Avatar Passes the $1 Billion Mark

Could it be subliminal messages?

Will the directors cut have them just nuking the site from orbit?

Now if only smurfs we're big enough for a face hugger. (brainy would be quite for a little while and all would be happy. (la la a la la la, sing a happy song)
 
I agree that "Avatar" has a lot of dimensions to it. It's a Rorschach test--you see what you want. And that is why Cameron now has two billion-dollar grosses under his belt. Most people probably watch it for the CGI/3D (except, of course, those who experience nausea), some watch it for the story/politics, some out of curiosity. It doesn't matter why so long as your butt is in the seat.

I hear "conservatives" complaining it's anti-military, anti-American, overly environmentalist and even anti-white. I hear "liberals" moaning it's racist and sexist.

Before anyone buys into any of these arguments, they should see the goddamn movie before opening their mouths. Nothing's worse than someone who acts informed but is really not.

Personally, I've seen it twice in IMAX 3D (no nausea here). I can see how one would extrapolate these various points of view and messages. I don't choose to get worked up over them, because I enjoyed the movie mostly for being GOOD CGI.
 
It had some really nice visuals but that is the only thing good I have to say about it. The story was weak and nothing new. I knew what would happen in the end because it was obvious but I would have been surprised if the humans won in the end.
 
Fail said:
I"m waiting for it to come out on DVD or Blu Ray since i'm deaf and they don't offer subtitles or captions in theaters

not gonna pay $10 for a ticket + food for a slideshow
Click to expand...

Use captionfish.com to find a subbed movie in your region -- I've seen a subbed Avatar in my area. It was a good movie. (Yes, I'm deaf too)
 
TheCommander said:
It had some really nice visuals but that is the only thing good I have to say about it. The story was weak and nothing new. I knew what would happen in the end because it was obvious but I would have been surprised if the humans won in the end.
Click to expand...

So you just told everyone that is discussing this and hasn't seen it the end. Smooth move Ex-Lax. :rolleyes:
 
Terry Olaes said:
James Cameron’s epic Avatar has surpassed the $1 billion mark in worldwide box office sales, propelling it past The Dark Knight into fourth-place among all-time sales. It’s pretty stunning when you consider that two of the top five all-time worldwide grossing movies are by James Cameron, with Titanic sitting comfortably atop the list at $1.8 billion. If you haven’t seen Avatar yet, what are you waiting for?
Click to expand...
As inflation increases, the Gross dollar amount for new movies will always make more.
How about just giving us the number of TICKETS sold so that we can actually be compare the viewership. TV ratings have always been like that, why not movies?

This is no knock against James Cameron, I think most of his films are very good but when tickets are $10-20 each, it just doesn't measure up to films when ticket prices were $3-5. Sure they made more money with the newer film but did less people see it? Thats what I want to know.
 
bbvdd2 said:
As inflation increases, the Gross dollar amount for new movies will always make more.
How about just giving us the number of TICKETS sold so that we can actually be compare the viewership. TV ratings have always been like that, why not movies?

This is no knock against James Cameron, I think most of his films are very good but when tickets are $10-20 each, it just doesn't measure up to films when ticket prices were $3-5. Sure they made more money with the newer film but did less people see it? Thats what I want to know.
Click to expand...

thats why they factor in inflation :rolleyes:
 
bbvdd2 said:
As inflation increases, the Gross dollar amount for new movies will always make more.
How about just giving us the number of TICKETS sold so that we can actually be compare the viewership. TV ratings have always been like that, why not movies?

This is no knock against James Cameron, I think most of his films are very good but when tickets are $10-20 each, it just doesn't measure up to films when ticket prices were $3-5. Sure they made more money with the newer film but did less people see it? Thats what I want to know.
Click to expand...

The other thing is that tickets cost more because it is 3D. There was something like a $2-$3 surcharge at The Arclight because it is a 3D film. IMAX theaters already cost more, obviously.

Did you guys have to pay a little more to see it in 3D at a normal theater? I'm really curious now.
 
