Muppet Movies Actual Box Office!

[frogboy4]

While I appreciate the NYTimes giving the Muppets a high-profile article, many of the facts are contrived or just plain wrong. Tough Pigs artfully goes through many of the discrepancies, yet I still wondered what the 6 Muppet movie box office actuals would be when adjusted for 2011 ticked prices. Here's what I got for the totals.

FILM/ORIGINAL B.O./ 2011 ADJUSTED
TMM: $ 65,200,000 / $ 208,068,526
GMC: $ 31,206,251 / $ 89,914,414
MTM: $ 25,534,703 / $ 60,872,908
MCC: $ 27,281,507 / $ 52,656,595
MTI: $ 34,327,391 / $ 62,208,688
MFS: $ 16,625,807 / $ 26,215,101

TOTAL: $ 200,175,659 / $ 499,936,232 (a half-billion dollars!)

(based on 2011 average over-all average ticket price $8.01)

I must point out that the Times claims that the last 5 Muppet pictures together didn't take in as much as Toy Story 3 did in its first 5 days. That's comparing apples and cannonballs! TS3 is the 9nth biggest film of all time, grossing $415,004,880. Not many films do that! It also commanded a heftier 3D ticket price. Its first 5 days TS3 made $141,036,487 compared to the last 5 Muppet films' unadjusted domestic take of $134,975659. The actual adjusted domestic for those 5 pictures is $291,867,706. Nonetheless, a cockeyed comparison.

Any picture, taking in account that it's not some big budget sci-fi adventure, that makes over $50 million at the domestic box office is still considered a hit. That's what causes MFS to be the only "flop" in this little model, but rest made enough bank and we're not even talking overseas or the lucrative home video market. The NYTimes has a thing or two to learn about the Muppets, but I thank them for inspiring me to investigate the facts. Aren't you glad to have them now too?

 

[CensoredAlso]

Actually I remember at the time of the article (2008) the Tough Pigs forum also mentioned that there was a Letter to the Editor after this article, so at least there was some interest from the public.

 

[frogboy4]

Actually I remember at the time of the article (2008) the Tough Pigs forum also mentioned that there was a Letter to the Editor after this article, so at least there was some interest from the public.

This is actually a new article that just came out. I listed the wrong link and fixed it.

 

[dwayne1115]

I said this on facebook but I will say it again.

I don't think you can compare all six Muppet movies, and how well they did in the box office. They where very different movies, so it would like compareing Follow that Bird to Elmo in Grouchland.

 

[frogboy4]

I said this on facebook but I will say it again.

I don't think you can compare all six Muppet movies, and how well they did in the box office. They where very different movies, so it would like compareing Follow that Bird to Elmo in Grouchland.

Well one of those films sucked, while FTB was fantastic.

 

[Drtooth]

I must point out that the Times claims that the last 5 Muppet pictures together didn't take in as much as Toy Story 3 did in its first 5 days. That's comparing apples and cannonballs! TS3 is the 9nth biggest film of all time, grossing $415,004,880. Not many films do that! It also commanded a heftier 3D ticket price. Its first 5 days TS3 made $141,036,487 compared to the last 5 Muppet films' unadjusted domestic take of $134,975659. The actual adjusted domestic for those 5 pictures is $291,867,706. Nonetheless, a cockeyed comparison.

Any picture, taking in account that it's not some big budget sci-fi adventure, that makes over $50 million at the domestic box office is still considered a hit. That's what causes MFS to be the only "flop" in this little model, but rest made enough bank and we're not even talking overseas or the lucrative home video market. The NYTimes has a thing or two to learn about the Muppets, but I thank them for inspiring me to investigate the facts. Aren't you glad to have them now too?

That's the problem with society and the model they're using. We need a completely in your face culture to constantly remind us that something exists. And if something doesn't have fifty TV shows going at once anymore (a hard feat, since it's impossible for ANYTHING to go to regular broadcast or even cable TV), it's off the radar.

Plus... oh... the creator and head of a company died. So that's gonna cause some headaches. Disney floundered around for sometime after Walt died... then it came back with Eisner, who preceded to ruin things again.

It happens.

Now, truth be told, there is NO WAY a Muppet project can survive on television in this climate, where everything has to be either a reality show or a pale carbon copy of something successful. Shows that start off huge never really manage to keep up that momentum (look at Heroes), and they won't accept something that isn't a monumental hit off the bat. Though... Fox did force that horrid Till Death show down everyone's throats and no one wanted it. They must've had a GOOD contract negotiator, otherwise that show would have lasted 2 episodes. the exception to the rule is Reality TV, because it's so cheap to produce it doesn't matter if no one's watching. You're still guaranteed 2 seasons.

A Muppet TV series, possibly variety style like the original, just won't work on network television... it never did. TMS lasted 5 seasons ONLY because it was syndicated... networks didn't want to give it a shot. JHH, ha! NBC pretended it was on another network, ABC blew any chances of MT doing decent by moving the timeslot around, giving it a terrible spot opposite 60 minutes. The only way we'd see a Muppet show is on Disney or ABCFamily, and they're stuck in too deep pandering to a specific demographic.

