BOX OFFICE: THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY Expected To Cross $1B Mark By March

We have an update on the box office gross for Peter Jackson's first Hobbit film, and it looks like An Unexpected Journey will become the 15th movie to surpass the $1 billion by March. Hit the jump for full details.

Follow Paul:
By Paul Romano - 1/21/2013


2012 saw Marvel's The Avengers ($1.5B), The Dark Knight Rises ($1.08B), and Skyfall ($1.03B) all surpassing the $1 billion mark at the worldwide box office. And now it looks like we can add a fourth title to that list: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. Director Peter Jackson's return to Middle-earth has been going strong since its December 14th debut, and has grossed $921 million worldwide so far, with $288.7M domestically and $632.2M internationally. With several more weeks in theaters and a February 22nd debut in China, The Hobbit will likely become the 15th film to ever grosss over $1B. The film is currently the 23rd highest grossing movie of all time, which is obviously great news for Warner Bros. and New Line Cinema. The Hobbit: The Desolation Of Smaug is scheduled to be released December 13th this year, while There And Back Again will hit theaters June 18th, 2014.











Source: Variety
DISCLAIMER: This article was submitted by a volunteer contributor who has agreed to our code of conduct. ComicBookMovie.com is protected from liability under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) and "safe harbor" provisions. CBM will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please contact us for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. You may also learn more about our copyright and trademark policies HERE.
2
LIKE!
45 Comments
1 2
Spideyguy94 - 1/21/2013, 2:54 PM
It should do as well. It was released in 5 different formats in my cinema, 2D, 3D, IMAX 3D, 48 fps and D-Box.
ManOfKrypton - 1/21/2013, 2:55 PM
Suck it Haters! Say what you want, but this monster of a franchise does make the cash... And i for one Loved The Hobbit!!!
Jollem - 1/21/2013, 3:07 PM
haha! take that, jordanites. tolkienites are winning!
CaptainObvious - 1/21/2013, 3:15 PM
Are these "ites" part of some other language?
ToTheManInTheColdSweat - 1/21/2013, 3:20 PM
cameronjacksonwhedonnolanite4life

Jollem - 1/21/2013, 3:21 PM
#sarcasm
DumbledoreCalrissian - 1/21/2013, 3:29 PM
this really made a billion dollars

SauronsBANE - 1/21/2013, 3:29 PM
Mostly agree with LEVITIKUZ. The Hobbit was incredibly underwhelming and, coming from a big fan of the LOTR movies and books, disappointing as well. Looking past the 48 fps complaints, the pacing problems, and the run time, it was kind of a mess. With Radagast, the entire Azog storyline, and the awful cheesy and cliche' parts, the only reason it's doing so well is because of the still strong LOTR following. This movie is nowhere near the same league as that trilogy. Martin Freeman's great performance saved it, along with the Riddles in the Dark scene. Hopefully the next two movies redeem it and do a much better job of telling Bilbo's story.
thewonderer - 1/21/2013, 3:34 PM
I loved this movie on the first watch and didn't understand what everybody was whining about.

Then, I sat down to watch it a second time the next week and oh god oh god why.

The movie is okay, I ultimately do like, but man does it drag. You notice these things after knowing what to expect.

I didn't mind the Azog storyline or Radagast, but all the time spent in the shire, all the time spent in Rivendall, agh it was too much on second watch.
thewonderer - 1/21/2013, 3:35 PM
Django deserves a billion though!
damntree - 1/21/2013, 3:37 PM
Also a big fan and totally disagree with you. Then I noticed the guy you agreed with said Ted was better. Funniest shit I read all day. Trolls don't even try anymore.
RichardHedski - 1/21/2013, 3:48 PM
This movie was alright but nothing special. Never was much of a LOTR guy. Peter Jackson's a good director but they should have had someone like George Lucas or Ridley Scott do it. They know prequels.
Tainted87 - 1/21/2013, 4:02 PM
Yeah, it's a legendary book - I mean most kids read it in school during elementary school. This is very expected, regardless of quality.

