Senior HTF Member
- Nov 1, 1998
- Real Name
- Lou Sytsma
One can slice it up any way they want but the outcome is the same: Cameron is still King.
Originally Posted by TerryRL
"Avatar" will become the first film in history to earn at least $50 million in three consecutive weekends of business. Based on these numbers the movie could actually be looking at another weekend of earning north of the $60 million mark. This thing looks headed for a final haul in the neighborhood of $450-$500 million. The movie has already earned more than $800 million globally, and a final worldwide mark of over $1 billion is now a lock.
Originally Posted by Carlos_E
I would respectfully disagree as to final haul if this third Friday's estimated gross of 25 million is any indication. Avatar will challenge the Dark Knight at 533 million and Titanic at 600 million before it completes its run. Just in my humble opinion.
In VA/MD, 12/23 would've been the last day, but the blizzard kept kids home 12/21 and 12/22. And that storm clearly hurt business on the east coast over the movie's opening weekend...Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
Not in Michigan unless you're talking about some colleges. The last day for school was Wednesday.
Kids go to school roughly 180 days/year, and I believe that was the case when I was a kid many moons ago. Kids have it no easier or tougher now - the number of holidays are virtually the same, but their distribution is different...Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
The kids have it easy today. When I was in grade and high school, our first day of school was the day after Labor Day and out last day of school was around the 3rd or 4th week in June depending on how many snow days were called. Also, we didn't have any spring break either. We got a couple of days off for Easter and that was it.
To some degree, they don't. If I wanted to see "Avatar" at my local multiplex, I had this choice: 3D or IMAX 3D. No 2D version playing there, and that's not the only place without a 2D option.Originally Posted by Patrick Sun
Any film that can make people voluntarily hand over more money for the 3D version, I say more power to that film and its maker. It's not like people don't have a choice in paying less for the 2D version.
$200m for "The Blind Side" would impress me more than $700m for "Avatar". "Blind Side" was a total out of nowhere flick - I didn't even know it existed until it was out for a couple of weeks! "Avatar" came with a certain level of guaranteed success, but "Blind Side" could've vanished without a trace and no one would've noticed...Originally Posted by mattCR
The Blind Side turned into the little movie that could. Yes, all due focus on Avatar.. but an amazing, amazing box office performance to reach $200M for that film. Kind of defied normal blockbuster logic.
"Profitability" has never been a big factor in the discussion of movie success. "Paranormal Activity" was a jillion times more profitable than "Avatar" could ever be, but not that many people care about that. It's all about total grosses, baby!Originally Posted by dpippel
The profitability of a film is determined by box office revenues, not by the number of tickets sold.
You still had a choice. You're being obstinate for the sake of it.Originally Posted by Colin Jacobson
To some degree, they don't. If I wanted to see "Avatar" at my local multiplex, I had this choice: 3D or IMAX 3D. No 2D version playing there, and that's not the only place without a 2D option.
So yes, I could've gone out of my way to see it 2D, but that'd defeat the purpose of saving a few bucks on tickets, wouldn't it?
Kinda wish I HAD gone 2D, though. Went IMAX 3D and the imagery made me a little motion-sick. Not "Blair Witch" or Paul Greengrass motion-sick, but a bit googly - had to close my eyes occasionally to ward off nausea...