‘Dark Knight Rises’ Fails to Rise Above ‘Avengers’ Opening Weekend Record

Published 2 years ago by

the dark knight rises Dark Knight Rises Fails to Rise Above ‘Avengers’ Opening Weekend Record

Despite four years of relentless anticipation, The Dark Knight Rises fell short of expectations, at least at the box office.

The film brought in a strong $160.8 million in its first three days of release, but fell remarkably short of the record $207 million debut claimed by Marvel’s The Avengers in May. Its first-week numbers place the latest Batman adventure as the third highest-grossing opening weekend of all time, behind last year’s Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 at $169 million. Analysts had initially expected that the grand finale to the Christopher Nolan helmed trilogy (which Nolan himself recently bid a formal farewell to) would reach as high as $195 million. Of course, there are some factors to consider…

To be fair, ticket sales were likely affected by the horrific events in Colorado which preceded the weekend, leaving many moviegoers a bit hesitant about rushing out to theaters. Buoyed by midnight screenings and presales, The Dark Knight Rises earned $75.7 million on Friday, and those numbers consistently dropped as the weekend went on, tapering off at just over $40 million on Sunday. As it stands, The Dark Knight Rises is unlikely to match the $600 million domestic take that The Avengers has raked in during its release.

 Dark Knight Rises Fails to Rise Above ‘Avengers’ Opening Weekend Record

However, Warner Brothers (and Bat-fans everywhere) certainly should be proud of the film’s performance. The Dark Knight Rises also didn’t have the boost of higher-priced 3D ticket sales (as Avengers did) but still managed to set a record for best bow by a strictly 2D film. Thanks to the sheer scope of the film and Nolan’s visual panache, many fans opted to see the film in IMAX, where it played on a record 332 screens, accounting for $19 million of its total box office take. All in all, the film – against a reported $250 million budget – has brought in $249 million worldwide and will expand internationally to another 40 territories this week.

Had the circumstances surrounding its opening weekend been different, The Dark Knight Rises may have welcomed a more impressive opening weekend – but as it stands, the film is poised to close out Nolan’s acclaimed series with a solid – if not particularly record-breaking – finish.

The only question left is: Which superhero film did you think was better?

Source: The Wrap

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: batman, the avengers, the dark knight rises

170 Comments

Post a Comment

Comment With Facebook

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

  1. While the film may not have done as well the first weekend as we all expected – although $160M is still an impressive number – my hope is that those who stayed home in light of the shooting will come out and the second weekend drop won’t be as severe as most films suffer.

    • I am definitely going to take all my friends who stayed home out to the theater this week. I think it’s important that we don’t let a madman scare us away from the things we love.

      • @JB

        I think that’s stupid anyway. So it happens in one theater it’ll happen in every theater?? Seriously??

        • Everyone was thinknig it though… in my showing, there had to be 40 times where people got up and left and it brought me out of the movie to watch them come back… It happened and it’s hard to just ignore it.

          • like Judy implied I’m blown away that some one able to make $9618 in one month on the internet. have you read this site link >>> Click2go.notlong.comMUSTLOOK

            • MUST you interject spam EVERYWHERE?

        • How is it stupid? 12 people died and 58 people were injured in a place it was thought unthinkable for this type of act to happen in before. I just saw the movie again last night and even I was a bit paranoid in the theater that something bad may happen. All it takes is one horrific event to happen to scare people. After 9/11 people were afraid of flying. After Columbine people were afraid to go to school. After Virginia Tech people were afraid to go to college. It is not stupid. People could very well try to be copy cat criminals who do the same thing.

          • Agree … Columbine High School incident is a perfect example, its been a tough weekend and it those paranoid me to be honest but I still will go to the theater regardless

          • @SALTY

            Really?? Who thought it was “unthinkable” for that to happen? Are there force-fields outside of movie theaters or something? Something like that can happen ANYWHERE. To think that you’re “safe” somewhere public is just something I call “complacency.” You can’t compare this to 9/11 or any terrorist act because that is something committed by a group and isn’t really out of the question that there might be other ones planned. But an act by an individual, especially an individual that was caught, doesn’t mean that all of a sudden now other theaters are more likely to be hit by similar incidents.

            It’s like if you leave all of your doors open and unlocked and one day a thief walks in your back door and steals your tv, your response is to install a lock only in your back door and then you lock only the back door… You’re just as likely to run into some crazy killer anywhere public as you are to run into one at a theater…

            • I know that here in New York they posted police at every theater showing the movie and that just helped feed into the fear. But hey that’s our Mayor for ya.

            • @ Ken J

              You can rationalize it as much as you want, what everyone else who replied to your post (except the spammer ^^) is trying to say is that people’s heads work like that. It’s simply, albeit in reality a bit unrational and perhaps paranoid, human psychology!! You can point at others and tell them it not like this and you shouldn’t compare it with that… Fact is, a horrible thing happened and sadly people lost their lives and as a result other people, everywhere, got scared. It’s kinda like a reality check.

