• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Rottenwatch: AVATAR (82%)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hollywood is going to milk the heck out of this 3D thing even worse now, considering half of it's gross is through the higher 3D ticket sales in NA.

Warner Bros. "We want Batman 3D!"

Christopher Nolan, "Kindly go fuck yourself."
 
2jb5ytd.jpg
 
I called 1 billion worldwide during the first weekend box office for Avatar.

At this point number 2 world wide is on lockdown. next week we find out if number 1 is possible.
 
elrechazao said:
Good movie > high grossing movie
dark knight > avatar

Huh? Aside from a glorious acting job, which will never be repeated that movie was nowhere near as epic as Avatar, in fact it was shit.
 
Gallbaro said:
Huh? Aside from a glorious acting job, which will never be repeated that movie was nowhere near as epic as Avatar, in fact it was shit.

Uh...no.

Excellent reviews, numerous awards, The Dark Knight was anything but "shit".
 
DanielPlainview said:
we should just replace the thread title with "4th Highest Grossing Movie of All-Time"

then change it as it proceeds to
number 1

Seriously, I'd say this film and thread have surpassed the average Rottenwatch. Rotten Tomatoes is irrelevant concerning Avatar at this point. Thread title change needs to happen.
 
gdt5016 said:
Repost all these pics in the Wkd BO thread.

Why, the guy that makes it will probably pick out some obscure movie that finished number 5 that impressed him to focus on.
 
Speevy said:
Uh...no.

Excellent reviews, numerous awards, The Dark Knight was anything but "shit".

Was amazing the first viewing, but every time I've tried to watch it again I get bored with it. Feels like it drags on and on and on...
 
WEEKEND ESTIMATES: JAN 1- 3, 2010

1
AVATAR

STUDIO RATING THEATERS WEEK WEEKEND GROSS AVERAGE TOTAL
Fox PG-13 3461 3 $68,300,000 $19,734 $352,111,074


2
SHERLOCK HOLMES
STUDIO RATING THEATERS WEEK WEEKEND GROSS AVERAGE TOTAL
Warner Bros. PG-13 3626 2 $38,385,000 $10,586 $140,675,000


3
ALVIN AND THE CHIPMUNKS: THE SQUEAKUEL
STUDIO RATING THEATERS WEEK WEEKEND GROSS AVERAGE TOTAL
Fox PG 3747 2 $36,600,000 $9,768 $157,345,269


http://www.ercboxoffice.com/index.php?section=movies&subsection=top12_details

edit: 3rd weekend record is down
 
irfan said:
WEEKEND ESTIMATES: JAN 1- 3, 2010

1
AVATAR

STUDIO RATING THEATERS WEEK WEEKEND GROSS AVERAGE TOTAL
Fox PG-13 3461 3 $68,300,000 $19,734 $352,111,074


2
SHERLOCK HOLMES
STUDIO RATING THEATERS WEEK WEEKEND GROSS AVERAGE TOTAL
Warner Bros. PG-13 3626 2 $38,385,000 $10,586 $140,675,000


3
ALVIN AND THE CHIPMUNKS: THE SQUEAKUEL
STUDIO RATING THEATERS WEEK WEEKEND GROSS AVERAGE TOTAL
Fox PG 3747 2 $36,600,000 $9,768 $157,345,269


http://www.ercboxoffice.com/index.php?section=movies&subsection=top12_details

Seems kinda low based on Friday & Saturday's numbers.

I suspect actuals will push it over 70.
 
irfan said:
WEEKEND ESTIMATES: JAN 1- 3, 2010

1
AVATAR

STUDIO RATING THEATERS WEEK WEEKEND GROSS AVERAGE TOTAL
Fox PG-13 3461 3 $68,300,000 $19,734 $352,111,074


2
SHERLOCK HOLMES
STUDIO RATING THEATERS WEEK WEEKEND GROSS AVERAGE TOTAL
Warner Bros. PG-13 3626 2 $38,385,000 $10,586 $140,675,000


3
ALVIN AND THE CHIPMUNKS: THE SQUEAKUEL
STUDIO RATING THEATERS WEEK WEEKEND GROSS AVERAGE TOTAL
Fox PG 3747 2 $36,600,000 $9,768 $157,345,269


http://www.ercboxoffice.com/index.php?section=movies&subsection=top12_details
Sherlock Holmes and Alvin are doing pretty well...
 
gdt5016 said:
Yeah, it seems like they're lowballing Sunday.

