Oscilloscope Takes U.S. Rights To ‘Reality’ 
‘Mud’: Did Cannes Save One Of The Best For … 
Will Smith’s ‘MIB3′ Beats … 
Cannes Podcast: Pete Hammond On ‘Lawless’, … 
Over-Achievers Of This Year’s Upfront 
Aussie Pay-TV Shakeup Impacts Hollywood 
USA: ‘Rebounding’ & ‘Modern … 
Interview: Philip Kaufman At Cannes With ‘Hemingway … 
R.I.P. Television Mogul Lee Rich 
Cannes Biz Shines Despite Wind & Rain 
Full 2011-2012 TV Season Series Rankings 
2011-12 Season Network Rankings: Fox Still On Top But Down, … 
HLN Set To Air Daytime Emmy Awards 
Grant Bowler Cast As Richard Burton Opposite Lindsay Lohan … 
UPDATE: Dish Network And Broadcasters Ask Courts To Decide … 
Cannes Surprise Screening: Change Of Plans On Juan Antonio … 
Kevin Hart In Talks To Join Kevin James In ‘Valet … 
Anthony Hopkins Up For ‘Red 2′ Villain; Can … 
Cannes Conflicted Over ‘The Paperboy’ As … 
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘American Idol’ Posts … 
Ghost Of 2004 Hovers Over L.A. Screenings As Int’l … 
UPDATES ‘Avatar’ Now #2 All-Time Grossing Movie
UPDATES ‘Avatar’ Passes $1B Worldwide And $352M Domestic
SATURDAY PM/SUNDAY AM UPDATE: Guess what? Twentieth Century Fox’s 3D Avatar is still #1 in North America and overseas. The studio says it took in $13.3M domestic Friday, down -48% from New Years Day, and $21.2M Saturday for a hefty $48.5M weekend that’s only -29% down from last Fri-Sat-Sun. That’s four #1s in a row for James Cameron’s big budget technopic which hasn’t happened at the box office since The Dark Knight in July 2008. Its domestic cume is now $429M, passing 2009′s highest grossing pic Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen and its $402.1M. Hollywood.com says later this week Avatar will be first IMAX Hollywood feature to cross $100M in global receipts. The studio announced that Avatar made another $143M at the international box office this 4th weekend from 14,839 screens in 111 countries. That’s up 4.5% from the 3rd weekend, raising its foreign cume now to $906.2M. Its worldwide cume is now $1.335 billion, 2nd only to that other Cameron epic Titanic‘s $1.843B (not adjusted for inflation or 3D’s higher ticket prices). ”It’s kind of like Usain Bolt breezing in the quarterfinals of the Olympics 100M — stretching out a lead but with no real competition,” one Fox exec exulted. The big question now is whether Denzel Washington’s Book of Eli can knock it off next week.
Nothing released today was even in the same sports stadium. Hmm, sneaking a release into the first week of January used to be a good strategy over the last few years. But not if faced with a worldwide juggernaut that became the No. 2 highest grossing movie of all time in just 20 days. (The record hasn’t been adjusted for ticket prices of inflation.) So Lionsgate opened the vampire film Daybreakers, which came in a distant but still decent #2 Friday after its trailer’s views grew 113% this week for first place. Although the film is getting good buzz, it fell to #4 after Saturday. Universal’s debut of the romantic comedy Leap Year barely cracked the Top 5 during its first day of release Friday, then fell out to #6 Saturday. And The Weinstein Co’s rebel without a clue Youth In Revolt showed life with its Friday debut despite its modest run.
Here’s the Top 10:
1. Avatar (20th Century Fox) Week 4 [3,422 Theaters]
Fri $13.3M, Sat $21.2M, Wkd $48.5M, Cume $429M
2. Sherlock Holmes (Warner Bros) Week 3 [3,626 Theaters]
Fri $5.1M, Sat $7.3M, Wkd $16.6M, Cume $165.1M
3. Alvin & The Chipmunks: The Squealquel (Fox) Week 3 [3,641 Theaters]
Fri $3.4M, Sat $8M, Wkd $16.3M, Cume $178.1M
4. Daybreakers (Lionsgate) NEW [2,523 Theaters]
Fri $5.8M, Sat $5.5M, Wkd $15M
5. It’s Complicated (Universal) Week 3 [2,955 Theaters]
Fri $3.2M, Sat $4.9M, Wkd $11M, Cume $76.3M
6. Leap Year (Universal) NEW [2,511 Theaters]
Fri $3.3M, Sat $3.9M, Wkd $9.1M
7. Blind Side (Warner Bros) Week 8 [2,880 Theaters]
Fri $2.2M, Sat $3.3M, Wkd $7.7M, Cume $219.1M
8. Up In The Air (Paramount) Week 6 [2,218 Theaters]
Fri $2M, Sat $3.2M, Wkd $7.1M, Cume $54.7M
9. Youth in Revolt (The Weinstein Co) NEW [1,873 Theaters]
Fri $2.7M, Sat $2.5M, Wkd $7M
10. Princess And The Frog (Disney) Week 7 [2,620 Theaters]
Fri $950K, Sat $2.2M, Wkd $4.5M, Cume $92.4M
—
Limited Runs
Invictus (Warner Bros) Week 5 [1,340 Theaters]
Fri, Sat $785K, Wkd $1.71M, Cume $33.5M
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus (Sony Classics) Week 3 [552 Theaters]
Fri, Sat $701K, Wkd $1.7M, Cume $2.1M
Nine (Weinstein Co) Week 4 [1,060 Theaters]
Fri $469K, Sat $676K, Wkd $1.6M, Cume $16.8M
The Young Victoria (Apparition) Week 4 [476 Theaters]
Fri $301K, Sat $514K, Wkd $1.1M, Cume $4.5M
3 Idiots (Big Picture) Week 3 [135 Theaters]
Fri $134K, Sat $261K, Wkd $540K, Cume $5.5M
Precious (Lionsgate) Week 10 [408 Theaters]
Fri $130K, Sat $200K, Wkd $460K, Cume $44.3M
Crazy Heart (Fox Searchlight) Week 4 [33 Theaters]
Fri, Sat $200K, Wkd $435K, Cume $1.2M
Brothers (Relativity/Lionsgate) Week 6 [428 Theaters]
Fri $120K, Sat $160K, Wk $380K, Cume $28.2M
A Single Man (Weinstein Co) Week 5 [48 Theaters]
Fri $89K, Sat $158K, Wkd $358K, Cume $2.2M
Broken Embraces (Sony Classics) Week 8 [101 Theaters]
Fri $90K, Sat $152K, Wkd $345K, Cume $2.2M
The Road (Weinstein Co) Week 7 [207 Theaters]
Fri $72K, Sat $106K, Wkd $247K, Cume $7.3M
Crazy On The Outside (Freestyle) NEW [74 Theaters]
Fri $21K, Sat $28K, Wkd $68M
The White Ribbon (Sony Classics) Week 2 [5 Theaters]
Fri $12K, Sat $20K, Wkd $48K, Cume $168K
Pyarr Impossible (Yash Raj) NEW [29 Theaters]
Fri $14K, Sat $18K, Wkd $44K
Lovely Bones (Paramount) Week 5 [3 Theaters]
Fri $10K, Sat $10K, Wkd $35K, Cume $444K
In Search Of Memory (Icarus) NEW [1 Theater]
Fri $3K, Sat $3K, Wkd $8K
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.
