Official Wkd Box Office 01•1-3•10 - [obligatory OMGZ!!!! Avatar thread title here]

Status
Not open for further replies.
And Domestic:
rr4jk5.jpg
 
StoOgE said:
Yes, because children's movies making money is the end of the world. The target demo of the chipmunks is not us or critics.

Also, Cameron is god.

There are great kids movies. ET, Goonies, any number of Disney or Pixar films over the years. And then there are films that make your kids suck. You can make a great kids film without hurting the the children watching it.
 
That Mortal Kombat picture outlived its stay in just one thread. Way to kill off a potentially good meme GAF :lol

There are great kids movies. ET, Goonies, any number of Disney or Pixar films over the years. And then there are films that make your kids suck. You can make a great kids film without hurting the the children watching it.

Oh come on, they're just kids. You should be bitching about ADULTS who watch Michael Bay or Vin Diesel movies.
 
jamesinclair said:
Even better than adjusted grosses Id like to see tickets sold.

When an Avatar ticket costs $15 at Imax and $13 at other 3D locations.....no shit its doing so well.
Adjusted numbers = Number of tickets sold. (Its basically the same, they take the number of tickets sold and multiply it with the inflation index)

As for the 3D & IMAX premium, you'll never get the real number of tickets sold for Avatar. :P
 
irfan said:
Adjusted numbers = Number of tickets sold. (Its basically the same, they take the number of tickets sold and multiply it with the inflation index)

I dont think so. I thought it was just original gross times the general inflation.

So if ticket prices have increased faster than inflation has (which they have), thats not recorded.
 
koam said:
I'm pretty sure if Avatar was released as-is in 1939 it would have done better than Gone with the Wind.

But then Avatar's would have had such an impact on the United States that they wouldn't have joined World War II and the Nazi's would have won... Are you saying you wish the Nazi's had won!?
 
jamesinclair said:
I dont think so. I thought it was just original gross times the general inflation.

So if ticket prices have increased faster than inflation has (which they have), thats not recorded.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

Notice the pattern? If you need more help understanding, use the Adjuster on the top right, select 2009 and see ;)

(By inflation index I meant ticket prices which I guess is derived from inflation index, should have worded it better :D )
 
C4Lukins said:
There are great kids movies. ET, Goonies, any number of Disney or Pixar films over the years. And then there are films that make your kids suck. You can make a great kids film without hurting the the children watching it.

Shitty kids movies don't "hurt" kids.

Kids also like goofy fun movies. Not every kids movie has to be amazing and whimsical.

I liked a lot of movies when I was a kidthat I probably couldn't stomach to watch now. Try and go watch the G.I. Joe or Transformer Cartoon movies.. of the original Ninja Turtle live action films. Or Mario Bros movie. They are fucking terrible. I drug my parents to all of them and loved them as a kid.

As was stated, bitch about adults who like to go watch piece of shit movies in droves. Don't bitch because children have bad taste in movies.. they're kids after all.
 
TheQueen'sOwn said:
Just ruined my day.

as a silver lining, a new generation of kids will be introduced to awesome stories/characters :D

Krev said:
No, they won't.
Not while this current regime is alive. Also, their 'classics' are dated concepts in an age where Alvin is the overlord of children's films.

one can hope, but seeing how much CGI animated films gross... they would be fools not to capitalize. They could/would prob. differentiate from their classic counterpart by not incl. the musical aspects, but in an age of American Idol... why? ;)

and Alvin isn't anywhere near the overlord of our younglings... that would be Pixar animated films, Shrek (which is basically an updated fairy tale concept...), and STILL Disney pretty much. Look at Enchanted, which made major bank, and would not have done half as much had it been a completely old-skool animated flick (though yes, the story wouldn't have made sense :lol), and the upcoming Rapunzel.

seriously, expect live-action/CGI remakes of Disney classics in the future.

i can see a 3D, CGI animated Peter Pan doing well...
 
Avatar yeah yeah yeah but it really is nice to see that Sherlock Holmes has legs.

I *really* have no interest in Avatar, but much more of this and I'll feel like I havr to see it just to know what people are talking about.
 
Ignatz Mouse said:
Avatar yeah yeah yeah but it really is nice to see that Sherlock Holmes has legs.

I *really* have no interest in Avatar, but much more of this and I'll feel like I havr to see it just to know what people are talking about.

much more of this?

it made ONE BILLION dollars in 17 days. How much more do you want? :lol
 
I *really* have no interest in Avatar, but much more of this and I'll feel like I havr to see it just to know what people are talking about.
wtf, i think you're the only person at GAF who hasn't seen it
15
times
 
koam said:
wtf, i think you're the only person at GAF who hasn't seen it
15
times
I'm afraid you are buddy. I'm afraid you are.
 
3d pricetag is definitely helping avatar. Just goes to show what can happen when you take 3d beyond simple gimmick shit. I don't think there was one scene in avatar that looked like it was designed for the viewer to go OMG there is a leaf right in front of my face 3d rocks my socks! Instead, you make a world beautiful enough that you kind of want to see it in 3d cuz you'd feel like you are missin out otherwise
 
irfan said:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

Notice the pattern? If you need more help understanding, use the Adjuster on the top right, select 2009 and see ;)

(By inflation index I meant ticket prices which I guess is derived from inflation index, should have worded it better :D )

Oh I see, they are using an actual ticket only inflation metric. That makes more sense.

Now I just wonder how they break down the 3 different price points for a movie like Avatar (Imax, 3D, 2D)
 
jamesinclair said:
Oh I see, they are using an actual ticket only inflation metric. That makes more sense.

Now I just wonder how they break down the 3 different price points for a movie like Avatar (Imax, 3D, 2D)
I believe they are using overall annual ticket prices for the adjustments.

They may track weighted average ticket prices per film, but I'm not sure.

Adjusting for ticket prices is an utterly meaningless measure, though. I don't see any value in it.
 
Wouldn't it be possible to find out tickets sold, at least for the US take? Just take the gross and divide it by the average ticket price.
 
24q4p40.png


Note: ROTK opened 2 days earlier (Wed) and is now 60M behind Avatar, overall 130M+ behind if you account for those 2 days. 130M to ROTK's total is 500M+ ... :D
 
wow it's Cameron's dick-sucking thread.

If Avatar surpasses TDK in domestic gross, I will retire from movie-watching
 
canova said:
wow it's Cameron's dick-sucking thread.

If Avatar surpasses TDK in domestic gross, I will retire from movie-watching
just pack-up your stuff in advance man!
 
canova said:
wow it's Cameron's dick-sucking thread.

If Avatar surpasses TDK in domestic gross, I will retire from movie-watching
Never take BO too seriously. If I went by your metric I would have quit movies when TF2 hit 400M. :P
 
Future said:
3d pricetag is definitely helping avatar. Just goes to show what can happen when you take 3d beyond simple gimmick shit. I don't think there was one scene in avatar that looked like it was designed for the viewer to go OMG there is a leaf right in front of my face 3d rocks my socks! Instead, you make a world beautiful enough that you kind of want to see it in 3d cuz you'd feel like you are missin out otherwise

There were plenty of cheap uses of 3D in Avatar as well. Yes, the 3D made the world pop more, but the resorted to similar old tricks from time to time too.
 
Just wait. 6 months from now people on this forum will be downlplaying the success and saying 'Of course AVATAR was going to make that much money' and completely forget what a huge gamble the film was (if you forget that Cameron was on board).

I already see that people are mentioning that widespread 3D release is an unfair advantage, when before this the stigma of 3D movies made it even more of a gamble.
 
Kung Fu Jedi said:
There were plenty of cheap uses of 3D in Avatar as well. Yes, the 3D made the world pop more, but the resorted to similar old tricks from time to time too.

Which scenes are you talking about?
 
canova said:
wow it's Cameron's dick-sucking thread.

If Avatar surpasses TDK in domestic gross, I will retire from movie-watching

Really?

Really?

One movie doing better than another is going to make you stop watching all movies altogether?

Jesus Christ I will never understand the depths to which stupidity runs on the internet.

I happen to like both movies, but neither movie is in my top 5 films of all time. In a perfect world There will be Blood, Children of Men and No Country for Old Men would be the top 3 grossing films of the decade.

Luckily for me, I can still enjoy all three of those movies even though they weren't smash hits at the box office.
 
Scullibundo said:
Just wait. 6 months from now people on this forum will be downlplaying the success and saying 'Of course AVATAR was going to make that much money' and completely forget what a huge gamble the film was (if you forget that Cameron was on board).

The same thing has happened with virtually every one of Cameron's films. Starting with Aliens every single one was a massive financial gamble that paid off. With the exception of the Abyss I believe all of his films starting with Aliens 2 were the most expensive film of all time to that point. No one seems to remember this. Hell, Terminator 2 was a 100 million dollar sequel to a cult hit.

That would be like dumping 300 million dollars on a Serenity sequel.
 
Scullibundo said:
Just wait. 6 months from now people on this forum will be downlplaying the success and saying 'Of course AVATAR was going to make that much money' and completely forget what a huge gamble the film was (if you forget that Cameron was on board).

GAF is like that.

Last year it was all TDK, TDK this, TDK that. Now it's Avatar this, Avatar that.

in 6 months, they will be Iron-Man 2 this, Iron-Man 2 that
 
DanielPlainview said:
much more of this?

it made ONE BILLION dollars in 17 days. How much more do you want? :lol

For it to be a movie I have interest in watching outside of the phenomenon of its popularity.


I mean, woohoo for the fans and all, and I don't hate it (how could I? I haven't seen it) it just leaves me scratching my head.
 
It's definitely going to have huge legs, i've only just been able to get my imax ticket. It's been sold out since release (17th Dec). Seeing it tomorrow :)
 
aznpxdd said:
Which scenes are you talking about?

The one that jumps most quickly to mind is when Jake lit the spear/torch in the woods when he was fighting those cat like critters. After lighting it up, he spins around and sticks it right out into the crowd. It was like something you'd see out of Friday the 13th - 3D or something. There were others that were similar. Again, though, for the most part the 3D was solid and used to make the world seem more immersive.
 
Ignatz Mouse said:
For it to be a movie I have interest in watching outside of the phenomenon of its popularity.

I mean, woohoo for the fans and all, and I don't hate it (how could I? I haven't seen it) it just leaves me scratching my head.

Get ready for some Titanic level backlash people.
 
Dax01 said:
With Avatar's success, hopefully that means we'll be seeing more sci-fi movies in the future.

Star Trek, District 9 and Avatar all but assure SciFi will be making a resurgence.

My guess is the super hero genre has become over-saturated and is about to bust in the next 2-3 years. SciFi will be replacing it.

Hopefully this means Universal will throw some real money Twohy and Cauron's way. Well, maybe not Twohy. He seems to do better when he is constricted by budget.
 
canova said:
GAF is like that.

Last year it was all TDK, TDK this, TDK that. Now it's Avatar this, Avatar that.

in 6 months, they will be Iron-Man 2 this, Iron-Man 2 that
Talk to me when Iron Man 2 makes 1B in 17 days.
 
Scullibundo said:
Get ready for some Titanic level backlash people.

Jesus, I'm not running it down, I am just disinterested. Based on the reviews alone, I expect it's a lot better than Titanic, which I did see and which did suck.
 
canova said:
GAF is like that.

Last year it was all TDK, TDK this, TDK that. Now it's Avatar this, Avatar that.

in 6 months, they will be Iron-Man 2 this, Iron-Man 2 that
You act like this is limited to GAF.

TDK had the second biggest box office take (at the time).

Avatar now has the second biggest box office take.

It's not GAF, it's the popularity of the movies in question.
 
StoOgE said:
Star Trek, District 9 and Avatar all but assure SciFi will be making a resurgence.

My guess is the super hero genre has become over-saturated and is about to bust in the next 2-3 years. SciFi will be replacing it.
I disagree but we'll see. IronMan's capitalizing all the success in Spiderman's absence, I'll make this judgement (over-saturated) if/when SM4 bombs.

ryutaro's mama said:
Talk to me when Iron Man 2 makes 1B in 17 days.
Not possible, ready to eat PD level of crow if this comes true.
 
StoOgE said:
Star Trek, District 9 and Avatar all but assure SciFi will be making a resurgence.

My guess is the super hero genre has become over-saturated and is about to bust in the next 2-3 years. SciFi will be replacing it.

Hopefully this means Universal will throw some real money Twohy and Cauron's way. Well, maybe not Twohy. He seems to do better when he is constricted by budget.
But superhero movies are a subgenre of the science fiction genre... o_O
 
StoOgE said:
Star Trek, District 9 and Avatar all but assure SciFi will be making a resurgence.

My guess is the super hero genre has become over-saturated and is about to bust in the next 2-3 years. SciFi will be replacing it.

I agree with this, I think the Superhero Flick has about hit its limit.
 
Spike Spiegel said:
But superhero movies are a subgenre of the science fiction genre... o_O

Technically true, but if you look at what passes as sci-fi in movies and then superhero films, they're pretty different.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom