Highest Grossing Movie Franchises Infographic
Adam Rifkin stashed this in Infographics!
Stashed in: Best of Imgur, Are You Not Entertained?, Best of BuzzFeed, Infographics, movies, Star Wars!, Indiana Jones, Star Trek!, Back to the Future, James Bond, Harry Potter, The Matrix, Avengers!, Will Smith, Bruce Willis, @schwarzenegger, Superman!, Batman!, Spider-Man!, Stories, Aliens!, Lord of the Rings, Johnny Depp, Dinosaurs!, Pirates!, Disney!, Brands!, Hollywood, Business Facts, Best PandaWhale Posts, Game of Thrones!, Walking Dead, Christopher Nolan, Kristen Stewart, Illusion of Choice, @theslystallone, Marvel!, Sean Connery, Jurassic World
To be fair theres been a shitload of bond movies
Also to be fair, Disney only owns 3 of the top 10: Star Wars, Marvel, and Pirates.
Where ARE all the Disney movies? Why isn't Toy Story or Cars or Princesses on here?
Which studios own which franchises:
You made a mistake, there were only three Indiana Jones movies. THERE WERE ONLY THREE!!
Just keep telling yourself that, buddy. It's just a matter of time before they make number 5.
The fact that Twilight is higher than things like Jaws, Rocky, Star Trek, Back to the Future, The Godfather ect is disappointing...
Yeah, thanks for point that out.
So Harry Potter, LOTR/HOBBIT, and Pirates of the Carribbean the highest single-director / cast / crew franchise? Interesting.
You are correct, sir. And welcome back!
Many thanks, Adam! :) I love this graph. The blockbusters are an example of good business being good for the fans in this instance, especially those of the Comic Book and Sci-fi/Fantasy genre.
Comic Book and Sci-fi/Fantasy stories lend themselves nicely to multiple chapters and fan loyalty.
So what's missing above?
The new generation, aka Hunger Games, etc., as well as Game of Thrones, The Walking Dead, etc.
Also, note how well the Fast and Furious franchise is doing. It is truly an original.
The big surprise for me was Pirates of the Caribbean. Talk about creating a franchise out of air.
Ultimately, I'm reminded that 6 companies own 90% of media:
Hunger Games would most definitely edge on to the list after the release of their second film. http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=hungergames.htm
Curious how TV compares to film, e.g. Game of Thrones, The Walking Dead. What's missing?
Ender's Game (There's a whole list of additional works by Orson Scott Card in that series just waiting for the big screem)
Possibly Elysium, which was created by the guy who was originally intended to create the Halo Movie (I believe Xbox is witholding this to keep it exclusive to the Xbox franchise not on the big screen and dilute their property, even though they could make a fortune)
The Wheel of Time
Eragon, but it bombed at the box office.
And of course, the Justice League and its associated heroes (Wonder Woman, Martian Manhunter, et. al)
While the success of the Avengers is enticing, all of the Justice League heroes are much "bigger," and more "powerful," ergo harder to put on big screen. See: Green Lantern. For example, Batman runs around on the streets, does detective work, and gets into fist fights (and loses) one on one; Superman when he fights destroys cities (accurately in Man of Steel, and in the comics). The scale of putting just those two on screen together would be enormously challenging, but Man of Steel showed us that it just might work.
The Fast and Furious franchise is humming along nicely; the teaser from the end of the sixth shows an addition of Jason Statham, which should work out extremely well. It's similar to the Expendables in the sense that they're adding a laundry list of their own stars who are mostly well-known for the similar kind of work to FF.
You're right, Adam. Impressive on Disney's part to create a billion-dollar franchise out of an amusement park ride. Hats off to Disney and Johnny Depp. The reviews from the Lone Ranger don't seem promising, but nonetheless, who can turn down seeing Johnny Depp teamed with Armie Hammer?
No one can turn down Johnny Depp plus Armie Hammer but many might wait for Netflix.
I like the rest of your analysis.
Game of Throne and Walking Dead are interesting special cases since they have no box office.
The question is, could they have been more valuable if they were done as 7 movies instead of 7 television seasons?
Star Trek is an example of a franchise that was able to successfully jump from TV to big screen.
Perhaps those franchises have that in their futures, too.
If you read Steven Spielberg, the film "Lincoln," almost debuted on HBO: http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/06/13/lincoln-spielberg-hbo/. It made $275m worldwide. Game of Thrones has 13.6m weekly viewers for season 3. HBO is a Time Warner company. Time Warner owns Warner Brothers. It's reasonable for us to assume, that GOT is worth more to Time Warner as an HBO property, and that beautiful recurring revenue, than as a single movie franchise. It's hard to parse; we don't know how many GOT or Walking Dead viewers watch HBO and AMC, respectively, just for those shows. In HBO's case, viewers must pay a premium charge. With a cost of roughly $15/mo, http://hbowatch.com/how-much-does-an-hbo-subscription-cost-these-days/, So if, say, 10m viewers (I wonder if this is broken down by household, or say 3 viewers on 1 subscription) watch HBO just for GoT, and say that equates to 3m subscribers, that's $540m yearly subscription fees just for viewers to watch GoT, a lucrative franchise. Let's say 1m subscribers are there purely for game of thrones, HBO is, or at least the cable company, is generating $180m/ yearly revenue from one show. How much passes through to HBO? We're not sure, right? But it seems it's a portfolio approach. Movies are roughly twice to three times the same budget as the Game of Thrones (which produces at $5m-$10m an episode, reportedly) and whilst can hit higher rewards (see: LOTR, Harry Potter) also assumes much more risk. Since Time Warner owns the license for a great deal of these properties, it makes sense that they're able to diversify their risk portfolio between recurring revenue and franchise movie properties. And one would think that their licensing opportunities are similar for merchandise and extracurricular revenue regardless of the format, TV or Big Screen.
In addition to HBO subscription fees, Game of Thrones can make money through DVDs and Blue Rays, iTunes, Streaming... and eventually merchandising, too.
Then again, so can any of those movie franchises.
But I see your point. Game of Thrones and Walking Dead are very valuable to HBO and AMC, because they mean that people won't stop subscribing to cable or satellite.
Are there no ninjas?
Not yet. Someday. No cowboys or pandas, either.
New Disney animation...The Outlaw Panda Whales?
This grand-baby just might be my new muse, we could be on to something here
Bruce Wayne is definitely a ninja.
In the Christopher Nolan films he is. In the previous ones, not so much.
In the comics/cartoons he is. Besides, does anything matter except Christopher Nolan's films? ;)
Now that we're in the post-Nolan era Batman better still have a future!
More importantly we can't wait to see more Nolan films!