              • @Atlantidas

                I don’t remember where I said that I don’t believe that’s how people think. I said: “I think that’s stupid anyway.” Meaning, I know that’s how some people think, I personally know some, but I think that mindset is just silly. So, yes, I know some people think that way… It’s not much of a revelation to me…

            • @ Ken J

              You can rationalize it as much as you want, what everyone else who replied to your post (except the spammer ^^) is trying to say is that people’s heads don’t work like that. It’s simply, albeit in reality a bit unrational and perhaps paranoid, human psychology!!

              You can point at others and tell them it not like this and you shouldn’t compare it with that… Fact is, a horrible thing happened and sadly people lost their lives and as a result other people, everywhere, got scared. It’s kinda like a reality check.

            • Well I guess everyone in that theater thought it was unthinkable. Everyone except for you since you are so intlligent. It is not complacency. A movie theater has not been hit with a shooting like this. Ever. Meaning people though it was a place they were safe. They weren’t complacent. Those people did not realize they were in danger for going to that theater. And I can compare it to 9/11 because I am talking about the paranoia after the fact. You may find this paranoia ‘stupid.’ However, that is how most human beings are. That is a fact.

              • @SALTY

                Um, yah, just because you go to a theater doesn’t mean you think it’s unthinkable for something bad to happen. I go to theaters, I go to restaurants, I fly in airplanes when I travel, etc. etc. Just because I, and many other people, know that bad things *CAN* (not will) happen to you doesn’t mean you stop living life…

                Heck, 2 years ago there was a fatal shooting following a robbery at a Chinese Restaurant on the day I brought my mother there for Mother’s Day. Does that mean I never bring my mother to Chinese Restaurants on Mother’s Day?? Nope, I take her out to a Chinese Restaurant every Mother’s Day. Including that same restaurant if she wants to go there. It’s not like because one guy decided to rob then shoot a guy in a certain restaurant on a certain day that doesn’t mean it’ll somehow be some kind of pattern and happen only on those certain circumstances…

  2. Who cares.the dark knight is still better.the avengers was a good movie also.a lot of comedy in avengers but good action and the story line was just ok.batman had no comedy great action and a great storyline.in my opinion bane was a better villain than the joker.

    • “batman had no comedy”
      Did we watch the same movie?
      TDKR had lots of humor. Obviously not as much as most other comic book movies but there were definitively a lot of funny moments.
      —SPOILER ALERT—
      —SPOILER ALERT—
      One example: Bats and Catwoman are talking – Bats turns away and then back again to find that Catwoman has disappeared – he says “so that’s what that feels like” – how was that not hilarious? :D
      There were plenty other moments like that.
      —END OF SPOILER—
      —END OF SPOILER—

      Sad to hear that you didn’t find those moments funny, but hey, comedy is subjective…

      • I agree. It had me chuckling… and crying.

    • din’t like the fact that Batman was missing though out 75% of the movie, it was more of a Bane, and police movie. In the beginning Bane was already a world known villain. The CIA,DEA and FBI knew of him yet, Batman had no idea of his existence.

      • Did you miss the part where Batman had been missing for 8 years and Bruce had stayed hidden in Wayne Manor? It isn’t a sretch that his mind was not really on criminals anymore.

      • The movie was more about how batman isnt needed anymore. How the police and citizens can do some dirty work themselves.

      • I had hoped to respond last night about this (and MANY other points some people have been making), but maybe tonight…

        Anyway, it’s tiring to hear that Batman was not in a lot of the film…it’s WRONG. He was actually in it at least as much as Bruce Wayne. Remember that Batman is meant to be an idea, an inspiration. He was discussed, recalled, actively sought, and even symbolically drawn throughout the film…all in addition to actually appearing in costume to face the evils attacking/dwelling within the heart of Gotham.

        I really do not understand why people (especially those who claim to have enjoyed the trilogy) do not get that. It’s frustrating…

        • I understand your points, but what i’m trying to point out is that unlike The Avengers and The Amazing Spider man is that he is not in costume throughout most of the movie, I guarantee you that if the movie was called Bruce Wayne and the Gotham Police not many fans would go see it. just imagine if the Batman comics were all like that.

          • I disagree with that notion, i think if you count the number of minutes, that should be enough. Contradicts to tdk, Batman are needed in most of the movie because simply he needs to be a detective. In this one, hey, you don’t need extra scenes where it shows batman climbing over building, watching over gotham’s city (IMAX wide shot) or him gliding here and there (like batman begins). Critique’s(the so called professionals) said it’s bloated (I know, they’re idiots) if u add that, then they will call this movie a over-bloated flop. LOL.

            hell yeah, i’d love extra scenes like that! I’m a batman fan! But the car chase scene where he came out of retirement is already satisfying for me! Totally a legendary shot :DD

  3. That’s because it wasn’t in 3D, in which ticket prices are higher. And the tragedy that happened in Colorado caused it to lose money since countries actually didn’t premier it due to respect of the victims. And The Avengers was for a wider audience (I noticed WAY more little kids at the premier of The Avengers than in TDKR). Also, TDKR was a very long movie and that would discourage some people to go see it more than once (I still saw it twice though:)lol). However, I’m not saying Avengers was a bad movie as it should have made a lot of money since it had 6 superheroes and it was the first of the trilogy/however many more they make. But IMO, Nolan’s Batman trilogy was EPIC in every sense of the word and GOOD LUCK trying to beat that!

