<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Movies That Found Early Success</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086</link>
	<description>Feel Smart Again</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 06:11:15 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Schneh</title>
		<link>http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086/comment-page-1#comment-19197</link>
		<dc:creator>Schneh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2007 02:54:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086#comment-19197</guid>
		<description>Er... That&#039;s odd.  Pirates: Dead Man&#039;s Chest is both 2 and 19 on that list.  Maybe it did so well it spilled over into another spot.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Er&#8230; That&#8217;s odd.  Pirates: Dead Man&#8217;s Chest is both 2 and 19 on that list.  Maybe it did so well it spilled over into another spot.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: soops</title>
		<link>http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086/comment-page-1#comment-19097</link>
		<dc:creator>soops</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:38:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086#comment-19097</guid>
		<description>Now forgive me if my calculations are wrong, but in the top 20, the Harry Potter series made around $184,583,652...
Anyone else going to try their hand at well written original in depth children&#039;s books?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now forgive me if my calculations are wrong, but in the top 20, the Harry Potter series made around $184,583,652&#8230;<br />
Anyone else going to try their hand at well written original in depth children&#8217;s books?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amanda</title>
		<link>http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086/comment-page-1#comment-19078</link>
		<dc:creator>Amanda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2007 20:41:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086#comment-19078</guid>
		<description>Melissa, of course kids drive the movie market.  They drive most commercial aspects of popular culture.  Ever hear of Harry Potter?  Top 40 radio?  MTV?  

However, I&#039;m not sure why you think the number of family pictures on the list is odd, nor would I consider most of the films on the list &quot;family.&quot;  Certainly, children might enjoy the Star Wars or Pirates of the Carribean films, but that hardly makes them &quot;family films.&quot;  They are simply films with mass appeal.  Mass appeal = massive ticket sales = inclusion on this list.  &quot;Edgy&quot; films make some people uncomfortable.  &quot;Mature&quot; films exclude a large portion of potential moviegoers, including people who don&#039;t want to take their families to see them, as well as those who prefer their entertainment to be more light-hearted.  Or as Homer would say (this is a post about the Simpsons), &quot;Less artsy, more fartsy.&quot;     

