Potter overtakes TPM

[Marcus Telcontar]

http://entertainment.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4459,3804395%255E10431%255E%255Enbv,00.html


>_<

No other comment needed

[Champion of the Force]

Edit: Gave thread a more descriptive title than just :\. :P

[ReturnOfTheCB]

Say it isn't so....of course, I guess it's only rightful that another overhyped, overrated movie take the spot right next to Titanic (Titanic of course being the overhyped and overrated movie of which I speak).....

[JMK]

Well we can't say we were unprepared for this. The writing has been on the wall for weeks now. But really, what does it mean? What did the little bugger have going for him that propelled him past TPM? It's obviously the international scene that put HP over the top because there is NO way it's going to catch TPM's domestic tally.

[Marcus Telcontar]

The Intl tally is staggering. And still going up at a resonable rate.

What annoys me is that FOTR has got little chance of overtraking Potter in return. FOTR at No.2 would be cool. Pootter at No. 2 is annoying cause it jsut simply wasnt THAT good. It was okay tho.

[Jedi Master Carr]

FOTR was a much better film IMO, it won't matter some film in the future will boot HP out of that 2 spot, I am hoping for AOTC maybe or it could be something in 5 years for all we know. I don't think HP 2 will do it I doubt it will do that well, it certainly won't do that well in the US because I won't go see it and I know a lot of people who won't and plus there won't be the hype the first book had, it could spiral down like the Jurassic Park movies have.

[imported_QuiGonJ]

Gee, are the grapes just a wee bit sour in here?

Adjusted, Harry hasn't overtaken Star Wars yet. Probably won't. But seeing as how WB paid a mere $750,000 for the rights before anyone knew about "the Harry Potter phenomenon", they did good. Give em credit.

Sides, this Potter/LoTteR schism I've seen is like trying to say the Alien and Star Wars films are competitors. Each is the same genre, each had lotsa hype (light up bleedin drinks glasses at BK for LotR?) and each has made vaultloads of money.

AOLTW gets the money from both properties no matter how the split goes and are extremely happy overall, just like Fox has to be happy with the monies they got from their franchises.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I don't know if thats a vaild comparison, (just because I don't know of anybody that thinks the Alien movies are better than the Star Wars movies). I think this mostly because FOTR is a way superior film than Harry Potter (the Oscars proves this and just about every body who saw it agrees) I think LOTR will be justified in round 2 as TTT does close to 300 (280-300) and HP 2 does around 250 domestically and this LOTR will win out.

[ReturnOfTheCB]

I once read that the world's reading level averages that of a third grade level...I don't recall where the statistic was though, I'll have to look for it...Potter is obviously a children's book, whereas LOTR is a bit intimidating to most children...perhaps that explains why Potter has such widespread appeal? :D

[imported_QuiGonJ]

Some film director I remember said a few years ago that he wondered why everything needs to be a competition. I do too. I just don't get it.

That same director released a film in 1999 where, since the lead character was a child, he worked to have the story reflect that. Remember how I told you bout relationships tween Potter and Star Wars?

Like Lucas, Ms. Rowling has the overall story mapped out and knows what we'll see at the end. Lucas' next story has his protagonist get older, and the story gets darker. So it is in Harry Potter. As Harry grows, the stories get stronger, and darker, and then strung together in a tight package.

In Book Three, a man's life is ruined by a lie. By the end, Harry and his friends find out what happened of course, but can't tell anyone. Why? The plausible lie sounds more convincing to the average person than the reality. Happens all the time in the real world, but yeh, that's kid stuff huh?

In Book Four, by the time you read the descriptions of death and of severed limbs and Voldy drinking the human blood of a main character, you might revisiting that 3rd grade comment, CB. And I hear it's gonna get worse. She's said she doesn't want to cheat the evil being evil part.

And, as for the second film, since the script is written AND has a reason for existing AND John Williams and the director and the creative team are all still working on it just like the Rings series is doing, I think Chamber of Secrets will do fine. Might not end up as high as the first one at the box office, but, it will do fine.