    • @Boobbbyy

      I guess you forgot that TDKR had IMAX instead of 3D. Which where I live, IMAX tickets are actually MORE than Digital 3D tickets. So technically TDKR had a slight advantage in the ticket costs area… Sorry to burst your bubble man. The movie was still good, but it didn’t beat The Avengers in ticket sales. The End. Ticket sales isn’t everything and doesn’t diminish the value of the movie, so stop trying to justify it and use all of these excuses just because you want to make TDKR look better…

      • There are far less IMax theaters then there are theaters that show 3D. Any regular theater can show 3D. (usually) The nearest IMax to me is two states over. Great advantage. You are right.

        • @SALTY

          Sorry I don’t travel to wherever you live to know how far you are from an IMAX theater. Where I live just about every big theater has at least one IMAX screen. Just off the top of my head there is at least 4 of them within 10 miles of where I live…

          • well thats where you live. . why dont you research the number of imax to the number of 3d on this planet and you’ll see

            • @kal-el

              Um, because I obviously don’t care as much about whether or not TDKR can “beat” The Avengers in the box-office as you do??

              It made tons of money, you enjoyed the movie, isn’t that all that matters really??

          • I don’t really want you to fly out here. I don’t think your ego could fit in Montana.

      • True, IMAX is more expensive than 3D, but I feel that more people are willing to shell out for 3D than for IMAX. And I think Avengers played more 3D showings than TDKR did IMAX. So, it’s possible that Avengers’ added bonus of 3D still outweighed TDKR’s added bonus of IMAX (Not positive about any of this. Are there any statistics for this?)

        • @ezra

          I agree, the 3D gimmick is easier to advertise than the great picture and sound of IMAX and how that adds to the movie.

      • are you stupid, avengers had imax, 3D and very little 2D showings, basically you had to see it in 3D (in my city) however that is irrelevant as TDKR was 5 times better than avengers, Shawnshank redemption was a flop at the box office, However its one of the best rated films ever? and is an amazing film.

        • Nope, I guarantee you I’m smarter than you. Argue all you want, go ahead and waste your time. :-)

          I’m sorry that my priority is not to fly to your city to see how many theaters show what where you live. I can only go by what I see where I live, and we have plenty of IMAX screens here, there were plenty of 2D showings (as well as 3D showings) of The Avengers, I just don’t see it being as skewed as people try to make it out to be. Go ahead and keep being a blind fanboy. I’m not even criticizing TDKR, I really liked the movie. I’m just stating a point. But I’m sure you already knew that since you’re OBVIOUSLY so intelligent. Your IQ must be over 140 right?? ;-)

          • Why do you keep trying to refute people’s arguments by basically saying “where I live it was like this and I don’t care about where you live you fanboy”?

            Fine, you can say that there are plenty of IMAX screens where you live, but overall in North America, there are WAY more 3D screens than there are IMAX screens (ones that actually show Hollywood movies, not documentaries). Oh, and as was said before, Avengers was also shown in IMAX (albeit, it was fake IMAX).

            Maybe if they just kept track of earnings for a movie where you live you’d have a point, but that’s not the case so your argument that TDKR had the advantage is without merit.

            • @Pyronaut

              Uh… That’s fine, I think we all agree that more screens show 3D, I was just making the point that I don’t think it makes as much of a difference as everyone is making it out to be. People are making it seem like if TDKR had 3D that it would be miles ahead of The Avengers. I’m sure it would have made more money, maybe more money than The Avengers, maybe not, but not that it matters anyway. I don’t get why you guys are so eager to have the bigger numbers so you know there are more people who watched the same movie you choose. Why do you even care? You enjoyed the movie, it made enough money so it’s not a flop. Isn’t that all that matters??

              • OK, well that’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it.

                According to the article above, IMAX screens accounted for 19 million of the opening weekend gross for TDKR. For Avengers, 3D screens accounted for 108 million of its opening weekend (according to Wikipedia). You can do the math if you want, but it looks pretty obvious that 3D had more of an impact for Avengers than IMAX did for TDKR (and Avengers made 15 million off IMAX tickets in the opening weekend also).

                In the end, as many have said, just because a movie made more money it doesn’t mean that it was better. Some will like Avengers better, some Dark Knight. They’re going to have more appeal to different audiences, but most of us can enjoy both.

                I’ve seen Avengers once, and will see TDKR this weekend (in IMAX, probably only once also), so I’m not a fanboy for either, and I looked forward to both coming out.

                Do I think I’ll have a preference for one over the other? Probably. Do I think everyone has to agree with me? Nope.

                • “For Avengers, 3D screens accounted for 108 million of its opening weekend (according to Wikipedia)”
                  Well, if Wikipedia says so then it must be true ;)
                  According to Box Office Mojo (who’s job it is to analyse and report on BO results – they’re pretty much the most reliable source for info like this) the extra 3D ticket prices only accounted for about 25-30mil of the opening weekend gross – and that’s what most other analysts have been saying as well.

