'Pirates' Outsells 'Matrix' in High-Def Showdown

An anonymous reader writes "As Slashdot recently reported, last week saw the latest showdown between HD DVD and Blu-ray, with both formats bringing out the big guns in terms of high profile format-exclusive disc releases. In one corner were the Blu-ray exclusive releases of the first two 'Pirates of the Caribbean' films on Blu-ray — in the other, the HD DVD exclusive releases of 'The Matrix' Trilogy. So who won the sales battle? According to preliminary estimates, this one goes to 'Pirates' in a big way. The two 'Pirates' flicks sold an estimated 47,000 units, while the 'Matrix' sets sold just about 13,900 units. Is this an indication of movie quality, or another notch in the belt for the Blu-ray format?"

uggghhh

[Anonymous Coward]

Please raise your hand if you give a shit about this.

Re:uggghhh

[Anonymous Coward]

_o/
shit! it's not http://www.piratesxxx.com/ [piratesxxx.com] ... never mind.

Re:

[slashthedot]

Though a bit premature, it's an indication Blu-ray format is going to win over HD-DVD.

Re:uggghhh

[DAtkins]

How is this really an indicator? A new movie sells more copies than an old movie that people probably already have a copy of. I don't see how this really means anything?

Re:

[Fred_A]

I'll wait until the 6 star wars movies (which lots of people already have on VHS, laser disk *and* DVD) come out in either format to form an opinion.

Re:

[livewire98801]

Perhaps Pirates just appeals to a wider audience than Matrix.

I will be moved when ONE title is released to BOTH formats on the same day. A big title, perhaps we'll see that soon.

Re:

[The Warlock]

I do believe that Pirates (XXX) is an HD-DVD exclusive.

Re:

[swerk]

*leaves hands down* I agree entirely. Yawn.

As long as we're off-topic anyway, I was SURE, absolutely SURE, that we'd get hi-def Star Wars last month. 30th anniversary for cryin' out loud, and all that comes of it is some animated series, a postal service publicity stunt, and a few quick cash-in documentaries. Movies old and new are being shoveled out in HD all the time nowadays and I thought there was no way on Earth that Lucas would pass up the chance to sell us those movies yet again.

I was so sure it

Re:

[dubbreak]

I was excited at first. I thought Pirates [piratesxxx.com] outsold the Matrix.

Wow....

[JargonScott]

In this hand, I hold an apple. In the other, an orange.

Re:Wow....

[Anonymous Coward]

No... in your right hand you hold an apple picked last year, and in your left hand you hold a fresh one. Most people seem to prefer the fresh apple.

So does this reflect poorly on your right hand? Submitter must be on drugs to even suggest such a point.

Re:Wow....

[jimstapleton]

And you are charging $4 for the old apple, $2 for the new.

Re:Wow....

[Forge]

That's it exactly. People tend to buy the movies they love in the best available format (Available means it fits within the budget and the player they own).

They generally do not buy movies they already own in another format. I.e. While DVD was the "hot thing" very few people bought DVD movies they already owned in VHS.

With that in mind. How many Pirates fans haven't gotten around to buying Dead Man's Chest on DVD? Compare with Matrix fans. Hell, I could compile a Star Trek Univers (tm) boxed set in ANY format containing all the series, Movies and documentaries. I could then toss in a player and sell the whole package for $2000. Dosn't matter weather I pick Blue Ray or HD-DVD. It would outsell any other $2000 TV bundle.

Darn. I should go back to school and study marketing, so I can know why this won't work.

Re:

[aichpvee]

The Pirates movies are also considerably better than the Matrix. Even if they weren't they have a wider audience to begin with. Now sure how it's news, but does give me another chance to reiterate how lame the Matrix movies are so that's always worth something.

Re:

[LokiSnake]

There is also the fact that Matrix is a decently "old" movie, and people that would've bought the trilogy has already purchased it in DVD format. Pirates is relatively recent, and perhaps a larger portion of its fan base has yet to buy the movie. I guess what I'm getting at here is that for most people, having the Matrix trilogy on HD DVD doesn't offer enough over normal DVD for people to repurchase it, and people that are paying for the Pirates movies wouldn't mind shelling out a little more for the bett

Re:

[aichpvee]

There's always that, but I think the quality issue (only the first Matrix movie is any good) and the wider audience (Pirates clearly has broader appeal) have a lot more to do with it.