[ReturnOfTheCB]

You know, I would go a lot easier on Potter if Rowling would admit that a lot of her ideas are "borrowed", but the interviews I've seen she treats them as if they're her very own, completely original...Lucas at least admits that a lot of his ideas aren't new...and I'm partially pissed because I just don't get why Potter is so "wonderful"....I just absolutely cannot figure it out...people can say I'm biased, or whatever, but I tried reading it, and it was not that great...it was alright, but hardly the cultural phenomenon status it has been given...of course, it's the same with Titanic...millions of people loved it, and I still fail to see what it has to offer that far greater stories do not...or why Britney Spears, 'N sync, Backstreet Boys are popular, yet they sound like ****...perhaps that's one more thing to "ponder" when I should be studying :D Someone feel free to explain this one to me...

Tell me a third grader (boy, especially) wouldn't think blood drinking was cool :D I know I would have....hell, that almost makes me want to skip everything, go read that part of book four, just for the description, and what character it happens to...I guess it's too much to hope that it's Harry, isn't it? :D

You know, I am really pissed off at Barnes and Noble...I wanted to buy "hero with a thousand faces" by Joseph Campbell, because they had it on the reduced price shelf, for like 10 bucks...well when I finally get the money, it's gone...not to mention I'd been looking for the book anyway...oh well....

[Doc Milo]

Hey CB, don't know if this helps or not:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0691017840/drmilo

It's a tad more than $10, though... although used it was $7 (click the title on that page, and it takes you to another page with a link to the used book.)

[Marcus Telcontar]

Well, Potter IS well written, but there's nothing exceptionally original about it. But it is an easy and attractive read.

OTOH, LOTR is one of the most original books ever. It also created a genre, spawned thousands of clones and thousands of writers to do something in scope and magnificence. There are languages invented for it. But hell, it's not easy to read! But it's worth it!

Who said it earlier in this thread? LOTR part II will beat the second HP moive? Yes, I agree with that. There will be a lot of people introduced to Tolkein for the first time, we have seen how damn good the first movie is, there will be a far higher opening next time round - with was the only real difference between the two this time. I doubt Potter will do 93 million again!

Hell, I have a hard time believeing ANYTHING will get close to that for a long while

[ReturnOfTheCB]

Doc, thanks for the link,I'll have to look into that...

Marcus, I'm starting to think that my definition of well written differs from that commonly employed...yes, it is easily read and understood, so I suppose if you use it in that context it can be considered well written, but I generally consider books well written if they offer something in the writing that differs from other books, that sets it apart from other works...like with Tolkein, as I'm sure you'll agree, it feels like a story that's being told to you...not just words on a page, but something more like Iliad or Odyssey, that you can just imagine that you are hearing, sitting around a table, fire, what have you....Potter style wise has always struck me as mediocre, as it has in many other areas...

[JMK]

True, that 93 million is going to be nearly impossible to beat, for quite a while I think.

[Jedieb]

I still haven't read any HP books, which is surprising considering I see them on a daily basis. I just haven't had the urge to read them so I can't compare HP and LOTR. I liked the Hobbit and FOTR and I'll be reading the next book later on this year. I've liked what I've read so far, but they weren't the best books I've ever read. I thought the film did an excellent job of staying true to the spirit of Tolkien's novel. A page by page translation woud have been IMPOSSIBLE, but I think Jackson delivered a very good film. He trimmed just the right amount and the little bonus at the end may have spoiled part of the next novel for me, but I thought it made for a stronger ending.

Are HP and FOTR's international runs over? Do they each have a shot at a $1B WW gross? Just how many more markets are left?

[imported_QuiGonJ]

JediEb, I rather like the Potter books, as you can tell. Like Star Wars, yes, I can point up flaws to you, (most in the timelines as this is on our Earth supposedly), but I repect what JK Rowling has done. I haven't quite forgotten everything I learned in the UCLA English department.

Rowling touches on issues like being social misfits, promising futures gone awry and her own battles with depression into the books. His class is ticked off at him a lot of the time for breaking rules (they do things on a point system, and Harry keeps costing them points for breaking rules), he doesn't have the highest grades in the class, and he likes one girl who so far hasn't really noticed him, despite his "celebrity" and all.

