Dreamgirls number 4 in Highest Domestic Grossing Film Musicals since 1974

Posted: 3/21/07 at 4:33am

So is it at least a minor sorta hit? *confused*

In all seriousness the list--which is ONLY domestic box office so the totals for some liek Evita would be much higher--is kinda sad--the lack of really hugely scoring musicals in the past 30 or so years on film though the numbers aren't adjusted for inflation so some would be considerably higher now.

MUSICAL
1974-Present
Live action only.

Rank Title (click to view) Studio Lifetime Gross / Theaters Opening / Theaters Date
1 Grease Par. $188,389,888 862 $8,941,717 862 6/16/78
2 Chicago Mira. $170,687,518 2,701 $2,074,929 77 12/27/02
3 The Rocky Horror Picture Show Fox $112,892,319 - n/a - 9/26/75
4 Dreamgirls P/DW $102,897,430 2,797 $378,950 3 12/15/06
5 The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas Uni. $69,701,637 1,435 $11,874,268 1,400 7/23/82
6 Moulin Rouge! Fox $57,386,607 2,283 $167,540 2 5/18/01
7 The Blues Brothers Uni. $57,229,890 - $4,858,152 594 6/20/80
8 Annie Col. $57,059,003 1,102 $510,632 14 5/21/82
9 The Phantom of the Opera WB $51,268,815 1,515 $4,001,890 622 12/22/04
10 Evita BV $50,047,179 1,045 $195,085 2 12/25/96
11 Popeye Par. $49,823,037 901 $6,310,520 901 12/12/80
12 Yentl MGM $40,218,899 747 $3,050,219 501 11/18/83
13 Funny Lady Col. $39,000,000 - n/a - 3/9/75
14 Little Shop of Horrors WB $38,748,395 1,183 $3,659,884 866 12/19/86
15 All That Jazz Fox $37,823,676 - $86,229 5 12/20/79


Full list at http://www.boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=musical.htm

[FOAnatic]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 4:41am

Wow.

RENT and THE PRODUCERS don't even make the list. That's pretty laughable.

I had no doubt DREAMGIRLS would be a success. Can't wait for the DVD.

Posted: 3/21/07 at 5:25am

It's funny some of the films--I always assumed the film of Last Little Whorehouse was basically a flop that only had success later on tv...

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 6:40am

>> though the numbers aren't adjusted for inflation

And that *is* a problem. When I saw SOUND OF MUSIC (during its original theatrical release), tickets went for the then unheard of price of two dollars for advnacce sale, two-fifty if you bought them at the wicket. Now, with ticket prices hovering around the fifteen dollar mark in some places, it's relatively easy for a movie to make serious money and have the *impression* of being oh so much better than those that preceded it.

Updated On: 3/21/07 at 06:40 AM

Posted: 3/21/07 at 8:10am

Sean Martin said: "But there's something slightly suspicious about this list. What's the "Funny
Girl Collection" doing on it?"

Funny Girl's not on the list but Funny Lady is (it's 1974 and post remember--otherwise Cabaret would surely be on--and they do admit that they add on money made domestically in official re-releases, which probably helped with Grease and of certainly is largely reflective with Rocky Horror). The Col. after Funny Lady is an abreviation for COLumbia--it's much clearer if you go to the link. I know BoxOfficeMojo is far from 100% but they're smart enough not to include dvd sales on a box office list

To be fair, while not a massive hit, if you just compare Dreamgirls to other filsm this past year that made around 100 mill domestic or more you'll see it's not a massive list--but I agree the inflation makes it hard to compare directly--however it can still give a sense IMHO (for some reason film fact fans always harshly debate whether when these kinds of lists are made prices should be changed to reflect inflation or not--I don't admit to really understanding the argument for why they shouldn't--but there is one...)

I shoulda been a bit more careful with how I posted this though--I swear I'm not trying to bring back the arguments about whether Dreamgirls is a hit or not (though to call it *not* a minor hit seems silly to me)--but I find the list as a whole pretty interesting if also pretty sad...

Updated On: 3/21/07 at 08:10 AM

[bk]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 12:06pm

It's a hit to those who don't understand or want to know how box-office works. It's a hit to those who love the film. It is certainly not a hit to the studio whose bottom line is has the film broken even or made a profit. First of all, as is pointed out, if the numbers were adjusted for inflation it would be a different list. Second, it's box-office mojo. Third, the film cost 80 mil and has grossed domestically 102 mil. They spent at least 50 mil on their insanely overdone compaign (which backfired), and this film would have to make well over 200 mil to see a profit. And making a list of the highest grossing musicals SINCE 1975 is one of the most ludicrous things I've ever seen.

[LuPonatic]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 12:12pm

Popeye? What is that doing on there? it was a musical? I remember singing (if they mean the Robin Williams one) but it's on a list of musicals? really?

[shesamarshmallow]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 12:18pm

Wait, Rocky Horror? Does that count every single screening of it since it was released? Because I'm sure that was a huge flop back in 75.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 12:35pm

Empire had a simailr discussion (they also claimed Dreamgirls has gone over 150 million dollars with worldwide gross).

Even if figures were adjusted to represent todays financial market the list would not shift that much due to the fact that when sound of music, Cabaret etc opened they were a lot less cinemas(theatres) for them to open in

today america can open films in over 300 screens but 20 years ago the amount of screens were half of that.

Also some of the old musicals had very large budgets and many did not profit the studios (cabaret falls under this)

[Ourtime992]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 12:40pm

I really wish the studios kept stats on how many tickets were sold to each movie. That would be a much easier way to track these things across decades of inflation.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 12:46pm

Grease ,Dreamgirls and Chicago would all stay in the top 4

You also have to take in to account that grease got a re release as well.

That chart also doesnt take in to account worldwide grosses(what can add $30 $40 million on to films such as chicago and dreamgirls(box office mojo is great with american gross but very in accurate with worldwide gross)

The advertising budget for dreamgirls was $30 million not $50 million

Also box office mojo doesnt take in to account dvd and video sales what would send grease and chicago through the roof

[Dark_Angel]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 1:25pm

I"It's relatively easy for a movie to make serious money and have the *impression* of being oh so much better than those that preceded it..."

Well SeanMartin, to be honest with you just because a movie rakes in a huge amount of money at the box office doesn't make it any better or worse than the film that preceded it. Whether a movie is good or not or better or worse all comes down to a matter of opinion. If the list was adjusted for inflation and say something like THE SOUND OF MUSIC came out on top then the fact of whether it was better than the rest is still a matter of opinion because I know many people who can't stand the movie.

So in the grand scheme of things is it really that important?

[musicalfandukie]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 2:35pm

i say it's a hit for a number of reasons. one being there has hardly been any musical movies to do well in the past 30 years. ya chicago made a killer at the box office but it also came home with the oscar. ya of course i'm sure the studio would of liked it to do better but i say 103 million shows that there is still an audience out there for musical movies which is great for the future!..also the movie has made 150 million world wide so far. then there is dvd sales..i'm sure it's going to profit.

[Thesbijean]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 2:36pm

Where are tickets hovering around the $15 mark?

[musicalfandukie]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 2:39pm

tickets are only 8 dollars where i'm from.

[LoringsGuy]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 2:40pm

"this film would have to make well over 200 mil to see a profit"

bk, if Dreamgirls' budget was $80 million, with an advertising campaign of $30 million (or even $50 million as some have speculated), how is it that it must gross in excess of $200 million to turn a profit? Wouldn't it start seeing a profit at the $110-$130 million mark?

[Paulyd]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 3:00pm

For your information a huge percentage of movies do not make their money back during a domestic release. DVD sales are slowly making a huge contribution to a films overall gross, and if the proposed shortening of theatrical windows happens, then DVD sales may ultimately be more important than the theatrical release.