Re:Wow....

[Cerberus7]

No kidding. The Matrix set costs around $60-$70, while each Pirates movie is $20-$25. NO SHIT Pirates sold more units. Somebody needs to go back to economics class. The price difference alone, regardless of any other factor, is enough to make the Pirates releases more successful in terms of units sold.

Re:

[badasscat]

The price difference alone, regardless of any other factor, is enough to make the Pirates releases more successful in terms of units sold.

Two more factors:

* More owners of Blu-Ray machines
* The Matrix set is also a Blu-Ray release (later in the year)

Given its non-exclusivity, there's no reason for anyone who doesn't already own HD-DVD to jump in just for The Matrix, even assuming there are such rabid fans out there. Blu-Ray owners will wait for the Blu-Ray edition, owners of neither format are not going to

Re:Wow....

[Ngarrang]

No kidding. The Matrix set costs around $60-$70, while each Pirates movie is $20-$25. NO SHIT Pirates sold more units. Somebody needs to go back to economics class. The price difference alone, regardless of any other factor, is enough to make the Pirates releases more successful in terms of units sold.

With those estimated prices (going with the low estimate), Pirates made about to $958,000, the Matrix 834,000. Going with the high estimate, Pirates made $1,175,000 to the Matrix making $973,000. That isn't much of a difference. The Matrix probably made a higher margin, as well. As a disc seller, I think I would prefer a higher margin.

Lower Price + Movie In Theaters = More Sales

[Aqua OS X]

Lower Price + Movie In Theaters = More Sales

Duh.
Why is this even "news?"

Re:

[aliquis]

Also Pirates is funny, adventorus, exciting, works for the whole family, and Jack is HOT!

Where only the first Matrix movie is good and that's sort of fucking old and noone would buy it again.

So yes, of course Pirates sells more, whatever format, since it's a much better movie.

Thought I still hope bluray wins just to piss Microsofts evil strategy of and also because there are plenty of bluray burners already.

Re:

[zoogies]

Yep, it's really not fair to compare the sales of two products on different platforms (HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray) and expect it to be a reflection of the platforms themselves. At least on the consumer side, if you have the capability to play either, does it really matter? I really don't know - or care that much - about the specific differences between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, or which one "wins", for that matter. On the consumer end, much more important factors are price, and what the movie *is.*

Also, Pirates '3' is out

Re:Wow....

[eln]

Ideally, you would have the same movie at the same price on both formats if you wanted to do a direct compare. Hell, if you wanted demographic data you could do that with several movies that each appeal to a different demographic. But, since exclusivity is the name of the game these days, that's not likely to happen for a while.

Re:

[Red Flayer]

Not only is exclusivity the name of the game, it is in the interest of both parties to be able to 'massage' the data as they see fit.

Blu-ray: We sold more units!!1
HD-DVD: Our sales volume was higher!!1

While both are factually true, the other important issue is installed base; I would think if sales per playback unit of media are higher for one format than the other, it would make sense for content producers to shift to that unit (once data has been normalized for demographic, of course). This works in

Re:

[sverrehu]

Rated "funny", but should have been "insightful".

Clearly...

[DohnJoe]

Clearly these evil pirates must be stopped.

Rather...

[Opportunist]

..in this hand I hold arsenic, in the other one strychnine. Pick your poison.

Re:

[IchBinEinPenguin]

In this hand, I hold an apple. In the other, an orange.

But dude, it's an exclusive special edition orange!!

Or... neither

[mikej]

Perhaps it's because there's an episode of the Pirates franchise in theaters now and we're being bombarded with its associated marketing campaigns, while nobody's thought much about The Matrix in the past few years.

Re:

[bilbravo]

If this were the other way around, HD DVD proponents would be shouting the superiority of "The Matrix" trilogy and talking about "Pirates" as child's play. You may have a point, but MY point is that either way, BluRay wins in this situation. They sold more.

Re:

[hendersj]

Except that the Matrix trilogy wouldn't have won out that way. I loved the first film, but #2 and #3 just didn't live up to the expectations set at the end of the first one. The effects were still mind-blowing, but the story just didn't carry the promise that the first one did.

