Harry Potter is the highest grossing film franchise ever

[kristie]

http://marquee.blogs.cnn.com/2011/0...r-star-wars-to-become-top-grossing-franchise/

 

[Tusan_Homichi]

http://marquee.blogs.cnn.com/2011/0...r-star-wars-to-become-top-grossing-franchise/

I can't say that's surprising considering just how many of them there are.

 

[The30YardSlant]

Not really fair seeing as very few movie franchises reach eight films, even fewer have eight sequential films that follow a singular plot that flows from movie to movie and none have ever had the kind of incredible media fan buildup even prior to the first film. It's a continous story, and ANYONE who gets hooked by even one of them has to see them all to see how it ends. It's an absolute brilliant marketing move by both Rowling and all those involved in producing these films, but just not that impressive that it grossed all that money.

 

[kristie]

Not really fair seeing as very few movie franchises reach eight films, even fewer have eight sequential films that follow a singular plot that flows from movie to movie and none have ever had the kind of incredible media fan buildup even prior to the first film. It's a continous story, and ANYONE who gets hooked by even one of them has to see them all to see how it ends. It's an absolute brilliant marketing move by both Rowling and all those involved in producing these films, but just not that impressive that it grossed all that money.

why do you say that?

 

[SaltwaterServr]

why do you say that?

Everything preceding the part you bolded is his explanation of the bolded.

 

[burmafrd]

IF Lucas had brought out the sequels not the prequels a few years after his first trilogy, those might have grossed more. Add to the fact that the first movie came out 20 years before the first Harry Potter movie if you adjust for inflation HP does not even come close. And they had only 6 movies and nowhere near the publicity and marketing.

 

[big dog cowboy]

IF Lucas had brought out the sequels not the prequels a few years after his first trilogy, those might have grossed more. Add to the fact that the first movie came out 20 years before the first Harry Potter movie if you adjust for inflation HP does not even come close. And they had only 6 movies and nowhere near the publicity and marketing.

When I saw Star Wars in 1977 I only paid $3.50 for my ticket.

 

[BIGDen]

Well I've gotta say they did a nice job with all of the movies. They didn't just keep pumping out garbage. They were all entertaining and I really enjoyed the last one. The author and directors deserve a great deal of credit for consistently putting out quality films. Some were better than others, but none were bad. To keep making film after film before the actors got too old or burnt out, without sacrificing quality, is quite a feat. The best part is that, in my opinion, they saved the best film for last. I'm looking forward to re-watching all 8 films with my son when he gets a little older.

 

[burmafrd]

the fact that the primary cast members outside of Dumbledore and a few others grew up doing it helped keep it believeable and they did not burn out. Now if they were to try and keep it going from this point on I bet the quality would drop.

 

[The30YardSlant]

why do you say that?

Because given the circumstances and the number of films they literally could have thrown poop at the audience for the final seven films and it would have still set the record.

 

[zrinkill]

I can't say that's surprising considering just how many of them there are.

This ...

 

[burmafrd]

to be fair there have been twice as many Bond Movies. Even the last half dozen combined probably only match a couple of the HP movies.

 

[jimmy40]

Because given the circumstances and the number of films they literally could have thrown poop at the audience for the final seven films and it would have still set the record.

if they were poop they would have never made that much money. They made that much money because they kept making really good movies.

 

[Kevinicus]

When I saw Star Wars in 1977 I only paid $3.50 for my ticket.

I was paying $3.50 for tickets in 2002.

 

[Hostile]

Highest grossing isn't as impressive as the best. I like the Potter series very much, but I'd actually have to say it is not the best movie series.

 

[kristie]

Highest grossing isn't as impressive as the best. I like the Potter series very much, but I'd actually have to say it is not the best movie series.

what is the best movie series ever?

 

[Hostile]

what is the best movie series ever?

Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, and the Godfather would be up there on my list.

 

[kristie]

Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, and the Godfather would be up there on my list.

i agree with you on that one.

 

[The30YardSlant]

what is the best movie series ever?

For sheer number of good movies, it has to be the James Bond franchise. Not all have been up to par, but there has been 22 of them about half depending on who you ask were pretty good to great movies.

For most consistent franchise from start to finish it is either the Godfather (though the third movie was underwhelming), Indiana Jones (though Temple of Doom was average) or Lord of the Rings (Probably my choice, none of the movies were incredible but all three were very good and fulfilled expectations). Stars Wars can't be considered IMO because of the newest films, of which only one was any good. The newest Batman trilogy has a chance to get its way onto the list with a strong showing in the final film.

 

[Cythim]

Will the two Hobbit movies count for the LOTR franchise? If so I imagine there is a possibility of LOTR rivaling Harry Potter.

At the end of the day Harry Potter will never touch Star Wars on total revenue. Star Wars merchandise, video games, cartoon series, etc will keep it well above Harry Potter.