New Years Weekend Box Office: 'Avatar' rings in the new year with lots more money!

[The Clown Prince]

With the New Years holiday weekend, a lot of films saw increases in their business this weekend. But the story of the weekend is once again Avatar, and again like last weekend, there is plenty to say so here is Comingsoon.net's take on it once again....



James Cameron's Avatar (20th Century Fox) continues to be one of the biggest box office phenomenon's of the decade--much like Titanic in the prior decade--having grossed $350 million after just 17 days and crossing the one billion mark worldwide. It set a new Near Year's Day weekend box office record with its estimated $68.3 million, down just 10% from Christmas weekend and making it the highest third weekend gross for a movie domestically (surpassing the $45 million made by Spider-Man in 2002).

By next weekend, Cameron's comeback will hit the $400 million mark and by next Sunday, it should pass Michael Bay's Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen to become the highest-grossing movie of 2009, as well as breaking into the Top 10 highest-grossing movies (domestically) of all time.

Internationally, Avatar has grossed $670.2 million which brings its worldwide total to $1.02 billion, making it the fourth-highest grossing movie worldwide EVER, and that's after being in theaters for only 17 days, too. It has surpassed the worldwide gross for The Dark Knight and only needs $46 million more to beat Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest. (Currently, Cameron's Titanic still holds the worldwide grossing record with $1.84 billion with $600 million of that domestically.)

What's so remarkable about the movie's success, besides how much of that money is being made in 3D and IMAX venues (with many daily sell-outs still being reported ), is that Avatar is also the biggest non-sequel since George Lucas' original Star Wars and Steven Spielberg's E.T.: The Extraterrestrial. By the end of January, it should have surpassed both of their non-adjusted box office takes. It's still a few days behind Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight, which had the benefits of opening in summer, while Avatar will be facing moviegoers' return to school and work starting tomorrow, so we'll have to see whether it can cross the $533 million mark to become the second-highest grossing movie after Cameron's own Titanic.


Coming in second place is Sherlock Holmes earning another $38.3 million and a $140.6 million total, but falling almost 39% from Christmas weekend.

In third place and adding 47 theaters (3,747 total) and falling 25% is Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel with $36.6 million and a $157.7 million total.

The fourth place spot goes to It's Complicated with $18.7 million and a $59.1 million total.

And rounding out the top 5 and joining 2009's $200 million club is The Blind Side which earned $12.6 million and a $209 million total. Warner Brothers made the push by adding another 160 theaters this weekend (2,926 total) which helped to increase it's business over last weekend by 10.3%.

Seven out of the twelve films this weekend saw increases in it's business over last weekend. The two biggest jumps were New Moon which jumped 18.3%. It added 34 theaters (1,627 total) and made another $3.6 million with a $287.7 million total.

And the other big jump of the weekend was The Princess and the Frog which even though lost 147 theaters (3,328 total) saw an 11.2% jump with a $10 million weekend and a $86 million total.

Opening next weekend for the first wide releases of 2010 are three new movies. First up is the horror film Daybreakers (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=21566) (rated R) starring Ethan Hawke, Sam Neill, Willem Dafoe, Claudia Karvan, Michael Dorman, Vince Colosimo, and Isabel Lucas.

Up next is Youth in Revolt (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=41254) (rated R) based on the book of the same name by author C.D. Payne. It stars Michael Cera, Portia Doubleday, Steve Buscemi, Ray Liotta, Justin Long, Jean Smart, Ari Graynor, Fred Willard, Zach Galifianakis, Mary Kay Place, and Rooney Mara.

And finally we have Leap Year (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=49717) (rated PG) with Amy Adams, Matthew Goode, Adam Scott, and John Lithgow.

Here are your numbers....

1) Avatar- $68,300,000 ($352,111,000)
2) Sherlock Holmes- $38,385,000 ($140,675,000)
3) Alvin and the Chipmunks 2- $36,600,000 ($157,345,000)
4) It's Complicated- $18,700,000 ($59,105,000)
5) The Blind Side- $12,650,000 ($209,052,000)
6) Up in the Air- $11,350,000 ($45,020,000)
7) The Princess and the Frog- $10,013,000 ($86,085,000)
8) Did You Hear About the Morgans?- $5,200,000 ($25,620,000)
9) Nine- $4,250,000 ($14,047,000)
10) Invictus- $4,130,000 ($30,755,000)
11) New Moon- $3,605,000 ($287,753,000)
12) Brothers- $1,290,000 ($27,510,000)

[Philo & Gunge]

Nice to see Avatar is still going strong. I can only assume the January legs will be good, it'd be nice to see this be the #1 of 2009 over Transformers.

Nice to see we have The Blind Side passing $200 million. I haven't seen it yet but it's fantastic to see a drama like that really excel past expectations.

