)

psycht (233176) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550520)

You have to note this: Spider-Man wa shown on more screens in their 3-day opening, than in Star Wars EP2 4-day opening. I think it was on 1500 more screens (if I remember correctly).

Given that fact and good math skill, EP2 did outdo Spider-Man. Either way.. I've seen them both twice anyways.. they both rock.

The Slashdot Subscription Model (1, Funny)

perl_god (578135) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550529)

1. Set up Port-a-Potty in a public space

2. Hang a magic marker from a string inside the crapper; encourge users to write graffiti

3. Periodically toss advertising flyers through the door as users sit and write

4. Offer an "advertising-free" experience to users for a small charge

5. Nickel-and dime yourself into financial oblivion

AOTC v Spiderman (1)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550534)

I saw them both. They were both pretty good, however, I for one prefered Spiderman simply because it's the first movie i've ever seen with a downtrodden geek standing up for other downtrodden geeks, or downtrodden in gerneral, that did not have to do with being an l3et0 h4x0r, or was Antitrust. I'm still not sure that i've got a handle on that movie.

press release... (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550538)

George Lucas today in a special press conference denounced the record sales on attack of the clones as clouding the issues at hand " Clearly It should have pulled in at least 30 Trillion dollars the first weekend, all those lost profist are due to piracy and the internet."

Soruces close to Mr. Lucas have stated at his dismay at not having more money than Bill Gates, and is deeply troubled at the rising costs of buying laws and legislators. The Senate is rumored to hold hearing to offer Mr Lucas financial support due to the huge losses he has incurred due to piracy. Sen Hollings today said, "This is a travesty, piracy has robbed this man of his ability to work... we must crush piracy in all it's forms"

AotC was better. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550544)

What do you mean spiderman is better? Am I the only one that was not impressed by that movie? It was ok but not in the same league as the first Batman, or Superman or even X-Men.

When I leave the theater after a good action flick, I feel like kicking ass, that's how I felt after AotC, but Spiderman did not leave me with any long lasting impression, it was an average action/sci-fi movie.

AotC was a great action/adventure movie, and also a poor sci-fi movie (the Star Wars saga has more in common with Tolkien than Asimov, look who wrotes the book for episode 1), but one does know that before going in to see a Star-Wars movie.

So I loved AotC, and Spideman was ok, but neither fulfilled my sci-fi cravings. But films rarely do, I go to the library for that, BTW can anyone find a way to make David Weber publish a Harrington book a month without dropping the quality (like the last one)? I know it's also action/adventure but damn I need my Honor.

i like how you state.. (1)

VoiceOfRaisin (554019) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550547)

"spider-man is better". maybe YOU THINK spider-man is better. its not a fact or something. i thought spider-man was painfully formulaic, nothing was a surprise. straight ahead boring story, exactly what i was expecting. i thought star wars 2 was MUCH better.

Spider-Man was a little bit better than X-Men (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3550550)

but not much.
I enjoyed reading the comic, so I was quite accustomed to Peter Parker. Maybe this is why
I don't feel very thrilled about the movie.

While the movie had some strong moments, I felt quite bored in many, many scenes.

SW: AOTC is so much richer in style, texture and content that you almost HAVE to see it twice to
get it all in.

At least I had to and I enjoyed the second time much more than the first.

International Release dates (2, Interesting)

galaga79 (307346) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550552)

Regardless of which one is deemed the "better" film of two, one thing I do like about Attack of the Clones is that its release date of May 16 was pretty much synchronised throughout the world. Living in Australia it can be quite frustrating to read about all these great films currently showing in America and having to wait a month or two till it starts showing here. Spiderman is an example, you people in the US have been able to see it since early May but those of us in Australia have to wait till June.

Out of curiousity does anyone know what factors determine whether a film gets a synchronised global release or not?

Celebrity Deathmatch (2)

Col. Panic (90528) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550556)

Natalie versus Kirsten - who will win?

who cares? (1)

CeramicNuts (265664) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550576)

with inflation, Scary Movie 7 will make $116 milion its opening weekend in 2018.

number of asses in seats would be the statistic to report.

Yellow Journalism (1)

southpolesammy (150094) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550586)

If you count only the 3-day weekend for each movie's opening, Spidey beats out AotC by almost $30M. Because of AotC's mid-week opening, it comes in ahead for the overall weekend, but the numbers don't lie. This is simply a case of journalists trying to stretch the truth to make it seem like something happened that actually didn't.

Also, they talk about the highest revenue weekend of all-time. Well, that's great, but what about ticket sales and inflation in ticket prices over the years? The last movie I saw in the theaters was a few weeks ago and it was $9 for entrance. If you do the math, for AotC, that comes out to a little under 13 million viewers of the movie. Now take into account how many more people are alive today as compared one or two generations ago, do the math again...I'll bet that although this is still an impressive opening, that it's not a record per capita.

Lame comparison. (1)

Evro (18923) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550592)

I'm sure this is why Lucas opened Starwars on practically a wednesday night. That way they can say he had a huge opening weekend, when in reality he had 4 days to make the same amount as Spider-Man did in 2. Considering that Spider-Man's money was actually related to the quality of the film itself, rather than being some sort of a lame nerd cult with an automatic audience, I think Spider-Man will be the one remembered long after this year. Remember, Phantom Menace did well at the box office too, and that was an awful movie.

These statistics seem meaningless... (4, Insightful)

linuxrunner (225041) | more than 12 years ago | (#3550596)

First of all, when I'm told a movie grossed the most $$$ ever, I cringe.
These stats are great for me knowing that yes, Spiderman sold more tickets than Star Wars at the box office this year... But don't tell me it's the best selling movie ever. It's probably not!

I mean, look at how much it costs to buy a ticket today.. What, $8.50 round about?

So what you're telling me that year after year, with inflation, there will always be a bigger and better blockbuster according to gross sales?
Why has no one EVER ajusted for inflation? For all I know the best and most watched movie way Ben Hur... hehe....

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?