Until now, a theatrical was out of the question. Studios wouldn't want something that wasn't... well, third and fourth party CGI cartoons or scraping the bottom of the barrel super hero movies (that only appeal to people who say how terrible they are, either instantly or in hindsight)... yet they'd take a chance on making D and F grade CGI talking animals in a human world films they THINK kids love. most of them done by the guy who ruined MFS, actually.

So what do we have left... TV specials and DTV's. Now, Oz, I still feel ruined the franchise and it was the Batman and Robin of the films... the sad part is, Disney didn't make that one, but felt it was getting off on the wrong foot. The last special we had was 3 years later, LTS... that was alright but it really wasn't enough. The virals and comics basically held the franchise together until production of the movie.

That said... WB has been killing itself because they feel they needed to rebrand the Looney Tunes after BIA, and they kept screwing things up.

 

[frogboy4]

I said this on facebook but I will say it again.

I don't think you can compare all six Muppet movies, and how well they did in the box office. They where very different movies, so it would like compareing Follow that Bird to Elmo in Grouchland.

I feel the need to be clear just in case. The point of the gross receipt listing was not to compare as much as compile how much Muppet movies have made altogether. That should have been clear from the paragraph accompanying the list. Maybe that part was skipped. Still, Elmo's movie did bite, but that's neither here nor there in the listing of Muppet Show character movies.

That's the problem with society and the model they're using. We need a completely in your face culture to constantly remind us that something exists. And if something doesn't have fifty TV shows going at once anymore (a hard feat, since it's impossible for ANYTHING to go to regular broadcast or even cable TV), it's off the radar.

Plus... oh... the creator and head of a company died. So that's gonna cause some headaches. Disney floundered around for sometime after Walt died... then it came back with Eisner, who preceded to ruin things again.

It happens.

Now, truth be told, there is NO WAY a Muppet project can survive on television in this climate, where everything has to be either a reality show or a pale carbon copy of something successful. Shows that start off huge never really manage to keep up that momentum (look at Heroes), and they won't accept something that isn't a monumental hit off the bat. Though... Fox did force that horrid Till Death show down everyone's throats and no one wanted it. They must've had a GOOD contract negotiator, otherwise that show would have lasted 2 episodes. the exception to the rule is Reality TV, because it's so cheap to produce it doesn't matter if no one's watching. You're still guaranteed 2 seasons.

A Muppet TV series, possibly variety style like the original, just won't work on network television... it never did. TMS lasted 5 seasons ONLY because it was syndicated... networks didn't want to give it a shot. JHH, ha! NBC pretended it was on another network, ABC blew any chances of MT doing decent by moving the timeslot around, giving it a terrible spot opposite 60 minutes. The only way we'd see a Muppet show is on Disney or ABCFamily, and they're stuck in too deep pandering to a specific demographic.

Until now, a theatrical was out of the question. Studios wouldn't want something that wasn't... well, third and fourth party CGI cartoons or scraping the bottom of the barrel super hero movies (that only appeal to people who say how terrible they are, either instantly or in hindsight)... yet they'd take a chance on making D and F grade CGI talking animals in a human world films they THINK kids love. most of them done by the guy who ruined MFS, actually.

So what do we have left... TV specials and DTV's. Now, Oz, I still feel ruined the franchise and it was the Batman and Robin of the films... the sad part is, Disney didn't make that one, but felt it was getting off on the wrong foot. The last special we had was 3 years later, LTS... that was alright but it really wasn't enough. The virals and comics basically held the franchise together until production of the movie.

That said... WB has been killing itself because they feel they needed to rebrand the Looney Tunes after BIA, and they kept screwing things up.

Yeah, It does show just why MFS sunk the Muppets cinematic future from a bean-counter perspective, but the rest/the bulk of the films held firm and performed impressively in some cases. It wasn't fair of the NYTimes to paint the entire Muppet enterprise with one brush when only one out of 6 films disappointed at the Box Office. Even so, MFS made bank on home video.

 

[Drtooth]

Yeah, It does show just why MFS sunk the Muppets cinematic future from a bean-counter perspective, but the rest/the bulk of the films held firm and performed impressively in some cases. It wasn't fair of the NYTimes to paint the entire Muppet enterprise with one brush when only one out of 6 films disappointed at the Box Office. Even so, MFS made bank on home video.

As it should, MFS screams Direct to video quality all over. And it does indeed play better that way. Especially the commentary of the DVD.

But really, the NYTimes article was written by someone who's the product of the it has to be in your face 24/7 to matter camp.

 

[ZeppoAndFriends]

As it should, MFS screams Direct to video quality all over. And it does indeed play better that way. Especially the commentary of the DVD.

I've been trying to find a DVD copy for just that reason.

I didn't really think the movie was anything really impressive, but it does arguably have the most fearsome Muppet villain of all time.

 

[minor muppetz]

Any picture, taking in account that it's not some big budget sci-fi adventure, that makes over $50 million at the domestic box office is still considered a hit. That's what causes MFS to be the only "flop" in this little model, but rest made enough bank and we're not even talking overseas or the lucrative home video market.

Are you talking about in today's ticket prices? Because I was looking at the profits you mentioned and The Muppet Movie is the only one that made more than 50 million dollars at the box office.