Why is Up In The Air making as much money as it is?! I saw it on Christmas night and didn't think it was this masterpiece the critics were making it out to be and, quite frankly, people I know who did see it agree with me. Ridiculously overrated film, let me just say that there was another film in 2009 with the word "up" in the title that is much more deserving of praise than this just decent movie.

The Princess and the Frog is also recovering well from the Avatar competition of the second weekend, $100 million is attainable at this point. Not the best run and it doesn't look like it'll outgross Bolt, but still an excellent effort.

Invictus is also recovering from it's bad first weekends. Clint really deserves it even if it isn't his best film (again, I haven't seen this one yet either but I want to soon). I wish it the best for the rest of it's theatrical run.

[CaptainHero]

Why is Up In The Air making as much money as it is?! I saw it on Christmas night and didn't think it was this masterpiece the critics were making it out to be and, quite frankly, people I know who did see it agree with me. Ridiculously overrated film, let me just say that there was another film in 2009 with the word "up" in the title that is much more deserving of praise than this just decent movie.

Really? I thought Up In The Air was pretty deserving of its acclaim and at this point Reitman is batting 3 for 3. It makes me feel good when I see a movie like Up In The Air and come out thinking it was worth the hype. (*Cough*Cough*I'm looking at you Avatar*Cough*)

I think Youth in Revolt will do pretty well next week, maybe a $15-20 opening weekend.

[Lord Dalek]

Well lets look at the rest of January...

January 15
The Book of Eli (another lousy Denzel paycheck movie, but this and Dwayne the following week are probably the only things that could knock Avatar for the next few weeks)
The Lovely Bones (been delayed too much to matter)
The Spy Next Door (nah)

January 22

The Tooth Fairy (see The Book of Eli)
Legion (#5 at best)
Extraordinary Measures (nah)

January 29

Edge of Darkness (nah)

Avatar could theoretically make it to 600,000,000 domestically. It appears to be the only film playing in 3-D for the next month (then the Beauty and the Beast 3-D reissue comes out). I'm not saying it will, but the schedule is pretty lousy at the moment.

[Spideyzilla]

I could not be happier. Avatar could outgross Titanic. Seriously. If that were to happen, imagine the irony.

[CaptainHero]

Well lets look at the rest of January...

January 15
The Book of Eli (another lousy Denzel paycheck movie, but this and Dwayne the following week are probably the only things that could knock Avatar for the next few weeks)
The Lovely Bones (been delayed too much to matter)
The Spy Next Door (nah)

January 22

The Tooth Fairy (see The Book of Eli)
Legion (#5 at best)
Extraordinary Measures (nah)

January 29

Edge of Darkness (nah)

Avatar could theoretically make it to 600,000,000 domestically. It appears to be the only film playing in 3-D for the next month (then the Beauty and the Beast 3-D reissue comes out). I'm not saying it will, but the schedule is pretty lousy at the moment.

I think you're under estimating Edge of Darkness, not only does the film look pretty good but it's also Mel Gibson's first return to film since 2002's Signs and judging from audience reactions to the trailers, it looks to make a decent sum of cash.

[Michael24]

I think you're under estimating Edge of Darkness, not only does the film look pretty good but it's also Mel Gibson's first return to film since 2002's Signs and judging from audience reactions to the trailers, it looks to make a decent sum of cash.
The trailer is dynamite! I've watched it at least 2-3 times a day for about the last week. I'm excited to finally see Mel back on the big screen in the first place, but being back in the kind of "kick ass and take charge" role that I most like seeing him in makes it even more exciting. I can't wait to see it. :)

[Hobbes829]

I don't care about the box office totals. Serenity is miles away a better film than Avatar and it didn't make much money at all. It has great characters, a solid story and clever dialog. Avatar is has none of that. The story is unoriginal (which isn't a problem but i expect more out of cameron, the characters are cardboard and i haven't heard much positive feedback about the dialog.

[HG Revolution]

I don't care about the box office totals. Serenity is miles away a better film than Avatar and it didn't make much money at all. It has great characters, a solid story and clever dialog. Avatar is has none of that. The story is unoriginal (which isn't a problem but i expect more out of cameron, the characters are cardboard and i haven't heard much positive feedback about the dialog.

You, Mister, get the award for stating the obvious! EVERYONE here knows there's no strong correlation between box office and quality of a film.

[Knight]

Im not a fan of Avatar as a movie but you cant deny a billion for any movie isnt impressive.

[Mesousa]

I don't care about the box office totals. Serenity is miles away a better film than Avatar and it didn't make much money at all. It has great characters, a solid story and clever dialog. Avatar is has none of that. The story is unoriginal (which isn't a problem but i expect more out of cameron, the characters are cardboard and i haven't heard much positive feedback about the dialog.