When at the end of the first film Neo said:

"Now, I'm going to hang up this phone, and I'm going to show these people what you don't want them to see. I'm going to show them a world without you...a world without rules and controls, w

Re:

[milamber3]

I'm sorry, but did you see the second Pirates movie? It was the worst piece of filler/advertisement trash I have ever had the displeasure of viewing. I would rather watch the second and third matrix movies over and over than have to see that again and I didn't really like them much at all. With that in mind I don't think a difference in quality of the films is a big factor in HD sales. Most likely, pirates is selling more because it's more recent, people haven't watched it over and over on HBO and TNT, a

Re:

[hendersj]

Yep, I saw the second and third. The thing about the Pirates franchise is that it's entirely Disney advertising - it's based on a theme park ride, for cryin' out loud. There's not really a promise of anything in those movies except pirates, fighting, and explosions. Oh, and maybe a story thread here and there.

But Matrix set an expectation about there being a coherent story line, and in Matrix 2 and 3 they failed to meet that expectation. Like someone else here said, Pirates is something a 4-year-old mig

Re:

[Fred_A]

The thing about the Pirates franchise is that it's entirely Disney advertising - it's based on a theme park ride, for cryin' out loud. There's not really a promise of anything in those movies except pirates, fighting, and explosions. Oh, and maybe a story thread here and there.

Since I've never, nor do I ever intend to set foot in a Disney theme park, I've no idea whet the ride is like. However I did notice there really weren't any pirates to speak of in the movies. Nobody attacked any passing innocent sh

Re:

[thesolo]

Yes, Blu-ray sold more, but you can't just arbitrarily pick two movies and choose a winner based on them, especially when the movies are priced wildly apart from each other, and appeal to two completely different demographics.

I'm not a proponent of either setup, I don't have a single Blu-ray or HD-DVD disc. I just think the comparison here is flat-out stupid. Next thing you know, we'll have a Slashdot story about Casino Royale Blu-ray release outselling the HD-DVD version of Bruce Almighty.

Re:

[XxtraLarGe]

Next thing you know, we'll have a Slashdot story about Casino Royale Blu-ray release outselling the HD-DVD version of Bruce Almighty.

Would it make you feel better if there was a Slashdot story about Bruce Almighty HD-DVD outselling Casino Royale Blu-ray? 'Cause if it would, I could submit it! ;-D

Re:

[dAzED1]

how about the fact that consumers don't really care about the format war? The war, really, is fought on the front of "who can get the better releases." If blueray is successful in getting better releases, and the reason they have more sales is because their releases are better, then that is still a win for them.

Feature-to-feature, the two formats are so close that 95% of the population won't even know that there is a difference. The other 5% really shouldn't care either, but they've got reputations to ma

Re:

[CommunistHamster]

Nonsense! The Edsel Citation had 29% more chrome trim, and is therefore more winningester.

Re:

[CrackedButter]

That was my thought as well, god it so obvious that posing the question in the blurb was a waste of time. It has nothing to do with formats.

I think

[rolfwind]

that the original Matrix was done in by lackluster sequels. There was blowback, and the sequels were so poor lowered the value of the original because they were all supposed to be tied in together into some humongous puzzle. The fans felt a lot of betrayal for the extended wait for what turned out to be crap.

The original Pirates was much better than the two sequel, each of declining quality. But the sequels were "good enough" not to get fan blowback on the original.

Also, each Matrix felt slightly incompl

Re:

[amRadioHed]

or maybe also because it's a Matrix set which forces you to spend money on the shitty sequels when all you really want is the first movie.

time is the decider

[SethJohnson]

It's been many years since Matrix was released. Hype has long since died over that franchise. Especially with the help of its weak sequels. Pirates has all kinds of current advertising and marketing hype surrounding it. No surprise people bought more of that hi-def title.

Seth

Re:

[Bamafan77]

But I thought President Bush was the Decider. I believe SethJohnson will be getting a call from the Department of Homeland Security soon.

Please...this is silly

[JohnnyComeLately]

A Disney release with broad appeal, versus a niche movie that sucked almost since it started....and you're surprised? My 4 year old wants to watch Pirates, but has 0 interest in Matrix. Does that mean my 4 yr old snubs my HD DVD XBox and wants a PlayStation3? LOL....please

Re:

[JohnnyComeLately]

I agree with you (and the other named poster who replied)...the sequels sucked (which is why I said, "almost," since it started, vice, "Always sucked"). Honestly, if it weren't for the sci-fi appeal and (at the time) cutting edge animation and camera sequencing, I'm wondering if it wouldn't be just another Nicholas Cage movie with little play.

