• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

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

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Far away from being a bust. This is the first 2 weeks. You have another 2-3 weeks shelf life on this movie. And you add on streaming and DVD sales. This one should be profitable (considered that most movies are not profitable).
 
lifeobry said:
LOL @ people that thought James Cameron could make a bad movie. :awe:
Click to expand...

He doesn't make bad movies, he just steals everyone else's ideas. He stole Terminator, Aliens, and Avatar. He's being sued over it, too. Sure he makes good movies, but he's a freaking thief.
 
Nik said:
He doesn't make bad movies, he just steals everyone else's ideas. He stole Terminator, Aliens, and Avatar. He's being sued over it, too. Sure he makes good movies, but he's a freaking thief.
Click to expand...

Cameron's Avatar scriptment predates Delgo by about 10 years. That's one lawsuit that's going to get tossed pretty easily.
 
K1052 said:
It was Dances With Wolves light with more cliched dialogue.

The visuals are pretty damn impressive though.
Click to expand...

I feel like it's even worse than that. Let's walk down the cliches

1) The white man turns native
2) The dewey-eyed Disney Bride.. of COURSE she's a princess too 🙄
3) Wise shaman woman
4) Brusk but wise scientist interested in the bigger picture
5) Faux tough as nails 'traitor 'female character who goes down guns blazing
6) Psychotic, larger than life military figure to have an epic showdown with
7) Corporate stooge
8) Jealous native male who wants the Disney Bride

The list can go on and on, every single possible thing that happened in the movie was mapped out the exact second you meet any of the walking cliches of characters..down to the last detail. It felt insulting to watch it.

Visually I'll give it credence but none of that matters without a good story.
 
I think he's pretty much in the green now so not a bust not to mention the money he's raking in from licensing deals for video games, toys, McDonalds happy meals, etc... Then you have DVD/Blu-Ray sales sometime down the line. Cameron still has it.

At the movie level, I thought it was great asthetically but like others have said, the story leaves much to be desired. I still enjoyed it watching it in IMAX 3D and I went purely for eye candy so in that regard I was not displeased with the result though I did leave with a minor headache from the 3d awesomeness.
 
Platypus said:
I feel like it's even worse than that. Let's walk down the cliches

1) The white man turns native
2) The dewey-eyed Disney Bride.. of COURSE she's a princess too 🙄
3) Wise shaman woman
4) Brusk but wise scientist interested in the bigger picture
5) Faux tough as nails 'traitor 'female character who goes down guns blazing
6) Psychotic, larger than life military figure to have an epic showdown with
7) Corporate stooge
8) Jealous native male who wants the Disney Bride

The list can go on and on, every single possible thing that happened in the movie was mapped out the exact second you meet any of the walking cliches of characters..down to the last detail. It felt insulting to watch it.

Visually I'll give it credence but none of that matters without a good story.
Click to expand...

I'll go with 1-4 & 6 as being valid.

#5 I woulnd't so much consider to be a cliche as the character is pointless not to mention poorly written and acted.

#7 There's always a corporate stooge, even in real life. A middle management wienie that wants to deliver regardless of how he gets there while trying to avoid anything resembling responsibility in the event of failure.

#8 wasn't played up nearly to the extent it could have been, I was actually thankfully he manage to mostly avoid that old trap
 
K1052 said:
I'll go with 1-4 & 6 as being valid.

#5 I woulnd't so much consider to be a cliche as the character is pointless not to mention poorly written and acted.

#7 There's always a corporate stooge, even in real life. A middle management wienie that wants to deliver regardless of how he gets there while trying to avoid anything resembling responsibility in the event of failure.

#8 wasn't played up nearly to the extent it could have been, I was actually thankfully he manage to mostly avoid that old trap
Click to expand...

I'm thankful for 8 too, that would have added another hour to a film that was already an hour too long anyway.

They couldn't find ANYONE else to play the corporate stooge? I mean seriously?
 
compared to what it could have been with a good story its probably partially a bust. every oither review basically says this, very awesome visuals but you have to tolerate the story. with a good story it could have done insane money.
 
I did not mind the storyline, it was done well. Sure we have seen it before in other movies, but it is hard to come up with a totally original storyline and not hear people complain that he ripped that off from some other movie.

For the people complaining about the storyline what would you change about it? Throw out some suggestions, you don't have to go into extreme detail.
 
graph_for_simon_edhouse3.gif
 
We've seen it twice now at $15.50 x 5

Yeah story sucks and is contrived bullshit but wasn't Star Wars and I still watch it. I want to punch Luke in the face he's such a whiney bitch but still great fuggin movie.
 
Just an update. Friday's estimates are showing Avatar is actually *UP* from last weekend. It already broke Dark Knight's record for highest grossing second weekend ever, and it's a safe bet Avatar will easily break the record for highest grossing third weekend ever.

Over $300m domestic, over $475m international, and that's just in the first 15 days. It should be crossing the $1b worldwide mark sometime in the next 14 days.
 
0roo0roo said:
no
comic book 3d is what u get if you try that.


crude stuff

plasma/120hz+ tv's + newer spec bluray will be able to do full hd with lcd shutter glasses. its not out yet but the standard was finalized.
Click to expand...

Thats what I thought, I went to the theater for the full effect of the show and would not even considered the movie without it.
 
bctbct said:
Thats what I thought, I went to the theater for the full effect of the show and would not even considered the movie without it.
Click to expand...

yea current dvd/bluray 3d is shameful stuff.
it pretty much devalues 3d more than anything else. not sure what they are doing since they should be preserving the theatrical release 3d specialness after all.

we'll see how much sway cameron has. if he has any say avatar wont be out in 3d on dvd. hopefully.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2009/12/hollywood-has-been-so-enthralled.ars
Hollywood has been so enthralled with the recent renaissance of 3D in the theater that the Blu-ray Disc Association has finalized a specification for delivering full 1080p high definition stereoscopic video on Blu-ray discs. The format relies on an extension to the H.264 encoding standard, and provides for a fallback to 2D output on players that can't decode the separate stereoscopic images. It's been a long time coming, but along with a recent update to the HDMI spec and a coming wave of 3D-capable displays, the technology is now in place to deliver the full 3D experience at home.
The specification, which will be published shortly for device manufacturers and content producers, specifies encoding two separate 1080p frames together using the Multiview Video Coding (MVC) extension to the H.264 Advanced Video Coding (AVC) codec—one of the codecs already supported for creating Blu-ray discs. This method allows the two separate views, one for each eye, to be compressed together in such a way that common elements from both views are melded together. The result is that a 3D-encoded movie should typically only take up about 50 percent more space on disc compared to a 2D version, and players that aren't 3D-capable will be able to play back a 2D version instead, for backward compatibility.

Additionally, the specification is technology-agnostic when it comes to how to create the 3D effect. It will deliver two 1080p frames to the display, and the display will then use whatever method it can to create a 3D effect—whether it's passive filtered glasses, active filtered switching glasses, anaglyph, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top