Avatar - James Cameron Returns! (Spoilers in thread, obviously!)

Sad Max said:
Timing, timing, timing.

Well, and being a fun, well-made movie didn't hurt, either.
Click to expand...

Agree. What was Avatar going against in terms of mainstream entertainment when it was released? Exactly. Toy Story is fighting for the same bucks as Shreck, Salt, Predators, The Last Airbender, etc.

All these films made decent money, which means less "concentrated" box office for a particular film.

If Toy Storycame out in November,however...
 
SPZ said:
Agree. What was Avatar going against in terms of mainstream entertainment when it was released? Exactly. Toy Story is fighting for the same bucks as Shreck, Salt, Predators, The Last Airbender, etc.

All these films made decent money, which means less "concentrated" box office for a particular film.

If Toy Storycame out in November,however...
Click to expand...

I still don't think it would have come close. Avatar was a phenomenon that only comes along once in a while. The domestic gross was impressive but it's the Worldwide gross of 1.9 billion that boggles the mind.
 
Titanic's success was mainly because of Celine Dion. "That" song is going to last way longer than the film, may it be in its original version or in the many Hip Hop remixes of the theme or chorus that will inevitably appear by some one hit wonders...
 
It'll be interesting to see how Avatar does with the re-release next month. 3D (And IMAX[3D]) only.


The first 2 (fake) IMAX's in Alaska opened in the past couple of months. So the biggest 2 cities in the state (Anchorage & Fairbanks) have the opportunity for their first "IMAX" screenings of it. While here in Juneau (3rd largest city in the state) we don't have any 3D theaters, so apparently you won't be able to see it here at all.

Interesting dynamics.


- Mikko
 
A new trailer is out for the re-release: http://www.avatarmovie.com/


IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later.
I AGREE



- Mikko
 
WTF!!! He is releasing the movie AGAIN!?! Is this a new movie or Just "directors cut" scenes? Seems like he his milking it for all its worth... A new sequel/prequel, I would stand in line for but... how much of this footage is new?
 
azharrison said:
WTF!!! He is releasing the movie AGAIN!?! Is this a new movie or Just "directors cut" scenes? Seems like he his milking it for all its worth... A new sequel/prequel, I would stand in line for but... how much of this footage is new?
Click to expand...

checking imdb It looks like it has 10 minutes of new footage....
 
azharrison said:
WTF!!! He is releasing the movie AGAIN!?! Is this a new movie or Just "directors cut" scenes? Seems like he his milking it for all its worth...
Click to expand...

You know, there's an interesting - and acrimonious - conversation going on at another board regarding the whole 'milking' angle.

Do you mean to suggest that a studio holding a successful film with potential for worthwhile earnings is in some way doing something wrong by re-releasing that property that they created, and that they own, in order to make some more on it?

Are they supposed to say well, we *could* re-release and earn some more but instead we'll just sit on the film because...

...why?

Asceticism? Some sense that it's nobler to pass up a chance for a for-profit company - that is to say an enterprise whose purpose is to generate revenue - to avoid turning profit wherever they legitimately and legally can? How would you like to be a shareholder in a company that deliberately avoids opportunities to earn a profit by 100% legal and ethical means?

Was it 'milking' to keep the film in theaters as long as it was in its first release? Would Fox have been somehow morally superior if they had decided you know, one month in theaters is plenty, let's pull it now because... once again, why?

If you have some kind of problem with a studio re-releasing a film in the hopes of (shudder) making some more money on their investment (outrageous!) - don't buy a ticket.
 
They absolutely are doing the right thing in capitalizing on a re-release (the first of many, I'm sure). After all, Cameron never said he wouldn't do so. Lucas, on the other hand, claimed that he would "never, ever" release the original version of Star Wars on DVD...only to do just that a year or so later, "forcing" me (pun intended) to buy the set again (whilst cursing his name to the poor Target clerk in the process).

Now THAT was a valid calling of the bullshi*, not this Avatar jazz...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top