Loading ...
Impressive as hell, but it doesn’t look like The Dark Knight’s domestic total is gonna crumble. Still, #2 worldwide is nothing to sneeze at. Congratulations to James Cameron for making it two in a row.
What are you talking about mate? After 10 days The Dark Knight was at $313,781,677 and Avatar at $212,711,184, that’s $101 million if you do the math. Two weeks later, day 24 and Avatar will be at around $425 million while The Dark Knight made $441,628,497. It’s not only going to crumble The Dark Knight, it’s going to fly past it at easily Mach 2-3.
The real question isn’t anymore if it will pass The Dark Knight, the question is when it will happen.
Since TDK managed a fantastic $533,345,358 at the US Box Office, I’m going to say Avatar will need around 2-3 weeks tops to get there.
Yes, it will. Avatar is on track for at least a $560 final tally now. And that’s before Oscar noms come into play.
Are you friggin kidding me OK? Avatar only needs another 175 to pass Titanic as the biggest Domestic Winner of all time. It will without any doubt pass Dark Knight.
Maybe, maybe not. There’ll be another, smaller bump after the Oscar nominations and ceremony. “Avatar” will get more nods and major category wins than “Dark Knight”, and that will bring in an audience who otherwise would not have chosen to see this kind of film.
Still, as you said, impressive either way.
I think there is a very good chance of that domestic total crumbling:
Day 22 gross for Avatar: $13 million
Day 22 gross for TDK: $7.8 million
TDK was a slow-burner as well after the first few weeks…
You sure about that? It’s got IMAX booking for almost two more months. Steady business there, coupled with continued strong showings in the other formats, should at the very least edge it past TDK. I still think it will eclipse Titanic on the domestic charts by a nose.
After the weekend it’s going to be a little over a hundred million shy of TDK’s intake. All it has to do is maintain through March and boom, big enchilada status statesisde and abroad. I will say, though, that the competition starts to get a little interesting in February with stuff like The Wolfman, Shutter Island, Percy Jackson and Valentine’s Day.
You’re just saying this to bait folks, right?
99.9% of the comments on here are indignation bait.
Stunning… $77m, $76m, $68m and now $45m… slaughtering the record for the 4th weekend… when will it end?
The haters have only two arguments left now: (i) high 3d tickets somehow invalidate the numbers, as if Whole Foods is a worse supermarket than Walmart because it charges higher prices for better products and (ii) the inflation-adjusted canard — it’s called the box office gross chart, it’s money in the tills pure and simple; there’s no requirement to inflation-adjust downwards revenues, expenses, etc.
If it really did $12.6 on Friday, it ain’t doing $45 million this weekend. That is a 3.6 multiplier, which is just too high. I think $35 to $40 is more realistic. That is still fantastic, obviously.
Wow!!! I was incredibly wrong. I definitely didn’t think it would make $48.5 mil this weekend. Just unbelieavable.
Its actually closer to $48.5. Could pass $49.
Yeah, high ticket prices DO invalidate the box office numbers.
Because tickets sold generally predict (not always) DVDs purchased and rented.
Studios make most of their money from:
1. Home video sales (and rentals).
2. TV rights sales, foreign and domestic.
NOT from Box Office.
It IS NOT money in the till, pure and simple. The studio gets only 50% (or less) after the first week. This is why, despite Titanic pulling in great box office, but with a week opening weekend, and fairly anemic home video sales, no one threw money at Cameron. He spent a decade doing … what exactly?
What did Cameron have after Titanic? Dark Angel? If Studios thought that AVATAR was making a PROFIT (recall, it cost ungodly amounts) they’d be throwing money at Cameron. His agents would have studio heads lined up just to throw money and projects at him.
Cameron’s next project? A film about a Hiroshima survivor. Yeah I smell box office records on that one.
Home video sales are likely to be anemic because almost no one will have a 3-D TV set out, and this movie screams to be seen in hi-Def/3-D. Which almost no one has at this point, FT reports only 700,000 of those sold in 2008. Heck Blu-Ray is only 10% of consumer home video purchases, according to VideoBusiness.
Avatar is a money-making machine IF: 1. Suddenly Hollywood has switched to making money at the box office instead of home video and rights sales; 2. AVATARs costs suddenly go away.
How hot was Bryan Singer, Christopher Nolan, Sam Raimi, heck Jon Favreau, when their action films hit big? How many competed to get them for their projects and studios? Didn’t FOX lose Singer from X-Men to Superman? Because people thought he could make lots of money?
The lack of feeding-frenzy around Cameron is the dog that isn’t barking. AVATAR is making a lot of money, just not a lot of profits. The two are not the same.
This to me says that FOX probably had to assist ($$$$) a lot of theaters to go IMAX. Great for IMAX, maybe good for FOX later on with other 3-D films. Maybe long-term movie-goers can find it cheaper and easier to see a real, 3-D immersive experience at the theater, which they can’t get at home for under $2,000, and go back to 1940s-1970′s behavior, before home video and TV sales dominated profits. This certainly is a short-term way to beat pirates (i.e. why pay for a pirated 2-d copy of a film when the real-thing is only in 3-D at the theater). Piracy is a huge threat that is beat only by offering a better deal for consumers non-pirated (i.e. Itunes).
But Cameron is not signed ALREADY for “Avatar 2″ which should tell you something. I.E. Fox is not convinced it’s worth it to throw money at Cameron for a sequel. [How quick did it take Sony to sign Raimi for Spider-Man 2, or for whoever to nab Favreau for Iron-Man 2, etc.?]
lol you know it’s a whiskey post as soon as the complete lack of logic sets in
also Singer wasn’t such a great buy was he, he drove Superman right into the ground and possibly set back that franchise another ten years…the character will have to be rebooted hard to get over his gay illegitimate son having version of Superman
lack of logic just about sums it up. the problem with whiskey’s posts in general is he starts from an ideological place and then constructs his arguments to support it. in his mind, avatar is a “liberal” movie that he feels attacks white people– which in reality is absolute rubbish. but it doesn’t matter how much it makes. he will continue to spin it as a failure. he claimed it would tank at the box office, but now that it’s a record breaker, he is claiming it will tank on dvd and box office doesn’t matter. we’re supposed to take his word on that because he uses a lot of analytical, box office lingo, but he’s yet to admit he was wrong on that first prediction.
as far as Cameron’s employment is concerned, the notion that he is unwanted by studios is ludicrous. I went to a Variety screening the other night where he was on a panel and the guy is treated like the pope. He does what he wants to do, and the fact that he hasn’t set up a sequel yet tells me he either is holding out for more money or he just doesn’t want to do it right now.
Who says James Cameron wants to make a sequel to Avatar? Maybe he wants to move onto something else now.
James Cameron has only made one sequel to one of the movies that he’s directed (Terminator 2). And he only did Termintator 2 because of the new effects that he can install into it.
He didn’t make any sequels to his hits like True Lies or another Aliens movie or even Terminator 3.
