I went into the theater with pretty low expectations. I felt like I was going into a film that relied on visual effects to carry an inane or juvenile storyline.
I was fucking blown away
AVATAR is a goddamned awesome movie, I loved it. There were a few very minor groan-inducers (naming the mineral "unobtanium", some of the human lines), but holy crap. Several times I became aware of my surroundings and came to the realization that I was literally gripping the edge of my seat. I can't remember the last time that I was that emotionally wrapped up in a movie. The Na'vi acting was nothing short of SPECTACULAR. It was a perfect storm of absolutely believable and astonishing visual quality (I forgot moments into the first view of the Na'Vi that they were CG), incredible voice acting, and astonishingly perfect portrayals of alien movement, emotion, and spark.
I went into the theater with pretty low expectations. I felt like I was going into a film that relied on visual effects to carry an inane or juvenile storyline.
I was fucking blown away
AVATAR is a goddamned awesome movie, I loved it. There were a few very minor groan-inducers (naming the mineral "unobtanium", some of the human lines), but holy crap. Several times I became aware of my surroundings and came to the realization that I was literally gripping the edge of my seat. I can't remember the last time that I was that emotionally wrapped up in a movie. The Na'vi acting was nothing short of SPECTACULAR. It was a perfect storm of absolutely believable and astonishing visual quality (I forgot moments into the first view of the Na'Vi that they were CG), incredible voice acting, and astonishingly perfect portrayals of alien movement, emotion, and spark.
I went into the theater with pretty low expectations. I felt like I was going into a film that relied on visual effects to carry an inane or juvenile storyline.
I was fucking blown away
AVATAR is a goddamned awesome movie, I loved it. There were a few very minor groan-inducers (naming the mineral "unobtanium", some of the human lines), but holy crap. Several times I became aware of my surroundings and came to the realization that I was literally gripping the edge of my seat. I can't remember the last time that I was that emotionally wrapped up in a movie. The Na'vi acting was nothing short of SPECTACULAR. It was a perfect storm of absolutely believable and astonishing visual quality (I forgot moments into the first view of the Na'Vi that they were CG), incredible voice acting, and astonishingly perfect portrayals of alien movement, emotion, and spark.
Mind = blown.
-signed, the ultimate cynic
Well, I still say it was dumb, and I'm more qualified to say that because I make films.
I FINALLY saw Avatar tonight. I agree, the acting, directing, FX, etc. were all brilliant. It was an amazing movie. Parts of it had me at the verge of tears, something that isn't easy to accomplish. I must say though, the story was a bit predictable but the acting and everything else that went into the movie sold it pretty well.
Sherlock Holmes is a lame film that pisses all over the classic Sherlock IP. BUT, this is a thread about AVATAR, and not Holmes, so I will not thread crap in my own thread.
Ok, so it's like this,
The adjusted for inflation list is a completely moot point. Allow me to explain: Gone with the wind will NEVER be toppled from that throne, but it is an inaccurate benchmark. That film came out in the late 1930's. "talkies" had only existed for a decade, and it was one of the earliest feature length films to be presented in color. So the technology, while not exclusive to gone with the wind, was still in its infancy, and still very impressive to viewers. It was a good film, but it had a pull much bigger than its story.
On top of that, in those early days of cinema, there were no home video options. There wouldn't be home video options for almost 35 years. The ONLY place you could see a film was in a theater, and as a result, films would generally stay in a theater for months on end, and in some cases, years. This was the case as recently as The Godfather. Gone with the Wind was re-released, even, over the course of 6 or 7 times along different years. It sat in cinema almost uncontested. Back at that time, there wasn't much real competition for the film - it was nothing like the competition of today. People would see it over and over again, it's legacy is unmatched in cinema, and it is something that will not be repeated, because everything has changed far too much. Today, films see critical reception, incredible amounts of competition, typical theatrical runs of 1.5 months, and expectations of a home video release in roughly six months. They aren't given the chance to go the long haul by distributors, and consumers wouldn't allow it anyways, as interest in a film typically dissolves after a month.
Look at the dates on that list adjusted for inflation. Almost all of those films are from the 70's, the 60's... old films that were released in a time that was completely different than the cinema environment of today. Most of these films will never give up their spots on that list, it just isn't possible.
