“Barbie” has answered the billion-dollar question with a resounding “yes.” Barely three weeks into its run, writer-director Greta Gerwig’s blockbuster has raked in an astounding $1.03 billion at the global box office, according to official Warner Bros. estimates. This makes Gerwig the first solo female director with a billion-dollar movie.

    • ludwig@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Here’s a list of the top 30 adjusted for inflation: https://www.gamesradar.com/highest-grossing-movies-inflation/

      With that information, I don’t believe Barbie is in the 50 if you adjust for inflation.

      Unadjusted isn’t entirely useless. It’s interesting to see how a movie compares to more recent ones and it also filters out movies that were released in a time where TVs, home media or streaming didn’t exist or were not as common.

        • Chetzemoka@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          That does not answer the question, relative to WHAT exactly? Precisely?

          Relative to last year? When Avatar 2 and Maverick pulled in over a billy? Relative to 2018 when Black Panther did? Relative to 2008 when The Dark Knight did?

          Exactly which one of these achievements is suggested to be the benchmark by which to desperately downplay the current achievement?

          Inflation adjusted for SOME time period, shouldn’t ALL these movies receive some discount and skepticism? It’s funny how you only hear about how inflation is a big deal when it’s a movie made by a woman for a primarily female audience. It’s almost like there’s some other motivation in this “just asking questions” 🤔

          • ludwig@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            This is how Wikipedia adjusts their numbers:

            InfInflation adjustment is carried out using the Consumer price index for advanced economies published by the International Monetary Fund. The index is uniformly applied to the grosses in the chart published by Guinness World Records in 2014, beginning with the 2014 index. The figures in the above chart take into account inflation that occurred in 2014, and in every available year since then, through 2022.

            Basically they are adjusted so that 10 $ in 1939 is equal to what it’s worth today. Seriously it’s basic economics.

            And no, inflation is mentioned every single time someone somewhere brings up a film from the highest grossing films list. Because Gone with the wind is the highest grossing film ever.

            Just because you didn’t notice those other times doesn’t make this time worse. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_correlation

            At the end of the day, highest grossing is a worthless metric to measure in except that it’s just a bit interesting. Don’t take it too seriously.

            Edit: oh and to be clear, she is still the first solo female director with 1B$. Adjusting for inflation doesn’t change that (except if there is a movie with another solo female director that goes above 1B if adjusted)

            • Chetzemoka@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              No one said highest grossing. They said IT MADE A BILLION DOLLARS, WHICH IT DID

              I know what fucking inflation adjustment is. Of course I know that inflation adjustment is a relevant metric that gets brought up when discussing “did this movie make the most money ever”

              But the report is not “Barbie is the highest grossing film in history.” It’s “Barbie made a billion dollars” which is just…a fact

              • ludwig@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                I think the commenter was referring to this paragraph.

                According to Dergarabedian, only about 50 films in history, unadjusted for inflation, have hit the billion-dollar mark.

                But if you are only talking about the female director thing, then yeah I agree, that’s nice.

                I still don’t understand any of your other comments though. But let’s leave it at that.

                • Chetzemoka@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  13
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Christ it’s not that hard to understand. Everytime a woman achieves something in public, a whole bunch of people have to figure out SOME way to say it’s not that impressive.

                  Here, let me help: “No way! That’s cool”

                  AND LEAVE IT AT THAT. For fuck’s sake.

              • Iamdanno@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                “made a billion” as in profited that much?

                Or,

                “Made a billion” as in that much revenue?

      • snooggums@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        ‘Sexism’

        Anytime a woman does something monetarily big in Hollywood people being up inflation. They also do with most records, but always with women.

        • ludwig@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nah, people bring it up every time any of the highest grossing movies are discussed, like Avatar and Avengers Endgame.

          Beating Gone with the wind is very hard. Avatar is surprisingly close, but not close enough.

        • velxundussa
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s too broad a claim for me to agree.

          In this specific event, adjusting for inflation on older movies might show that there was precedent where a movie directed by a single woman was more successful than this one.

          If that happen, that achievement should also be celebrated. If that didn’t happen, this movie should be even more celebrated.

          Asking for more data isn’t the same thing as attacking a claim.

          Maybe I’m just naive, but I like to assume good intentions.

          If someone actually say something sexist, calling them out is important. But I don’t think assuming sexism first is a good thing either.

          • snooggums@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I also used to be niave, but the decades have taught me that it is almost always sexism (or racism) even if it is subconscious. Now I just assume good intentions if that has no negative consequences.

        • Chetzemoka@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oh, believe me I know. That’s why I asked them to be specific about what they meant here.

          The secret ingredient is always 🌈✨ misogyny ✨🌈