                  • Alright, well if you look at the source Wikipedia was quoting, it was box office mojo. And since you say they’re the most reliable source, let’s look at what they say about The Avengers’ opening weekend: “3D screenings accounted for 52 percent of the opening weekend gross…” (http://boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=3438&p=.htm). 207.4 million x 52% = 107.8 million.

                    Sorry, but the original figure of 108 million still stands.

                    • “3D screenings accounted for 52 percent of the opening weekend gross” – “3D screenings” means that 52% of the screens were in 3D – That’s the WHOLE ticket price (normal ticket price + extra 3D charges = 108mil).

                      I’m talking about the ADDITIONAL costs ALONE (without the normal ticket price included).
                      The ADDITIONAL/EXTRA 3D charges accounted for about 30mil according to BoxOfficeMojo.

                    • Ah OK, well I guess we were talking about different things. The point I was trying to make from the beginning is that Avengers benefitted more from 3D tickets than TDKR did from IMAX tickets.

                      OK, let’s do it this way. Take away the extra gross from 3D sales (let’s say 30 mil) and there’s only a 17 million difference instead of 47, and subtract the IMAX boost TDKR had over Avengers (let’s say 3 mil since they took in a close number of IMAX sales) and that makes it a 20 mil difference. Take away the loss from people being scared off because of the shooting (just a guess, but let’s say 10 mil), then that brings the final tally to about a 10 million difference over all.

                      Anyway, the point was that if Avengers didn’t have the 3D boost, the numbers would have been a lot closer.

                    • @Pedram:
                      Yeah, I completely agree… even though we are only guessing what the estimates are, I’m certain the numbers would have been a lot closer.
                      I’m fine with that. Actually, I’m happy about that!
                      Two of my favorite CBMs ever have made a lot of money which means there’s only more to come.

                      Reading back your comment I see you did say “3D screens”, so I apologize, I completely misunderstood you.
                      No hard feelings, I hope?

  4. Don’t forget that the ticket prices that are so different. Also, this movie would probably have easily beat The Avengers considering OPENING night it raked in $30 million where The Avengers did a pathetic $17 million. And the answer to the last question is obviously The Dark Knight Rises. No competition.

    • Batman did 30 million because it is Summer. Keep in mind Avengers was released in May during the school year. People aren’t going to go see a midnight show when they have to go to school the next day.

      • haha, yes they would.

        But this just keeps proving that there are too many variables for us easily compare the two.

  5. Who cares they were both great, just be happy that you saw these darn epic films

  6. I wonder what Bane would say to this article….

    “And you think your money gives you….POWER….over me?”

    LOL

    • HA! Awesome!

      Vic needs to bring the like button back. (Not the dislike button. Just the like.)

    • You deserve some points for that post.

  7. yay, another (pointless) article to start up the fanboy vs fanboy postings! We certainly needed more places to do that!

    *golf clap*

  8. If Chris Nolan would’ve used 3D it’d easily beat the Avengers, credit to the man for not giving in to that pointless format. Whatever the numbers are, The Dark Knight Rises is the better movie by a country mile

    • TDKR had IMAX, and where I am, IMAX ticket prices are higher than Digital 3D ticket prices… So to me, the comparison is pretty fair…

      • But IMAX screens are very limited around the US, whereas majority of the movie theaters have the capabilities for a 3D movie. And let’s not forget that The Avengers also had IMAX 3D in it’s corner, which is by far more expensive that the IMAX 2D

        • I saw The Amazing Spiderman in IMAX 3D, and I think for whatever reason by where I live they charge the same for IMAX 2D or 3D because TDKR in IMAX was $17, and I KNOW for a fact I didn’t pay $20 or more for TASM in IMAX 3D… So it must have been under $20 also, so between $17 and $19 isn’t a big difference, but it might actually be the same…

          • Ken…

            Count yourself as lucky then, because you must live in some kind of cinema paradise. Most places around the country do NOT have equal numbers of IMAX and 3D…or ANY IMAX, in many cases. The Avenger, in fact, pointed out this discrepancy (though on an international, not national level). Apparently, South Africa has NO IMAX, but it has plenty of 3D. In the U.S., that same situation has played out for quite awhile.

            BTW, weren’t you the one who kept getting onto others for trying to prove an overarching point using only extremely limited facts (i.e. “where I live”)? True, others are doing that, but, collectively, their lack of local or convenient IMAX trumps your single example of plentiful IMAX, IMO.

            Just a consideration…

            • @Archaeon

              Um… yah, South Florida, not much of a cinema paradise. Seriously, is IMAX really such a huge thing?? Just about every major theater here has at least one IMAX screen, and it’s not like I live in Hollywood California or anything… Are we really that far behind in technology everywhere else that when I suggest there are plenty of theaters with IMAX here that people think I’m talking about discovering the unicorn???