And CB, you don't like HP cause of the author's intent? Then how can you possibly like the LoTR movies? Tolkein was dead set against his books ever being filmed. His estate was furious bout it as well, though I've no doubt they will still take the royalty checks.

And have you caught the part about how Tolkein was a mythology professor yet? He just borrowed (a la Campbell) from archetypes, same as Rowling. There was just no Net and 60 Minutes for him to talk about it on.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I did Marcus and I think TTT will easily beat HP 2, Hp 2 will not have the hype of the first book which will hurt IMO because it won't open nowhere near as huge, I am guessing it will open between 60-70, and make 50 million less domestically, I think. Now about the borrowed thing, sure LOTR borrowed some things but just about every novel borrows something from somewhere even the classics like Shakespear's plays to The Cantebury Tales, nothing is really original so that is a mute point. Still LOTR is the novel that created the fanasty genre it didn't really exist before it (the only novels like it are The Wizard of Oz which has fanasty overtones but is not a true fanasty). And like Marcus says the novel has been cloned over and over by different offers, and it also exists in many different movies and books (Some of the themes even exist in Star Wars). To me Harry Potter is nothing original (they are bad books I haven't read them just have never got around to it) But if I have to compare the films I have to say FOTR is vastly superior especially on the story level and with the characters, I think that is because its source material is better.

[JonathanLB]

There is no comparing the Alien films, monetarily, to the Star Wars films! That's a bad comparison.

The Alien movies all did mediocre at the box office, at best, just plain lousy in the case of the fourth film. The first Star Wars movie made more in its first few releases than all of the Alien films put together! There is not any comparing those movies to the Star Wars Saga.

Anyway, Harry Potter is not Star Wars, lol, never will be. It made more internationally for obvious reasons: increasing theaters and interest in our films internationally (which is why basically every top ten film internationally is from the last ten years). AOTC should kill HP.

[imported_QuiGonJ]

Oddly enough Jon, I find myself in agreement with you on that last statement. I am still a fan of the Star Wars film first and foremost. And I did state that adjusted, ANH still beats Potter. :)

My point on the Alien films was not a Box Office comparison as such. My point was that a corporate parent loves all it's money-making children equally. They see no rivalry. The directors Chris Columbus and Peter Jackson have no enmity. So why are some of the denizens of the Net so worried about it?

[ReturnOfTheCB]

Tolkein's said that he wrote LOTR to give England a "myth" to call it's own, much like Lucas did with Star Wars...yes, the archetypes are similar, but if you are familiar with Campbell, he states that ultimately all myths and stories are the same in the archetypal realm, giving the philosophy of the "monomyth", so the "borrowing archetypes" arguement, if you wish to use Campbell as a criterion with which to examine it, has no relevance, nor was it what I originally intended the arguement to state...the story elements, on the other hand, can be original...ie. show me where a ring of power, other elements in LOTR are found elsewhere...Rowling straight out ripped off ideas, not just archetypes, and calls them her own, hence I am more critical...if something is going to be claimed to be an original idea, I am of course going to hold it to that standard, yet if anything, Potter appears more mediocre and rehashed fantasy mixed together than anything blatantly original....

I don't recall ever seeing that I hated Potter because of Author's intent....the "estate was furious" arguement is a bit wrong, I believe...I've read numerous interviews with Christohper Tolkein, where he directly says that he is not angry about the movies being made, he just has (I guess philosophical is the word) disagreements on whether or not they can accurately portray his fathers work...I don't remember Tolkein being dead set against making movies either...but I still don't remember criticizing Potter because of intent...I am criticizing it the same I would any other work, the same I have other works, I saying that I fail to see what is so outstanding about it that makes it so much more popular than other works/films, and when I examine it by my standards of quality, it has nothing special whatsoever to set it head and shoulders above the rest, if even at a level equal to the rest....what I want to know, that I've failed to see anyone say to me, is what is so special about Harry Potter that makes it unique, or in any way providing anything new that makes it deserve this status...seemingly, with this overwhelming popularity, there must be something absolutely ****ing awesome about it that I'm just missing, unless it is merely a pop culture event ("fad" if you will), like has been seen in other instances...now, perhaps, if Potter had something unique and outstanding in other areas, such as writing style, for example or some other novelty, the presentation of recycled ideas could be excusable, as it would have something to set it apart.....all I'm asking for, again, is what it is that makes Potter special....I will respect that you are indeed entitled to your opinion to enjoy the book, and that is not to be debated, as that is an entirely subjective realm.....but if there is any legitimate justification of Potters widespread success, that is what I'm interested in....