Okay, that's too just too random.

Serenity was good, but don't just randomly bring it up. That's like bringing up a Pixar film to an animated film not from DreamWorks.

See? It makes no sense. Don't suddnely go off-topic like that.

[Hobbes829]

Okay, that's too just too random.

Serenity was good, but don't just randomly bring it up. That's like bringing up a Pixar film to an animated film not from DreamWorks.

See? It makes no sense. Don't suddnely go off-topic like that.
you clearly didn't understand what my point was. It's hardly off topic. I was saying that it doesn't really matter in the scheme of things how much money a movie makes. What matters is how good it is.

[Old Guy]

January 29

Edge of Darkness (nah)


I think you're under estimating Edge of Darkness, not only does the film look pretty good but it's also Mel Gibson's first return to film since 2002's Signs and judging from audience reactions to the trailers, it looks to make a decent sum of cash.


The trailer is dynamite! I've watched it at least 2-3 times a day for about the last week. I'm excited to finally see Mel back on the big screen in the first place, but being back in the kind of "kick ass and take charge" role that I most like seeing him in makes it even more exciting. I can't wait to see it. :)

Plus it's directed by Martin Campbell. The same guy who directed GoldenEye, The Mask of Zorro, and Casino Royale. And the same guy whose in pre-production for the Green Lantern.

If a movie like Gran Torino managed to gross $148 million early last year then I don't see why Edge of Darkness should be any different. The talent is there.

Also, let's not be so quick to dismiss Book of Eli. It's directed by the Hughes Brothers. The same duo behind Menace II Society, Dead Presidents, and From Hell.

[Discloner]

. What matters is how good it is.Perhaps to film fans....but as an INDUSTRY, it certainly matters how much a film makes.

[Hobbes829]

Perhaps to film fans....but as an INDUSTRY, it certainly matters how much a film makes.
i get that, but unless you're in the film industry, i hardly see how it matters to anyone.

[Old Guy]

i get that, but unless you're in the film industry, i hardly see how it matters to anyone.

Let's put it this way. FOX is notorious for under-funding movies and enforcing a 90-minute running time. Yet, they spent $300-400 million on Avatar and allowed it to be nearly 3 hours long. Why? Because it's James "friggin" Cameron directing. You know why Joss Wheldon struggles so much? Because his movies and TV shows flop. Money speaks. If a filmmaker you enjoy gets a hit movie then that's great because they'll have freedom for their next project. Or, heck, they'll actually have a movie to direct. Box office matters to film fans because we get to see which filmmaker will be employed tomorrow and which won't. And the same applies to actors. Nick Cage still gets work. You know why? Cause those darn National Treasure movies actually made money.

[The Landstander]

Really? I thought Up In The Air was pretty deserving of its acclaim and at this point Reitman is batting 3 for 3. It makes me feel good when I see a movie like Up In The Air and come out thinking it was worth the hype. It's also to Reitman's credit that he's made off-beat and original drama/comedies that not only get acclaim but have managed to be pretty profitable in this process; it's hard to do that sometimes. For this reason I'm glad to see Up in the Air is doing well.

Admittedly you could argue Juno was a bit unoriginally "indie" style, but I think the point stands anyway.

[Hobbes829]

Let's put it this way. FOX is notorious for under-funding movies and enforcing a 90-minute running time. Yet, they spent $300-400 million on Avatar and allowed it to be nearly 3 hours long. Why? Because it's James "friggin" Cameron directing. You know why Joss Wheldon struggles so much? Because his movies and TV shows flop. Money speaks. If a filmmaker you enjoy gets a hit movie then that's great because they'll have freedom for their next project. Or, heck, they'll actually have a movie to direct. Box office matters to film fans because we get to see which filmmaker will be employed tomorrow and which won't. And the same applies to actors. Nick Cage still gets work. You know why? Cause those darn National Treasure movies actually made money.
Buffy nor Angel were flops. Even if they were that says nothing of the quality of the work. James Cameron has made some great movies, but that's not about the box office. T1, T2, Aliens, and True Lies were great films regardless of how much they made. Titanic was a huge film, but it was formulaic and you knew the ending.

A lot of good tv shows flop but that says nothing about them creatively. Veronica Mars, Firefly and Arrested Development were great shows but they got canned, yet Smallville and Heroes keep going.

There are 2 sides to the coin in what makes money, revenue and cost. The stuff joss makes doesn't cost much. He's not going anywhere.

If i'm glad that this movie didn't tank it's because we might get more cameron films. hopefully not dances with smurfs 2 but something that doesn't take 12 years to come about only to tell a cliched man bad, nature good story.

[Wonderwall]

I could not be happier. Avatar could outgross Titanic. Seriously. If that were to happen, imagine the irony.

In the words of Arthur Spooner, How is that ironic?