If James Cameron was only about the money, he could’ve made TONS of it if he made sequels to those movies. But he didn’t.
Maybe he’s gotten all he wants out of Avatar and now he can move into a new direction.
I actually agree that Avatar is a liberal-oriented movie filled with cliche white villains…but anyone with a brain knows there is an audience for that…Hollywood usually keeps it PC and audiences generally take that into account (i.e. aren’t terribly shocked when Hollywood bashes the military, businessmen, Republicans, etc.)
Whiskey’s mistake is thinking that what he hates is what the mainstream of America hates, and his failure to realize that most people can tune out stuff like cliche villains and sit through a movie with brain totally disengaged
Personally I’m no fan of Cameron’s outlook, which was evident back in his T2 days, and I think he has a hack sensibility as a writer, but only a fool would predict with certainty that Dances With Smurfs would tank…it was always going to be a 50/50 deal, either a huge hit or a total bust…Fox took the risk and reaps the rewards…pity this is going to make it even harder to get a smart non-pandering movie made
Superman Returns had a lot of problems, but ‘gay illegitimate son’ (a stupid homophobic conceit) was not one of them.
So the director with the two highest grossing films of all time is unemployable? Not only that, the highest grossing films were his last two feature films. Both films that weren’t franchises or adapted from comic books, but original material (Avatar is technically original). Deuce Bigelow can get a sequel green lit, but people won’t return Cameron’s calls? And you also claim that no one will buy a DVD of the biggest movie of the year. I guess you’ll claim that Terminator 3 (2003) wasn’t directed by Cameron because he wasn’t trusted to be financially viable after Titanic. I guess he was also turned down for both Aliens vs. Predator and its sequel.
Kevin Smith’s highest grossing film (out of
has made less than $32 million. And he hasn’t been kicked out of Hollywood yet. He even has a movie coming out in February (Cop Out).
“It IS NOT money in the till, pure and simple. The studio gets only 50% (or less) after the first week. This is why, despite Titanic pulling in great box office, but with a week opening weekend, and fairly anemic home video sales, no one threw money at Cameron.”
–>Right, no one threw money at Cameron, that’s why he was able put together a 400M+ project. I don’t know if people are banging down Cameron’s door, but if they aren’t it’s probably because he can and will do whatever the hell he wants – that’s why after Titanic he spent five years underwater in submersibles filming ocean life, and then showed up out of nowhere and got financed to make an insanely risky and expensive picture that’s now the #2 film of all time.
Yes, obviously ‘the real’ money for studios comes from ancillary, merchandising, screwing participants out of their shares, etc. But box office success, while ‘meaningless’ from the standpoint of Fox’s bottom line (if not necessarily from that of other participants), BO performance IS a very meaningful indicator of how things will play out down the line, and effects what will happen down the line.
As if you’re in the loop, as if you know what is or what is not going on Cameron’s desk. As if the studio’s bottom line is the only financial consideration (it’s not the 1940s). As if Fox fully financed the project anyway; as if any studios fully finances anything. As if you have any reliable data about when what director signed on to direct what sequel.
Cameron is above the system. In both instances, TITANIC and AVATAR, he took original material and leapfrogged over what had been done before. Studio executives are a rotating bunch of corporate ‘businessmen’ without vision. That’s why we are stuck with comic books movies and recycled ‘proven conceptual’ projects. “Let’s mine this lode until it is completely exhausted.” AVATAR will (has) become enormously profitable by any standard. It’s already made money for those who worked on it, the techs, actors, suppliers, etc. By simple arithmetic. it’s made a hundred million for investors now and the exhibitors are taking in unusual profits. Everyone is benefiting. AVATAR has also developed new technologies that will benefit the industry for years to come. The whining and hairsplitting about the value of the film is absurd. It is a freak. A needed freak that has overturned a musty and outdated industry.
Whiskey, if you think Cameron is unemployable, it’s time to put down the bottle and start attending AA meetings.
The man can make any movie he wants; isn’t the very existence of Avatar proof of that?
To Whisky:
If a women sleeps with alot of men for money, she is a wh0re.
Your mother slept with alot of men for money.
Therefore, your mother is a wh0re.
Just b/c you can creat a valid argument, does not mean the argument is sound. B/c if your argument about Titanic & Avatar is sound, by the same logic, your mother must be a wh0re.
Whisky Whisky Whisky. You’d better check the 2009 numbers on distribution revenues before making such ignorant statements. The paradigm of DVDs vs domestic theatrical revenues etc etc changed drastically last year. And, BTW, Fox’s deal with US theatres on Avatar was much tougher than usual and will probably net them 60%, not 50%, of domestic box office grosses.
I normally don’t bother responding to such complete & utter nonsense on these forums, but Whiskey’s arguments are SOOO ridiculous, I feel compelled to chime in…
As others have pointed out – The reason Cameron’s “not being chased” is because not since Aliens has he been a Director for hire. Check his resume, every single film he’s directed since then (and including it) was not only Directed By James Cameron, but Written By as well. He doesn’t get “offered” films. He creates them from the ground up.
Regarding the other Directors you list as having been “chased” after their big films:
* After X-Men 2, Bryan Singer was fired from X-Men 3, and forcibly removed from the lot when he showed interest in Superman.
* I’m pretty sure (but not 100%) Sam Raimi signed on for a trilogy to begin with. And, even though number 3 was the biggest of the series, after the brilliant, although commercially disappointing Drag Me To Hell, he & Sony are still working out their differences for number 4.
* Jon Faverau was the last person to sign on for Iron Man 2, after the Studio set the date with or without him.
* Chris Nolan did The Prestige & Inception, two of his own projects, that he took to the studio, not the other way around.
All those wanting to adjust lists for inflation etc, if you’re so interested in an even playing feild, how about you also adjust the International Box Office for the devalued American dollar?
Last week, Avatar passed Titanic as the highest grossing film of all time here, in Australia. Titanic had $57million Australian Dollars, which in 1997 terms was USD$38m. Avatar sits at AUD$58m before this past weekend, which works out at USD$53.5m.
My point isn’t that Avatar’s box office is any less impressive, it’s simply that comparing the performance of the two films is completely pointless. The money made is interesting from a statistical point of view only, and doesn’t really effect the profitability of the film. (Which, as evidenced by a couple of other people’s posts, is beyond question, regardless of the massive production & promotion cost)
DH wrote: “haters have only two arguments left now: (i) high 3d tickets somehow invalidate the numbers,”
First off, please name one single person who said that high 3D prices “invalidates” Avatar’s success. Just name one single person. You won’t be able to: nobody ever said that (a straw man argument).
Secondly, why is stating a fact – 3D tickets cost more money – so offensive to people? It doesn’t diminish Avatar’s achievement (it qualifies it, in my opinion, but it doesn’t diminish it), and it will never be marked on any of the lists for posterity.
So why, then, have their been several dozen people making posts that are nearly hysterical whenever somebody notes that 3D tickets cost more money? I don’t understand the fear of data, the fear of knowledge. It makes no sense to me. It’s the equivalent of religious people in Medieval times who refused to allow astronomical study because they were afraid it would diminish God. It’s just so anti-curiosity, so anti-knowledge, that I can’t even grasp how somebody rationalizes it.