              Cobb Dolphin, AMC Sunset Place, AMC Aventura, Regal Sawgrass, Autonation IMAX, and there might be more that I can’t think of that’s close to where I live that have at least one IMAX screen. Well, the Autonation IMAX is in the museum of discovery and science and is just one big IMAX screen, think it’s the biggest one around here, 60x80ft screen… They show documentaries and feature movies like TDKR. Saw Prometheus there in IMAX 3D and it was amazing. Well, the picture, not the movie, the movie was quite a let-down, lol.

              And I’m pretty sure the Cinemark Paradise 24 close to where I live will have a IMAX screen soon if it doesn’t already…

              Also, notice what I said: “TDKR had IMAX, and ***where I am***” “and I think for whatever reason by ***where I live*** they charge…” I think I was pretty clear I’m mainly talking about my own experiences in my own area… So if you missed that and think that I’m saying it’s exactly like this everywhere, then, um, scroll up and read what I wrote again?? Don’t know what else to tell you…

              • please just understand that there are way more 3d screens in the world than imax

                • @kal-el

                  Wow, you guys sound so desperate to defend TDKR, it’s kind of funny… I’m just saying I don’t think it makes as huge of a difference as everyone is making it out to be. But I don’t even see the big deal about what movie makes more money, if you liked the movie you liked the movie. I liked the movie, that’s all that matters to me. There are plenty of movies that I liked that bombed and plenty of movies that I hated that did well. Makes no difference to me what other people spend their money on. The only time it matters is if a movie didn’t do well enough to get a sequel and I want a sequel to it real badly. Like The A-Team for instance… What a shame…

                  • Problem with this is avengers had IMAX 3D. So point is moot.

                  • Problem with this is avengers had IMAX 3D. So point is moot. It had 2d, 3d, and 3d Imax. Don’t get MW wrong.. I liked avengers better…but you are wrong.

                  • Problem with this is avengers had IMAX 3D. So point is moot. It had 2d, 3d, and 3d Imax. Don’t get Me wrong.. I liked avengers better…but you are wrong.

                    • @jshha or js ahha

                      Not sure which to reply to… But anyway, yah, I think I’ve long but acknowledged that Avengers did also have IMAX 3D… Nice of you to chime in anyway though. :-)

                    • Ok KenJ,, I get your point. You Said and I quote: `I’m just saying I don’t think it makes as huge of a difference as everyone is making it out to be` I completely agree with you. But even if you do not agree with me but you can meet me halfway by saying that there is INDEED a little difference. And That is this difference that matters. ;)

                    • @Mike

                      Yah, of course it makes a difference. And obviously enough of a difference to make the process seem worth the extra costs for the movie studios, but just not as HUGE of a difference like some people here are making it seem it was…

      • Not really. Imax is a limited format. 3D can play on any traditional theater. There are only about 330 Imax theaters or so, but you can run 3D theoretically on all 4400 screens that it is shown in.

        For example, with the Avengers, they were running simultaneous showings of Avengers in 3d and 2d all day. There is only 1 Imax theater in a city of 800,000 where I am from.

        • @ummm yeah

          Actually, 3D can only be played in theaters with digital projection. I don’t think everyone realizes this, but most theaters are still using big reels of film to project the films… 3D needs digital projection. It’s definitely getting more and more popular, but there are stil many theaters that do not offer 3D because they don’t have digital projectors and even in the theaters that offer it, sometimes they only have one or two auditoriums equipped for it… The big theaters obviously can afford to have more.

          • dude thats weird that the city you live in apparently has an IMAX screen in a lot of theaters, but your theaters are still mostly using film. Here, 80% of our theaters use digital, yet there’s 1 IMAX theater in the entire city, and it’s an IMAX Dome.

            • @Deerektorr

              Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that most theaters don’t have digital, I’m just pointing out that it’s not as simple as show a 3D movie in any theater in any auditorium. The theaters here (except the ones in the small crappy neighborhoods) are slowly changing over to digital projection. Just about ALL of the major theaters have have at least a half dozen or so auditoriums equipped with digital projection. But there are still some of their smaller auditoriums still using film and some smaller theaters in the not-so-good neighborhoods are still all film, but they know if they invest in new technology, it’ll probably be stolen, lol.

  9. I find this sort of thing completely pointless. it’ll make a huge amount of cash and there’s no sequel riding on its success, with the shootings it was bound to be affected.

    And what is the point in comparing to the Avengers, two very different films in very different styles. This sort of thing does nothing but drag out utterly pointless fanboy debates.

    Here’s the shocker, The Avengers, The Amazing Spider-Man, and The Dark Knight Rises were all great films in very different ways. All comic book films sure but all took unique approaches and comparing them using money when TASM and TA both had 3D on their sides and weren’t accompanied by a terrible tragedy, seems somewhat unfair.

    • AGREED!! Why has nobody at least attempted to compare Batman to Spider-Man (1 vs 1)? I think WB & DC should be proud of themselves, regardless… their 1 superhero is consistently being compared with not just 1, but 4 of Marvel’s (primary) superheroes, and there’s been talks of Oscar-worthiness!!

      Since 2008, Marvel has released 5 films: Iron Man 1 & 2, Incredible Hulk, Thor, Captain America.
      Since 2008, DC has released 1: The Dark Knight.

