Re: Biggest Grossers of all time : Adjusted

"rkusenet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> V" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote

>
> U have cleverly snipped what u can't answer. I am pasting it again.
>
> "How are his last two movies Devdas, ChalteChalte a
> hit. How come Devdas/ChalteChalte not affected by cable, but Asoka
> affected by cable".
>
> > Probably people would have ended watching
> > Bemisaal, Jurmana, Ganga ki Saugandh on Cable/TV had they had the
option.
> > But they did not have the option. So, although Shahrukh has 13 movies in
> > there ( and Aamir has 1 ), movies do not get their correct ranking,
because
> > the numbers have been distorted by those who watched the movie on
TV/Cable
> > rather than the theatre. I myself enjoyed Dil Chahata Hai but I saw it
on
> > DVD. I would have definitely watched it on the big screen, if I did not
have
> > the easy access to DVD. But my (and I am sure, your) watching it on DVD
> > brought down the ticket sales. The reason why movies gross more is
simply
> > because the tickets are a lot more expensive. If you take the total of
> > people who watched it, I am pretty sure, more people watched Asoka, than
> > those who watched Hera Pheri. But simply because, Asoka was shown on
cable
> > in Mumbai, no one bothered to watch it in a theatre.
>
> Again I am pasting my question which u r avoiding to answer:-
>
> "How are his last two movies Devdas, ChalteChalte a
> hit. How come Devdas/ChalteChalte not affected by cable, but Asoka
> affected by cable".
>
> Why did cable not affect Gadar, Devdas and Koi Mil Gaya, the super hits of
> 2001, 2002 and 2003.

Hi rk, ( thanks for calling Devdas a  superhit :)

I have answered the question above, when I talked about hera Pheri and
Asoka, I will try repeating it here.

It does distort the numbers. Gadar, Devdas and KMG would probably have been
greater hits if there had been no TV/Cable. They would have been rated much
higher on ibosnetworks. But its on the average hits, that this disparity
reflects the most. Lets say, there is this movie Himmatwala, which is
supposed to be a decent movie(  or Samay for a more recent example ). A
friend of mine tells me to check out this movie. Had this been 25 years ago,
I would have watched it on the big screen, and I would have had no option.
But now, I can either watch it at home for $3 on DVD ( 10 Rs in India ) or
$35 in a theatre (2*$10 tickets + $5 commute + coke + nachos ), what do you
think I would prefer, and even if I go check out one of the movies in a
theatre, I would definitely not do it on a regular basis.  And most of the
movies, which do not have a repeat value, you would end up watching them
just once, on the DVD.

Hence, fewer movies are a bigger hit now. I specifically remember the
posters of Prem Qaidi "Celebrating 35 days". Don't you think its weird? How
many celebrating 100 days posters do we see now? Its all about the first
couple of weekends. Thats it. Movies used to celebrate 25 weeks, silver
jubilees all over the country. Now it celebrates its 25th week in a remote
theatre, whose owner is paid to keep the movie running inspite of the number
of viewers.