[Jedieb]

Why is HP so popular? As I said before, I haven't read any of these books. But I have seen the effect the books have had on children. I can tell you that the HP novels have struck a resounding cord with Elementary school age children. I've seen kids who've never finished a novel read straight through a HP book. The characters and their adventures have connected with them for some reason. If it were just one book I'd call it a fad, but we're going on what now, 4? I can see these books hanging around school libraries for years to come. Kids like them that much. Eventually I'll read them and form my own opinion as to their literary worth, but I've seen more than enough evidence that these books are special to many of the children that have read them. Therein lies a major difference between LOTR and HP. These novels are geared towards two distinct audiences. You could split them right up at middle school or Jr. High if you'd like.


show me where a ring of power, other elements in LOTR are found elsewhere..

An object of power that can turn the balance in the battle of good V. evil was invented by Tolkein? ;)

Jon, I don't think AOTC will outperform HP or LOTR internationally. It certainly won't "kill" them. It'll come within $100M of them, but I'd be surprised if it made more internationally than either of them. SW has done great overseas, but it's never been as strong across the board internationally as it has been domestically.

[imported_QuiGonJ]

"There is a kind of ancient Cauldron of story. Everyone is free to bid into this great heritage and use it as best suits our own purposes." - JRR Tolkein

Have you ever read "The Mabinogion"? It's 12 books of ancient Welsh mythology, and many scholars acknowledge Tolkein's debt to it. Doesn't make LoTR any less of an accomplishment, but even Shakespeare wrote from earlier works.

As for people liking Rowling, we've given you reasons: for layers within it, for the writing (Marcus), and I'll add for the likability of the characters and for the way she's melded a fictional reality to our own.

If you don't like it, not much I can do about it, but I'd like to know why this whole rivalry thing isn't a soporific "Star Trek v. Star Wars" thing. Just cause you like one thing doesn't mean you can't like more than one thing along those lines.

[ReturnOfTheCB]

Like I said before, I didn't have a problem with reusing ideas, until I read her claiming them as her own....that's when I had a problem with it...did Tolkein run around saying "look at what I came up with on my own?"...did Shakespeare say "hey, look at this wonderful play about this guy called Juilius Caesar...you know, I came up with the guy"...about the writing, what is it that makes it so wonderful? What is so well written about it? I can pick up dozens of books that are written just as well as Potter....and I still don't understand what it is about the writing that is so wonderful....Potter, to me, is not absolutely horrible, nor absolutely astounding...it is average, and hardly deserving of all the hype it has received...yes, perhaps credit for getting children to read...I'm not debating that.

This is not about Potter "versus" LOTR...I simply do not see why Potter deserves literary merit....Jedieb, I will give you that it is written for a children's audience...there's nothing wrong with them considering it a good children's book.....but it's gotten to the point where I'm seeing it put on as a work of great literature...and I simply do not see how it can deserve that.....

Let me ask you this...by the same standards, can we not consider Dr. Seuss a great literary work?

About AOTC, as much as I'd like it to do well, I honestly don't think it will beat LOTR or HP...a lot of people, regardless of where you stand, were left with a bad taste in their mouth after TPM...I'm not saying it wasn't a good movie, but a lot of people were disappointed in it, and won't be as likely to make it out to see AOTC, unless it gets wonderful word of mouth and reviews...which I see it unlikely that the media is going to give good reviews to a Star Wars film (even if it deserves them)...

[imported_QuiGonJ]

Again, if you don't like it, there's not much I can do about it.