Secondly, I know probably 10x as much about the story and characters in Avatar as anybody here, and I’ve been anticipating it and writing about it for years. So I’m the total opposite of a “hater”, but I’m willing to state the empirical fact (“A fact?!? The horror, the horror!”) that 3D tickets cost more money. This disproves your message that only “haters” are willing to acknowledge material facts.
“First off, please name one single person who said that high 3D prices “invalidates” Avatar’s success. Just name one single person. You won’t be able to: nobody ever said that”
LOL… you obviously didn’t look very far, suggest you scan back over the past 4 weeks comments, multiple mentions of high ticket prices invalidating success, always worthwhile checking facts before posting and making a dick out of yourself.
It says in case you are too stupid to read Whiskey’s post above yours says “Yeah, high ticket prices DO invalidate the box office numbers.” Please note the use of the word “invalidate”.
People get frustrated because this “data” that you’re talking about (IMAX tickets costing more) has nothing at all to do with the reality of the movie business. What future films get greenlit will not be based on ticket sales, but on profitablility. It doesn’t matter where those profits come from. I’m confident Avatar will make it’s investors/participants $500 million before ancillary revenues!!! Since “the fact” of higher IMAX tickets are so important, you must be blogging like crazy, telling everyone who will listen that Hannah Montana: The Movie’s $80 domestic gross is much, much more impressive than other peoples $100 million movies because almost all of it’s tickets were matinee tickets, steeply discounted.
1) Whiskey above just did hahaha…
2) Higher ticket price will mean lower attendance and vice versa. If the TDK ticket price is 20% more, does it mean that it would gross $106m more and surpass Titanic? If Avatar charge only $1 per ticket its attendance will probably surpass GWTW (everybody may watch it 10 times as it’s so cheap) but that doesn’t make any sense as its total gross may not reach 1b and it’d incur a much higher running cost.
If Avatar charge a lower 3D price, it won’t reach 1.3b now but will reach it eventually. Lower price will mean more people can afford it and boost attendance.
In the end only gross $ counts. Movie attendance is going down slowly because of home entertainment, free download etc. You’d never get GWTW attendance as that’s a TV-less era. If Avatar ends up to be highest grossing film after inflation adjustment of the past decade, isn’t something of an achievement comparable to GWTW, Star Wars?
@DK
Why do you feel TDK boxoffice won’t crumble? Avatar is still tracking better then TDK did. In it’s 4th weekend TDK did about 25 million total, and that was summer.
It had virtually no drop off in the first 3 weeks, even the 3rd to 4th week drop off was smaller than the Dark Knight’s (31% to 39%, if the estimates are correct).
The Book of Eli is a R-rated action movie starring Denzel Washington. The Taking of Pelham 123 (2009) also starring Denzel made $23 million opening weekend. If the bottom doesn’t drop out of Avatar and Eli performs the same as Pelham, Avatar should win next weekend. The same 31% drop would give Avatar a $32 million fifth weekend, another record.
Avatar may have a very long tail, there’s some justification for it remaining on some screens even after it’s been released on DVD. Especially IMAX. I still don’t understand why people are continuing to see the Blindside, but that’s me.
DK, what are you talking about? AVATAR will be roughly 100 million away from DARK KNIGHT at the end of this weekend. It could pull in 100 million from IMAX and 3D alone (remember it’s not losing those screens until March). You’re also not accounting for the Academy Awards bump it’s going to get. This could do 15-20 million a week for five weeks just on the strength of those two factors alone. This still has a shot at number one all time and DARK KNIGHT is almost certainly toast.
Next weekend will be the real test, though. See you then.
Looks like Cameron is again the king of the world!
DK sorry to disapoint u…but avatar will take the domestic gross of TDK and get an even better number..$580m is for sure for avatar…
DK…your analysis is off…with just a 33% drop from a holiday weekend, and smaller drops ahead, Avatar is on page to break TDK’s domestic take. A lot could still happen..but most analyzers said if the drop from last weekend was less than 40%, then it would probably beat TDK.
With the estimated future drops in the 30-35% range, Avatar looks headed to at least 550 million when all is said and done.
Who said I’m disappointed? Avatar fanatics are getting foamingly aggressive with each passing day. The comments here and on IMDb are disgusting: “I can’t wait until it beats TDK so all those losers will kill themselves when they have nothing to boast about their precious little movie!” No lie, swear to God, that was a real comment on IMDb. To say the least, it’s creepy.
I’ve seen this film twice, BOTH times in IMAX 3-D, and I just may see it once more because I thought it was so enjoyable. I’ve told all my friends to go see it; I bring it up at every party. And I actually love Titanic and I hate it when people talk poorly of it. So excuse me if I don’t think Avatar will sail past $3 billion domestic just because it beat Daybreakers and Leap Year (Oh, shock of all shock, the fiftieth vampire flick of the year and a faceless rom-com couldn’t beat it). So just calm down.
And for the record, if the film drops 33% this weekend, then I have a feeling it will fall even harder next weekend when The Book of Eli, a film that, unlike these three surefire losers, actually has a chance of doing well, steals some of the audience. And if I’m wrong and Avatar becomes #1 domestic, I don’t care and I sure as hell won’t be scared to show my username for fear of rebuttal; ooh, wow, I was wrong about how a film performed. Woe is me. /sarcasm
Joey Pants makes a good point: February is a lot more competitive than usual this year, with The Wolfman and Shutter Island coming out, not to mention Book of Eli and Edge of Darkness, as well as smaller possibilities scattered across the board. Every little bit is a nip at Avatar, whether it be a big film like Wolfman or a modest film like Daybreakers; that’s another $15 million that may have gone to Avatar. And on March 5th, Avatar will die a quick death because it will have already lost almost every 2D screen by the 4th, and when Alice in Wonderland assumes 3-D and IMAX, that’s the end of it, right then and there. So no, everyone comparing this to Titanic (“Oh, Titanic’s fourth weekend was only 10% of the final total!”) is comparing apples and oranges.
End rant. But the zealots around here are really getting edgy.
I gave up on movie discussion over at imdb a long time ago. the comments there could not get any crazier, and that goes for any movie.
You know what, I was going to mention that as well. Then I did some research. There are several movies that you can look at that came out around the same time as Avatar in their respective years, and all of them had a pretty high multiplier on their 4th weekends.
Titanic – 64% increase from Friday ($7.7 million) to Saturday ($12.7 million) and then a drop of 35% on Sunday ($8.2 million) for a weekend total of $28.7 million (A 3.7 multiple from Friday’s gross).
Return Of The King – 75% inrease from Friday (%3.6 million) to Saturday ($6.4 million) and then a drop of 36% on Sunday ($4.1 million) for a total of $14.2 million (A 3.94 multiple from Friday’s gross).
Two Towers had a similar multiple of about 3.8 from Friday to the weekend’s final gross. Fellowship Of The Ring also had about a 3.8 multiple.
If Avatar has a 3.7 multiple from Friday to its final weekend gross, it will have $46.6 million for the weekend. But now estimates for Friday are actually a little higher at $13.3 million (not $12.6 million). So, if Avatar has a multiple of 3.5 to 3.8, its weekend total will be somewhere between $46 – $50 million.
It’s obvious now that Avatar will top The Dark Knight domestically.
In its 4th weekend, The Dark Knight made $26 million for a $441 million total. It went on to make another $92 million after its 4th weekend. That’s 3.5 times what it made in its 4th weekend.
In its 4th weekend, Avatar is predicted to make around $45 million, for a total of around $425 million. Even if Avatar only makes 2.5 times its 4th weekend, it’s final total will be $537 million.
After their comparitive 2nd weekends, Avatar trailed Dark Knight by $101 million ($313 million to $212 million).
After each movie’s 3rd weekend, Avatar was $41 million behind ($393 million to $352 million).
After this 4th weekend, Avatar will trail by only $16 million or so (The Dark Knight had $441 million and Avatar will have around $425 million).
Actually, Avatar will be outpacing The Dark Knight by the end of their respective 5th weekends. If the trend continues for Avatar, it’s total after 5 weekends will be around $475 million. The Dark Knight’s total after 5 weekends was $471 million.
If Avatar continues its current trend, the movie will finish its domestic run with about $575 million, falling short of Titanic’s total, obviously.
Not bad for a movie that people predicted would make only $250 million!
Maybe there isn’t a requirement to adjust to inflation but lets be honest, by not adjusting we are ignoring the fact that past movies have gotten more people into theaters. I guess people like getting all excited about records being broken.
http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm
The dollars are misleading. Avatar is #87 on all time adjusted domestic gross.
This is Fox bleating all this poop out there. I will be interested when the final numbers come out, including adjusted Intl take.
Why did Weinstein kill Youth in Revolt by releasing it so modestly? People are sick of Michael Cera, but the film still could have made $15 million easy if they knew how to market their way out of a paper bag. Once again, Lionsgate one-ups ‘em despite a flood of vampire flicks. When will Weinstein finally cave?
Well, at least they didn’t release it in two theaters with no promotion.
I am still amused that the comedy for old fogeys”It’s Complicated” is handily beating the overrated “Up in the Air.”
And no I am not a Clooney “hater.” Just don’t think he’s that good an actor. He can’t hold a candle, for example, to good ole Jeff Bridges
UITA doesn’t seem to be catching on as enthusiastically as originally anticipated. It’s clearly no Juno, and it’s cleary not going to get within sniffing distance of 100 million. I agree that the jubilant critic praise about it being a touchstone for where we’re currently at as a society was mostly a bunch of hot air. It’s an okay film. Nothing revolutionary. I rolled my eyes a little during the third act at the reversion to an oh so predictable formula of a misanthrope trying to reconnect with humanity.
It’s true that Clooney basically just plays himself in everything, but I don’t necessarily view that as a bad thing. He’s more of a movie star in the classic sense than a gifted actor with boundless range. He would’ve been right at home in the classic silver screen era of yesteryear.
The problem of UITA is that it deals with a subject matter (layoffs) that people don’t need to go and pay money for in order to see it happening. I mean, we are in a deep recession in the real life, and the last thing people want is to feel for George Clooney (who is his affable self in the movie, or let’s say, he is the same personality he plays in his Nescafe commercials) and his emotional problems. There is a direct emotional disconnect, which is kind of ironic, since that is what the movie is supposed to be about.
All the things that the critics are praising about UITA are exactly the reasons why not more people show up. Let’s say you have been laid off yourself, or you know somebody in your family who has been, the last thing you want to do is watch your own pain once more on the big screen… and PAY FOR IT.
It’s the same reason barely anybody has seen THE HURT LOCKER. A movie about a war we are still in? Without an actual plot, more like an observational, Hemingway’esque arrangement of scenes, war is a drug, dum de dum, well, yeah, thanks, people say, but if I want to feel shittier about the world than I already do, then I can just as well switch on the news… and not have to pay extra money.
Both movies, by the by, are not inherently bad, they are constructed reasonably well and are competently done, but they simply do not have anybody to connect to, emotionally speaking.
Say what you will about Cameron and AVATAR. He understood (and was also somewhat lucky) that people need somebody to identify with in a movie, and the worse real life is, the more we need something or somebody to tell us that “yes, they are coming, and they will try to beat you down, but you can stand up, you stand up and fight, you can stand up and make a stand”. And that very simple message he wrapped into a visual extravaganza that is breathtaking. In a way it is a movie that is right for this time, whereas pretty much all of the other Award contenders this season are brainy, sometimes even masturbatory exercises that come out and scream at you, saying “Look at me! Look at me! I am important, god damn it! Look at me! I am going to put your finger into the wound!”
Cameron went out and said, “pssst. I’m going to tell you a story. You may like it, you may not, but come on over, sit at the fire, get yourself warmed up, let me start…”
Great post.
I agree. I love Clooney and enjoyed Reitman’s two previous movies (especially Thank You for Smoking) but I work in an industry that’s shaky at best. Every day, I hear of people with jobs similar to mine getting laid off. I really don’t want to pay $12 to see that on the big screen.
Yeah, Thomas, you got it exactly right. Avatar is a good, old-fashioned “once upon a time, in a land far away” escapist fantasy that is thrilling and gorgeous and makes people completely forget about our problems here on earth. That’s why I loved it. That’s why even thought I though Up in the Air was a beautifully crafted movie, it left me sad, while Avatar left me wanting to see it again. I want to go back to Pandora! And that’s what audiences are responding to, I think. We’re longing for a more beautiful, peaceful world where the inhabitants live in harmony with nature. Avatar, I think, has touched a chord somewhere deep within people that films like UITA and The Hurt Locker completely miss. And that’s why we are seeing the huge box office numbers.
Also, I tried seeing It’s Complicated and I could only stomach about a half hour of it before fleeing the auditorium in horror. This is the first and last Nancy Myers film that I’ll ever purchase admission to. I don’t care what age or gender you are, if you’re part of the crowd that finds sitcom tripe like this pleasing, you have dubious entertainment tastes. Why on earth would anyone go out of their way and pay money to see this when they could walk a few paces to their couch, turn on the tv to any random channel where a show with a laugh track is on, and more or less replicate the same experience? I was disgusted by seeing Streep and Baldwin’s considerable talents go to waste on such simplistic fluff, that’s what compelled me to flee.
People like “It’s Complicated” because it is actually funny. Movies that audiences enjoy make money. Streep and Baldwin and Martin are fantastic together, and that’s why it’s a hit. It’s what the movies are supposed to do, so I don’t understand the snobbery.
How much do you want to bet that “Up in the Air” is a $100 million + earner? It is a weak year for the Oscars, so the Clooney film should recieve a good boost for the award season. It will be well past $50 mil by the end of the weekend, so I think 9 figures is certainly possible.
I’ll take that “bet” – how bout a buck?
Are you nuts?
I hear ya, Victoria. is there a more overrated director working today than Jason Reitman? He defines middle-of-the-road vanilla, in my humble opinion. No wonder geriatric critics and the Academy eat his movies up!
Reitman would be more bearable as a human being if he didn’t mug it in every interview possible. If he didn’t make that stupid pie chart of the questions he was asked. Hey, Reitman — most of us got here because we’re talented, not because we’re purely a result of nepotism. You’re lucky anyone asks you anything at all. 3 movies, all three terribly overrated.
Victoria — seems something’s got your knickers in a twist – we’ll assume it’s not Clooney – despite his reputation.
I have to disagree with your assessment, Up In The Air is a very entertaining film.
Anna Kendrick stole the show, Vera was surprising and I just love J.K. Simmons’ work. So give the film a break. Whether you like Clooney’s acting (or the man himself) or not, there are others in the film who give very solid and entertaining as hell performances and your comments denigrate their contribution.
Haven’t seen Jeff Bridges’ newest, but I’ve enjoyed his efforts in the past. That doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy both films!
Are you high? Kendrick is the movie’s liability. She never makes the character remotely likeable even though it’s clear by the end that we’re supposed to feel she has become more human. When all was said and done she was still running a dehumanized call center where college dropouts read scripted responses to people devastated by their layoffs. Wrong actress for the job, her tight mouth and beady eyes make her look like an emotionless heartless corporate drone throughout.
I saw this movie the day it came out…ehhh not impressed, thought it was boring and never at any point was i moved in any way. I dont see what all the hype is about. I guess James Cameron is “i can do know wrong of hollywood.” Everyone made a big boo-ha about TITANIC and that made a boatload of money as well but like with AVATAR dont see why. Dont get me wrong im not a James Cameron hater, i just dont think either movie was that good. Personally i think INCEPTION will is and will shit all over AVATAR. It may not make as much money but i can guarantee it will be alot more exciting and entertaining.
wow,you really arent a James Cameron Hater. With words like “shit all over Avatar” & “boring” & “NEVER at ANY point was I moved in ANY way”.
Your right and the rest of the globe who made it the 2nd highest grossing film of all time,by ponying up over $1 Billion are wrong.
Who do you really think you’re kidding?
Actually jonathan i am right because its my opinion and it reeally dosent matter what the other billions of people around the world think because the opinion of your own is the only one that matters. Now as far as me being a James Cameron hater..you couldnt be more wrong. Not only do i like him but i think he was of the premier and most talented directors of our time. His work with TERMINATOR and T2, his producing on POINT BREAK, and the underwater sci-fi epic ABYSS were all exceptional.,and also happen to be movies that i liked very much. So…am i still a hater? I dont think so. The fact remains and stand firm on MY opinion that AVATAR simply isnt as great as its hype.
Oh and yeah my friend…INCEPTION will shit all over AVATAR
Actaully i am right because its my opinion of the movie and it doesnt matter much what the millions of other people globally think because the only opinion thay matters is that of your own. Hating on Cameron im not.. im more like an advocate. He is one the premier and most talented directors of our time.,TERIMNATOR, T2, ABYSS. All great movies that i enjoyed thoroughly but that doesnt change the fact that “I” feel AVATAR wasnt that great. Based on what ive seen already from AVATAR and the trailers ive seen for INCEPTION, “MY” feeling is that it looks to be a better movie.
You try to give your bias opinion ‘objectivity’ by claiming you are not a ‘hater.’ Then you proceed to reveal your bias against James Cameron by stating that ‘Inception’, a film yet to be released, ‘will shit all over Avatar.’ Do you see why you are both a ‘hater’ and an idiot? By the way, I am not a Chris Nolan hater.
Titanic did great box office, but the studio saw less than it liked because the money mostly came in late, when their revenue-sharing agreement with theater owners dropped from 75% first weekend to 50%. Titanic did poorly in home video.
This is why Cameron spent a decade “making” Avatar. Despite successes like: True Lies, Terminator 1 & 2, etc. Yeah the Abyss was a failure, rather abysmally, but you’d think that one bad film among those winners would not hurt him. Weird. I guess Titanic had a bad vibe among the studio execs. I know it cost a lot for the time.
And you know this how? Words are not as mightier than evidence to back your claims.
Titanic did poorly in home video? Try again, jackass. It was the number one DVD of 1999 and the first DVD ever to sell 1 million copies. You are honestly trying to argue against the success of Titanic now? Studios saw less money than they liked from the HIGHEST GROSSING FILM OF ALL TIME? What planet do you live on? Are you called whiskey because you’re wasted all the time?
For the record, I don’t even like Avatar, but your absurd attempts to spin it as a failure because it has a different political viewpoint than your own are desperate, pathetic, and entirely wrong.
If you use the “why weren’t studios fighting over Cameron” argument one more time I’m going to scream. Studios weren’t fighting over him because he’s not a director for hire. He’s too big for that. He decides when and what he wants to make and the studio says, “whatever you say, Mr. Cameron.” He didn’t want to make more fiction films for a long time after Titanic. But if you don’t think he could have walked into any studio in town, pitched virtually any idea he had in his head, and walked out with a greenlight, you are deeply mistaken.
You clearly have no idea how Hollywood actually works, Whiskey, so please stop trying.
Oh Whiskey…Our dear clueless Whiskey. How we’ve missed your un-informed psycho-babble…Really, I missed it dearly!
A quick check online once again proves your inept, fabricated numbers.
Unless you think $1.2 billion in video, DVD sales and rentals is considered “poor” for Titanic (http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/1997/TITAN.php)
I can’t say that the number is “official”, because I don’t know how reliable the website is, but I saw it on another website as well.
So, the worldwide total, including theater and home entertainment is closer to $3 billion for Titanic. That means that if the studio only received 50% of the total of everything, it made over $1.5 billion (although they likely receive a bigger percentage of the video and DVD sales).
Let’s say that Titanic cost $300 million including marketing. That means that the studio still made a profit of around $1.1 – $1.2 billion.
Even if you make up more numbers, and say that Titanic actually cost $500 million, it still made over $800 million profit.
In the end, no matter how much you falsify your numbers, the studio made hundreds of millions!
ALL I ASK IS THAT YOU DO RESEARCH BEFORE YOU COMMENT! SHOW US ACTUAL PROOF!!!!!
saw youth in revolt, really good movie, weinsteins fucked the advertising bag on that one.
as for avatar um once it actually has some competition the numbers will drop notice with a few newer movies it had a good percentage drop, not an anything crazy but once u release films like book of eli, tooth fairy, valentines day, wolfman, percy jackson, valentines day avatars numbers will crumble.
Daybreakers wont win any awards, but it’s fun if you love vampire movies.
Daybreakers was pretty good. It was stylish and it had kind of a John Carpenter vibe. It worked better as a societal horror parable than as an action movie. I left feeling satisfied but wishing that more of the former had been incorporated.
Also, the sooner Michael Cera stops being cast in major roles, the better. This guy is so bland, vanilla, and devoid of screen presence or range. Superbad and Juno succeeded in spite of him, not because his participation was a vital ingredient of their respective success. A day will never come when people make a trek to theatres based on the allure of Michael Cera’s name on the marquee.
It looks like Nine fell out of the top ten. Weinstein marketed the hell out of it.You have to admit that. News of the movie was all over the place. Still nobody wanted to see it.It never opened and it never caught on…I don’t think a platform release would have helped, as some have suggested. Word of mouth must have been brutal. I think they knew it was getting bad numbers and hoped to get a good opening weekend and make some money. That failed. It’s just a case of a movie that should not have been made..
Nine was a shit movie, plain and simple. Horrible music, pedestrian direction, and egregious miscasting of the lead role. It was depressing seeing all of the talented actors floundering about trying in vain to make the movie work.
i just dont get it. i saw the movie and dont get the appeal of the movie at all. it is predictable from beginning to end. other than the special effects it is essentially an okay movie. it was not even remotely as good as the dark knight. this can only inflate the overly inflated ego of james cameron. also, oscars for this? you have got to be kidding me. but then again i gave up watching the oscars after crash won best picture.
You are right on the dollar mate.
TDK was a million times better. Avatar was a major disappointment. i guess its B.O performance is due to the curiosity of being the new 3D and all that.
TDK was a great film for its genre but I’m sorry to burst your bubble and have to tell you that Avatar by comparison IS the better film as evidenced by the numbers which tells us that MORE people have gone to see Avatar globally (and will domestically) and seen it multiple times..I have seen both and enjoyed both tremendously btw…TDK is just too dark for the entire family to see plus it does not cut across demographics and international boundaries as well (check out boxofficemojo for the numbers) compared to Avatar…and women are seeing and recommending Avatar…I never came across Twitter chatter or facebook or any news articles mentioning women recommending TDK to their friends…matter of fact, all nationalities and genders and age groups are recommending this film to their family and friends so sorry, your opinions are in the minority and I feel badly that you couldn’t enjoy the film because if this film didn’t impress you and all you can enjoy are dark,violent (and just as derivative) subject material as TDK (I’m assuming you bring up TDK as a direct comparison of all the films in history is because you guys dig this type of material) then NOTHING in your lifetime will ever impress you.
That doesn’t make AVATAR better, just more popular. Transformers 2 was more popular than a lot of other films–does that make it better?
Um, with all due respect Dogsbody, look at the numbers..you can’t obtain numbers like this without repeat viewing and why else would one think a movie goer would pay to see a film more than once if they didn’t enjoy it? Based on the box office numbers globally, this film is not only the better film financially but also in terms of popularity. I define “popularity” by the amount of people who have seen a film as based on box office figures. In my book, if you have financial + popularity = superior = better, does it not? Transformerz 2, btw, was the better financial performer, and yes, better in terms of popularity than yeah, a lot of other films. To me, box office is King. It is what makes headlines and gets you noticed by the media and especially if you have been da King for 4 weeks straight with number 5 in its sights as people realize IMAX will be sporting Jonny Depp’s latest venture into LA LA land courtesy of Tim Burton, you probably heard of that one, there is limited time to see this film in all its f*cking 3D glory, and this juggernaut ain’t heading off to pasteur before it’s had it’s financial fill to the last drop. Yeah, in my world, Avatar is better than TDK (TOP 10 in my book for sure but sorry, I call it like I see it).
You didn’t come across women recommending TDK because they weren’t recommending it. TDK had a great set up but the last half was tedious. The remarkably uninteresting boat lesson was excruciating. Avatar, on the other hand, is pure wonderment from beginning to end. It deserves to utterly eclipse TDK (as it is).
some people care about story and writing, don’t get mad at them for it
With all due respect, did I accidentally post on rottentomatoes? Ain’t it cool.com? My apologies. I found this rather interesting topic under the headline “Avatar grabs 4 #1 weekends in a row…” and thought we were discussing Avatar with a finanical bent. Btw, who are we to presume TDK has a better story than Avatar? Avatar exquisitely excuted a timeless classic fable and brought it to life in the most clear and fascinating way that I never thought I would live to see such an event in cinematic history. It’s a tale that will be told for generations to come and in many different forms I don’t doubt the last famous one being KC’s Dances with Wolves which as you know had a great deal of success at the Academy awards. Dances was a great film it’s just that KC’s other film ventures thereater were great letdowns which didn’t help his brand but he created that one great film. With Avatar, the message was easy to understand and allowed you to explore the world, basically he gives so much attention to detail to pull you into the world he’s created which is a great sign of storytelling, wouldn’t you agree…but it all starts with a simple yet powerful message that shouldn’t be lost on generations to come. There are those that will scoff at the idea of Avatar having a great story but I dare say it does. The beauty is in the simplicity. Human greed/consumption vs Nature is timeless. You can draw endless parallels between this film or that. Does this make Avatar’s story inferior to TDK’s? Also, the characters, frankly, what they say does mirror something you may find quite shocking- it’s not Shakespeare, Edgar Allen Poe, but realistic lines that you can relate to and understand clearly which to me is the point of great writing. Correct and educate me of course if I’m being off base here. My opinion of Avatar as given above is as objective as possible. What more scientific proof do you need that Avatar in the end will succeed TDK as the better film? It is perfoming better at this point than TDK at its 4th lap around (boxofficemojo.com for direct head to head comparison).
Let’s make this easy: If you gave the average film goer a choice between two movies that he will get a free ticket to, the two films being Avatar IMAX 3D or TDK IMAX, which film do you think he will choose? Do you feel, ultimately what that consumer chooses is because ultimately in his mind, this film is better and thus is the best choice for him to spend his next couple of hours at the theater because in his mind, he will have a better time/a better experience than the other film? Looking forward to being enlightened further.
while people are mentioning the dull knight, i just have to say what a piece of shit that movie was. and heath ledgers acting? i couldnt stand the way he kept licking his lips- what was that supposed to convey, how annoying he was? and the plot? everyone in the whole police dept is corrupt? that plot couldnt happen in tiajuana. and his plan was to get arrested, get the drop on his interrogator, hold him hostage for a cell phone to detonate his bomb? an austin powers spoof wouldnt touch that. of course, i didnt see it in the theatre, just someone elses dvd, i wouldnt pay a penny to watch such excrement, so i have a theory that the theatres used some type of hypnotic gas/ weaponized neurotoxin to make people leaving the theatre think they liked it. and ironically, i liked the first batman with bale, and i liked ledger in first knight. also, i loved avatar, but i couldnt stand titanic. well, i guess we all have different tastes, mine are just better. because i can guarantee that if somehow some objective alien race, or some supercomputer program,could be provided examples of human art and good and bad cinema- they would conclude that dark knight was truly not only one of the worst movies ever made with the worst plot ever written, but ledgers “performance” was only saved from being laughable in the same way that watching maggots crawl on a turd is too disgusting to elicit mirth.
I just saw the all time box office list adjusted for Inflation. Man, how far has the dollar fallen in the last 10 years?
That’s sad.
Movie ticket prices have increased faster than inflation. According to the National Association of Theater Owner, average US ticket prices rose by 53% from 1998 to 2008, while the CPI was only 31% higher in 2008 than 1998. Although, NATO has US average ticket prices in 2008 at $7.18, which seems a little low to me. I always pay between $8.50 and $10.50 for movie tickets.
So by Fri., Jan. 8, AVATAR has made:
Domestic-393,815,000
Foreign-781,821,010
Total-1,175,636,010
If you take it as fact, (i don’t know whether it is or not), that the theatres KEEP 50% gross Domestic and 65% Foreign than AVATAR has made for the studio:
DOM–393,815,000 * 0.5=196,907,500
FOR–781,821,010 * 0.35=273,637,354
Fox Studios AVATAR revenue:470,544,854
The movie has paid for itself already in spite of being the most expensive movie in history. It’s all in the black here on out people!
http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm
There is NO other way to look at box office results other than by comparing apples to apples – ie, inflation-adjusted numbers. Over time, the value of a dollar declines as inflation rises. Would you compare how much a TV cost in 1960 with what one costs now and say that TVs are at “record-breaking prices?” Of course not.
GONE WITH THE WIND is still the king, and its record is no danger of being broken.
Just try to have someone give you a 1939 dollar so you can pump it up to current value.
Besides, 1939 was without television and all the other entertainment geegaws and distribution methods we have today.
There is no truly valid way to compare performers in different eras. So we default to gross metrics. Avatar – and I don’t want to see the movie and I don’t get why people are so invested in its box office performance for their self-validation – is THE phenomenon for film commerce this year and clearly the 2000-2010 decade, though I can see the argument that 3D and IMAX have changed the market over the time period. Avatar will post the numbers that set the top mark for the next few years to come. Then inflation and new distribution modes will kick in and it may be easier to post Avatar’s numbers and someone will. Records are made to be broken.
It’s interesting that you bring up TVs in your comment.
Tell me, how much did TVs cost in 1939? Oh, that’s right, there were no TVs in 1939 when Gone With The Wind came out.
How much were computers in 1939?
Face it, there was no entertainment competition for movies when Gone With The Wind came out.
If Gone With The Wind didn’t come out in 1939 and it came out today, do you still think it would be the king? Would it still sell the 200 million tickets today that it sold back in 1939?
Yes, the truth is that no movie will EVER sell 200 million tickets again. But you can’t compare movies today to movies from a time when the movie theater was the only form of entertainment for movies.
Jason, movies don’t live in a vacuum. If you are going to use inflation numbers, then you should also take into consideration other factors. When Gone with the Wind was in theaters, there were far fewer entertainment options and distractions. Can you seriously tell me that GwtW would have made $1.45 billion dollars domestically if every home back then had a tv, video games, internet, iPods, and DVDs? It wouldn’t have. What Avatar has managed to achieve, despite the fracturing of people’s attention, is incredibly impressive.
Um. Accounting for inflation, it would be IMPOSSIBLE for any film to beat “Gone With the Wind”. Films were still relatively young in 1939 and were still a marvel for people – there were no downloads to counter ticket prices, there was no video – the only place for anyone to SEE a movie was in a theater. Therefore, no film will EVER touch it. It’s ridiculous not only to compare it to inflation, but to discount the fact that no one could see “Gone With the Wind” anywhere BUT in a theater. Technology has drastically reduced the amount of people that see films in theaters. Thus, a film like “Avatar” or “Titanic”, which makes nearly a billion and a half dollars, in THIS environment, is ASTOUNDING. Comparing everything to “Gone With the Wind”, given those factors and more, is ABSURD. Just DOMESTICALLY, inflation-adjusted, “Gone With the Wind” made a billion and a half dollars – that’s DOMESTICALLY. Non-inflation adjusted, it made 198 million. Therefore, it would be impossible for ANY FILM to EVER come close – the comparison is silly. For example, “Star Wars”, non-inflation adjusted, in 1977, made $460 million. Inflation adjusted, that would be $1,309,179,000 today. We’re dealing with REALITY here. Not fantasy. If you want to deal in fantasy, you could say that, inflation adjusted, F. Scott Fitzgerald made more money selling “The Great Gatsby” in 1925 than Stephen King has in his entire career, all of his books combined. It’s ridiculous to ascribe that standard to contemporary media. So seriously – just stop. Inflation adjusted, “The Graduate” made more money than “The Godfather” – even though non-inflation adjusted, “The Godfather” made TWENTY MILLION MORE than “The Graduate” when it was released. The films were just four years apart. It’s not a realistic standard to apply to movies today, there are simply too many factors, home video and internet just being one of them. Stop being silly.
There’s no reasoning with the Avatar haters. In their eyes, it will forever be a dubiously profitable piece of shit with asterisks next to its box office records.
If anyone is worried bout the long term gross of avatar just wait til it gets closer to the end of it when the oscar run is over and they will crank out the ads telling people they have limited time and its gonna bring people back who may have only seen in it the one time early on in its run. the extra ads may cost money but this movie is a surefire to draw people back so morwe fuel for the fire right? Either way, Avatar is going to outgross TDK.
Are the Intl numbers “hard” numbers or “soft” numbers? How reliable are the numbers being reported?
More reliable than anything you have said on here.
How can people compare It’s Complicated to Up in the Air? Setting aside the quality of the films, respectively, just consider economics! UITA cost $25-30M, with Clooney taking a cut salary in exchange for a bigger backend. While IC cost upwards of $85M with full freight for Streep, Meyers, and Rudin (shooting for 80+ days I hear). Plus they had to kiss Steve Martin in for a point or two for ten days work. So yeah, IC might come out on top at the box office, but believe you me, it won’t see black for quite some time, and Paramount will see a tidy profit on UITA sooner than later.
It’s unlikely that UITA will make a ‘tidy profit.’ Foreign income will be negligible and the film will probably top out at 60m plus a little domestic and that won’t pay for production, prints and advertising, and other costs. For some strange reason, the advertising campaign has changed and become more intense (expensive). People complain that the movie is not what is being advertised, a light, romantic comedy, and leave the theater depressed and disappointed, so good word of mouth isn’t a factor here. It may break even eventually after everything is in but it will take a lot of time and effort that may better be spent on something else.
The lastest ubiquitous ads that I’ve seen did nothing but emphasize the Clooney/Farmiga romance. It basically ignores the fact that it’s about an itinerant guy who fires people. The studio must really be desperate if they’re trying to mislead potential viewers on this scale.
It’s Complicated cost 85 million? Lord almighty, Nancy Myers is up there with Judd Apatow in terms of fiscally irresponsible comedic filmmaking.
Just caught it in the theaters. Oh my gosh! Totally disappointed. Talk about over-hype!
Here’s why
1) Same old plot of white boy discovering a new world and learns about the ways of the natives. (Dances with wolves, Last Samurai, Poca Hantas..)
2) Boy was selected by the natives cause of unexplained magical powers.
2) Boy team up with the natives to stop evil white man. (see above)
3) Boy wins and gets the girl
So much for the 3D effects. The so called last 20mins fight scene was once again over blown. Kind of reminded me of Narnia..the 1st one
And now there is talk of a sequel. Can’t wait for it to bomb like the 2nd Narnia.
Complete nutter and waste of my freakin money
Thought experiment: What about a movie with a plot so original and unappealing that nobody every wrote anything like it before – like a guy who falls in love not with a being but an inanimate object(oh wait that’s been done too). How about this movie spends time explaining magic or technology in detail and boring 90% of the audience. And instead of winning and getting the object, he loses and dies like every other French or Russian film.
The best stories are fresh re-tellings of the simplest. If you’re too jaded to see that you’re too jaded for movies. It’s not hype when over 80% of people who see a movie end up begging and dragging everyone they know to see it.