>
>Really, just answer the question
>

it's two completely different genres of film making. but i GUESS you think that IRONMAN is better than both, aren't you?? since you're the one trynig so hard to make some point, whutever the fuck that point is...



>
>Right, and TDK will never, ever, ever, surpass Titanic.
>
>And before you said Titanic and TDK aren't comparable
>since they are different
>
>Why then, is TDK comparable to Star Wars?


i never SAID it was...just stating a fact that it's going to surpass 460 million by next week which IS where star wars currently at. BUT if you REALLY want to go there in regarding of sales comparison with star wars, star wars ONLY made barely over 220 million in it's ORIGINAL THEATRICAL release...and that run was within a 43 WEEK span, which is completely unrealistic in today's theatrical runs...


if this was 1977, and TDK had been released, it would of been ALREADY at 139 MILLION within just 4 weeks!!!

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm?adjust_yr=1977&p=.htm

star wars in ITS 4th week was ONLY BARELY close to 13 MILLION

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=weekend&id=starwars4.htm


this is why the whole adjustment gross shit is completely irrelevent to make an arguement, especially with star wars and the numerous times that movie was rereleased over the pass decades....

star wars is STILL one of the most important films in cinema history and it would be UNFAIR and disrespectful to even TRY to compare that to TDK, with that said....TDK is going to pass the 460 million mark in which star wars is currently at...to deny how BIG that is for ANY film passing that mark is insulting as well, because no other film aside from titanic have done that