[Hobbes829]

In the words of Arthur Spooner, How is that ironic?
wouldn't that be more of a coincidence?

[peacebyanymeans]

In the words of Arthur Spooner, How is that ironic?

His clothes would have no wrinkles.

[Old Guy]

Buffy nor Angel were flops.

Firefly and Dollhouse were. Can you imagine a world where Firefly was still on the air? Well...too bad you don't live in it. Or what about a world where Serenity was a movie franchise? Sadly, you don't live in that either.

See, box office and ratings do affect fans.

[Hobbes829]

Firefly and Dollhouse were. Can you imagine a world where Firefly was still on the air? Well...too bad you don't live in it. Or what about a world where Serenity was a movie franchise? Sadly, you don't live in that either.

See, box office and ratings do affect fans.
i get that it affects us in a way, but in terms of judging something's asthetic value, box office isn't high on my list of concerns. When i watch something my concern is if it will be worth my time and money. Yeah it's nice when what i like is successful but that's a minor concern.

[defunctzombie]

My mom went to see Holmes again, so we contributed. I do not intend to contribute to Avatar.

[Hobbes829]

My mom went to see Holmes again, so we contributed. I do not intend to contribute to Avatar.
Same here, although, i didn't see it again. i just saw it the first time. It was good and i might see it again as i didn't catch everything on the first go around.

I keep hearing things like Avatar is the future. The visuals are impressive but it's not like this hasn't been done before. In a few years, there will be greater leaps in technology. Impressive CGI in films is nothing new. It will continue to happen, but there's always going to be films that don't have to push the technological envelope to tell a story that connects.

[Spideyzilla]

I keep hearing things like Avatar is the future. The visuals are impressive but it's not like this hasn't been done before. In a few years, there will be greater leaps in technology. Impressive CGI in films is nothing new. It will continue to happen, but there's always going to be films that don't have to push the technological envelope to tell a story that connects.

Its how the technology is done. Its not just the look: the production was undoubtably revolutionary. Just check this out.
http://12.media.tumblr.com/oQVQZmnS4lg9sw7vFmkGRmSxo1_500.jpg

[Hobbes829]

Its how the technology is done. Its not just the look: the production was undoubtably revolutionary. Just check this out.

great, but the story fell flat, so i don't care how good the CGI is. Besides, it will only be a few years before someone else does it better. Hopefully in a better movie. I'm glad it was profitable. Profits are good. I just wish it was a different film

[Spideyzilla]

great, but the story fell flat, so i don't care how good the CGI is. Besides, it will only be a few years before someone else does it better. Hopefully in a better movie. I'm glad it was profitable. Profits are good. I just wish it was a different film

Shouldn't this be in the talkback?

[Hobbes829]

Shouldn't this be in the talkback?
you could argue either way. I'm also talking about profits.

[Spideyzilla]

you could argue either way. I'm also talking about profits.

Yeah, I guess.

[CaptainHero]

Book of Eli will probably open pretty well, people love Denzel and it looks like it could be alright, though word is it sucks.

[Hanshotfirst113]

I've gone to see it three times now, and its been sold out every single one.


The trailer is dynamite! I've watched it at least 2-3 times a day for about the last week. I'm excited to finally see Mel back on the big screen in the first place, but being back in the kind of "kick ass and take charge" role that I most like seeing him in makes it even more exciting. I can't wait to see it. :)

I'm mostly interested because Martin Campbell is directing. He's misfired a few times, but this looks like he could really be back on form.


I don't care about the box office totals. Serenity is miles away a better film than Avatar and it didn't make much money at all. It has great characters, a solid story and clever dialog. Avatar is has none of that. The story is unoriginal (which isn't a problem but I expect more out of Cameron, the characters are cardboard and i haven't heard much positive feedback about the dialog.

Dialogue has never been Cameron's strong point. Serenity is a pretty good film, if a bit overinflated by fanboys and not entirely without its problems.


You, Mister, get the award for stating the obvious! EVERYONE here knows there's no strong correlation between box office and quality of a film.

True. But I like seeing Avatar make so much money just to spite Mr. Happy :p.


You clearly didn't understand what my point was. It's hardly off topic. I was saying that it doesn't really matter in the scheme of things how much money a movie makes. What matters is how good it is.

What matters is if it lasts and endures.


Buffy nor Angel were flops.

No, they were cult favorites. There's a difference. And neither show is entirely without its problems and misfires.


Titanic was a huge film, but it was formulaic and you knew the ending.

True, but it wasn't without merit.


In the words of Arthur Spooner, How is that ironic?

It's like on your wedding day. It's a free ride, when you're already there. It's the good advice that you just didn't take. And who would've thought? It figures.