For all the people bitching about CGI... I don't get it. You pay how much for graphics hardware for your PC, then you get graphics in movies that you could never do on a home computer, on a screen the size of which you could never afford... it costs a lousy $8-10 to see - less than a meal in some places, and you bitch about it? Talk about spoiled! What do you want, stop-motion clay like they used to use? :rolleyes:

Regarding the Left and Right pundits, I don't see the movie as anti-military. It's stated early on that the soldiers are mercenaries hired by a corporation, not uniform military. There's a big difference there. If someone says it's anti-capitalist... well if you support what the mercenaries are doing in the movie and that's your idea of capitalism, then I say that kind of capitalism should definitely be opposed. As for racism, how is there any racism? It's a fictional race of aliens. If they have any resemblance to any tribal peoples, it's in the fact that they live close to the land, use bows and arrows, and ride on animals for transportation. I think that can be said about any number of tribal cultures. The movie isn't just "humans are the bad guys" either. The protagonist is a human, as are several other important characters that are not bad guys. There's nothing wrong with confronting greed and the kind of devastation it can and has caused, and could cause. Human failings and the struggle to overcome them are the basis for many, many stories, so that's nothing new.

I thought the movie was impressive. It was entertaining, had plenty of eye candy, and I never felt bored or uninterested in what was going on. If you like science fiction and action and pretty colors you'll probably like this movie. :)
 
sc3252 said:
I didn't see any real reason to have this movie in 3d. While watching it all I could think about is the gimmicky shit they kept putting in it for no other reason then being 3d.
Click to expand...

Avatar is one movie where the 3D effect was not used as a gimmick.
 
James Cameron is a top director and a very respected around the World. Avatar in Russia is already the highest grossing film of all time.
 
Spewn said:
Rear Window Captioning. It's a feature installed in a couple of theatres locally whereby there's a screen displaying the closed-caption text at the back of the theatre and you're given a mirror to attach to your armrest so you can see it. It works out such that the Captions end up displayed somewhere near the bottom right of the screen in your field of vision, but I don't know how hard it is to focus on both. One of the main advantages of this setup is that if you don't have one of the mirrors on your arm-rest, you don't see the captions.
Click to expand...

It can be total crap or very good depending on how well it's implemented. Just like any other augmented reality implementation, really.

Sovereign said:
I hear "conservatives" complaining it's anti-military, anti-American, overly environmentalist and even anti-white. I hear "liberals" moaning it's racist and sexist.
Click to expand...

Well, it's probably all of those things. Any time you put white westerners in contact with a tribal culture which has less evident technology, especially if you go out of your way to make a point about how "spiritual" they are, you're quite blatantly invoking a Noble Savage trope. Which is usually everything on that list, and then a few more.

The question is, at that point do you constantly flog the audience with it so you can make a point of how awesome and enlightened your hypocritical ass is, or do you leave it alone and try to make a good story? A few racist tropes can be forgiven if that's not the whole focus of the piece.
 
Phoenix333 said:
For all the people bitching about CGI... I don't get it. You pay how much for graphics hardware for your PC, then you get graphics in movies that you could never do on a home computer, on a screen the size of which you could never afford... it costs a lousy $8-10 to see - less than a meal in some places, and you bitch about it? Talk about spoiled! What do you want, stop-motion clay like they used to use? :rolleyes:

Regarding the Left and Right pundits, I don't see the movie as anti-military. It's stated early on that the soldiers are mercenaries hired by a corporation, not uniform military. There's a big difference there. If someone says it's anti-capitalist... well if you support what the mercenaries are doing in the movie and that's your idea of capitalism, then I say that kind of capitalism should definitely be opposed. As for racism, how is there any racism? It's a fictional race of aliens. If they have any resemblance to any tribal peoples, it's in the fact that they live close to the land, use bows and arrows, and ride on animals for transportation. I think that can be said about any number of tribal cultures. The movie isn't just "humans are the bad guys" either. The protagonist is a human, as are several other important characters that are not bad guys. There's nothing wrong with confronting greed and the kind of devastation it can and has caused, and could cause. Human failings and the struggle to overcome them are the basis for many, many stories, so that's nothing new.

I thought the movie was impressive. It was entertaining, had plenty of eye candy, and I never felt bored or uninterested in what was going on. If you like science fiction and action and pretty colors you'll probably like this movie. :)
Click to expand...

Dude, don't knock stop-motion. Stop-motion is incredibly advanced these days, look at Coraline. Beautiful movie and even with the headache it brings on its one of the most well done 3D movies I've ever seen. Pity they ruined it be putting those crappy stereoscopic glasses in with the DVD.

Anyway, CG is nice and I love it when its well done, but I'm a fan of old school practical effects. Stuff done live on screen with little to no help from computers. Of course if something is impossible to actually do live then I'm all for CG being used.
 
Derangel said:
Dude, don't knock stop-motion. Stop-motion is incredibly advanced these days, look at Coraline. Beautiful movie and even with the headache it brings on its one of the most well done 3D movies I've ever seen. Pity they ruined it be putting those crappy stereoscopic glasses in with the DVD.