Oh, and no. Only 4 yr old Pirates play Xbox

Re:

[HappyEngineer]

For me, the biggest problem is that they got the ending wrong. (SPOILER) It basically turned into a boring Superman-like fight where it was one-on-one and they just kept coming back for more until Neo just got tired (pretended to be tired?) and let Smith absorb him so that somehow that infected Smith.

I ended up just doing my best to pretend that it really ended the way I wanted it to. I wanted Neo to discover Smith's trick. Instead of a one-on-one, Neo would start absorbing Smiths right and left. The camera

Re:

[camperdave]

Neo would start absorbing Smiths right and left.

That is a much, much better ending. Except I wouldn't have Neo killing himself and the millions of people (after all, they need to be rescued). Now that he's "wedged" in he could launch some sort of denial of service attack against the Architect, leaving the Matrix intact, but under human control, so it could be shut down cleanly. Morpheus, Trinity, and crew would attack the machine city and prevent the machines from re-launching the Architect program, o

Re:

[xero314]

You and the rest of the Matrix haters DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE STORY.

It's not a mater of understanding. I've never even said that the story behind to movie was bad, though I read it many years ago when studying ancient philosophers, it is after all nothing new. What I think sucked was the movie. You take some of the worst actors to every waste time of the big screen and lead the whole thing with Keanue Reeves. Then you over use special effects for no purpose what so ever and make the actions scenes utterly boring. This is what happens when you have a role that you offe

Or not.

[thesolo]

Is this an indication of movie quality, or another notch in the belt for the Blu-ray format

How about neither? If anything, it's an issue of price. Just look at the prices at Best Buy:
Matrix Trilogy HD-DVD: $79.99 [bestbuy.com]
Pirates of the Caribbean: $29.99 [bestbuy.com]

At those prices, even though Pirates of the Caribbean sold many more units, it only brought in a roughly $200K more than the Matrix Trilogy.
This is ridiculous comparison, the movies appeal to different fan bases, and are in completely different formats (trilogy box set versus individual movies sold separately). If this was a comparison of, say, the Matrix Trilogy released on both formats at the same price point, it would far more realistic.

Apples to Oranges

[whereiseljefe]

No, its an indication that the Matrix was just a release of a movie that quite a few people already had (and had a long time to obtain bargain-bin priced copies) where as Pirates were relatively new movies that I haven't seen drop below $14 yet.

Price?

[Spudtrooper]

Pirates movie on Blu-Ray = $24
Matrix set on HD-DVD = $75
Declaring victory based on fuzzy math = Priceless

Price Comparison

[nevek]

Well Both Pirates Movies are priced around 27.99CDN
The Matrix Set is priced at 89.99CDN

I could see myself buying The First Matrix in HD for 27.99, but i'm not up for spending 90$ on 3 movies.

Also if you check the numbers again - they are comparing the sale of 2 movies to 3? - Huh?

Not the Quality of the Movies

[eldavojohn]

Is this an indication of movie quality, or another notch in the belt for the Blu-ray format?

In my opinion, this has nothing to do with movie quality.

It has to do with how recent the movie is. Ever wonder why it costs you $1 to rent the DVD of The Sting [imdb.com] from Blockbuster while War of the Worlds [imdb.com] will cost you $5.89? It's not because War of the Worlds is a different movie, it's just more recent.

Aside from the fact that the original Matrix came out in 1999 & the original Pirates movie came out in 2003, there's also the rating of the movies. All three Matrices were rated R, all three Pirates movies were rated PG-13. That's a big difference. Most parents will buy the Pirates movie and park their 10+ year old kid in front of them and consider it a babysitter.

Never underestimate how much an R rating will detract from your profits. America is full of parents who believe that their children will turn into a foaming nutcase if they catch a glimpse of an adult situation, nudity or violence.

My last point, Pirates is Disney. Never underestimate what the power of the mouse will do to promote a film no matter how crappy it is.

Re:

[Kjella]

All three Matrices were rated R, all three Pirates movies were rated PG-13. That's a big difference. Most parents will buy the Pirates movie and park their 10+ year old kid in front of them and consider it a babysitter.

Never underestimate how much an R rating will detract from your profits. America is full of parents who believe that their children will turn into a foaming nutcase if they catch a glimpse of an adult situation, nudity or violence.