The newest film on the top twenty is 1993. In fact, any film released in 1990 or higher that is listed in front of AVATAR could quite possibly be passed by AVATAR. And that is the biggest point of all - AVATAR is far from finished. It's been out for six weeks, and it is STILL sitting on top of the box office, and it is STILL selling out IMAX shows. It won't be leaving the cinema any time soon, expect it's sales to continue to soar.
AVATAR is showing consistency in the box office unlike anything else has ever done in recent cinema - perhaps of all time. People keep seeing it, people love it. It is printing money and it has a looooong way to go. It's performance cannot be denied. The movie is making history, and it is achieving incredible recognition - and it deserves all of it.
And it's 3D tax and IMAX prices don't play a huge role, really. Sure, it is higher, but like I said, the film is incredibly consistent. So many repeat viewings (because people are AVATAR depressed lololol) and word of mouth viewings, especially over seas.
By the time all of this is over, AVATAR will have made so much money, and so many people will have seen it, that most of these arguments won't matter - the truth will be in the numbers.
The adjusted for inflation list is a completely moot point. ... it is an inaccurate benchmark. That film came out in the late 2000's. "Stereos" had only existed for a couple years, and it was one of the earliest feature length films to be presented in mostly CGI. So the technology, while not exclusive to Avatar, was still in its infancy, and still very impressive to viewers. It was a good film, but it had a pull much bigger than its story.
Silly argument is silly when you can change a couple words and have it describe YOUR side of the argument, too.
But shouldn't we be having this discussion when Avatar's done selling theater tickets, merchandise, DVD/Blu-Ray/4D/digital downloads, iTunes rentals, etc? If the mark we care about is "most money gained evar," then we logically have to wait until Avatar no longer makes money. Anything before that is premature.
Allow me to explain: Avatar will NEVER be toppled from that throne, but it is an inaccurate benchmark. That film came out in the early 2000's. "threedies" had only existed for a decade, and it was one of the earliest feature length films to be presented in realistic 3D. So the technology, while not exclusive to Avatar, was still in its infancy, and still very impressive to viewers. It was a good film, but it had a pull much bigger than its story.
On top of that, in those early days of cinema, there were no home 3D options. There wouldn't be home 3D for almost 35 years. The ONLY place you could see a 3D film was in a theater, and as a result, films would generally stay in a theater for weeks on end, and in some cases, months. This was the case as recently as Avatar III. Avatar was re-released, even, over the course of 6 or 7 times along different years. It sat in cinema almost uncontested. Back at that time, there wasn't much real competition for the film - it was nothing like the competition of today. People would see it over and over again, it's legacy is unmatched in cinema, and it is something that will not be repeated, because everything has changed far too much. Today, films see critical reception, incredible amounts of competition, typical theatrical runs of 1.5 days, and expectations of a home holo release in roughly 2 weeks. They aren't given the chance to go the long haul by distributors, and consumers wouldn't allow it anyways, as interest in a film typically dissolves after a week.
Sherlock Holmes is a lame film that pisses all over the classic Sherlock IP.
Not to be a gigantic basterd(yes)...but...then you haven't read/read enough of the Sherlock Holmes stories. The characters in the movie are closer to the originals than the vast, vast majority of other takes on Sherlock Holmes.
I'm being dead serious here. For instance, Sherlock Holmes was a bare-knuckle boxer, and he was good. This coming straight from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
Some people have some big political, philosophical, or otherwise emotional connection with this movie for some reason. I liked it, and I liked Black Dynamite just as well, but I don't see a huge emotional "MY SIDE OR THEIRS" type of debate about Black Dynamite and its Kung Fu Treachery.
Not sure what it is; either I'm missing some big cultural cue, or I am (as usual) oblivious to some glaring fact.. either way, I liked Avatar, I thought it was awesome? I guess that's not cool or something?
Comments
I was fucking blown away
AVATAR is a goddamned awesome movie, I loved it. There were a few very minor groan-inducers (naming the mineral "unobtanium", some of the human lines), but holy crap. Several times I became aware of my surroundings and came to the realization that I was literally gripping the edge of my seat. I can't remember the last time that I was that emotionally wrapped up in a movie. The Na'vi acting was nothing short of SPECTACULAR. It was a perfect storm of absolutely believable and astonishing visual quality (I forgot moments into the first view of the Na'Vi that they were CG), incredible voice acting, and astonishingly perfect portrayals of alien movement, emotion, and spark.
Mind = blown.