[HG Revolution]

great, but the story fell flat, so i don't care how good the CGI is. Besides, it will only be a few years before someone else does it better. Hopefully in a better movie. I'm glad it was profitable. Profits are good. I just wish it was a different film

You know if you haven't seen the movie yourself, how can you fairly criticize if the story falls flat or not? Yeah, you can read a summary of the movie to find out what happens, but the quality of a movie is in how it presents its plot, not what its plot is.

[Hobbes829]

You know if you haven't seen the movie yourself, how can you fairly criticize if the story falls flat or not? Yeah, you can read a summary of the movie to find out what happens, but the quality of a movie is in how it presents its plot, not what its plot is.
any story that is nature good, man bad has fallen flat to me. I can't get past the premise

[HG Revolution]

any story that is nature good, man bad has fallen flat to me. I can't get past the premise

Well, nature is mostly good, and the movie doesn't say all people are bad, just the corporate-imperialist types who typically are pretty bad.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Any story that is nature good, man bad has fallen flat to me. I can't get past the premise.

Which is fine, but I still don't think that you can really criticize a movie fairly, or indeed at all, without having seen it. Given that you were championing one movie as superior to another, I was under the impression that you had seen both.

[Desensitized]

Man, I still haven't seen most of these movies. Better get on that soon...


Serenity is a pretty good film, if a bit overinflated by fanboys and not entirely without its problems.Whedon in a nutshell.

[suss2it]

I don't care about the box office totals. Serenity is miles away a better film than Avatar and it didn't make much money at all. It has great characters, a solid story and clever dialog. Avatar is has none of that. The story is unoriginal (which isn't a problem but i expect more out of cameron, the characters are cardboard and i haven't heard much positive feedback about the dialog.I'm baffled at the fact that you seem to think Serenity is better than Avatar even though you haven't seen the latter. How exactly do you know Avatar doesn't have a solid story or clever dialog? How do you know the characters are cardboard? You haven't even seen the film!

[Old Guy]

Monday Numbers

1. Avatar - $8 million ($360.2 million)
2. Sherlock Holmes - $2.9 million ($141.6 million)
3. Alvin 2 - $2.2 million ($158.1 million)
4. It's Complicated - $1.4 million ($60.6 million)
5. The Blind Side - $824,120 ($209.3 million)

[Blankments]

Opening next weekend for the first wide releases of 2010 are three new movies. First up is the horror film Daybreakers (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=21566) (rated R) starring Ethan Hawke, Sam Neill, Willem Dafoe, Claudia Karvan, Michael Dorman, Vince Colosimo, and Isabel Lucas.

Up next is Youth in Revolt (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=41254) (rated R) based on the book of the same name by author C.D. Payne. It stars Michael Cera, Portia Doubleday, Steve Buscemi, Ray Liotta, Justin Long, Jean Smart, Ari Graynor, Fred Willard, Zach Galifianakis, Mary Kay Place, and Rooney Mara.

And finally we have Leap Year (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=49717) (rated PG) with Amy Adams, Matthew Goode, Adam Scott, and John Lithgow.

Heath Ledger's last film The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus is also expanding this weekend into 500 theatres.

[Old Guy]

Tuesday Box Office:

1. Avatar - $7.3 million ($367.5 million)
2. Sherlock Holmes - $2.7 million ($144.3 million)
3. It's Complicated - $1.7 million ($62.3 million)
4. Alvin 2 - $1.5 million ($159.6 million)
5. Up in the Air - $910,705 ($46.1 million)

[Old Guy]

Friday Box Office

1. Avatar - $13.3 million ($393.8 million)
2. Daybreakers - $5.8 million
3. Sherlock Holmes - $5.1 million ($153.7 million)
4. Alvin 2 - $3.5 million ($165.3 million)
5. Leap Year - $3.3 million
6. It's Complicated - $3.2 million ($68.5 million)
7. Youth in Revolt - $2.7 million

So, it seems like audiences have grown tired of Michael Cera.

[Elf]

That's great for Avatar, and at least we can all agree on one thing, we won't have any idea what the sequels will be about.

So have any of you heard about the expansion for Doctor Parnassus (Heath Ledger's last film by the way) this weekend? It's playing in some 500 theaters and is just as wondrous as Avatar with the difference being you have to figure out what's going to happen next instead of having it mapped out for you by scenario.

And besides Terry needs it for Don Quixote! :)

[CaptainHero]

Friday Box Office

1. Avatar - $13.3 million ($393.8 million)
2. Daybreakers - $5.8 million
3. Sherlock Holmes - $5.1 million ($153.7 million)
4. Alvin 2 - $3.5 million ($165.3 million)
5. Leap Year - $3.3 million
6. It's Complicated - $3.2 million ($68.5 million)
7. Youth in Revolt - $2.7 million

So, it seems like audiences have grown tired of Michael Cera.

