>>78984557Die Hard would cap out today under $300m; going by ticket price inflation it would do about the same as by general inflation. It also cost fuck all to make by modern standards, which is partly because audiences demand higher-definition imagery and this pushes up costs all over.
Terminator looks like shit today; it was made on what was a very low budget even then and was a surprise hit. Most hit R-rated movies are a surprise; the vast majority (we're talking dozens to one) are lossmakers that sink without trace. Theater chains won't even keep them in a screen because they make so little. Terminator's "big gross" was only considered a hit because it cost so little to make originally. It would make something like $175m to $186 today depending on whether you went straight inflation or ticket price inflation.
Predator is a similar story, falling about halfway between Die Hard and Terminator in both budget and worldwide gross. Lethal Weapon would cost about $30m to make today - and make around $240m back. It was a big hit for Mel Gibson, who was a cult figure but didn't have wide appeal at that time. The key difference with Gibson and Reynolds of course being that Reynolds doesn't even have a cult following - he's just a pretty boy who inexplicably gets lead roles even after failing again and again.
Rambo wasn't a movie until 2008... First Blood outperformed it significantly in real-terms, but that came during the ascendancy of Stallone's career, when he was already a big star with a successful franchise behind him (Rocky).
The reason those franchises became franchises isn't that they were R-rated - it's that they had a lucky break. There were plenty of R-rated movies that sank without trace from the same era, just as there are today - because people don't go see R-rated in anything like the same numbers.
tl;dr Rob's an idiot