Les Miserables should be jumping lightyears past the Hobbit though - if it weren't for Russell Crowe.
LordHuck - 1/21/2013, 4:13 PM
OhThePurdue

So you're just another caricature. Why do we have so many people who feel the need to craft a persona just for this site.
RichardHedski - 1/21/2013, 4:31 PM
Caricature? How am I so? Maybe these are just my opinions. Maybe I would prefer someone other than Jackson to do Hobbit, OK?
HavocPrime - 1/21/2013, 4:37 PM
I loved this movie, can't wait to see more
marvel72 - 1/21/2013, 4:40 PM
most underrated movie of 2012,miles better than the 65% rotten tomatoes score.
SWAGGATRON - 1/21/2013, 4:40 PM
Fantastic, can't wait for parts 2 and 3.
SauronsBANE - 1/21/2013, 4:46 PM
@ckal I completely agree. There's also no reason why Radagast (and Azog, for that matter) should have been in the movie in the 1st place. Completely pointless, and don't even start with his idiotic bunny sled. WAY too many action scenes that were there just for the sake of action. Fair to say that my expectations are a lot lower for the next two movies.
Facade - 1/21/2013, 4:52 PM
@LEVITIKUZ...here's another "ite" for you: hypocrite. In one post you hate on the movie and in the next you "dream" of a site where marvelites and nolanites get along. You are part of your own problem!
StephenStrange - 1/21/2013, 5:19 PM
I saw it again today. Epic.
DrDoom - 1/21/2013, 5:39 PM
Watch out! Levitikuz is calling opinions 'facts' again.
Super12 - 1/21/2013, 6:27 PM
What are you people smoking? Really? Peter Jackson is a hack? Ok. So let's look at these complaints. 1) Azog. For those that haven't read the appendices, they nailed this part of the backstory of the dwarves(with a small exception). Seeing Thorin's backstory is crucial to the success of the other films. If its just about Bilbo the Battle of Five Armies is almost meaningless. Now the addition of Azog to the main story was put in to add some drama in an otherwise less dramatic half of the book. Understandable. I think it was a bit much, but from a pacing point of view it is necessary. Also builds up for a big showdown at the BOFA.

2) Radagast. A little overdone, agreed. But in the books he's rarely mentioned, and of that he's regarded as a bit of a cook. So they're not far off. PJ made him a lot more kid friendly and a comic relief, adding to the overall lighter tone of this one.

3) someone said too much unnecessary action? Sorry but had they not you'd be saying it was too slow and boring.

Basically, of course they made some changes, we knew that was going to happen. If you're a fan at all of the books you'll appreciate it all regardless of some minor inconsistencies. I didn't like the stone giant scene, it felt forced for 3D purposes only. But I didn't let it ruin the movie. Ok, sorry I'm ranting. I'll go back to watching South Park.

But crap movies don't make 1 billion...
Ranger14 - 1/21/2013, 6:40 PM
Anyone who passes off statistics as being fact needs to take a statistics course, especially when those statistics are based on critics' opinions. 256 critics out of millions of viewers? ;-)

Most of the negative reviews by the critics I read were based on the FPS rate, which I had no challenge with and actually thought added to the film. To rate the film low based mainly on that is kind of a joke. My opinion, not necessarily a fact, just like their opinion, but not necessarily a fact. 84% of the public liked it better than a number of the films you posted.
SauronsBANE - 1/21/2013, 6:50 PM
@Super 12 Nobody said Jackson was a hack, but he's not a genius filmmaker by any means either. Take a look at his resume', all he was known for before LOTR were awful, B-movie horror flicks. Ya, he struck gold with LOTR (and even then, there's a lottt of problems with them. Still good movies though), but you can see so many of his deficiencies in The Hobbit.

For one thing, they didn't nail anything with Azog. In the book, Azog's dead already. And it doesn't even happen in the same battle that we're shown in the movie. It was a completely different battle that Thorin became known as "Oakenshield" and Azog was killed. Completely unnecessary, forced drama just to spice things up when it didn't need to be. Come on, the whole 'revenge' storyline was contrived and cliche'.

