Roger Ebert on the Last Airbender

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Ns1

No Lifer
Jun 17, 2001
55,413
1,570
126
I'm not sure what that all means. :hmm: Are you saying it is or is not profitable?

KT

50MM = cost to produce

let's say the movie made 100MM Domestic + 50MM Worldwide

The studio takes in approximately 50% of that, so theatrical revenues to the studio = ~75MM

50MM = production budget, which probably means 50-60MM advertising budget, +10% for other misc. expenses

Then we take into account all the various investors, production companies, finance companies, producers, etc., then what's left is gross profit before a whole slew of other deductions (interest, etc)

Really just depends on how the deal was laid out (for instance, Disney finances all their films in house, Avatar used a partner which probably took 50%)
 
Last edited:

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
30,856
4,974
126
I personally didn't think this movie would be great... but MAN does my 9 year old want to see it. Maybe I can hold him off until its on DVD.

Talk about a media blitz though, I think ever other commercial on Nick is for this movie.
 

Kev

Lifer
Dec 17, 2001
16,367
4
81
Oh man I had high hopes for this one :(

As soon as you saw that shamalamadingdong was directing you should have lost all hope. He is the worst director on earth. He's actually worse than Uwe Boll, because for some reason people and movie studios still take this hack seriously. Oh yeah and everyone knows this.
 
Last edited:

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,235
117
116
50MM = cost to produce

let's say the movie made 100MM Domestic + 50MM Worldwide

The studio takes in approximately 50% of that, so theatrical revenues to the studio = ~75MM

50MM = production budget, which probably means 50-60MM advertising budget, +10% for other misc. expenses

Then we take into account all the various investors, production companies, finance companies, producers, etc., then what's left is gross profit before a whole slew of other deductions (interest, etc)

Really just depends on how the deal was laid out (for instance, Disney finances all their films in house, Avatar used a partner which probably took 50%)

Yeah I remember reading about the Avatar deal and how much it would take for it to actually be profitable. I have to think DVD sales will give them a good boost on the revenue side, since the production has to be relatively minimal.

It's all quite fascinating. :hmm:

KT
 

AyashiKaibutsu

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2004
9,306
3
81
I try to enter into every cinematic experience with a fresh palette. But in this case, I was excited. Every ounce of marketing fodder that Paramount released made The Last Airbender look like M. Night Shyamalan’s saving grace.

http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/reviews/review-the-last-airbender.php#ixzz0sNIDwj4g

I don't watch much TV, but I always got the impression that that would fit pretty much any of his movies? Always seems like the clips contain the only 30 seconds of the entire movie that are actually good.
 

ChaoZ

Diamond Member
Apr 5, 2000
8,909
1
0
Wth? Even Twilight has a way better rating at Rottentomatoes. Are they just hating on it because it's a cool thing to do is it really that bad?
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
the metacritic review excerpts are just friggen brutal.


still going to see it though, me and my nephews loved the show. but i aint stoopid, we're makin this one a matinee. They can have my $6, that's how much I'd pay if I were home using the air conditioner anyway.
 

AndroidVageta

Banned
Mar 22, 2008
2,421
0
0
Go figure, a shitty director adapts a shitty anime into a shitty movie and it gets bad reviews...

Have you ever seen the anime? Shitty...far from it.

I am dissapointed though...I wonder if the movie would fair better with someone who actually knows all the characters and whats going on...I doubt most if not any of the reviewers have actually seen the anime...
 

Loop2kil

Platinum Member
Mar 28, 2004
2,606
21
81
The name alone told me that I would never see this movie....It sounds like a 'B' CGI movie.
 

flashbacck

Golden Member
Aug 3, 2001
1,921
0
76
Really the only one that was a flop was Lady in the Water (good lord that was awful) and even that one earned more than its production budget: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/people/chart/?id=shyamalan.htm even The Happening made over $160 million worldwide on a $48 million budget. He's been making money consistently on almost all his films. Village made over $260 worlwide and Signs was over $400!

