![](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffirebasestorage.googleapis.com%2Fv0%2Fb%2Fmantic-markets.appspot.com%2Fo%2Fdream%252FFY_QDeIs88.png%3Falt%3Dmedia%26token%3D268d68bc-9ef5-4144-abaf-2cd0ede5e203&w=3840&q=75)
🏅 Top traders
# | Name | Total profit |
---|---|---|
1 | Ṁ252 | |
2 | Ṁ221 | |
3 | Ṁ177 | |
4 | Ṁ151 | |
5 | Ṁ139 |
@JonathanRay so went short this and long the other out of my own personal incredulity that the pre-release probability distribution for box office receipts could be so narrow
@JonathanRay $200M is hardly "narrow;" many mid-budget movies would be lucky to even make that much for their whole box-office.
There are a lot of film releases every year, so it's not hard to find ones in a similar reference class. International blockbusters that pull ~$1B are almost always family-friendly animated films or PG13 action comedies linked to a major franchise. The only R-rated movie to gross more than $800M is Joker.
Oppenheimer is rated R, not a comedy, probably not very action-packed aside from the Trinity test, and focuses on a specific segment of American/WWII/science history that won't appeal to everyone. (Will many Japanese, for example, turn out to watch a film about the Manhattan project? We'll see!)
My current reference point for Oppenheimer is Dunkirk - also Nolan, also WWII, also a July release. If anything, Dunkirk should have better "financials," because it had more action and a more accessible rating. It grossed $527M.