I wouldn't say that, he's had 2 movies that have underperformed, Youth in Revolt is a pretty dark comedy that was hard to market and Year One was an awful stinker people could smell before the trailer hit.

Don't count him out just because he's had two films do poorly, he's still got a pretty large fanbase and he has Scott Pilgrim next year, I still think he has a lot left in him.

[Old Guy]

he has Scott Pilgrim next year

Yeah, that's the movie he could rebound with.

[Spideyzilla]

I'm so glad Avatar is a success. The critics really like it, audiences like it, and it's making heaps and heaps of money.

[NewcomerDC]

he has Scott Pilgrim next year
Thought the film was coming out this year. Plus, for those critics who aren't fans of the graphic novel series, they might write it off by being too weird or too much geared towards the gamers/fans of fighting movies and might be just to bring in the teens and no one else. The success of the film depends on how it's being advertised.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Whedon in a nutshell.

Yeah, just about.

[Hobbes829]

are our attention spans so short that if a star has 2 bombs, he's considered washed up? As if no star hasn't had his fair share of flops.

I'm baffled at the fact that you seem to think Serenity is better than Avatar even though you haven't seen the latter. How exactly do you know Avatar doesn't have a solid story or clever dialog? How do you know the characters are cardboard? You haven't even seen the film!
Dialog has never been what Cameron is known for. Plus, i've read enough to know that the story's terrible. I also have friends who's opinions are in line with mine as far as tastes go and they thought the story was weak, and a lot of the reviews on here say the same thing, nature good, humans bad. I've never liked those stories. The movie's all sizzle and no steak.

You're right though, i haven't seen the film and refuse to pay to see it on principle.

I'd rather see a movie like Sherlock Holmes where the guy uses his intelligence to save the day. I'm glad it's making money and that RDJ has some hits under his belt. This is the sort of story i like to see.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Are our attention spans so short that if a star has 2 bombs, he's considered washed up? As if no star hasn't had his fair share of flops.

To whom are you referring?

[Hobbes829]

To whom are you referring?
there was a guy who said something to the effect of people getting tired of Cera. I've seen this sort of comment before. If someone has a box office bomb or 2, then you get comments from people that say that the bloom is off the rose.

[Hanshotfirst113]

You're right though, i haven't seen the film and refuse to pay to see it on principle.

What principle? Again, it's really unfair to criticize a movie that you haven't seen. That's one of my principles. I think that that's fair. I don't go around saying that The Island is awful, however much I may criticize Michael Bay. If I criticize a movie I haven't seen, then my opinion probably shouldn't be taken seriously. Quite frankly, if you haven't seen a movie, it's simply not fair to criticize it, especially compare it to another movie.


There was a guy who said something to the effect of people getting tired of Cera. I've seen this sort of comment before. If someone has a box office bomb or 2, then you get comments from people that say that the bloom is off the rose.

In Hollywood, that can sometimes be the case.

[Hobbes829]

the principle that i refuse to pey to see a movie that i deem to have an awful message.

[NewcomerDC]

the principle that i refuse to pey to see a movie that i deem to have an awful message.
I also count as someone who writes films off as being bad without seeing them. I mean one example is New Moon which I saw a few parts of the film in theaters and had a good ol' time making fun of it.

[Hanshotfirst113]

I also count as someone who writes films off as being bad without seeing them. I mean one example is New Moon which I saw a few parts of the film in theaters and had a good ol' time making fun of it.

It does look like it would be fun to MST3K it ;).

[Hobbes829]

while i did see The day after tomorrow, i didn't pay to see it, but i would've spoken against it had i not, just like i refuse to see An Inconvenient Truth or anything Michael Moore does. I dont want my money going towards these films.

[DarkAngel]

Plus, i've read enough to know that the story's terrible.

I'd rather see a movie like Sherlock Holmes where the guy uses his intelligence to save the day. I'm glad it's making money and that RDJ has some hits under his belt. This is the sort of story i like to see.
Let's be fair, though. There have been quite a few reviews for Holmes saying its story is weak. Some might find that to be a lot more egregious given that one usually expects something featuring Sherlock Holmes to have a lot of intelligence to it. And from the trailers, my impression of Holmes has been that the movie has more flash than substance.

Now, it looks entertaining and sounds like it is based on reviews and feedback from others. But it seems like its largely the cast and performances that make it so enjoyable, rather than the story.

[Old Guy]

Thought the film was coming out this year.

It is. We're only a few days into 2010. People are bound to make mistakes.

[Hobbes829]

Let's be fair, though. There have been quite a few reviews for Holmes saying its story is weak. Some might find that to be a lot more egregious given that one usually expects something featuring Sherlock Holmes to have a lot of intelligence to it. And from the trailers, my impression of Holmes has been that the movie has more flash than substance.