KT

huh. I am so disappointed in humanity right now.
 

thomsbrain

Lifer
Dec 4, 2001
18,148
1
0
Have you ever seen the anime? Shitty...far from it.

I am dissapointed though...I wonder if the movie would fair better with someone who actually knows all the characters and whats going on...I doubt most if not any of the reviewers have actually seen the anime...

I've seen it, and it has interesting moments, but the interplay between the main boy and his crush is just painful. The kid is drawn to look like he's 7 years old and he's talking about love. It just doesn't work.
 

PottedMeat

Lifer
Apr 17, 2002
12,365
475
126

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
82,854
17,365
136
But I have to admit, his reviews are often more entertaining than the movies themselves:

------------------------
Some of these people make my skin crawl. The characters of "Sex and the City 2" are flyweight bubbleheads living in a world which rarely requires three sentences in a row. Their defining quality is consuming things. They gobble food, fashion, houses, husbands, children, vitamins and freebies. They must plan their wardrobes on the phone, so often do they appear in different basic colors, like the plugs you pound into a Playskool workbench.

As we return to the trivialities of their lives for a sequel, marriage is the issue. The institution is affirmed in an opening sequence at a gay wedding in Connecticut that looks like a Fred Astaire production number gone horribly over budget. There's a 16-man chorus in white formal wear, a pond with swans, and Liza Minnelli to perform the ceremony. Her religious or legal qualifications are unexplained; perhaps she is present merely as the patron saint of gay men. After the ceremony, she changes to a Vegas lounge outfit and is joined by two lookalike backups for a song and dance routine possibly frowned upon in some denominations.

Then it's back to the humdrum married life of our gal Carrie Bradshaw (Sarah Jessica Parker) and the loathsome Mr. Big (Chris Noth). Carrie, honey, how can you endure life with this purring, narcissistic, soft-velvet idiot? He speaks loudly enough to be heard mostly by himself, his most appreciative audience. And he never wants to leave the house at night, preferring to watch classic black-and-white movies on TV. This leads to a marital crisis. Carrie thinks they should talk more. But sweetheart, Mr. Big has nothing to say. At least he's provided you with a Manhattan apartment that looks like an Architectural Digest wet dream.

Brief updates. Miranda Hobbes (Cynthia Nixon) is a high-powered lawyer who is dissed by her male chauvinist pig boss. Samantha Jones (Kim Cattrall) is still a sexaholic slut. Charlotte York (Kristin Davis) has the two little girls she thought she wanted, but now discovers that they actually expect to be raised. Mothers, if you are reading, run this through your head. One little girl dips her hands in strawberry topping and plants two big handprints on your butt. You are on the cell to a girlfriend. How do you report this? You moan and wail out: "My vintage Valentino!" Any mother who wears her vintage Valentino while making muffin topping with her kids should be hauled up before the Department of Children and Family Services.

All of this is pretty thin gruel. The movie shows enterprise, and flies the entire cast away to the emirate of Abu Dhabi, where the girls are given a $22,000-a-night suite and matching Maybachs and butlers, courtesy of a sheik who wants to have a meeting with Samantha and talk about publicity for his hotel.

This sequence is an exercise in obscenely conspicuous consumption, in which the girls appear in so many different outfits they must have been followed to the Middle East by a luggage plane. I don't know a whole lot about fashion, but I know something about taste, and these women spend much of the movie dressed in tacky, vulgar clothing. Carrie and Samantha also display the maximum possible boobage, oblivious to Arab ideas about women's modesty. There's more cleavage in this film than at a pro wrestler's wedding.

And crotches, have we got crotches for you. Big close-ups of the girls themselves, and some of the bulgers they meet. And they meet some. They meet the Australian world cup team, for example, which seems to have left its cups at home. And then there's the intriguing stranger Samantha meets at the hotel, whose zipper-straining arousal evokes the fury of an offended Arab guest and his wife. This prodigy's name is Rikard Spirt. Think about it.