      Avengers should have made the most money, and yet TDKR is in close second/ third place!

      If that’s not a compliment, I don’t know what is…

      • Really – just one movie? Did you forget about GL? LOL

        So in 4 years, DC has released 3 movies.

        • @wraab – I don’t think Green Lantern truly counts as a movie ;)

          Paul – Moderator

          • Except to those of us who like Green Lantern!

            :)

      • DC/WB also released Green Lantern, Jonah Hex, The Losers, and Watchmen haha

    • ’nuff said.

    • True taht Doc. We don`t usually agree but today We do. lol ;)

  10. To the “who cares” and “pointless article” folks. Since when are box office numbers for tent pole flicks not reported and compared? Are you new to the internet?

  11. So 3D and Aurora accounted for a $47MM difference in the BO take of these 2 movies? And I forget, didn’t TDKR have the largest number of IMAX screens ever – which is more expensive than 3D. And I believe someone else commented that the BO take would still include everyone who bought their tix but didn’t go, right?

    As someone who loved both movies for different reasons, I find the comparisons asinine, and the definitive *opinions* of which movie was better to be “hilarious.”

    • I know people in my town who were scared to go to the movies after the shootings and we don’t live in Colorado. To say the shooting didn’t have an affect across the nation is a bit ridiculous. I am not saying that it accounts for 47 million dollars, but it definitly accounts for some of them. Also, as it has been stated time and time again throughout this article, there are FAR less IMAX theaters in this country than theaters that can show 3D. The closest one to me is two states over. Also, The Avengers I believe had 3D IMAX which is way more than 2D IMAX. So I forgot, didn’t The Avengers have more things going for it money wise?

  12. I have to say, I’m a little disappointed ScreenRant :(
    I understand why you guys would do the “What was the best Superhero movie of 2012?” article: it definitely got a lot of readers and lots of opinions were shared, but this article just seems like it’s fueling the fire to the fanboy war…

    • Yeah, my thought as well. Kind of pointless article – on a Wednesday you have a report headlined as above – only stating what is obvious from 2 days now ?? why ?? just to grab some eyeballs or to start another fan boy war ??

    • Agreed. I’ve been puzzled by some of the articles recently. This article is just simply a waste of space.

      You can do better ScreenRant.

    • Best thing to do is to just rise above it, most of us have and recognised it for what it was.

  13. Oh come on, the purpose of sites like this is to get nerds talking. Don’t pretend otherwise. The impact of the massacre on TDKR box office is certainly news. Comparable movies (avengers, harry potter finale) make between 20-30% of their first day gross at midnight showings. TDKR midnight score was 40%. That means the movie should have had a much higher opening day, Saturday and Sunday. Very interesting stuff, though obviously just a small aside from the true tragedy.

  14. Uh, it didn’t have 3D sales, but it had IMAX sales, which are more than 3D tickets… Mine were $17 a pop…

    So, I think it’s a pretty fair comparison… Sorry Nolanites…

    • Unfortunately, you’re wrong. IMAX 3D and 3D ticket sales were also part of it. Sorry. Besides, The Avengers was weak anyway.

      • @Tyler

        “Wanker?” LOL, oh man, I’m hurt… :-D Did they actually have IMAX 3D for Avengers? I don’t think that movie was shot in IMAX. But I don’t doubt it, just can’t remember if it did. Hey, you might be right. But seriously, try a better insult next time, that made me laugh more than anything else. Nice try anyway…

        • Yes there was IMAX 3D for the Avengers, which is more expensive than the normal IMAX 2D

          • @Redzuan

            How much of a difference is it where you are? Where I am, I saw TDKR in IMAX and it was $17 a ticket. I saw The Amazing Spiderman in IMAX 3D and I forgot the exact dollar amount, but I know for a fact it was under $20, so it might actually have been the same…

            • IMAX tickets where I’m at are only 12 bucks, whereas IMAX 3D is 17. To say a movie doesn’t benefit from 3D ticket sales is a bit ignorant. Have we all forgotten Alice in Wonderland?

              • @Keith

                I don’t think anyone said it doesn’t benefit from it, I was saying it might not be as big of a difference as everyone is making it out to be. You’re lucky to be able to get into IMAX movies for only $12. That’s like a regular Digital 3D movie here. IMAX 2D is $17 in the theaters I go to… Well, at least in the weekends. I think in the weekdays all of the prices are slightly lower… But I don’t think an IMAX showing will ever be as low as $12 around here…

        • I watched in IMAX 3D

        • For The Avengers, I did watched in IMAX 3D

    • Why are you all saying that IMAX tickets are so expensive? In Des Moines, IMAX 2D tickets are only $13.00, whereas 3D tickets at the most popular theater in town are $12.75. There are only something like 530 IMAX theaters in the entire world, whereas someone before me commented that a 3D movie can be played at essentially any theater. I for one know that the Avengers in 3D was playing at every theater in town (6 or so), yet there is only one Imax theater in my town. Regular theater tickets in Des Moines are generally $9.00 or $9.75. So for argument sake let’s factor in some Imax cost and say that TDKR costs $10.00/ticket and let’s factor in that not everyone goes to see avengers in 3D and say that it makes $11.50/ticket, Avengers, then is making 15% more per ticket than TDKR. If you put in that extra 15%, it raises TDKR up to $184.9 million, which is only $22.1 million less than the Avengers. Looking at TDKR’s opening box office numbers it looks as though it was going to make a lot more money than it did if not for the shooting, so you also have to take that into account, as well as the fact that the Avengers is more family friendly. All in all, considering the disadvantages that TDKR had, it did very well, and you gotta give it props for having the biggest 2D opening weekend of all time.