They have lowballed the last two Sunday's pretty significantly.

This one is going to be hard to gauge because tomorrow is not a holiday for the kiddos. today *should* act more like a normal Sunday.
 
http://movie-critics.ew.com/2010/01/02/avatar-vs-up-in-the-air/

'Avatar' vs. 'Up in the Air': The most symbolic Oscar race since 'Forrest Gump' vs. 'Pulp Fiction'
by Owen Gleiberman


On Academy Awards night, the moment just before the announcement of the Best Picture winner is always, of course, intensely dramatic — even if it’s one of those years when it has become obvious, by the end of the night, which film is going to win (hello The Sting, Gandhi, The Silence of the Lambs, Titanic). But the Oscars can be even more dramatic if you have no clear idea what’s going to win (hello Annie Hall, Driving Miss Daisy, Crash). And the years, to me, when they have the most drama are those in which the competition for Best Picture is dominated by two front runners, and each one of those movies stands for something radically different within the Hollywood cosmos. Then you have a horse race charged with meaning.

To me, the last Academy Awards year that really had that full-on, King Kong vs. Godzilla culture-war vibe was 1994, when the competition boiled down to Forrest Gump vs. Pulp Fiction. The fact that Quentin Tarantino’s jubilantly violent and head-twisty independent-cinema landmark had zoomed to the front ranks of the Academy Awards derby was enough to electrify the evening all by itself. Clearly, this was an acknowledgement, by the Hollywood establishment, that the indie movement was no longer just a bunch of eager rude upstarts but that it had truly arrived, and was a force to be reckoned with. But, of course, the Hollywood establishment doesn’t tend to like eager rude upstarts who rewrite the rules of their business. And so it was poetically perfect that the movie Pulp Fiction was competing against was Forrest Gump, a sentimental patriotic afflicted-hero fairy tale that seemed, in many ways, to be a kind of crowd-pleasing candy box of “mainstream” values.

That night at the Oscars, in the spring of 1995, it wasn’t just one big-hit movie facing off against another. With Forrest Gump taking on Pulp Fiction, it was square vs. street, classic-rock boomer fantasy vs. surf-rock Gen-X reality, Establishment vs. Outsider — and, since both films had gone on to become cultural touchstones, it was, in effect, a battle over the question of which mythological movie Hollywood would most like to represent its core values. Perhaps it’s no surprise that, Hollywood being Hollywood, the establishment candidate won. By contrast, the famous Best Picture moment that left a bewildered daze on Harrison Ford’s face — the surprise victory by Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan — may well have been as dramatic as they come, but not because the two films really represented competing, which is to say conflicting, values. It was a dramatic upset that signified…nothing.

I predict that the Oscar race this year will have a similar symbolic heft to the one in 1994/1995. First of all, my premise is that the Best Picture race will probably come down to two movies — and let me take just a moment to explain why. Dave Karger, in his very shrewd analysis, has already listed what he thinks the Best Picture nominees would be if there were only five of them (Up in the Air, Avatar, The Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds, and Precious). Out of those five, I think that Inglourious Basterds, fantastic as it is, will be seen as a kind of grateful-to-be-there, come-from-behind nominee; it’s far too naughty and reckless a movie, with too little collective critical support, to have much of a chance for nabbing Best Picture. Precious, it has become increasingly clear, may well have peaked too early, and The Hurt Locker, while it keeps racking up awards and does have that collective critical support, wasn’t a big enough hit, at least by the classic yardstick of Hollywood history, to be a likely Best Picture winner. I do think that Kathryn Bigelow could take home the Best Director prize, but my instinct tells me that the Best Picture award will probably go to a movie that’s perceived, in raw Darwinian box-office terms, as “bigger.”
That leaves Up in the Air vs. Avatar. And to me, at least, that’s a very, very symbolic race. In this case, though, it’s not Establishment vs. Outsider. It’s Old School script-driven Classic Hollywood vs. New Age post-script 21st Century Entertainment. Up in the Air is a movie of such nimble wit and craftsmanship, and such timely humanity, that it has been compared, often and justly, to the venerable films of the studio system — the screwball comedies, for instance, that were rooted in clockwork elegant screenplays, incandescent star performances, and a certain tossed-off (but, deep down, rigorously achieved) insouciance. Whereas Avatar is the eye-popping techno spectacle of the Now era: a vision so “revolutionary” that it leaves many of those pesky old-fashioned story elements behind, but (at least according to its adherents, who are legion) more than makes up for that by placing the audience directly inside an organic wonder-world, using technology to return fabulistic awe to the big screen. I may be mixed on Avatar myself, but to me that certainly sounds like a potential prescription for Oscar victory. Especially now that the jaw-dropping success of Avatar has sealed the film’s promise as a preview — and a savior — of the movie industry to come.