If they're going to park their kids in front of the tv as a ba

Re:

[zenyu]

If they're going to park their kids in front of the tv as a babysitter, I actually prefer them to use PG-13 movies... I'm not exactly sure where you're going with this, but putting on R rated movies with no parental guidance sounds like the worst of both worlds.

Doesn't this sort of depend on why it got an R rating? If it got it because it didn't come from an MPAA member and depicted two teenage girls kissing well then I think it is better than the average PG-13 movie full of violence and boobie obsession. I

Unfair comparison

[just_another_sean]

I'd say it's an unfair comparison. Pirates II is new enough that some residual excitement exists. Matirx is so 90's at this point.
Besides that if your anything like me then Matrix III ruined them all for you, I just thought it sucked. Pirates II was pretty
good but it would suprise me none-at-all if Pirates III sucks too. Something about pushing an idea to far seems to make most III's
suck in general, especially in comparison to the first in a series.

Possible exceptions (IMHO) are LOTR III, which was a natura

Re:

[just_another_sean]

Huh, I didn't even know it was out yet... Well of course it, as a franchise, did so much better in disc sales. A bet a lot of people that bought the discs just went and saw III in the theatre (assuming they don't need plot, character development, logic or suspension of disbelief that is. :-)

Truth of the matter is...

[packetmon]

One night in Paris or some other movie will outsell them both. Sounds funny or trollish but its likely true. Now if they could only make a LC||BSD||SCILF series ... (Linux,BSD,Solaris)

Hand waving magick

[Scrameustache]

"Our only weapon against the machines is the EMP..."

Oh, and guns. Turns out that guns work just as well.
No one wants to buy the third Matrix flick since they ruined the franchise by abandoning the entire premise in the third installment. So I'm not surprised that their box set isn't a top seller.

Maybe if they'd went with their better options [warnerbros.com] instead of insisting that humans expand more energy than they consume they would still be raking in the mind boggling profits they were enjoying when I first read that

Bloody marketing shills

[Eukariote]

Is this an indication of movie quality, or another notch in the belt for the Blu-ray format?"

Neither. This is astroturfing for the Blu-ray format.

The Age Old Battle

[Applekid]

So does this mean that Pirates > Ninjas after all?

Re:The Age Old Battle

[Chris Burke]

The battle rages on. This only shows that Eyeliner Pirates > Trenchcoat Ninjas, which I think we already knew.

Movie quality

[ushering05401]

I love sci-fi. A new sci-fi flick is one of the few things that will get me out to the theaters.

I liked the Matrix movies when they first came out, but they have not aged well. Looking back I see most of the initial success being in the films' visual appeal, not the execution of a well charted, multi-installment story line.

Pirates aspires to less, and therefore its failings are more palatable IMO... even though it lacks the high-minded 'message' content that the Matrix attempted. I own Pirates for those

So nothing 1080p is really selling...

[(H)elix1]

Only 47k units moved? Yikes! From those numbers, neither player appears to be really selling at this point - even combined, the sales are not even close to 'old and busted' DVD media. I've got a 1080p monitor, but went with an upscaling DVD player (Oppo dv-981hd) until the format wars sort themselves out. From my 'customer' perspective, both formats are way over priced at this point and quite a risk. Might go with a dual mode player when they get to the $250 mark, but forget about it for now.

Re:

[Chris Burke]

Only 47k units moved? Yikes! ... Might go with a dual mode player when they get to the $250 mark, but forget about it for now.

I think both formats risk failing, or remaining niche products for many years to come, due to their inability to connect the dots. They know that people don't want to buy two players, but they're trying to ensure their own format succeeds by killing the other. Nobody is killing anybody with those kinds of numbers, even if a real comparison showed one selling 5x better than the

Don't Know About You...

[Nom du Keyboard]

The two 'Pirates' flicks sold an estimated 47,000 units, while the 'Matrix' sets sold just about 13,900 units. Is this an indication of movie quality, or another notch in the belt for the Blu-ray format?"

Don't know about you, but I don't see either of those sales figures setting the world on fire. Not with 1.2 Billion DVD's [usatoday.com] being sold in 2004, and Finding Nemo selling 28 million DVDs alone in 2003.

The sales figures are just an illusion

[Anonymous Coward]

The world where these sales figures came from is just a construct.

The real world is a post-apocolyptic wasteland run by robots, where only VHS cassettes are available.

Dumb comparison

[krelvin]

A better comparison would be the same move released both formats. Then the issue isn't the movie but rather the formats.

All your analysis ignores one undisputable fact ..

[furball]

More Blu-ray discs are sold than HD-DVD discs are sold.

Not selling more than your competitor has never helped anyone.

A better comparison

[figleaf]

Planet Earth is available on HDDVD & Blu-ray. The HDDVD version outsold the Blu-ray version.
Today the HDDVD version is ranked #6 while the Blu-ray version is ranked #20 on Amazon for Disk sales.

Re:

[laffer1]

One title doesn't mean shit. You also have to look at the type of people who actually bought blueray or hd-dvd players. If they bought a game console as a player, there is a big difference in demographic between Sony DRM Rootkit err.. PS3 fans and broken buy a new every 3 months.. i mean xbox360 fans.

I know everyone wants an answer to this format "war" but its not going to be one movie that decides it. Just give up on that logic. Lets see some sales figures for players that are not game consoles. My fa

Duh?

[CriminalNerd]

Given how the Matrix trilogy lost its fanbase after Reloaded, I wouldn't be surprised that Pirates outsold the trilogy. I mean...COME ON...Johnny Depp just stole all the girls.

Come on.

[Pojut]

People didn't buy one movie over the other because it was on a certain format. They bought one movie over another because they enjoy it more.

Box office receipts should have been enough to show you that. Sheesh.

Re:

[amRadioHed]

Box office receipts should have been enough to show you that. Sheesh.

Of course Box office receipts are retarded too. Every summer we have a new movie breaking records at the box office and the studios get so excited about it as if it means anymore more than that they jacked up ticket prices yet again.

And the Doom movie outdid Serenity in theaters

[sycomonkey]

There's no accounting for tastes. Also, people who like to blow their money on HDTVs don't mind that the cheapest bluray player is $600. I guess there is a rumor that this particular model can play video games, but I don't believe it. Meanwhile $300 HDDVD players are nearly here. The only reason bluray has any market share at all is pure consumer stupidity and a distinct disinterest in saving any money whatsoever.

Re:

[petrus4]

Of course it did. Serenity was intelligent. Hence, it's naturally going to be less popular.

Not a fair comparison

[puppetman]

The two 'Pirates' flicks sold an estimated 47,000 units, while the 'Matrix' sets sold just about 13,900 units. Is this an indication of movie quality, or another notch in the belt for the Blu-ray format?"

The Pirates series has a hot new movie that just opened up. The Matrix trilogy finished back in 2003. There is more hype around the 'Pirates' movies, as the latest is in the theater now. More hype means more sales.

People have had more time to acquire the Matrix on DVD, which isn't the case for the Pirates f

Also

[Dancindan84]

Pirates pirate 'Pirates' more than pirates pirate 'Matrix'... discuss.

blame Keannu

[MoFoQ]

don't forget, the second Matrix movie (Matrix Reloaded) has Keannu's well..."bareness".
it's too bad we don't have access to the "birdie" device from MIB to erase that part of our memories.

Ask Dr. Obvious

[Programmer_In_Traini]

That is so stupid.

With the third installment of the pirates of the caribbean that just came out, of course its gonna beat the matrix. Give a fourth movie to the matrix to re-ignite the same fire and you've got a whole new ball game.

can't believe someone out there thought this would even be a fair comparison.

Re:

[DCheesi]

Exactly, it's all about timing. If Pirates I/II had come out on Blu-Ray at another time, the sales figures wouldn't have been as high. As it is, it's a direct tie-in to the new installment.

Unlike the Matrix Trilogy

[dave562]

Pirates has arguably gotten better with subsiquent releases. Or at least, the sequels haven't STRAIGHT SUCKED in comparision to the original.

Re:

[dctoastman]

Yes they have.
The Pirates trilogy has followed the Matrix trilogy formula exactly: Really good stand-alone movie followed by a 2 movie sequel with really shitty scripts and plots.

Dead Man's Chest was just a bunch of jokes and scenes rehashed from Curse of the Black Pearl but with a little more Bruckenheimer thrown in. At World's End, while better than Dead Man's Chest shows Bruckenheimer's influence more strongly with all the random shit that blows up for no good reason.

why not compare movie counts?

[duranaki]

I like those numbers: 47,000 vs 13,900. But thats 47000 * 1 movie (they did say combined) vs 13900 * 3 movies, so its actually 47000 vs. 41700. Worded like that it doesn't sound like much of a 'big win'. Maybe my math is wonky.

Not even 6 digits?

[Ant P.]

Those are some pretty pathetic sales figures for both.

Re:

[Afrosheen]

Considering the market saturation of HD media players, it's actually pretty decent.

B-b-b-but DVD is still outselling both of them

[My name is Bucket]

And we all remember how DVD sold 50 jillion kabillion in its first year.

Bad statistics...

[Cervantes]

Bad statistics == another desperate grab for attention and approval by the blu-ray crowd.

It's nothing more than that. Call me back when you sell blu-ray Pirates vs HDDVD Pirates.
Until then, the stats in this are so bad, even George W. could tell they were useless and misleading.

Astroturfing

[SQLz]

Jeez can they make it anymore obvious?

Matrix not an HD-DVD exclusive

[SuperKendall]

Even though currently you can only get The Matrix on HD-DVD, Warner is a dual-format studio, and later this year we should see The Matrix for Blu-Ray as well - and with any luck, an option to buy individual movies instead of the box set.

The interesting thing to see going forward is how stable sales remain week to week - HD-DVD sales figures have tended to be rather bursty, getting OK sales for a short time then dropping off rapidly.

This aggression will not stand, man....

[otis wildflower]

.... _The Big Lebowski_ is slated to be an HDDVD exclusive.

That just made my mind up for me. /abide

47,000 copies? Yawn. How about 5,000,000?

[ChaosDiscord]

Wow. 47,000 sales. Truly amazing. Clearly Blu-Ray has won.

Of course, Cars sold 5,000,000 DVDs in 2 days [appleinsider.com]. The direct-to-DVD movie American Pie Presents: Band Camp sold over 1,000,000 [hollywoodreporter.com] copies in its initial week. (Sorry I can't find anything newer; studios seem pretty secretive about these numbers.)

Conclusion: If you're looking for a "winner", DVD continues to crush both Blu-Ray and HD DVD without even noticing. The Blu-Ray and HD DVD numbers are minor and insignificant. Nothing useful can be ded

WHOA

[hurfy]

If i am reading things right....

VHS outsells them by at least a factor of 30 !!!

Pirates of the caribbean ONLY:

Video Rentals: $20,780,000
DVD Rentals: $42,730,000
Video Sales (to January, 2004): $24,400,000 --- around a million 1st month or two (dec 2,2003 release i think)
DVD Sales (to January, 2004): $235,300,000

Sorry link was a two-line monster that included referal and browser name :/

I only assumed the second sold half as many as 1st, feel free to look em all up and get hard numbers you math fr

Could be that...

[Altima(BoB)]

It could also be an indication that Keira Knightley [instacritic.com] is way hotter than Carrie Ann Moss... [celebrity-exchange.com]

(by the way, not safe for work if you work for Pat Robertson...)

NO shit?

[kinglink]

How many versions of Matrix has come out so far? We got the Matrix, the super matrix, the trilogy edition, the complete edition, the trilogy HD-DVD, and the complete HD-DVD. (hell it should be required ownership)

Some people don't actually have pirates so there's a higher chance of even getting the DVD. But from what I've seen most people are seeing the facts. DVD is still pretty high resolution (not the same as HD-DVD but higher then what most dvd players are putting out, an upscaling dvd player works per

Re:

[bilbravo]

And what do you think will help win the format war? Selling more movies? Yeah, I thought so too... trash the PS3 all you want, but you just proved a point by doing so. BluRay seems to be selling more here.

Re:

[Evanisincontrol]

This? [photobucket.com]

Re:

[SoCalChris]

No kidding. I'd be willing to bet that quite a few individual WalMarts sell more than 13,900 regular DVDs in a month.

Re:

[king-manic]

If anyone has noticed, Best Buy has begun to scale back their Blu-Ray section. HD-DVD offerings outnumber it significantly now. Not sure if this is any indication on the "format wars", but I am going to guess the whole UMD fiasco is probably making retailers pulling out quicker than normal this time around.

I've been there often int he last few weeks looking for movies. I have not noticed this. Future shop/Best buy have exactly the same shelf space for each.

Re:

[hurfy]

"proud owner of an RCA VHS VCR when all my friends bought Beta ..."

hehe, i just posted below that even VHS sold like 30x more than the HD version for the original Pirates! (DVD was like 300x) All your friends must be on VHS now ;)