Samantha is arrested for kissing on the beach, and there's an uncomfortable scene in which the girls are menaced by outraged men in a public market, where all they've done is dress in a way more appropriate for a sales reception at Victoria's Secret. They're rescued by Arab women so well covered only their eyes are visible, and in private these women reveal that underneath the burkas they're wearing Dior gowns and so forth. Must get hot.

I wondered briefly whether Abu Dhabi had underwritten all this product placement, but I learn the "SATC2" was filmed in Morocco, which must be Morocco's little joke. That nation supplies magnificent desert scenes, achieved with CGI, I assume, during which two of the girls fall off a camel. I haven't seen such hilarity since "Abbott and Costello in the Foreign Legion."

The movie's visual style is arthritic. Director Michael Patrick King covers the sitcom dialogue by dutifully cutting back and forth to whoever is speaking. A sample of Carrie's realistic dialogue in a marital argument: "You knew when I married you I was more Coco Chanel than coq au vin." Carrie also narrates the film, providing useful guidelines for those challenged by its intricacies. Sample: "Later that day, Big and I arrived home."

Truth in reviewing: I am obliged to report that this film will no doubt be deliriously enjoyed by its fans, for the reasons described above. Male couch potatoes dragged to the film against their will may find some consolation. Reader, I must confess that while attending the sneak preview with its overwhelmingly female audience, I was gob-smacked by the delightful cleavage on display. Do women wear their lowest-cut frocks for each other?

Note: From my understanding of the guidelines of the MPAA Code and Ratings Administration, Samantha and Mr. Spirt have one scene that far, far surpasses the traditional MPAA limits for pumping and thrusting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

NuclearNed

Raconteur
May 18, 2001
7,833
296
126
I hate how him and Tyler Perry have to prefix their names to the title of everything they do. Ugh.

Actually, that's a courtesy to all of us. In either case it means "Stay away from this movie. Stay far, far away."
 

UncleWai

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2001
5,701
68
91
The happening, that pos film fucked me in the ass. Worst money spent ever.
 

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
30,856
4,974
126
Shame... i had some hopes for this movie...

An article i read said M. Night never heard about the show until his daughter wanted to be Katara for halloween. He then had to look it up and thought it would be a good movie plot. The thought he didn't want to disappoint his daughter, and the fact that they weren't rushing thru 3 season in 1 90+min movie (this movie only covers Book 1:Water.. the other 2 books are supposed to be made into separate movies).. gave me some hope...

but after seeing pictures of Dev Patel's Zuko (his scar is practically non-existant, he's missing the archetypical top-knot of a Fire Nation prince, seen for most of Book 1) and Noah Ringer's Aang (his Arrow tattoos are made up of hundreds of smaller tattoos.. instead of one big tattoo) ... i'm giving up all hope.[/QUOTE]

yes even though I'm not at all familair with the Avatar lore, I'm sure those are ultra-important to the storyline of the saga.
 

Q

Lifer
Jul 21, 2005
12,059
4
81
Ok I went and saw it midnight showing. I watched most of the animated series and had high hopes for the movie until the reviews came in, but we already had our tickets so I had to go.

Basically, the movie was bad, but not 7% RT bad. I didn't regret going, mainly because my friends and I had fun poking at the terrible dialogue in the movie. Example: (Aang): "Is there any special place I can meditate here?" (Moon Princess): "Yes, there is a very special place you can meditate at".

They rushed through the plot unbelievably fast, which is why it will be absurd and not make any sense to people who haven't seen the show. The movie should have focused on Aang and his character development, but they have too many characters and not enough depth with any of them.

Despite the movie being pretty bad, Dev Patel did OK, as well as the kid who played Aang. There are a few scenes (very few) that are pretty neat, but if you saw the trailer, you pretty much saw the movie. I can see how little kids would like the movie though, so ATOT parents good luck. (Kids never think movies are bad) If I hadn't seen/had knowledge of the story since I watched it on TV, I'd be really confused and would think it was worse. If you have to go see it, I recommend reading the Wiki on what happened in Season 1.

Bottom Line: Yes it sucks, but is bearable if you know the backstory. 4/10 for me.