Sunday, September 05, 2010

Dull Thud?

I don't know what I was expecting, but I thought more than this:

Avatar: Special Edition -- $2.3 million -- (-42.6%) -- total gross: $7.8 million

ASE opened in 800+ three dee movie palaces last week and didn't break the Top Ten.

For some reason, I anticipated that the nine minutes of new footage and the chance to relive everyone's favorite 2009 Sci Fi movie experience would bring more people into the local AMC with their goggles and tubs of popcorn at the ready. But I was wrong.

Eight million dollars in two weekends isn't awful for a re-release, I guess, but Fox-News Corp was probably hoping for grosses that were a bit more robust.

Add On: The L.A. Times speculated about the under-performance some days ago:

... It was a tall order to come on the heels of a DVD release and assume a few minutes of extra footage would restart the phenomenon. And much of this is found money for Fox. So it's not even the worst gambit in the world. It's just not exactly a major event ...


Anonymous said...

I was one of the last holdouts who had not seen 'Avatar' during the original release .

When I read that they were re-releasing it in a Special Edition I figured I better finally go see what all the shouting was about .

I saw it in a large theater only about 1/4th full. I had expected more of a crowd.

Anonymous said...

That's GREAT NEWS!!!!!!
At least your specially-designed Cameron 3-D Glasses didn't see the theater as 3/4's empty!!!!!

Anonymous said...

The story stunk the first time I saw it... that was enough.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, it was really stupid. Pretty to look at , technically impressive for the visual effects , but stupid.

Anonymous said...

I just watched it on DVD (Netflix). It was a fun movie. Good eye candy. But not something that I have an urge to see again - not even in 3D. By contrast, whenever I happen to catch "The Terminator" or "Aliens" on the telly, I'll often sit and watch - even with the commercials.

I bet if Cameron released a 3D version of "Aliens" that it would make a lot of dough.

Anonymous said...

The second release smells suspiciously like a steaming marketing ploy aimed at sucking the well dry and siphoning off every last nickel any enthusiastic and previously supportive audience members might still have in their pockets. I think people feel used.
As if $2 billion wasn't quite enough.

Viewers will support a great movie with a great story but they won't return for a third viewing just to help James Cameron break a record for most money ever drained from goggle-eyed viewers at unbelievable ticket prices.

Anonymous said...

The 3D fad is dying out faster than expected... of course since the country is at historic depression and unemployment levels maybe that is part of it too. No one has any money to spend on a 17.00 single movie ticket.

Anonymous said...

No. The audience has just become more savvy a lot quicker than the studios expected. They won't piss their money away on phony 3D and my guess the next Pixar 3D film won't do very well either. A re-issue was an obvious longshot and a way for them to test the waters. Didn't work and I doubt they'll try that again so soon after the original release. If they'd waited a couple of years the results might have been different.
Despite the naysayers, the economy does seem to be on the upswing. A couple of years ago restaurants were struggling and now they're back to their normal filled capacities and many new ones are opening. That alone tells me things aren't as dire as the Republicans would like.
BUT the audiences do seem to have plenty of disposable ncome for 3D fiolms they do want to see.

Anonymous said...

It's not 3-D, it's:
A) The Ride Is Over.
(You had to facepalm at Cameron's interview that he "felt that Disney's Alice prevented the movie from making more money in March"...)

B) The Ride Ends with Home Theater.
Theaters are not so strapped for releases, let alone 3-D ones, that they are "forced" to show movies from last year. Neither are mainstream audiences generous enough to pay $10-$12 for them again, especially when the movies have "done their duty" by going to Blu-ray.
(Just look at the Red-staters who cried "They could show Mel Gibson's Passion in theaters every Easter!"--Theaters tried once and made even LESS money. The movies just can't go home again.)

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...


Most likely. I just narrow it down to a piece of Blue Poo.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot said...

I like the fact that it not only bombed at the BO, but that there isn't anything for it to compete with...

"Moon" and "District 9" where far better movies than "Avatar"....


Steve Hulett said...

I deleted the above because it was waay off topic.

Anonymous said...


I see Mr. Periods is back. I don't recall that Avatar was "overrated."
Highly anticipated? No doubt. Popular? Obviously. Overrated? Not really.

I was one of the holdouts, as well. I finally went to see it last week in I MAX 3-D at City Walk. It was the middle of the week so the theater was only about 20% full. I had also seen it on DVD, so I knew the story.

I enjoyed the spectacle and having a better look at all the design and production details, but didn't come away thinking it was worth the extra money. They should try charging a 2-D admission price for the re-release and see how fast the theaters fill up.

My pet peeve with 3-D? I hate having to hold my head perfectly vertical for two hours. After a while it's an uncomfortable strain.

Site Meter