In Which Methods For Determining The Relative Profitability Of Various Films Are Discussed

Now here is a story I find quite surprising. 'They' were making a new list of the top 10 grossing films of all time, and decided to adjust it for inflation. Using this approach, Titanic is not, in fact, the biggest grossing film of all time (though it's still fairly crap but in a quite watchable sort of way, which is not a measure used on the chart), but comes in at Number 6; the top spot is occupied by Gone With The Wind.

Anyway, what puzzles me is this: why did no one ever think of this before? I mean, I had thought of it before, that newer films will always do better in these kinds of lists, simply because it's now exceptionally expensive to go to the cinema, whereas in 'the past' you could get in for a jam jar and some fluff, and it's not as if I'd ever really thought about it that much, or am any kind of Expert. So how come actual Experts have never thought of this?

And why don't they just count how many tickets are sold? Because this would also allow for the fact that some cinemas are more expensive than others. You could practically buy The Strand Cinema, for example, for the amount of money you've spent even before you get through the door at the Odyssey, what with car parking and so on. In fact, some friends of mine turned up at The Strand the other week and discovered that it was 'Mad Monday' or 'Wild Wednesday' or something and got in for the princely sum of about £1.50 for the pair of them. You could hardly get a handful of popcorn for that in most places.

So, in summary, I think they should change their system.