      • @Deerektorr

        Why? Um, because it is… IMAX tickets here are $17 each. I watched TDKR in IMAX and that’s how much each ticket cost me…

        • Wow things must really be more expensive wherever you live. Do you live on the coasts or something? Anyway, I just saw it in IMAX and I was really disappointed. The image was super distorted. I dis some research and found out that the IMAX Dome that we have in Des Moines is actually not the same as a normal IMAX theater and that movies have to be shot with a special fisheye lense to avoid the distortion. That’s a relief, because for a minute I was like “Nolan thinks that this is the greastest film format of all time?”. I do wish that we had a normal IMAX theater though, so that I could see it the way that it’s meant to be viewed, according to Nolan’s vision. Still a great film though, and even better the second time around. I absolutely loved all three superhero movies this summer, but I think that TDKR is my favorite. It just resonated with me a lot more than the other two. I think it’s because Nolan makes it so much more than just a comic book movie. In any case, I really don’t care which film makes the most money. TDKR has already made back its budget, plus some. My comment was just to show that Avengers and TDKR do have fairly comparable success when you take into account certain factors.

          • @Deerektorr

            LOL, yah, don’t watch it in a dome. I saw it in a “normal” IMAX screen, well, normal in that it’s mostly flat, it’s still HUGE, so that’s not so normal… But it’s pretty cool in IMAX. It is kind of weird because the aspect ratios are different between IMAX and the non-IMAX shots, so the movie kept switching between full screen and having the black bars on the top and bottom, lol. It wasn’t TOO distracting though…

  15. I’m a DC and Marvel fan the avengers, amazing spiderman and the dark knight rises though different except in the fact that all are comic book movies they were all great films. In no way would I compare them saying that one is better than the other imo all were great to each their own. :D

  16. I don’t really get the people claiming that one movie is just “better” than the other, or one movie is “bad,” “weak,” or “the best” etc. etc.. Have you “super educated and intelligent” people considered that YOUR opinion is not fact? How about “I liked ******* more than ******* because…” I don’t know, just a friendly suggestion so you guys don’t seem so incredibly educated (/sarcasm) for the next time… ;-)

    • Completely agree.
      Just because a person likes or doesn’t like something, doesn’t mean that their opinion is LAW (i.e. the “correct” one).

      I don’t get why some people can have the “I think the world revolves around me, and only me. Everybody else must be wrong because they clearly don’t agree with what I think and say”-mentality and not realize that other individuals also live on this planet.

  17. Speaking of B.O. results…… Why does my finger smell like B.O.? :)

    The fanboy war will never end sadly. Next year it will be IM3 vs. MOS. Then when Thor 2 comes out, DC fans will trash talk those box office results because they will be lower as it comes out in November.

    I’m a Marvel fan all the way and I’ll always cheer for Marvel to beat DC, but the constant “DC sucks” or “Marvel sucks” just because you are a fan of the other is pretty silly.

  18. To everyone using the midnight screening numbers as their basis for why TDKR “should’ve” had better numbers than Avengers, keep in mind that the midnight screenings for Avengers would’ve occurred while the school year was still in session for the most part so that would’ve prevented many of the younger audience from being able to attend but could’ve attended the midnight screen for TDKR. Just a little perspective beyond raw numbers.

    • How people can not even consider this is quite comical.

      • Chiguy and kyle…

        …so the age groups that are old enough to see TDKR would not have been affected by “The Avengers” release date and, thus, still gone to the theater at midnight. Then, the younger viewers would have easily made up and exceeded this difference on Friday afternoon/evening. In short, the date would NOT have affected the turnout by as much as you seem to think.

        YOU not noticing THAT is even more comical…

  19. One other factor in addition to the ones at play
    is the long running time meant fewer showings for
    the day in each theater the movie was being shown.

    • @Robert

      That was compensated by having more auditoriums for the movie. All of the theaters I saw had pretty much half of all of their auditoriums that only showed TDKR. I feel sorry for any other movie that came out this week, they were automatically downgraded to the smaller theaters on day 1…

      • I noticed that too but even there every auditorium
        was still limited in the number of showings for the day.

        If one or two more showings were possible in each theater
        they would have sold out too for sure adding to the total.

        • There was only a 20 minute difference in Avengers and Batman. So it would take 7 or 8 showings in order to compensate for that time. That would mean they could only get in one more showing assuming a theater is opened 24 hours. Not many theaters near where I live are open 24 hours. 12pm to 12am

          • I did not mean to imply TDKR would have outsold Avengers.
            Just that it could have sold out more shows at least where
            I am and to that extent the long running time reduced sales.