James Joyce and William Faulkner always left me wondering why people thought so much of them, so I know the feeling, but you are asking to objectify something that is subjective. As for Dr Seuss, he did win a Pulitzer Prize. He couldn't be all bad.

And as for this being a vs. thread, please re-read the thread and tell me how this isn't one.

[ReturnOfTheCB]

Ok, QGJ, I thought you were saying that I was making it into a "vs" situation...didn't know you were talking about the threat title...though wasn't it changed by a mod to that title? :D

and I don't think Dr. Seuss is bad at all (I was just using that as an example that if one childrens work can be considered literature, why shouldn't another), I just think that he's a lot better than some stuff that gets better recognition than his works...E E Cummings for example...some of his stuff that I read was complete ****...a fourth grader could've written better...and I said in an English paper that I think Dr. Seuss should be considered equal if not greater than Cummings....I never saw what was great about Joyce either...or Burroughs for that matter.....I don't recall if I ever read Faulkner though....

[imported_QuiGonJ]

no, it was the ":\" title and the thread's originator that started the vs. aspect to this. :)

[ReturnOfTheCB]

Hmmm....I don't know, I think that face is open to interpretation :lol

[Jedieb]

Remeber the literature thread we had awhile back CB? We talked alot about how different people have different views on what is or isn't great literature. I can understand reasons why you don't like HP, but you can't let your dislike for it be the basis for not recognizing that others see it as quality literature. If you do, then some stuffy lit professor can use his personal dislike for Tolkien's work as a reason for trashing LOTR.

I've read both Joyce and Faulkner and I enjoy Joyce immensely. Faulkner is a bit more of a chore, but you can learn a great deal about the South from reading novels like Absalom, Absalom. It's a matter of taste really. I look at it this way, if a novel is still relevant decades, even centuries after it was written then it has proved itself a classic. Some novels persist not because they were particularly well written, but because of their historical significance. Has anyone here ever read Uncle Tom's Cabin? IMO, the novel simplistic, poorly written, and rather racist. So why can you still find it in bookstores today? Because it was the 2nd best selling novel in the 18th century in the U.S. and it had serious political and cultural ramifications in the United States. It's relevant not because it was a good book, but because of the impact it had on a society. LOTR has passed the test of time. I think HP will pass the test also and be recognized as great children's literature one day.

AOTC V. LOTR/HP
I don't think that AOTC will easily beat their international grosses, but AOTC will crush them in the U.S. If you do the math and adjust for inflation you can see that NO SW film has grossed less than $400M in its first run. Bad taste or no bad taste (and I agree with you that many were dissapointed with TPM) I see no way that a SW film could gross under $310M. I just can't see that happening.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Eh... It wasnt started to begin an us vs them discussion. It was expressing my regret it actually happened.

Dont get me wrong, I like Potter and I liked the movie. But it's not a great one. There's nothing really notable about it. So personally, I'm confused why it even got as far as it has. I do admit tho, I would have rather seen LOTR get No. 2, cause it is a vastly superior movie and I even shot off an email to New Line, asking for my thanks to be passed on to Peter Jackson. I just never expected something that good - I was expecting much like Harry Potter was - worth a watch (For sure), but not brilliant.

Then again, if LOTR wasnt such a trial on the bladder, maybe the :/ would have been for LOTR passing TPM instead now. Ahh well

[Jedieb]

Then again, if LOTR wasnt such a trial on the bladder, maybe the :/ would have been for LOTR passing TPM instead now. Ahh well

:lol
I spent the last 45 minutes of FOTR cursing the large Coke I'd bought. CURSE YOU GIANT MOVIE CUPS OF DOOM!!!

[Marcus Telcontar]

I know.... it ruins the atmosphere of the movie if you keep on saying to yourself "must hold out, must... not... pee...on ... floor..."

The problem is, how do you make it shorter? The atmosphere develops and by the time Moria comes about, you soaked in it and you just dont want to move. Unfortunantly, thats when the bladder starts saying "I GUNNA BLOW UP!!!!!!"

