Holly Blue Balls, hey I get to say that twice in one movie year. Despite a snowed in East Coast, Avatar cleaned up at the Box Office. It’s projected to bring in about $73 million bucks domestically and $159 million internationally for a total of $232 million. That’s a lot of arrows to fight the evil humans with. The movie is rumored to have cost around $400 million to make and market the movie, so it’s well on it’s way to making it’s money back. Although I do find Hollywood math funny, when a movie cost $50 – $100 million, then it needs to make $300 million to break even, but the math works completely different when James Cameron’s involved. The film fell short of the record for December debuts of $77.2 million set two years ago by Will Smith’s “I Am Legend.” Go ahead, Will!
Michelle said “The film fell short of the record for December debuts of $77.2 million set two years ago by Will Smith’s “I Am Legend.”
What she fails to tell you is Avatar was the highest-grossing opening ever for a movie that’s neither a sequel, a remake nor a direct adaptation and that it handily set a new 3D opening weekend benchmark.
Just go here to see the truth
http://boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=2632&p=.htm
Well Michelle needs to justified her crappy review of the film becuase more than 90% of movie viewers already dropped it down the toilet. The movie dropped just 2% this weekend and is keeping strong legs do to strong word of mouth. This is not Transformers 2, G.I. Joe or 2012 who dropped more than half the audience next weekend. $726 millions in two weeks worldwide!!!!! Poor Michelle just need to shut up with her stupid math or take a break with the bashing of the movie.
Hi Michelle,
You are one of my favorite critics because we usually agree (and like to play video games). However, I don’t think you get this movie. I disagreed with you about “No Country for Old Men” as well (you may remember my Email), and felt you missed the whole point there too.
I think this movie has 2 pivotal issues. One is the game changing technological aspect of 3D. Action movies in theaters will probably never be the same, and the technology isn’t easily transportable to the TV screen. This has nothing to do with the movie story, of course, but has huge implications for the industry and the big screen.
Second is the movie story and message itself. I personally enjoyed the 3D effect and was captivated by the movie enough to forget it was really long. The real message was buried in the dialogue. It is easy to come up with the conclusion that it was just the hackneyed story of the evil miners trying to exploit the planet while trampling over the natives. But something Sigorney Weaver said put it into focus. “The unobtanium” (gotta like that mineral name) was not the real treasure. Imagine a world like we live in, but where each life form is connected empathically to every other one. Is that good or bad? The exploration of that concept was given life through the protagonists who expressed the strong plea (and defended their world) that despite the carnivorous, nasty environs, life was much better than our own petty self involvement. I think the lost exploration of how that can happen, what it’s like, and what it means to us is the real story in the movie.
Regards,
Norm