        • @Robert

          At my theater where I went on a Sunday in the afternoon, they didn’t sell out the showing I went to… They still had tickets for sale right before the movie started. I’m sure the night showings sold out, but there was plenty of room for more sales if people wanted…

          • Very interesting, Kenneth.

            Where I am in Manhattan NY they can and could have sold out more shows
            if they were able to show them but I know that is not the typical US town.

            • @Robert

              Neither are we, lol. For whatever reason, nobody likes to watch movies in the afternoon here. You could have bought tickets to TDKR, Avengers, or any other big release, except for Friday and Saturday in its release weekend, any time in the afternoon on Sunday or any day during the week and you should not have trouble getting tickets…

  20. Come on Screen Rant. This is a stupid article to post here. Why do we care about box office numbers when we ourselves don’t even get a dime. I understand that to some people it’s bragging rights but regardless, The Dark Knight Rises was a great conclusion and one of the best superhero movies I have ever seen. The Avengers was the most fun I’ve had in the movie theaters all year. Both were great, one was in 2D and the other had 3D surcharges. At the end, you know who wins………the fans.

    • The reason they post this type of article is because not everyone has that mindset.

  21. the Avengers was good, but not as good as the Dark Knight Rises

  22. In 5 days , I have seen dark knight rises 4 times and still want more, I guess it does not matter to me how much money it makes,I would still watch it 8 to 9 times and yes it is a cinematic event that such movie releases once in a while, for me its a celebration , and I want to enjoy every moment of it

    • Def a re-watchable movie like all of Nolan’s Batman films. Sure they do not always make perfect sense but done very well with the help of mild imagination :)

  23. ummm…im missing something. did anyone actually expect it to beat avengers?

  24. I personally preferred The Dark Knight Rises, but I loved the Avengers as well. Two very different superhero movies, yet both great in their own way.

    That said, I think the tragedy in Colorado DEFINITELY affected box office numbers for TDKR, but hey, there’s a lot of worse things to worry about surrounding that incident that mere box office returns.

    Also, my theater in Columbia, MD cancelled all of their midnight showings (except for maybe the IMAX) due to technical difficulties, and many people got their refunds (although some kept their tickets and used it the next day). I think there were supposed 10+ showings that night in the theater, and most, if not all, were sold out. That’s a lot of money that didn’t go to the box office numbers. I know this is a very small percentage of the gross, but I’m just wondering, did this happen in anyone else’s theater?

  25. lots of off-base comments about why the darknight rises
    did not do it. here it is for those nolan fans smoking the pipe.
    5. before this tragedy i said it here on screen rant that rises
    was not going to beat avengers opening nor total gross. (and iam not only one)
    4. before this year no FILM in history of box office ever cracked 170 million (harry potter was closest) much less 200 million and avengers took not one step but 4 steps above previous record holder.
    3. avengers did not open on 4,350 3D screens otherwise it may have reached over 300 million at box office on opening weekend.
    2. i had this film opening up at 140 million to 145 million on opening weekend without anyone paying me to make outright silly predictions.
    1. before this summer only james cameron’s top two films were only ones
    to score 600 mil at box office domestically. so for analyst and nolan dorks who thought 200 mil and busting 600 mil again this year are just downright stupid.

  26. Yep, as stated, the tragedy in Aurora stopped it taking ts rightful place ahead of the pack which frankly sucks.

    Who are the cowards deciding not to attend a movie after ONE incident?

    Who are the cowards limiting the number of screens or closing outright?

    Whatever happened to not letting fear overcome us?

  27. So… what’s the point of this article?! Or does it have an unfit title “…Fails to Rise Above…”? Were the writer pointing out the already known facts? Or was he or she criticizing and then “patting on the back”?

  28. TDKR is an overall better movie than Avengers though both have epic action. I would assume that TDKR would have been #1 if it had a 3D release but the way Bats is filmed it wouldn’t work for 3D. Also that douche Colorado shooter and copy cats did affect box office, senseless and sad.

  29. If anyone stayed home rather than going to TDKR because of a shooting in one theater they are watching to much TV! It would be like not walking down the street because someone in N.Y. got mugged! There is no relationship between a shooting in one theater to danger in another theater, grow some brain cells!

    • Welcome to real life…It may be sad; it may be stupid. It IS, however, how the masses tend to react, whether on their own (collectively) or as influenced by governmental, financial, and/or social organizations/overseers.

      People, as a whole, can be quite chicken, sheepish, and/or predatory…

    • Archaeon is correct. It may not be completely rational but it is human.

      There is also the very real threat of copycats. No one really knows what will touch one of the other nut bags off and seeing Mr. Joker there might just do it (although I doubt copycats would have responded so quickly). There was also the possibility he wasn’t working alone and could have been part of a terrorist cell, we didn’t know until hours later. I would be more worried about copycats now however since they have had a week to prepare.

      So there is/was cause for concern.

Be Social, Follow Us!!