Anyway, CG is nice and I love it when its well done, but I'm a fan of old school practical effects. Stuff done live on screen with little to no help from computers. Of course if something is impossible to actually do live then I'm all for CG being used.
Click to expand...

Forgot to add: As for whatever message this movie may or may not have, when I watch it I'll treat the message like I do every other Hollywood movie that tries to tell me to do or be something. That is to say, I'll completely ignore it and try to enjoy the movie as it is.
 
I don't care for getting overly cranial about the details...

I paid for this movie and was thoroughly entertained. To me it was the experience of the world that kept me wowed along with the technology they used to bring it to life.

Simply by doing that - it's a winner. Apparently some 1B in revenues suggest that too.
 
Derangel said:
I'm waiting for it to come out on Blu-Ray since the theater here is only showing the headache inducing 3D version and I'm not going to pay $2 extra to watch a movie that will give me a headache.
Click to expand...

May be you need to overclock your eyes :D
 
ditzilla said:
Same thought - why pay $$ for something you can't enjoy fully.

I do get motion sick (so 3D is probably out of the question) and have a horrible time with sensory overload - dark theater, large screen, LOUD music, people talking, moving around, fast movements, etc., it's too much and I've tried it and ended up having a drop attack which is so embarrassing and debilitating - along with being dangerous (hit head=yet another concussion). I'm not deaf - yet, but my right ear is now really going so probably before the year's out I'll have lost hearing in that one. Have bilateral meniere's disease, it's only a matter of time before both ears go. So I can empathize with you being deaf. I have used closed captioning at home for the last 10 years, as my hearing has been fluctuating that long.

No way I'd spend that kind of money to sit in a theater not being able to understand or distinguish half of what's being said and the 3D/things moving fast? oh boy.

I can't sit in my living room and watch a roller coaster commercial on tv - I fall over.

And closed captioning on tv is just easier than this RWC looks. Along with the fact that in my state there's a grand total of 6 theaters, none of which are anywhere within oh at least a 2 to 3 hour drive? and no I don't drive.

I do want to see this movie, it's just going to have to wait until it comes out on DVD. Just like every other movie I want to see. Either ppv on cable or DVD. And it's a heck of a lot cheaper, you can hit the pause button to run to the kitchen/bathroom/outside for smoke ;) and just sit comfy in your own place with little distraction (hopefully).
Click to expand...

May be you need to update your O.S. or overclock your CPU/Videocard :D
 
Derangel said:
I'm waiting for it to come out on Blu-Ray since the theater here is only showing the headache inducing 3D version and I'm not going to pay $2 extra to watch a movie that will give me a headache.
Click to expand...

I'm waiting for the DVD, too. I don't go to the theater anymore.
 
ICOM said:
I'm waiting for the DVD, too. I don't go to the theater anymore.
Click to expand...

I got to the theater and now then. I want to see Sherlock Holmes, but I'll probably wait for that to hit Blu-Ray as well. I'm pretty certain I'll go to Iron Man 2 later this year. It won't be opening day, but I'll go before it leaves theaters. I hate going to movies early, I like going after they've been playing for a week or two and then go at like 1-2 in the middle of the week so there are few people there besides me.
 
i like smoke tons of pot before going to see a movie on opening night.
 
Derangel said:
And why would I want to do that? I'm still paying extra money for a movie I can't fully enjoy. ALL forms of 3D that use glasses give me a headache. Whether its the stereoscopic crap or the so-called digital 3D that movies use now days. So why should I pay $12 (plus the cost of soda and popcorn) to watch a movie I won't be able to enjoy when for under $4 I can rent the Blu-Ray when it comes out or buy it for $20.
Click to expand...

WAAAAAAAAAH. Waaaaah, technology no good! Bad technology bad! Me want 4D NOW! NOW!

First of all no one forces you to buy soda and popcorn, you're paying $12 for the ticket. Second of all, the 3D is absolutely motherfucking incredible, so I feel bad for you that you your eyes can't bench 350...I mean can't watch 3D. It's incredible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Avatar in 3D was just sick. Absolutely the most visually entertaining movie I have ever seen. The story was also, very good.
 
ditzilla said:
Same thought - why pay $$ for something you can't enjoy fully.

I do get motion sick (so 3D is probably out of the question) and have a horrible time with sensory overload - dark theater, large screen, LOUD music, people talking, moving around, fast movements, etc., it's too much and I've tried it and ended up having a drop attack which is so embarrassing and debilitating - along with being dangerous (hit head=yet another concussion). I'm not deaf - yet, but my right ear is now really going so probably before the year's out I'll have lost hearing in that one. Have bilateral meniere's disease, it's only a matter of time before both ears go. So I can empathize with you being deaf. I have used closed captioning at home for the last 10 years, as my hearing has been fluctuating that long.

