Yep.Koodo said:Since when did the US changed its name to Worldwide?
ryutaro's mama said:Yep.
In fact, it doesn't even have the US record....yet.
Titanic still currently holds that one...<snicker>
GhaleonEB said:I'm a little lost here, so I want to recap how we got here. You made a broadside about "some people" equating the "highest grossing movie of all time" with "most popular movie of all time". I asked who, and you said, "I'm not talking about here on the Internet. People who I've spoken to."
Well, okay. Upon my pointing out that that doesn't make it a relevant point since no one here is making that mistake, you said these people may in fact be on the Internet, but are also in real life (but apparently not on GAF), as if that somehow makes your claim more relevant.
I guess where I'm going with this is when you make a bullshit strawman argument like you did, and upon getting called out on it resort to anecdotal experience with people you know (who may or may not have been on the internet but are clearly NOT on GAF), you've failed at making said argument.
You should make that argument with the bozos you know who said that, and probably not haul it into a conversation where no one is actually saying that.
aka, this. :lol
Who?MIMIC said:The 3D ticket prices are mentioned in articles for a REASON. And that reason is perspective, which a lot of people want to ignore. It's VERY relevant to the discussion of Avatar's gross, IMO. My argument may have been seen as a strawman before because I wasn't saying how I truly felt about how I think people are analyzing Avatar's success.
MIMIC said:I didn't initially come right out and say it but I said it in my previous post: "Nonetheless, I get the very strong impression that even people here on this forum tend to scoff at those who bring up the 3D ticket price because it sheds light on how popular Avatar really is".
No one has SAID "Avatar is the most popular movie of all time" but it's definitely being insinuated. That insinuation is ANNOYING--people don't come right out and say it (because saying it would be a lie) but to tout the gross as the best thing ever and ignore the reasons behind it is really shady. Like I said before, gross and popularity usually went hand-in-hand; if a movie had a higher gross than another, it usually meant that not only did it make more money, but that it was also more popular. But now, that definitely isn't the case and many people want make the 3D factor irrelevant, despite how incredibly relevant it usually is.
-Avatar made most of it's money from 3D tickets
-So?
Case in point.
The 3D ticket prices are mentioned in articles for a REASON. And that reason is perspective, which a lot of people want to ignore. It's VERY relevant to the discussion of Avatar's gross, IMO. My argument may have been seen as a strawman before because I wasn't saying how I truly felt about how I think people are analyzing Avatar's success.
Thagomizer said:Those floating mountains also introduce a pretty big plothole-if there is enough ore in those mountains to make them float hundreds of feet off the ground, why not just mine them? They aren't nearly as important to the Na'vi; just stay away from the dragons and whatever important stuff may be there, and it'll be all cool. Mine it until the raw mass of the ore can no longer support the mining equipment, and move to the next one.
Thagomizer said:Those floating mountains also introduce a pretty big plothole-if there is enough ore in those mountains to make them float hundreds of feet off the ground, why not just mine them? They aren't nearly as important to the Na'vi; just stay away from the dragons and whatever important stuff may be there, and it'll be all cool. Mine it until the raw mass of the ore can no longer support the mining equipment, and move to the next one.
GhaleonEB said:Who?
Dead said:Its the equivalent to people whining about the 3D prices. They are both retarded arguements.
3D Avatar presents a Premium Experience, the movie was built from the ground up to be experienced as such. The premium price is warranted, due to the cost of equipping the theaters with the ability to show it.
Sharp said:MIMIC and others who like admissions, when Avatar hits about $675 million it will have surpassed The Dark Knight's ticket sales. It is pretty much guaranteed to do this (and considerably surpass it) and become the biggest ticket seller of the decade. So it's not just 3D. Incidentally, The Dark Knight's gross was aided by higher-priced IMAX tickets. And Gone With The Wind's initial run was heavily bolstered by high-priced tickets for color (color was like 3D at the time). And that's just domestically. Worldwide, where Avatar is much more dominant on a ticket sales level, even Titanic had higher-priced tickets in some countries, which was justified because the movie was "longer." It's the sort of thing many a high-grossing movie has to deal with and I'm not sure why people feel that it would be more "legitimate" for Avatar or some other movie to break Titanic's record thanks to regular inflation and not 3D-enhanced inflation. If you're going by admissions it never had the domestic record anyway so this wouldn't be a relevant thread and nobody would be responding to it, but clearly money does matter at some level.
Count Dookkake said:Not a plot hole.
1) The bird thingies live there.
2) I imagine that mining on a surface that is prone to shifting balance the more you dig from it is just a teensy bit more dangerous than digging on solid ground.
Not even close, Snow White sold nearly 110 million tickets, compared to TDK's 74 million or so (really about 71 million if you factor in IMAX, which I'm obviously doing since people are more than happy to factor in 3D and IMAX for Avatar).Count Dookkake said:TDK fans can comfort themselves with this fact: TDK is the biggest movie ever based on a pre-existing children's property.
Thagomizer said:Why not just blow them to kingdom come with the massive airship and collect the pieces?
Sharp said:Not even close, Snow White sold nearly 110 million tickets, compared to TDK's 74 million or so (really about 71 million if you factor in IMAX, which I'm obviously doing since people are more than happy to factor in 3D and IMAX for Avatar).
My post was in relation to people discrediting the movie due to the 3D prices. For example, saying it should have an asterisk next to it in the record books. Ridiculous.MIMIC said:There are a bunch of people (and I don't want to start calling people out to start fights) but I'll use Dead as an example. One of his posts:
He was saying that using the "13-year-old girl" argument to discredit Titanic's run is just as retarded as using the "3D ticket" to discredit (or whatever) Avatar's run. No serious article is going to say that Titanic must account for the "13-year-old girl inflation factor" while MOST serious sources are definitely going to reference Avatar's 3D ticket premiums.
Fake edit: oh yeah...and jett.
I think it's got that in the bag.Count Dookkake said:Explosions, plus weaker gravity, plus floating rocks...
Hmm.
Drat.
How about "biggest movie based on a previously existing children's property that redefined the action movie and featured a dead actor"?
MIMIC said:There are a bunch of people (and I don't want to start calling people out to start fights) but I'll use Dead as an example. One of his posts:
He was saying that using the "13-year-old girl" argument to discredit Titanic's run is just as retarded as using the "3D ticket" to discredit (or whatever) Avatar's run. No serious article is going to say that Titanic must account for the "13-year-old girl inflation factor" while MOST serious sources are definitely going to reference Avatar's 3D ticket premiums.
Fake edit: oh yeah...and jett.
Well, he's right. He's saying just as you wouldn't dock Titanic of some arbitrary portion of its earnings for the basis of comparison, it likewise doesn't make any sense to do so for Avatar. This does not mean the 3D ticket prices shouldn't be pointed out: they're a huge part of the Avatar success story and should always be mentioned when talking about Avatar. But that really doesn't come near justifying adjusting its earnings for the sake of comparison to other movies, or to expose it's true popularity or whatever.MIMIC said:There are a bunch of people (and I don't want to start calling people out to start fights) but I'll use Dead as an example. One of his posts:
He was saying that using the "13-year-old girl" argument to discredit Titanic's run is just as retarded as using the "3D ticket" to discredit (or whatever) Avatar's run. No serious article is going to say that Titanic must account for the "13-year-old girl inflation factor" while MOST serious sources are definitely going to reference Avatar's 3D ticket premiums.
Fake edit: oh yeah...and jett.
And you're totally right, the 3D surcharges are very relevant. What's hilariously wrong are those that use it as a means to belittle the film's popularity or, most importantly, its appeal. Yes, the extra dollars have contributed an extra gross that is well into the hundreds of millions. However, this is more of an achievement than a cheat. Avatar has attracted an audience not seen since Titanic despite tickets being 30% higher than usual. More impressive is its astounding IMAX run, which just keeps growing, despite having on average the most expensive tickets around.MIMIC said:I didn't initially come right out and say it but I said it in my previous post: "Nonetheless, I get the very strong impression that even people here on this forum tend to scoff at those who bring up the 3D ticket price because it sheds light on how popular Avatar really is".
No one has SAID "Avatar is the most popular movie of all time" but it's definitely being insinuated. That insinuation is ANNOYING--people don't come right out and say it (because saying it would be a lie) but to tout the gross as the best thing ever and ignore the reasons behind it is really shady. Like I said before, gross and popularity usually went hand-in-hand; if a movie had a higher gross than another, it usually meant that not only did it make more money, but that it was also more popular. But now, that definitely isn't the case and many people want make the 3D factor irrelevant, despite how incredibly relevant it usually is.
-Avatar made most of it's money from 3D tickets
-So?
