Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2010 4:41 pm
It did so this weekend.Greg wrote:I'm guessing Avatar top $2 billion worldwide.
The internet's oldest Oscar discussion forum.
https://uaadb.com/
It did so this weekend.Greg wrote:I'm guessing Avatar top $2 billion worldwide.
Now if only people would stop trying to measure newborn penises against 12-year-old penises and try comparing the penises as if they were the same age I'd be less annoyed by these whole stupid box office record things.
LOL!dws1982 wrote:Interesting analogy, there, OG.
--rolotomasi99 wrote:--MovieWes wrote:I think that the furthest The Dark Knight can possibly go (and this is as liberal as possible) is no more than $560 million, but honestly I believe that it won't make more than $510 million. Titanic is at least safe for now.
That said, there are two other films on the horizon that I think could pose a possible threat to Titanic. The first is next Christmas's big release Avatar, which just happens to be James Cameron's first feature since Titanic, and which is said to have the most photo-realistic visual effects ever committed to film (and it's also going to be in 3-D, so people are going to want to see it in the theater). If the script and acting are great, then I believe it could gross as much as $850 million.
The second is The Hobbit in December 2011, which I think will gross between $650-700 million. After all, The Phantom Menace grossed an inflation adjusted total of $600 million and The Hobbit is going to be every bit as anticipated as that film was.
???
"the most photo-realistic visual effects ever committed to film." where have i heard that compliment before. oh, right! the FINAL FANTASY film. considered one of the biggest bombs in box office history.
great f/x may help a film have a huge opening, but are not enough to keep a movie going. THE DARK KNIGHT has hardly any big f/x scenes, and yet it is beating the pants off of all the other f/x heavy films of this year.
the other sentence which i found odd was, "If the script and acting are great..." uh, i love james cameron as much as the next fanboy, but since when have his movies been known for great scripts or acting? despite all its nominations, the writers refused to recognize TITANIC for its screenplay.
i think the biggest stumbling block for AVATAR (in addition to its horrible title) is the fact that it is an unkown commodity. almost all the films in the box office top ten are either sequels or adapted from a popular comic book character. only the first STAR WARS, ET, and TITANIC where original films. ET was released at the apex of spielberg's popularity, so he was the known commodity. TITANIC was the "perfect" film, being able to attract every demographic of filmgoer, faced no competition, and received a huge boost from its oscar triumph. STAR WARS is the only film in the top ten to come out of nowhere to become a blockbuster. the STAR WARS films are also the only movies in the box office top twenty to take place in outer space, as AVATAR does.
sure, james cameron's name alone will get some people excited, but outside of fanboy and movie websites most people are not familiar with his name. the more than 10 year span since TITANIC has left james cameron without the cache to open a film on his celebrity alone. i think AVATAR will make $300 million at the most.
as for THE HOBBIT, since warner bros decided to split one perfectly good book into two movies, as well as THE DEATHLY HOLLOWS, i am praying to the movie gods to punish the greedy studio. just like THE PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN sequels and THE MATRIX sequels (also warner bros), the executives are taking one movie's worth of a story and stretching it out to two movies so they can rake in as much cash as possible. i know some believe THE HOBBIT should/could be adapted into three movies, but the story is one book for a reason. it is not epic like THE LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy. it reads more like a travelogue, with amusing side stories and fastidious descriptions of meals and such.
the same goes for THE DEATHLY HOLLOWS. it is not necessary to stretch that book into a five hour movie split in two.
i think audiences will pick up on the studio fucking with them just like they did with THE PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN and THE MATRIX sequels where the second sequel did far less than the first...or at least i hope so. warner bros deserves to be punished for its arrogance and greed. hopefully audiences agree. :p
Well, I was using the first Star Wars film and Titanic as the precendent for this statement. From everything I've read and heard about the film, it's going to be like nothing anyone has ever seen before, which one of the reasons why both of those films achieved such astronomical box-office receipts. And the fact that Avatar is going to be completely 3-D (there isn't going to be a traditional 2-D print for this film), it's not the type of film that people are going to want to wait to see on DVD. In fact, I've heard that it's not really the type of movie that would play well on any home theater system (or, at the very least, will lose much of its impact when it makes the jump to DVD).
The fact is, you can almost get the big-screen experience now with all the home theater technology that we have nowadays, which is why we aren't seeing huge grosses like Titanic and Star Wars anymore (both of those films would gross between $900 million and $1 billion at today's ticket prices). And Avatar is going to be one of those movies that is going to change the way movies are watched, much like the introduction of Cinemascope in the '50s (this alone will make the film almost impossible to pirate). That's why I think it's going to be huge.
Just pointing out that the hyperbole around Cameron's film is not quite as big as some would like to think it is...
I'm quite calm...zen-like in fact.Sabin wrote:Oh, calm down! Cameron's going to have three films in the all-time high-grossers club compared to Spielberg's eight. That makes him a colleague, not somebody Spielberg is shitting on in any way shape or form.Spielberg still shits on Cameron as far as the popularity of his films go in North America. Adjusted, Cameron has only 2 films (soon to be 3) in the top 100 of all time (in today's dollars)
Exactly.. Besides the fact Spielberg made 25 movies and Cameron only 8.Sabin wrote:Oh, calm down! Cameron's going to have three films in the all-time high-grossers club compared to Spielberg's eight. That makes him a colleague, not somebody Spielberg is shitting on in any way shape or form.Spielberg still shits on Cameron as far as the popularity of his films go in North America. Adjusted, Cameron has only 2 films (soon to be 3) in the top 100 of all time (in today's dollars)
Spielberg still shits on Cameron as far as the popularity of his films go in North America. Adjusted, Cameron has only 2 films (soon to be 3) in the top 100 of all time (in today's dollars)