Now, it looks entertaining and sounds like it is based on reviews and feedback from others. But it seems like its largely the cast and performances that make it so enjoyable, rather than the story.
i quite enjoyed the story. It was clever and kinda like the hounds of baskerville. Even if you don't agree, the story is good enough, but yeah, the performances and the chemistry of the actors is what makes the movie. THAT'S why i go to the movies. Visuals are fun, but i feel cheated parting with my money to watch something that's complete flash. It's like TV, not every episode of a show you enjoy will have a great story or even a good one, but the acting and the characters can make up for that a whole lot.

[Old Guy]

are our attention spans so short that if a star has 2 bombs, he's considered washed up? As if no star hasn't had his fair share of flops.

Two flops in a roll though? But, like it has been said, he has Scott Pilgrim coming out later this year. So, he'll bounce back.

[NewcomerDC]

Two flops in a roll though? But, like it has been said, he has Scott Pilgrim coming out later this year. So, he'll bounce back.
It's a possibility, not a given.

[Hobbes829]

Two flops in a roll though? But, like it has been said, he has Scott Pilgrim coming out later this year. So, he'll bounce back.
He's young, 2 flops is nothing. Plus, i don't think it really matters. It's not like if you make a few flops you never get work.

2 points make a line, not a pattern.

[Hanshotfirst113]

While I did see The Day After Tomorrow, I didn't pay to see it, but I would've spoken against it had I not, just like i refuse to see An Inconvenient Truth or anything Michael Moore does. I don't want my money going towards these films.

The Day After Tomorrow was a stupid movie. It was just poorly made. Whatever message it had was so ham-fisted and stupid that I can't see anyone taking it seriously. And just because I see a movie and disagree with it doesn't mean much besides that I dislike the film. Really, what are "these films" precisely? It kind of reminds me of all of the people with signs protesting The Da Vinci Code. I shrugged and said "it's just a movie." Really, you shouldn't "speak against" a movie you haven't seen. I don't "refuse" to see Michael Moore movies because I disagree with their messages (to which Moore is entitled). I don't see them simply because they don't interest me. I suppose that if a film came out with subject matter that I protested strongly enough, I might change my mind, but I don't know if that will happen anytime soon. And even then, I'd still probably see it first.


2 points make a line, not a pattern.

I hate math.

So, anyone curious about how well Legion will do? I'm curious about it based on the trailers, but I don't know who exactly to whom it will appeal.

[NewcomerDC]

So, anyone curious about how well Legion will do? I'm curious about it based on the trailers, but I don't know who exactly to whom it will appeal.
Legion might do so-so. It doesn't look interesting in the trailers save for the Monster Granny in the beginning of the movie's first trailerr that premiered last year. I think of it as a film that most religious groups might down out hate because it depicts angels in a negative light.

[Hobbes829]

my lack of interest doesn't exist in a vacuum. One of the things that gets me interested in something is the subject matter. Global Warming disaster flicks don't interest me, nor does michael moore, nor any tree hugger flicks. I never said moore isn't allowed to have his opinion, it's just that i'm not going to put money in his pocket because that's my right.

Mystery movies interest me, Dances with Smurfs doesn't.

[CaptainHero]

Two flops in a roll though? But, like it has been said, he has Scott Pilgrim coming out later this year. So, he'll bounce back.


Quite a few actors have had 2 flops in a row and then come back to massive box office success. Pretty much any actor you can name has had a few flops in their career.

[Hanshotfirst113]

"This is just like High School Graduation...Nobody's Going Anywhere!"

What is that from?

[HG Revolution]

I suppose that if a film came out with subject matter that I protested strongly enough, I might change my mind, but I don't know if that will happen anytime soon. And even then, I'd still probably see it first.

I've avoided certain movies for partially political reasons. I mean, I have no interest in ever seeing Passion of the Christ, and I'm boycotting The Last Airbender due to the horribly racist casting.

I can't say I really get why Hobbes is boycotting Avatar, though. It's not saying all humans are bad; it's saying greed at the expense of other people's lives and civilizations is bad.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Legion might do so-so. It doesn't look interesting in the trailers save for the Monster Granny in the beginning of the movie's first trailer that premiered last year. I think of it as a film that most religious groups might down out hate because it depicts angels in a negative light.

Ah, in all honesty is just looks like an action/horror mishmash with inexperienced director at the helm. Decent cast though. I'm curious about both it and Daybreakers. Both look like potential cult favorites to me.


I've avoided certain movies for partially political reasons. I mean, I have no interest in ever seeing Passion of the Christ, and I'm boycotting The Last Airbender due to the horribly racist casting.

I just don't see myself ever actively protesting a movie. But who knows? Maybe someday. I doubt it though. What's wrong with Airbender? There are certainly movies I have no interest in (mostly extreme horror films and such).