My company has released 7 independent films in UK cinemas over the last year, and believe me the box office take is nowhere new the amount to clear the distrubution fees and general production, but DVD sales will always be factored in to the original profit and loss plan.

I dont really expect that Dreamworks are crying too much over the theatrical gross of Dreamgirls, because believe me they'll make it up in DVD sales.
Updated On: 3/21/07 at 03:00 PM

[javero]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 3:55pm

Thank you Paulyd for weighing in with your expert commentary in regard to the domestic takings of most movies. The major film studios in the US are very keen on inking deals with foreign studios that can co-produce much of the actual shooting in cheaper locales and guarantee sweetheart foreign distribution deals in exchange for a quota of native technical workers (and stunt workers) behind the scenes.

The studios stateside could barely get by on domestic box office receipts alone given the astronomical salaries demanded by A-list actors and film printing costs alone for a 3000 theatre opening. That has been the case for sometime now since the demise of the "studio system". They depend on video/DVD rentals, MERCHANDISING & LICENSING, foreign distribution (including US military bases abroad)and filming in increasing cheaper locales just to break even. A concise account of the lowdown on Hollywood movie making can be found in the book penned by Edward Jay Epstein, The Big Picture (Random House).

Finally, some marquee US players don't necessarily have that much box office heft overseas for sundry reasons, eg Denzel Washington. It'll be interesting to see the final tally on DREAMGIRLS' takings abroad.

Updated On: 3/21/07 at 03:55 PM

[wickedfan]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 4:05pm

Loringsguy-Studios don't take in all of the money that their movies make at the box office. They only take in about half of it (meaning that Deamworks has taken in about 52 million domestically from Dreamgirls) and it takes in a little less than half worldwide (about 20 million). It seems that everybody continues to exagerate the budget of Dreamgirls. Especially you, Sean Martin. It had a budget of 70-75 million and an advertising budget of 30 million (which is still HUGE) not 50. By the end of 2007 Dreamworks will have seen a profit from Dreamgirls.

[Effie]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 4:32pm

BK,

If we were to use your logic, Little Miss Sunshine, which grossed 59 million dollars was a bigger hit than Dreamgirls, since Little Miss Sunshine cost less to produce.

How much profit a studio makes and being a "hit" are two different things. "Hit" traditionally refers to the number of tickets sold. Dreamgirls is without question a "hit."

And on the question of profitability, while the studio surely would have prefered a 170 million dollar domestic gross, this is by no means a worst case scenario situation. 100 million dollars at the domestic box office indicates a high level of interest from consumers. In other words, it will sell a hell of a lot more DVD's than Little Miss Sunshine. And not just this year. They're going to repackage that sucker until the cows come home. (And I didn't even mention soundtrack sales, pay per view, pay TV, free TV...)

People go on and on about domestic box office, but the real issue for studios is the value of their library. Trust me, Dreamgirls is a very valuable addition to the Dreamworks/Paramount library. They aren't going to lose money on it.

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 6:00pm

>>

I'm sorry; is this supposed to mean anything at all? I suspect not, since of course all this is a matter of opinion. You're not saying anything revelatory. I'm not even impling that MUSIC *would* come out on top, merely that if ticket price inflation were thrown into the mix, it would do far, far better than DREAMGIRLS could ever hope. So would MUSIC MAN. So would AMERICAN IN PARIS. Whether or not these are gems of cinematic genius is a matter of opinion, but that's not the issue here, is it? It's how much did these films make?

Got it now? Good.

Eric: I realized after my post that the "col" meant "Columbia", but I find it incredible that FUNNY LADY would do that well. No accounting for taste, I suppose.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 6:04pm

Dreamgirls has made approx $37 worldwide

[Dark_Angel]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 6:19pm

SeanMartin,

I didn't get anything from your response other than the fact that you have an attitude problem buddy.

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 6:34pm

Then your sense of reading comprehension is as fuzzy as your avatar.

[Dark_Angel]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 6:35pm

^^ I rest my case.
Seek help.
Updated On: 3/21/07 at 06:35 PM