My point
The 3D ticket prices are mentioned in articles for a REASON. And that reason is perspective, which a lot of people want to ignore. It's VERY relevant to the discussion of Avatar's gross, IMO. My argument may have been seen as a strawman before because I wasn't saying how I truly felt about how I think people are analyzing Avatar's success.
Count Dookkake said:Explosions, plus weaker gravity, plus floating rocks...
Hmm.
Drat.
How about "biggest movie based on a previously existing children's property that redefined the action movie and featured a dead actor"?
Thagomizer said:Timed explosives + some kind of massive net.
SpeedingUptoStop said:I still don't really understand how it happened
GhaleonEB said:![]()
How big of a net are we talking here?
Kafarabo said:i wonder if avatar will surpass titanic as the best movie of all time though
I can't believe I'm even having this conversation. :lolThagomizer said:Do you think mines kilometers of miles long were blasted at once? You place explosives at one section, blow a bit off, collect it, repeat ad nauesum.
GhaleonEB said:I can't believe I'm even having this conversation. :lol
Let's see. Massive, unstable floating mountains containing ore hundreds and thousands of feet up in the air. An energy field that disrupts communications and scanning equipment. A native population that is extremely hostile to your presence. And hundreds (probably thousands) of really big dragons that hunt from the air roosting at that level.
What could possibly go wrong?
Anyways.
What's remarkable about Avatar's run isn't so much that's just passed Titanic (though that is quite stunning). It's that Avatar is nowhere near done; it's still making $20m a day, world-wide, on a week day, and $200m a week over all. It's heading for $2.5b territory pretty quick.
Kagari said:Terrible.
Titanic is definitely the better movie. And it's based on real history, not some fictional, generic blue alien inhabited planet with a cliche plot.
Just proves that people like gimmicks such as 3D... which means hollywood is going to be making a lot of terrible 3D movies. Thanks Jim!
Darko said:
Trust me, you're not alone.Kagari said:I already watched Avatar
It really wasn't all that good compared to some of the other movies that came out last year, just saying.
Kagari said:I already watched Avatar
It really wasn't all that good compared to some of the other movies that came out last year, just saying.
Gary Whitta said:You won't have to wait for Alice; Feb 12 is the weekend it will finally go down. Either Wolfman, Percy Jackson or Valentine's Day will do it. That's my guess anyway. Avatar could actually get knocked down to #3 or even #4 (unlikely).
Of course Eli already took it down, if only for one day ;-)
So did Chipmunks 2 and Sherlock Holmes - also for one day each.Gary Whitta said:Feb 12 is the weekend it will finally go down. Either Wolfman, Percy Jackson or Valentine's Day will do it. That's my guess anyway. Avatar could actually get knocked down to #3 or even #4 (unlikely).
Of course Eli already took it down, if only for one day ;-)
Scullibundo said:Its whether Cameron wants to do it or not. He has a green light to do whatever the fuck he wants.
Pretty elite club to be a member of! ;-) I'll always be proud of the great achievement I share with Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakuel.GhaleonEB said:So did Chipmunks 2 and Sherlock Holmes - also for one day each.
Why is a story being based on 'real history' better than it being concocted from someone's imagination?Kagari said:Terrible.
Titanic is definitely the better movie. And it's based on real history, not some fictional, generic blue alien inhabited planet with a cliche plot.
GhaleonEB said:I can't believe I'm even having this conversation. :lol
Let's see. Massive, unstable floating mountains containing ore hundreds and thousands of feet up in the air. An energy field that disrupts communications and scanning equipment. A native population that is extremely hostile to your presence. And hundreds (probably thousands) of really big dragons that hunt from the air roosting at that level.
What could possibly go wrong?
Anyways.
What's remarkable about Avatar's run isn't so much that's just passed Titanic (though that is quite stunning). It's that Avatar is nowhere near done; it's still making $20m a day, world-wide, on a week day, and $200m a week over all. It's heading for $2.5b territory pretty quick.
I see what you did thar. (Unintentionally.)Gary Whitta said:Pretty elite club to be a member of! ;-)
:lolThagomizer said:Everything is hostile on the planet, everywhere. The first 45 minutes of the movie were spent on this. Mining anywhere is dangerous, between space panthers, giant hammerhead rhinoceri, and everything else. And it's not like the dragons can hurt the big airship.
Krev said:Why is a story being based on 'real history' better than it being concocted from someone's imagination?