No way I'd spend that kind of money to sit in a theater not being able to understand or distinguish half of what's being said and the 3D/things moving fast? oh boy.

I can't sit in my living room and watch a roller coaster commercial on tv - I fall over.

And closed captioning on tv is just easier than this RWC looks. Along with the fact that in my state there's a grand total of 6 theaters, none of which are anywhere within oh at least a 2 to 3 hour drive? and no I don't drive.

I do want to see this movie, it's just going to have to wait until it comes out on DVD. Just like every other movie I want to see. Either ppv on cable or DVD. And it's a heck of a lot cheaper, you can hit the pause button to run to the kitchen/bathroom/outside for smoke ;) and just sit comfy in your own place with little distraction (hopefully).
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying, and I also have had headaches (no motion sickness) from 3D films in the past (Monsters vs Aliens 3D gave me headaches and so did Beowulf...walked out of the former it was so disappointing), but this gave me no real issues. There was additional eye strain in the beginning (probably from your eyes being forced to focus at a new focal length), but that stopped being noticeable pretty quickly.

And I have to say I went between using the glasses and switching to regular vision, and got a good representation of what it would be like to watch the movie without the 3D parallax effect. I have to say it was nowhere near as good. When I walked out of the film, I felt like I had been a part of that world. That has never happened to me before. Btw, saw it at IMAX, and they don't use the Real-D glasses, so people may be noticing a difference due to that.

Finally I have to say that for the people waiting for this film to come out on Blu-Ray... Don't. The movie isn't nearly as good when you take the immersion that 3D provides. It still holds up, but you may as well throw in Fern Gully at that point. The greatness of the movie comes out of the entire package. As Aristotle says, "greater than the sum of its parts." Holistic movie? Yes, fits the interconnectedness theme.

I don't know if that makes sense, but you see this sentiment being kicked around a lot. Cameron really made a breakthrough with the implementation of 3D in conjunction with the best CG i've seen by long shot. Its hard to explain I guess.
 
Cyraxx said:
GUISE!! MOVIES DONT MAKE MONEY ANYMORE!!! All this pirating and stuff - no one goes to theaters anymore! They just download them and gather around their bigscreen (17" monitor)!!
Click to expand...

I actually did pirate it first before seeing it in the theater. I absolutely cannot stand theaters, but decided to at least give it a try. Guy to my left kept coughing and eating popcorn loudly. A guy 2 rows behind me kept coughing as well. The place was completely packed 2 weeks after the initial release. I was hoping to not have that be the case.
 
Fail said:
i understand what you're saying but no there isn't

but what a theater could do is have a night or 2 a week when they have subtitles for movies, special nights, that would work just as well
Click to expand...

some theaters in toronto canada have sub titles.. i believe you wear special glasses that allow you to see it.. so this way, it doesn't effect others who dont want to see words on the screen
 
The movie was an interesting showcase of technological advancement in computer-generated animation, but the story, acting, and dialogue, pretty much what really makes a movie - was completely designed for dumbfucks. So, with that being said, James Cameron is a brilliant businessman, because there are literally billions of dumbfucks around that will love lap this shit up.
 
well i havent seen this movie yet, so i cant make any points about the movie, but its intersting to hear the impressions of other people. a small handful of people make a point to say they liked the story, while most seem really impressed by the visuals and even go as far as to say that without them, the movie just loses alot. that seems to be the concensus not just hear, but from other people ive talked to.

I still plan on seeing it sometime, but im not going to hold my breath for a deep story, more just the curiosity of seeing the visual effects. of course, james cameron doesnt care if i like the story or not as long as im in a seat lol.


titanic was similar in alot of ways to this movie. one the big draws for titanic was the great visual effects used to recreate the ship and to watch the utter distruction that followed a couple hours later lol. here we are again with another big budget movie from him that is heavy on the visual effects and it pays off. it appeals to a wide audience precisely becuase of that. youll get alot of people to go just to see how 'cool' it looks in 3D on the big screen.
 
I overheard this when we were in line buying tickets for Avatar:

Guy: What is the $2 surcharge for again?
Ticket Counter: For the 3D glasses.
Guy: So we pay $2 to wear the glasses?
Ticket Counter: Yes.
Guy: Can we keep the glasses?
Ticket Counter: No.
Guy: So when we return the glasses we get our $2 back?
Ticket Counter: No.
Guy: So basically the $2 is just another way to make money?
Ticket Counter: ....
 