I can't say I really get why Hobbes is boycotting Avatar, though. It's not saying all humans are bad; it's saying greed at the expense of other people's lives and civilizations is bad.It says the same thing as any number of other "save the rainforest" movies, and kind of hypocritically when it's "beautiful nature" is rendered digitally,to say nothing of its sometimes hypocritical and hackneyed messages, but all of that hardly matters. The film exists only because of it's breathtaking special effects and spectacular action set pieces (in an age of hyperactive editing, Cameron's graceful choreography is breath of fresh air). The movie's ham-handed message is sort of beside the point.

[CaptainHero]

What is that from?


Drawn Together

[Elf]

Hey Old Guy, do you know any numbers on Doctor Parnassus?

[suss2it]

Friday Box Office

1. Avatar - $13.3 million ($393.8 million)
2. Daybreakers - $5.8 million
3. Sherlock Holmes - $5.1 million ($153.7 million)
4. Alvin 2 - $3.5 million ($165.3 million)
5. Leap Year - $3.3 million
6. It's Complicated - $3.2 million ($68.5 million)
7. Youth in Revolt - $2.7 million

So, it seems like audiences have grown tired of Michael Cera.

I know I have. He's basically always the same character over and over in slightly different situations.

[Old Guy]

He's young, 2 flops is nothing.

2 flops is nothing. 2 flops in a row is a different story. Also, it doesn't matter that he's young. Jason Biggs was young too. We haven't seen him in a while.

Either way, it's a pointless argument. He has Scott Pilgrim coming up. Even if it doesn't do well at the box office it'll still gain a cult following. Nick and Norah didn't do that well either but it was a hit on DVD. Youth in Revolt could also find life on DVD, but then again, opening at #7 shows lack of interest. Nick and Norah didn't do that bad. It opened at #3.

[DarkAngel]

Even if you don't agree, the story is good enough, but yeah, the performances and the chemistry of the actors is what makes the movie. THAT'S why i go to the movies. Visuals are fun, but i feel cheated parting with my money to watch something that's complete flash. It's like TV, not every episode of a show you enjoy will have a great story or even a good one, but the acting and the characters can make up for that a whole lot.
Sure, so shouldn't that apply to Avatar, too? Mostly, I'm not seeing complaints that its story is weak, but that its been done before. Well, as I think we can all attest to from watching movie after movie, pretty much everything's been done before. If Cameron's done it well, and given us acting and characters we appreciate and care about (as you were saying), it could be a good experience. Throw in that newfangled 3D stuff, and maybe its a very good experience. :)

I certainly hope so.

As for Holmes, just got back from the theater. Can't say I'm too thrilled. It's certainly not bad. But it didn't consistently grab me. And, too often, I couldn't properly make out Downey's dialogue, which was of serious detriment. It's a solid start, though I hope they can tap into the potential better with the sequel. I'm certainly excited about the seeds they've planted, to that end.


So, anyone curious about how well Legion will do? I'm curious about it based on the trailers, but I don't know who exactly to whom it will appeal.
I find the premise incredibly appealing. Unfortunately, nothing in the trailer suggested execution that even begins to take advantage of it. I'm fearing it's probably a good idea flushed down the toilet. Based on what reviews say, I'll either wait to grab the dvd from the library or just skip it.

DA

[Old Guy]

Hey Old Guy, do you know any numbers on Doctor Parnassus?

They haven't been released, so I imagine they weren't good. However, the foreign box office is $12 million so far.

EDIT:

$20 million, actually. $10 million in Italy, $5 million in the UK, $4 million in France, and $1 million in Spain.

[Wonderwall]

I know I have. He's basically always the same character over and over in slightly different situations.

Yea he seems like a nice kid but I'm convinced he can't act or at least is extremely limited. Even the good stuff he's is in, he was never the highlight of it. At least not for me.

[Old Guy]

You're right. Cera has never been the hightlight of a movie. He's just one of those actors that make smart choices and pick good movies.

[HG Revolution]

What's wrong with Airbender?

The long story: Go to http://www.racebending.com (http://www.racebending.com/) for info.
The short story: The entirety of the heroic Air and Water Tribes are being played by white people, particularly inexcusable for the Water Tribe since they're the darkest-skinned in the series. Meanwhile, the genocidal Fire Nation is being played by an assortment of dark-skinned but mostly Middle Eastern actors despite being the palest in the series (and the vast assortment within the casting of the royal family alone, from Indian to Maori, doesn't even make plot sense given the Fire Nation is supposed to be obsessed with "racial purity"). Oh, except for Avatar Roku, who since he was the all powerful Avatar of the Fire Nation is of course being played by a white guy. Paramount hasn't even tried to make excuses for this.