Avatar at the box office. Is it a "bust"?

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
The last thing I saw Avatar has taken in 137 million in the US up to Dec. 24.
This puts it way behind such movies as the Lost World, Pirates of the Caribbean (both of them) and just barely beats out "300"
http://www.leesmovieinfo.net/Open-Compare.php?c=414

The box office was held down by the US weather, though.

Is it too early to say Avatar won't break even?
 

malbojah

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2000
1,708
7
81
Well, once you figure in the international take (currently @ $255m) you're right around $400m (I've chipped in my own $24 to that total). I think it would need to make it to $600-$800m to break even (using the 50/50 math from another thread). So for 1 week domestically and 2 weeks internationally, $400 isn't too bad. It will still be considered a bust because of the media / internet buildup and the fact that it won't win that many Oscars
 

pray4mojo

Diamond Member
Mar 8, 2003
3,647
0
0
I haven't seen it yet. Waiting for all the babies and frat boys to go see it first so I'll have a better experience.
 

malbojah

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2000
1,708
7
81
I haven't seen it yet. Waiting for all the babies and frat boys to go see it first so I'll have a better experience.

Suggestion (as I'm sure you've heard this already): Imax (good thing is that the movie has a 3 month run on Imax)
 

Lonyo

Lifer
Aug 10, 2002
21,938
6
81
You seem to be missing an important element here.
It cost lots to make, yes.
The current box office gross is a bit behind some other films, yes (hm, notice they they are almost all sequels?).

Now, imagine Cameron makes a sequel.
Since the first was well received, the second will probably do better, plus he's already invested in all the tech.

the ninth-largest opening-weekend gross of all time, and the largest for a non-franchise, non-sequel and original film

The only way it can truly be a bust is by not making back the production costs AND by not having a sequel.
 

malbojah

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2000
1,708
7
81
You seem to be missing an important element here.
It cost lots to make, yes.
The current box office gross is a bit behind some other films, yes (hm, notice they they are almost all sequels?).

Now, imagine Cameron makes a sequel.
Since the first was well received, the second will probably do better, plus he's already invested in all the tech.



The only way it can truly be a bust is by not making back the production costs AND by not having a sequel.

Productions and marketing should be made back in the next 2-3 weeks. And Cameron has already started that he is considering doing 2 sequels (hopefully not another 10 years away)
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
Productions and marketing should be made back in the next 2-3 weeks. And Cameron has already started that he is considering doing 2 sequels (hopefully not another 10 years away)

I'm not sure of this. If you consider the fact that Avatar did about the same as the first Pirates of the Caribbean and factor in that Avatar had to contend with a big winter storm you can figure, maybe, that Avatar will beat Pirates by a modest amount? Pirates did 650 million world wide.
Avatar supposedly cost 500 million to make, but some people say that number was rounded up a bit for hype. However, if you factor in the marketing costs 500 million seems a reasonable amount to use for the films cost to make and market.
So if Avatar beats Pirates to the tune of say 20 percent you get a world wide gross of about 780 million. Based on the 50/50 model it will earn 380 million. Leaving Avatar in the hole for about 120 million.

Though dvd and blu-ray sales should bring it up more.

If my calculations are correct it would be lucky to just break even.

Of course, some movies persist far beyond the first few weeks to draw decent crowds, many people seeing it more than once, though that has dropped immensely with the proliferation of dvd's and blu-ray disks
 
Last edited:

Adrenaline

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2005
5,320
8
81
I'm not sure of this. If you consider the fact that Avatar did about the same as the first Pirates of the Caribbean and factor in that Avatar had to contend with a big winter storm you can figure, maybe, that Avatar will beat Pirates by a modest amount? Pirates did 650 million world wide.
Avatar supposedly cost 500 million to make, but some people say that number was rounded up a bit for hype. However, if you factor in the marketing costs 500 million seems a reasonable amount to use for the films cost to make and market.
So if Avatar beats Pirates to the tune of say 20 percent you get a world wide gross of about 780 million. Based on the 50/50 model it will earn 380 million. Leaving Avatar in the hole for about 120 million.

Though dvd and blu-ray sales should bring it up more.

If my calculations are correct it would be lucky to just break even.