[Jedi Master Carr]

LOL I didn't have that problem the first time I saw it, I came prepared I went before I walked in the door to prevent it :) First off I agree with you Jedieb, I think AOTC will easily beat LOTR and HP domestically there is no question in my mind there, I don't see it doing less than 350 domestically (that was Dutchy's estamite right) That is a low as it could possibly go, I think it will do more than 400 but that is just my opinion.
As far as the other argument that is getting into a matter of taste and I agree with you about why certain books last as long as they do here are a couple of other examples that I can think of Mein Kempt(sp) and The Jungle, neither one are great books in fact the first is jsut the mad delousions of a monster and the second book is a very bad melodrama. In the first case the fact that it was written by Hitler has kept in librarys and book stores (I have no idea if anybody ever reads the thing except for Neo Nazis but wait they can't read :p)
The Jungle was written by a socialist Upton Sinclair (he was a mudracker) who was seeking changes in the practices of the meat industry. In fact that is the only reason that novel is important because it caused changes to be made in society and it showed the horrid conditions of the meat packing industry (don't read it if you have a weak stomach or you will never eat meat again). I am sure there are othere examples. Also there are books which get remembered for two other reasons, one they are popular, why are books like The Count of Monte Cristo, The Time Machine, and The Three Musketeers still around (and being made constantly into movies) is because they were extremly popular, most people today though don't actually read them but they were very popular in the 19th century. Then there are novels by Faulkner, Joyce, poetry by Cummings that are remembered because scholars put it on a pedestal for various reason: some valid others not so IMO, then there is a final reason some books are classics and popular (the works of Shakespear, Dickens, Hemmingway, Hugo, and Twain). This is where I think LOTR lies while HP is more with the popular books like Dumas and Wells that doesn't make them bad but they will never be deemed classics much like most of Dumas's books aren't deemed as classics and probably won't be read like they aren't 100 years from now (though they will probably be made or remade still into movies ;)) Now I am not really upset that FOTR won't catch HP but that is because I feel vidicated FOTR got 13 Oscar nominations, how many did Harry Potter get.

[Doc Milo]

I'd have to disagree with the LotR created the fantasy genre. It existed before LotR. But what was before it, in many ways, people no longer consider fantasy, but classic literature. Greek Mythology, the King Arthur and the Knights of the Round table stories, "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight", "Beowulf", "The Fairie Queen." These are all fantasy tales.

LotR may be the father of modern fantasy, but it did not create the fantasy genre. It's just that those tales are no longer lumped into the fantasy genre, because they are literary works and lumped in with classic literature. But I still consider them members of the fantasy genre.

Now, I agree that I don't find anything so awe-inspiring about the HP novels to warrant all the hype. I've read all four. I enjoyed all four. I think they are good books, and fun tales to read. But, for some reason, people seem to think that books about magic and magicians never existed before HP. A little story: I was "introduced" to HP by a friend online who really doesn't like Fantasy. She read the HP books and thought they were wonderful. She liked the magic. And when I read them, she was asking me if I thought the magic was just wonderful... Well, as a reader of fantasy novels, the magic was nothing really new in HP. There was nothing in the magic that I've haven't seen before in other works of fantasy.

What I think, though, is that HP somehow got people who usually don't read fantasy interested in the fantasy elements that were used. Because of HP, this friend became interested in seeing LotR. I think, maybe, that ability to cross-over, and interest people, who don't usually read fantasy is what HP was successful at -- and that is why it gets the hype. Because the fantasy in HP is new to those people, because they are not people who read fantasy normally.

I don't think of HP as a great work of literature on its own. I do consider LotR a great work of literature. But, as Jedieb has said, many novels are listed with the classics not because they are good in and of themselves, but because they succeeded at having an impact on the society of their times. HP might have done that -- it brought fantasy to those who had none....

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well I guess that is what I meant that it is the father of the modern fantasy, I am not sure if the term fantasy exists before Tolkien started writing anybody know? I would think King Arthur, Greek Mythology, would be considered more folktales and legends before (maybe not know) then thera are fairy tales which deal with magic somewhat. I guess you could even count Guliver's Travels (though it is more of a political commentary/satire in desquise)