Meh, this movie is like the game. Beutiful Graphics. Not substance. Like a game with good graphics and lousy game play.
I lost all my respect for Cameron when he made Titanic. He went sissy. From The Terminator to "I'm King of the World" WTF?

No wonder Linda Hamilton left him , he's a pussy.
 
PoopsMacClaude said:
The movie was an interesting showcase of technological advancement in computer-generated animation, but the story, acting, and dialogue, pretty much what really makes a movie - was completely designed for dumbfucks. So, with that being said, James Cameron is a brilliant businessman, because there are literally billions of dumbfucks around that will love lap this shit up.
Click to expand...

You want to see Good sci-fy that makes you think? See District 9. It's not only an actual film but it pushes a few Boundaries.
 
akotlar said:
WAAAAAAAAAH. Waaaaah, technology no good! Bad technology bad! Me want 4D NOW! NOW!

First of all no one forces you to buy soda and popcorn, you're paying $12 for the ticket. Second of all, the 3D is absolutely motherfucking incredible, so I feel bad for you that you your eyes can't bench 350...I mean can't watch 3D. It's incredible. So stop feeling like a bitch and deal with the pain because it will be so awesome it will blow brain boogers out your ears.
Click to expand...

Fanboy much? 3D doesn't impress me anyway. Some movies do it well very well, but even then it won't impress me. Sorry but I'm not easily impressed by trickery that makes you think something is 3D. Give me real 3D and I'll be impressed.
 
I wouldn't call District 9 a thinking film - and mind you, I liked it. District 9 takes an incredible suspension of disbelief for the film to even get rolling, but if once you are willing to - yeah it's a great ride. But thinking film? D9 relied considerably on CGI for the prawns and weapons, and that's not getting into the ridiculous "Fear 2 Demo" like suit sequence.
 
Vorazan said:
Pocahontas in space. I was going to say Dances with the Wolves in Space, but the characters are overly stereotypical, so Pocahontas it is.
Click to expand...

That's the exact same thing my girlfriend said two days ago when we saw it, "Pocahontas in space". And Cameron himself did say one of his main influences was Dances With Wolves.

In any case, it was a fantastic movie and the 3D was incredible. I didn't think it was headache-inducing at all.
 
riot8ap said:
I overheard this when we were in line buying tickets for Avatar:

Guy: What is the $2 surcharge for again?
Ticket Counter: For the 3D glasses.
Guy: So we pay $2 to wear the glasses?
Ticket Counter: Yes.
Guy: Can we keep the glasses?
Ticket Counter: No.
Guy: So when we return the glasses we get our $2 back?
Ticket Counter: No.
Guy: So basically the $2 is just another way to make money?
Ticket Counter: ....
Click to expand...

You can keep them if you want. They have places where you can "recycle" them after the movie, but I kept mine just for the hell of it. Not like you can really use it anywhere else, though, and they give you another pair every time. I don't mind the surcharge to get a fresh pair of glasses every time, and the 3D movies have to use a special projector as well, so I figure at least part of the cost is involved in that.
 
It's a $1 surcharge here and you definitely can't keep 'em, they have lil' anti-theft devices tacked unto them like high end clothing. Haven't read most of the thread, haven't seen the movie either (yet, the lines are still too freaking long)...

Last movie I saw in 3D was the Christmas Charol... I'm not sure the glasses would've fit over my regular glasses (had contact lenses on that night), and some people complained that it hurt their noses, but I found them comfortable and didn't really have any other ill-effects (other than the fact that when it snowed in the movie it sometimes made it hard to focus somehow).

Looking forward to see if Avatar takes it any further or if it's simply the same tech w/a lot better CGI behind it. I don't think I've seen any other 3D movies in recent memory, I saw Beowulf in regular 2D but I think they were actually screening the 3D version (a lot of elements looked out of focus or something).
 
Avatar was fucking awesome! Me and my gf walked out of the theater mad because we wanted avatars.
 
My wife and I enjoyed it too. The 3D really made her sick, but it might just be because she's pregnant right now. Anyways. Good show, and the 3D was really neat. I thought the story was mildly predictable, but still enjoyable. And the character development and voice acting were very well done. It was extremely polished, as you'd expect from Cameron. I've seen it twice in the theater now, and I think it was worth it. I've only been to the expensive theater for two movies in about 2 years time: Star Trek and Avatar in 3D. It wouldn't be so bad if tickets weren't $9.50 ... :confused:

Oh well, I suppose some places have it even worse. That's why I don't go very often.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top