As for movie ratings, the factors that drive movies into &quot;R&quot; ratings tend to be things like sex, violence, and language. While I understand that films which carry the &quot;R&quot; rating are intended for more mature (read &quot;older&quot;) audiences, I fail to see how an increase in the level of violence, sexuality or foul language in a movie is a hallmark of intelligence in its audience.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Melissa, of course kids drive the movie market.  They drive most commercial aspects of popular culture.  Ever hear of Harry Potter?  Top 40 radio?  MTV?  </p>
<p>However, I&#8217;m not sure why you think the number of family pictures on the list is odd, nor would I consider most of the films on the list &#8220;family.&#8221;  Certainly, children might enjoy the Star Wars or Pirates of the Carribean films, but that hardly makes them &#8220;family films.&#8221;  They are simply films with mass appeal.  Mass appeal = massive ticket sales = inclusion on this list.  &#8220;Edgy&#8221; films make some people uncomfortable.  &#8220;Mature&#8221; films exclude a large portion of potential moviegoers, including people who don&#8217;t want to take their families to see them, as well as those who prefer their entertainment to be more light-hearted.  Or as Homer would say (this is a post about the Simpsons), &#8220;Less artsy, more fartsy.&#8221;     </p>
<p>As for movie ratings, the factors that drive movies into &#8220;R&#8221; ratings tend to be things like sex, violence, and language. While I understand that films which carry the &#8220;R&#8221; rating are intended for more mature (read &#8220;older&#8221;) audiences, I fail to see how an increase in the level of violence, sexuality or foul language in a movie is a hallmark of intelligence in its audience.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jen</title>
		<link>http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086/comment-page-1#comment-19074</link>
		<dc:creator>Jen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:55:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086#comment-19074</guid>
		<description>It would be interesting to see a more comparative list. Say, take the top grossing movies for each year over the last 20 or 30 years, then divide the amount by the average ticket price of the time to get an approximate number of movie-goers for each film to get a decent idea of which movies throughout time have REALLY been the most watched movies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It would be interesting to see a more comparative list. Say, take the top grossing movies for each year over the last 20 or 30 years, then divide the amount by the average ticket price of the time to get an approximate number of movie-goers for each film to get a decent idea of which movies throughout time have REALLY been the most watched movies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Melissa</title>
		<link>http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086/comment-page-1#comment-19065</link>
		<dc:creator>Melissa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2007 18:14:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086#comment-19065</guid>
		<description>What I think is odd is how many of those are family pictures.  I wouldn&#039;t have predicted the almost total absence of anything more edgy or mature than a PG 13.  Are kids driving the movie market?  Or is our country that dumbed down?  Very strange.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What I think is odd is how many of those are family pictures.  I wouldn&#8217;t have predicted the almost total absence of anything more edgy or mature than a PG 13.  Are kids driving the movie market?  Or is our country that dumbed down?  Very strange.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stew</title>
		<link>http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086/comment-page-1#comment-19062</link>
		<dc:creator>Stew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:54:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086#comment-19062</guid>
		<description>Not only were there no multiplexes, films were released in a limited number of theaters.  Today big films are released in thousands of theaters simultaneously.  That never happened in the past.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not only were there no multiplexes, films were released in a limited number of theaters.  Today big films are released in thousands of theaters simultaneously.  That never happened in the past.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Miss Cellania</title>
		<link>http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086/comment-page-1#comment-19049</link>
		<dc:creator>Miss Cellania</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:46:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086#comment-19049</guid>
		<description>Even if this were adjusted for inflation, the opening weekend stats would be full of movies from the last few years. The multiplex is a fairly recent innovation, especially in small towns. Twenty years ago, it took months for a first-run movie to be seen everywhere.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Even if this were adjusted for inflation, the opening weekend stats would be full of movies from the last few years. The multiplex is a fairly recent innovation, especially in small towns. Twenty years ago, it took months for a first-run movie to be seen everywhere.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rachel</title>
		<link>http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086/comment-page-1#comment-19041</link>
		<dc:creator>Rachel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:33:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086#comment-19041</guid>
		<description>I find these kinds of lists ridiculous.  OF COURSE movies are breaking records every third day - tickets cost about ten bucks where I live.  I saw Return of the Jedi in the theatre when it came out and I think tickets were about $1.75 or something.  Plus, the movie theatre had the Journey arcade game, so BONUS!

Box office receipt records are utterly meaningless.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I find these kinds of lists ridiculous.  OF COURSE movies are breaking records every third day &#8211; tickets cost about ten bucks where I live.  I saw Return of the Jedi in the theatre when it came out and I think tickets were about $1.75 or something.  Plus, the movie theatre had the Journey arcade game, so BONUS!</p>
<p>Box office receipt records are utterly meaningless.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jenni</title>
		<link>http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086/comment-page-1#comment-19040</link>
		<dc:creator>jenni</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:29:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086#comment-19040</guid>
		<description>i wish they would adjust these things for inflation. i just find it a bit ridiculous that this list is entirely comprised of movies that came out in the last two or threee years. i&#039;d rather see a list that attempted to calculate how many people saw it, not how much they paid.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i wish they would adjust these things for inflation. i just find it a bit ridiculous that this list is entirely comprised of movies that came out in the last two or threee years. i&#8217;d rather see a list that attempted to calculate how many people saw it, not how much they paid.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rich</title>
		<link>http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086/comment-page-1#comment-19038</link>
		<dc:creator>Rich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:06:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/7086#comment-19038</guid>
		<description>That book&#039;ll have to be rewritten after &quot;Underdog&quot; comes out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That book&#8217;ll have to be rewritten after &#8220;Underdog&#8221; comes out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