Of course, some movies persist far beyond the first few weeks to draw decent crowds, many people seeing it more than once, though that has dropped immensely with the proliferation of dvd's and blu-ray disks

I read somewhere it cost about 240 million to make and 120 million in advertisement, so about 360 million total. I am sure Cameron films get more than 50% take for the studios and him.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
50,012
40,902
136
Avatar was never going to produce a Pirates type opening weekend because there simply isn't the capacity in 3D/IMAX screens to make that possible. So far it looks like the film has excellent mid week grosses (15-16M per day) and is scoring off the charts in post screening surveys. Not every film has it's entire box office story written in the first weekend. This is one of those films.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
I read somewhere it cost about 240 million to make and 120 million in advertisement, so about 360 million total. I am sure Cameron films get more than 50% take for the studios and him.
I was basing the 500 million on this:


http://www.cinemaspy.com/article.php?id=3534

But any way you slice it, Avatar will have to do a lot of reaping. The New York Times has published an interesting article about the sheer expense that is Cameron's highly anticipated, perhaps over-hyped, Avatar. According to The Times, the film's budget is swelling towards the $500M mark, when global marketing expenses are factored in
 

arrfep

Platinum Member
Sep 7, 2006
2,314
16
81
I haven't seen it yet. Waiting for all the babies and frat boys to go see it first so I'll have a better experience.

Suggestion (as I'm sure you've heard this already): Imax (good thing is that the movie has a 3 month run on Imax)

I actually think that the reputed mind-blowingness of the 3D IMAX version is contributing to lagging sales. I really want to see the movie, but I'm waiting untill I can see it in 3d IMAX. However, there are only 3 places to see it in a 50 mile radius, which means only like 12 showings a day, as opposed to probably 250+ showings a day of the regular version in the same area. My schedule's been busy Christmas stuff, so it's been hard to plan a viewing before it gets sold out.

I'm going to guess that there are plenty of people in the same boat, and that it will continue to have a steady amount of sales for the next few weeks.
 

F1N3ST

Diamond Member
Nov 9, 2006
3,802
0
76
I'm not sure of this. If you consider the fact that Avatar did about the same as the first Pirates of the Caribbean and factor in that Avatar had to contend with a big winter storm you can figure, maybe, that Avatar will beat Pirates by a modest amount? Pirates did 650 million world wide.
Avatar supposedly cost 500 million to make, but some people say that number was rounded up a bit for hype. However, if you factor in the marketing costs 500 million seems a reasonable amount to use for the films cost to make and market.
So if Avatar beats Pirates to the tune of say 20 percent you get a world wide gross of about 780 million. Based on the 50/50 model it will earn 380 million. Leaving Avatar in the hole for about 120 million.

Though dvd and blu-ray sales should bring it up more.

If my calculations are correct it would be lucky to just break even.

Of course, some movies persist far beyond the first few weeks to draw decent crowds, many people seeing it more than once, though that has dropped immensely with the proliferation of dvd's and blu-ray disks

I reading on wiki, $237m to make it.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
I'm not sure of this. If you consider the fact that Avatar did about the same as the first Pirates of the Caribbean and factor in that Avatar had to contend with a big winter storm you can figure, maybe, that Avatar will beat Pirates by a modest amount? Pirates did 650 million world wide.
Avatar supposedly cost 500 million to make, but some people say that number was rounded up a bit for hype. However, if you factor in the marketing costs 500 million seems a reasonable amount to use for the films cost to make and market.
So if Avatar beats Pirates to the tune of say 20 percent you get a world wide gross of about 780 million. Based on the 50/50 model it will earn 380 million. Leaving Avatar in the hole for about 120 million.

Though dvd and blu-ray sales should bring it up more.

If my calculations are correct it would be lucky to just break even.

Of course, some movies persist far beyond the first few weeks to draw decent crowds, many people seeing it more than once, though that has dropped immensely with the proliferation of dvd's and blu-ray disks

I reading on wiki, $237m to make it.

Yeah, I saw that on Wiki too. Big difference. I wonder who's right?
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
It's at $400 million worldwide so far and we're not even through the second weekend.

I checked Fandango today and Christmas day 3D shows for Avatar were nearly all sold out.

It's going to make bank.
 

malbojah

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2000
1,708
7
81
Yeah, I saw that on Wiki too. Big difference. I wonder who's right?

Fox spent $240m, Cameron agreed to defer some of his compensation until others made their money back, and Fox spread the amount of marketing over several companies to further reduce the risk