I don’t claim to have a clue as to how the kremlinology of this year’s voting procedures will influence all of this. But if I’m indeed right about these two films becoming the front runners, what I do know is that each one, on Oscar night, will represent a radically different, even opposed, set of dramatic/aesethetic/pop-cultural values. And so the voting, as it always does, will inevitably reflect what the majority of the Hollywood establishment has chosen as a symbol of its values. In more ways than you can count, it’s the past versus the future.

.
 
A science fiction movie that has no ties to any existing franchise at all, made by a man that hasn't made a film in 12 years just made $1 billion worldwide....this is not normal. But man is the crow so sweet. Phoenix has got to be crying now.
 
TacticalFox88 said:
A science fiction movie that has no ties to any existing franchise at all, made by a man that hasn't made a film in 12 years just made $1 billion worldwide....this is not normal. But man is the crow so sweet. Phoenix has got to be crying now.

In 13 days.
 
gdt5016 said:
Yeah, it seems like they're lowballing Sunday.
Running the numbers, they're expecting Sunday to drop 33%. Seems like a standard prediction for most movies, but not Avatar. It's Sunday drops have been 3% and 17%. So yea, I think they're low-balling too.

Especially since Saturday was revised UP again to $25.8m. :lol
 
TacticalFox88 said:
A science fiction movie that has no ties to any existing franchise at all, made by a man that hasn't made a film in 12 years just made $1 billion worldwide....this is not normal. But man is the crow so sweet. Phoenix has got to be crying now.
I wish you guys would stop saying this.

-He took a break after making a $1.8B box-office success;
-He apparently took a break to wait & see the CGI technological advancements for his next features films (Avatar and Battle Angel, not sure about that on though);
-He keep shooting stuff (documentaries), participate in audio-visual projects (with the NASA). Developed the 3D tech used with Avatar with his deep ocean documentaries.


This is not what I call a break from movie making.
 
TacticalFox88 said:
Alright GAF you say the masses are dumb and only like dumb action flicks. Well Avatar just proved you wrong. The mainstream DO like smart movies. :lol

The screenplay is not smart but the movie is smartly made.
 
TacticalFox88 said:
Alright GAF you say the masses are dumb and only like dumb action flicks. Well Avatar just proved you wrong. The mainstream DO like smart movies. :lol

We're talking about Avatar, right?
 
TacticalFox88 said:
Alright GAF you say the masses are dumb and only like dumb action flicks. Well Avatar just proved you wrong. The mainstream DO like smart movies. :lol

That can be turned around by the haters. Be careful. Avatar can be described by some as a dumb action movie.
 
I dunno, having seen Up in the Air and Avatar of course, both movies are well deserved winners. Both films are so different though. Up in the Air is great. It's been a good year for well written movies I think. Should be a very exciting Oscar race. One I hope I won't get banned from this time :lol
 
TacticalFox88 said:
A science fiction movie that has no ties to any existing franchise at all, made by a man that hasn't made a film in 12 years just made $1 billion worldwide....this is not normal. But man is the crow so sweet. Phoenix has got to be crying now.

I like how Cameron walks away from Hollywood for 12 years and during that time, no one really challenges Titantic's position.

In 12 years.

He comes back and rings up a cool billion in his first movie back.

In just 17 days--the same amount of time it would have taken for the Space Marines to be declared missing.

Jimmy was sending us code back in 1986.
 
TacticalFox88 said:
Alright GAF you say the masses are dumb and only like dumb action flicks. Well Avatar just proved you wrong. The mainstream DO like smart movies. :lol

Transformers 2 made $400 in america ;x...

Not the best thing to say ;p But it's nice to see Avatar soon to break that.
 
Paco said:
Was amazing the first viewing, but every time I've tried to watch it again I get bored with it. Feels like it drags on and on and on...


So how do you reckon that works out for a movie that is almost entirely about visual spectacle?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom