Michael Bay’s Name Pushed Paramount To Settle Injured …
Several More New Series In Recasting Mode; Returning Ones …
‘G.I. Joe: Retaliation’ Moving To March 2013 To …
Directors Fortnight Says It Must “Police …
‘Chronicle’ Helmer Josh Trank Takes On …
Big Media Chiefs Tell Cable Operators To Speed Up ‘TV …
Will ‘Pan Am’ Take Flight With Amazon?
EMMYS: Showtime Launches Free Weekend Promotion Targeting …
TOLDJA! ICM Management Buyout Complete
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Dancing With The Stars’, …
An Olympian Effort: NBCUni Plans 5,535 Hours Of Coverage …
Netflix Exec Denies It’s Responsible For Nickelodeon …
DESPERATE: HuffPo & Oprah Team Up Now
Hot Trailer: ‘The Great Gatsby’
How Did Women Pilot Writers Fare For 2012?
Disney Quits Snow White Film ‘Order Of The …
Cannes Planning Surprise Screening Of Non-Fest Films; …
Investors Unfriend Facebook As SEC Investigates IPO …
Cash Windfalls For WME Agents, Assistants
A&E IndieFilms Sets ‘Happy Valley,’ …
Hot Cannes Property: Natalie Portman, Lynne Ramsay Team On …
In yesterday’s News Corp earnings call, Rupert Murdoch revealed there have been “very early talks about it” with James Cameron and “we’ll be pushing for one”. He also noted about the sequel: “Jim had ideas for one” but “we haven’t come to any agreement with him or budget or timing.” Murdoch also referred to the fact that Avatar was 14-years in the making, so “being Jim Cameron I wouldn’t hold your breath for an early one.”
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.
Loading ... Loading ...
the technology was great the story was god awful..why spend the energy and time doing a rehash
Cameron said that he already has a trilogy arch figured out, and that because they worked out the technical motion capture and CGI parts in Avatar, the sequels shouldn’t take 4 years to make like the first film.
Hopefully we get a sequel before 2018.
I’d love to hear the naysayers response on this one… as I recall, their ringleader says no sequel is a sign that Avatar has still not yet turned a profit.
Ok, so there you have it!
When the words come from Rupert Murdoch himself that he wants a sequel to Avatar, you know that they have made money on Avatar. So to those that think that Avatar is still a failure, this news should finally silence you.
It’s still amazing to me that people out there think that Avatar “lost” money or barely covered cost when the movie has already made over $2 billion worldwide, but there are still a few delusional people out there.
And as I stated before, the studio doesn’t tell James Cameron what to do, he does something when he is ready to do so.
He is working on another project, so they are just in talks right now about a sequel to Avatar. I have a feeling it will be at least another 6 or 7 years before we see Avatar 2. And that’s just the way James Cameron works.
If Cameron’s too slow I see another opportunity for Kurtzman and Orci.
It’s not that much of a stretch, they’re doing everything else.
Even though Fox had distribution rights, I think Cameron still holds rights to the story/material. I couldn’t see him allowing anyone else but himself to create a sequel.
I like how Weekly Standard whined about AVATAR being “Anti-American,” despite just becoming the #1 movie in American history. Nevermind the world.
And that AVATAR was released and produced by a studio that’s part of Murdoch’s corporate empire.
You know, same Murdoch that owns Fox News, which employs several Weekly Standard people.
Yet notice those hawks never attack their boss. NEVER EVER!
Let’s see:
#2: Titanic – Chronicling the biggest failure of the Industrial Age, off the coast of America.
#3: The Dark Knight – Heralding a vigilante fighting crime AND a corrupt and broken American law enforcement system.
#4: Star Wars – A force of insurgent ‘rebel’ cells destroys the power center of a large imperialist empire.
People pay real money to see The Big Guys fall in all kinds of ways.
Number two sounds boring. The thrill of the tech ain’t that great!
If News Corp really wanted an AVATAR 2 they could have thrown enough money and deals to Cameron to get one. I’m sure the sticking point is money, i.e. budget, and also financing. Cameron wants to make other movies, which cost money, and his next movie does not look to be a blockbuster (Last Train from Hiroshima). Fox presumably has the marketing and production muscle to make that movie happen for Cameron without budget worries.
Previously I wondered WHY not report/book foreign revenue for AVATAR now? Another story about News Corps Q2 mentioned that AVATAR had been financed with outside partners. Fox may not have had much financial risk (the downside) if this is true, but the upside may taken by the financial partners, if they did indeed finance a good part of the movie.
FWIW, Box Office Mojo has a breakdown of reported foreign grosses. There seems to be some risk there, i.e. it seems doubtful that places like China ($127 million), India ($25 million), Brazil ($43 million), Mexico ($37 million), Russia ($101 million) are going to give a free and fair accounting, and gross-sharing, in the way that say, Japan, Germany, or Australia will.
Also, if you look at the numbers, Australia ($84 million) has far more revenue than India ($25 million) or Brazil ($43 million) and nearly as much as China, despite having far fewer people.
The biggest contributors to AVATAR’s foreign box office (its fascinating) are essentially First World countries unsurprisingly able to afford movie tickets instead of cheap pirated goods: South Korea, the UK, Germany, Spain, Australia, Italy, Japan, etc. Egypt, despite having many people, did only about $1 million or so.
You could probably produce an AVATAR Index of relative consumer wealth based on box office returns for foreign countries. I suspect a lot of these nations probably cost more to market/ship prints etc. than they brought back in gross revenues. Will FOX use this to simply skip a lot of low-performing places (India, Egypt, Iceland) in the future?
Hey whiskey, how are you doing with those voices coming from your air vents?
Yes, I’m quite sure it cost News Corp. over $25 million just to ship prints to India.
If releasing movies in foreign territories wasn’t profitable, then studios wouldn’t do it. Yet, plenty of movies that grossed less than Avatar (which means every single other movie released there, seeing as it’s the highest grosser of all time) has been released in foreign territories. Studios would’ve stopped by now if it was losing them money.
Oh My, just how stupid are you, seriously?!
The reason Australia’s Gross is so high compared to the number of people isn’t because less people saw it, it’s because the exchange rate on the Aus/US Dollar is almost 1:1.
Also, Australia is a developed nation, and going to the movies here costs the same, if not more than it does in the US.
But how could this be true? Avatar will never be profitable, right whiskey?
Rupert Murdoch must be taking crazy pills to want to push for an Avatar sequel, since it’s already lost him 4 billion dollars.
And the reason Avatar was 14 years in the making was because nobody else wanted to hire James Cameron, because he is someone who never gets asked to direct anything, since he always loses people money.
/sarcasm
LOL!!!
This post is the definition of ignorance and jealousy.
I’d like to see what Cameron could do with a billion dollar budget. Let’s really smash some records.
I heard from a friend at Fox that the sequel is not only definate, but could be ready in just two years. They were not sure if Cameron was on board though. The reason it could be done so much more quickly than Avatar is that much of the development and hard work had already been done (in Avatar), and so it would be a much simpler task doing part two.