Radagast was just ridiculous. From reading the books, I'm pretty sure Tolkien never envisioned a wizard with bird crap on him, driven around in a bunny sled, healing hedgehogs and fending off spiders somehow. Jackson didn't need to add to the overall lighter tone, if he stuck with what happened in the book, that would've shown through anyway.

And by unnecessary action, you mentioned one great example yourself: the stone giant scene. How about the characters constantly chased by Azog and having Radagast save the day in the most ridiculous way possible (not to mention it looked like absolute garbage CGI)? And of course, the completely contrived "epic fight" at the end. "I know my friends are hanging on for dear life on the tree that's about to fall over the cliff, but hey let me go kill my mortal enemy for kicks!" Even though if he actually put up any fight at all and killed him, he still has a bunch of orcs and wargs to deal with. Yep, great character development right there.

Again, had Jackson stayed true to the book, it wouldn't have been slow or boring even without any of that extra crap.

Bottom line, anyone who loved the LOTR movies and the books shouldn't really have a lot of good things to say about this movie. And as LEVITIKUZ correctly pointed out, ya there's many crap movies that get to 1 billion
ToTheManInTheColdSweat - 1/21/2013, 7:10 PM
on opening night i checked rt & imdb for the reviews and ratings, saw it was 66%, told myself the critics don't know shit. 3 hours later i walked out [frick]ing angry as a goddamn storm brewed on the horizon, it was like the weather knew how pissed i was. and don't get me started on the greatest cock tease known to man AKA smaug opening his eye.

Jackson [frick]ed up by hyping up hobbit as a lotr equivalent, it's not, it's a [frick]ing childrens book but my blind fanboy loyalty told me jackson would do the impossible and make the hobbit as "serious" as lotr. he failed.

Don't get me wrong it's a good [frick]ing movie, i give it a "C+" or "B" when i am really drunk, but as a lotr successor, it [frick]ing disappointed, as a hobbit adaptation, it simply [frick]ing hurt. Desolation of Smaug had better be [frick]ing good.
DrDoom - 1/21/2013, 7:25 PM
Numbers on rottentomatoes.com don't say whether a movie is good or bad. They simply say how many people like it. The movie being good or bad is still subjective to each person, Levitikuz.
Jollem - 1/21/2013, 8:40 PM
the hobbit was good
Boekelaar - 1/21/2013, 9:45 PM
This site has been infected with whingy morons, someone actually said that Two Towers is the worst LOTR. What has this site come to?
damntree - 1/21/2013, 10:04 PM
@Levi - Numbers don't lie? So, your little rotten tomatoes percentages matter but the money it makes doesn't? Those are numbers too. At least be consistent in your idiocy.

Ceejay - 1/22/2013, 12:06 AM
@SotoJuiceMan - need to get your facts straight. The clip with Thanos in the Avengers was midway through the end credits. The "tease" as you call it with Smaug actually was the last scene of the movie before the end credits began.

Peter Jackson didn't say he didn't want to do the Hobbit, he just couldn't devote all the time to it as he was planning to develop Naiomi Noviks "Temeraire" which he aquired the rights to back in 2006. He signed on as Producer and trusted G.Tel Toro to do the directors duties till MGM went bankrupt and G.Del Toro had to move on to his other scheduled commitments. The time it took to save MGM meant that Peter decided to push back his plans and do it himself as Del Toro was his only choice to take the reigns of the Hobbit.

The reason Halo wasn't made is due to it needing to find a distributor, films don't get made out of Directors own pockets for crying out loud. They get made by Studio's who in most cases pay for distribution. The Hobbit was a joint venture with W.B and MGM who held the production rights. Halo will also be a joint venture with Microsoft, Dreamworks and whoever they make a deal with to deliver distribution.

As for the Hobbit being made into three movies, well anyone who has read all that Tolkien wrote surrounding the Hobbit doesn't need convincing that the movie needs three films. For the rest of you like yourself however well you need to understand he's not just adapting a book, he's adapting a time-line. The Hobbit as a book is written from one persons perspective of events, Bilbo's! It's written as a childrens book and although it has lots of events, it has lots of inexplicable disappearances by Gandalf and very light on dramatization. When Tolkien decided he wanted to make it more serious the publishers wouldn't let him so he rewrote sections of it to fall into line with Lord of the Rings which he originally started as a rewrite of the Hobbit and then took shape as The Hobbit part 2 before finally becoming the three books we know now. He had so much more he couldn't fit into the narrative of LOTR that he put some in the appendixes of Return of the King but he died before he could finish dramatising The Silmarillion and fitting the rest in there too. His so Christopher released most of his works in The silmarillon and Unfinished Tales, both of which most people never bothered to read. Jackson did!

So to those who think the Hobbit is just a single book being beefed up to three movies simply for a basic cash-cow, there's never going to be a way of making them understand that Tolkien wanted more for that little kids book and that's why he wrote more for the events surrounding it in Middle Earth hence Jackson's desire to take the one chance he'll ever get in his life to deliver as much of that narrative on screen to fit in with the greater vision of the Middle Earth movies he's delivered so far.

So let's face it, The Hobbit disappointed YOU, not US, $920 million and rising is not a disappointment! I've seen it 5 times and going again a.s.a.p.
Ranger14 - 1/22/2013, 12:57 AM
I wasn't disappointed in the film, so if some of you were, that is your opinion. I am very glad they are doing three films because they are tackling a major battle in each, which is enough to me to warrant making it into three films. Different strokes.
AnungUnRama - 1/22/2013, 3:33 AM
I really would be pleased if The Hobbit made a billion +, I was expecting that from the beginning. But the BO revenues are slowing down (normal after 7 weeks in cinema); it made 30 million overseas last week meaning it would take another 3 weeks at least to get the billion. Well, yes the article already states that the billion is supposed to be hit by March which still is 5 weeks to go, but as I already said the BO revenues are slowing down. Maybe it might even be taken out of cinemas in some territories very soon. I know it on the other hands opens in China today, but as China seems to be a huge market with its 1.3 billion inhabitants there aren't that much cinemas as in the US or most of Europe and some 100 million Chinese cannot afford going to the movies, so I think the billion will be tough to hit. But I really hope The Hobbit gets its billion. Imo it deserves it. I remember some saying it would be doing well after the opening week. And now it has already surpassed Fellowship of the Ring's 869.3 million some weeks ago and is only 2.4 million behind The Two Towers ($923.3) which The Hobbit should surpass by Thursday. And the additional 20 million The Hobbit needs to bank to let PJ's Tolkien-franchise (calculated in average per movie) remain the most successful movie franchise ahead of the Harry Potter series (average of 963.3 per each of its eight films) will most likely be banked by the end of this week. So the movie will have performed great even if it didn't hit the billion.
Facade - 1/22/2013, 5:49 AM
@Levitkuz...because you (and a minority of RT critics) didn't like Hobbit doesn't make your statement a"fact." So not only are you a hypocrite, but you're also not as funny as you think you are...and that's a fact!
Nomis1800 - 1/22/2013, 7:28 AM
Oh my precious!
DrDoom - 1/22/2013, 9:03 AM
@Levitikuz

So now, not only are you discounting numbers (which was he whole crux of your broken argument in the first place), but you're still calling opinions facts.

This is hilarious.
Facade - 1/22/2013, 10:36 AM
@levitikuz...fact: you're a nutter. Find another hobby (other than CBM). Meet a girl. Learn to enjoy life!
Spideyguy94 - 1/22/2013, 12:26 PM
@Sotojuiceman are you going to rant for 5 pages, repeating yourself over and over again in the process again? We get it you don't like the movie, you only need to tell me once. And if you plan on insulting me come up with something original other than "get a girlfriend" or "get out out if your morher's basement", because I hate to break it to you but I have a girlfriend, and I live with her not my mother.
Facade - 1/22/2013, 1:27 PM
@SotoJuiceMan...I agree, but my wife probably wouldn't ;D
Facade - 1/22/2013, 1:52 PM
@SotoJuiceMan...had no idea he was 17, but that certainly explains A LOT! And by picking on him, do you mean calling him out for being a hypocrite?! Seriously?!

Are you over 18? Is it safe to assume I can pick on you without being called out for being childish? LOL. My wife knows I'm childish simply for frequenting CBM...you?!

1 2

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.