-signed, the ultimate cynic
Well, I still say it was dumb, and I'm more qualified to say that because I make films.
Yes. Suck it Grimnoc.
Oh you can suck it too, we're just going in reverse alphabetical order.
Figured I better go see what all the hype is about.
-Bobby
Your reverse alphabetical order can suck it.
This is for you lynx. Love it. Loveee itttt!!!
http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm
http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/
So.......at the expense of never being invited back to ICHQ again....
Suck it, Prime.
Not that I was able to find in a hurry. That's actually what I set out to find.
Yeah, and considering ticket prices have approximately doubled since 1997.
...
what.
Though, the artist is really good at expressive faces, for what that's worth. haha Lord.
Ok, so it's like this,
The adjusted for inflation list is a completely moot point. Allow me to explain: Gone with the wind will NEVER be toppled from that throne, but it is an inaccurate benchmark. That film came out in the late 1930's. "talkies" had only existed for a decade, and it was one of the earliest feature length films to be presented in color. So the technology, while not exclusive to gone with the wind, was still in its infancy, and still very impressive to viewers. It was a good film, but it had a pull much bigger than its story.
On top of that, in those early days of cinema, there were no home video options. There wouldn't be home video options for almost 35 years. The ONLY place you could see a film was in a theater, and as a result, films would generally stay in a theater for months on end, and in some cases, years. This was the case as recently as The Godfather. Gone with the Wind was re-released, even, over the course of 6 or 7 times along different years. It sat in cinema almost uncontested. Back at that time, there wasn't much real competition for the film - it was nothing like the competition of today. People would see it over and over again, it's legacy is unmatched in cinema, and it is something that will not be repeated, because everything has changed far too much. Today, films see critical reception, incredible amounts of competition, typical theatrical runs of 1.5 months, and expectations of a home video release in roughly six months. They aren't given the chance to go the long haul by distributors, and consumers wouldn't allow it anyways, as interest in a film typically dissolves after a month.
Look at the dates on that list adjusted for inflation. Almost all of those films are from the 70's, the 60's... old films that were released in a time that was completely different than the cinema environment of today. Most of these films will never give up their spots on that list, it just isn't possible.
The newest film on the top twenty is 1993. In fact, any film released in 1990 or higher that is listed in front of AVATAR could quite possibly be passed by AVATAR. And that is the biggest point of all - AVATAR is far from finished. It's been out for six weeks, and it is STILL sitting on top of the box office, and it is STILL selling out IMAX shows. It won't be leaving the cinema any time soon, expect it's sales to continue to soar.
AVATAR is showing consistency in the box office unlike anything else has ever done in recent cinema - perhaps of all time. People keep seeing it, people love it. It is printing money and it has a looooong way to go. It's performance cannot be denied. The movie is making history, and it is achieving incredible recognition - and it deserves all of it.
And it's 3D tax and IMAX prices don't play a huge role, really. Sure, it is higher, but like I said, the film is incredibly consistent. So many repeat viewings (because people are AVATAR depressed lololol) and word of mouth viewings, especially over seas.
By the time all of this is over, AVATAR will have made so much money, and so many people will have seen it, that most of these arguments won't matter - the truth will be in the numbers.
Dammit, Bobby.
Silly argument is silly when you can change a couple words and have it describe YOUR side of the argument, too.
But shouldn't we be having this discussion when Avatar's done selling theater tickets, merchandise, DVD/Blu-Ray/4D/digital downloads, iTunes rentals, etc? If the mark we care about is "most money gained evar," then we logically have to wait until Avatar no longer makes money. Anything before that is premature.
Also:
lul
Not to be a gigantic basterd(yes)...but...then you haven't read/read enough of the Sherlock Holmes stories. The characters in the movie are closer to the originals than the vast, vast majority of other takes on Sherlock Holmes.
I'm being dead serious here. For instance, Sherlock Holmes was a bare-knuckle boxer, and he was good. This coming straight from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
Now get out.
Some people have some big political, philosophical, or otherwise emotional connection with this movie for some reason. I liked it, and I liked Black Dynamite just as well, but I don't see a huge emotional "MY SIDE OR THEIRS" type of debate about Black Dynamite and its Kung Fu Treachery.
Not sure what it is; either I'm missing some big cultural cue, or I am (as usual) oblivious to some glaring fact.. either way, I liked Avatar, I thought it was awesome? I guess that's not cool or something?
Sweet beans!
First.