Will the new Star Wars movie top Avatar at the box office?

[ariich]

I can safely say that, right now, I have zero interest in paying money to see the sequels.

[hefdaddy42]

SO...

The Force Awakens only made $25m worldwide this weekend. I think that wraps it up. Everyone and their dog has seen it 5 times already.

It still has to make over 900m to beat Avatar and even at $25m a week - that's another 10 months.

Not gonna happen.

https://variety.com/2016/film/box-office/box-office-star-wars-crosses-1-billion-overseas-1201681819/

The space opera racked up $47.3 million overseas this weekend, topping charts and driving its global haul to $1.86 billion

[Chino]

I can safely say that, right now, I have zero interest in paying money to see the sequels.

I wouldn't have seen TFA if I was given free tickets.

[Kotowboy]

SO...

The Force Awakens only made $25m worldwide this weekend. I think that wraps it up. Everyone and their dog has seen it 5 times already.

It still has to make over 900m to beat Avatar and even at $25m a week - that's another 10 months.

Not gonna happen.

https://variety.com/2016/film/box-office/box-office-star-wars-crosses-1-billion-overseas-1201681819/

The space opera racked up $47.3 million overseas this weekend, topping charts and driving its global haul to $1.86 billion

I can post links too. https://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/

[Kotowboy]

I can safely say that, right now, I have zero interest in paying money to see the sequels.

I wouldn't have seen TFA if I was given free tickets.

Relax you didn't make Avatar. And Rich didn't make The Force Awakens.

[hefdaddy42]

SO...

The Force Awakens only made $25m worldwide this weekend. I think that wraps it up. Everyone and their dog has seen it 5 times already.

It still has to make over 900m to beat Avatar and even at $25m a week - that's another 10 months.

Not gonna happen.

https://variety.com/2016/film/box-office/box-office-star-wars-crosses-1-billion-overseas-1201681819/

The space opera racked up $47.3 million overseas this weekend, topping charts and driving its global haul to $1.86 billion

I can post links too. https://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/

Looks like the domestic numbers, not not foreign or global.

[Kotowboy]

Either way it still has around 900m worldwide to make. . .

[hefdaddy42]

Either way it still has around 900m worldwide to make. . .

I wasn't arguing with your larger point.  Definitely a long way to go, probably insurmountable.

[ariich]

I can safely say that, right now, I have zero interest in paying money to see the sequels.

I wouldn't have seen TFA if I was given free tickets.

Relax you didn't make Avatar. And Rich didn't make The Force Awakens.

I wasn't even slagging off Avatar, I enjoyed it. It was a good spectacle and pretty entertaining. But I didn't really find the story and characters very interesting and these days it takes a bit to get me to want to watch a film in theatres. I'll probably check it out when it hits Netflix or whatever.

[DarkLord_Lalinc]

George Lucas be like

[orcus116]

3) Cameron has said the sequels will play at a minimum of 45fps, and he's hoping to get 60fps. That will make the movie all the more pretty.

Avatar: The VHS Home Video.

[BlobVanDam]

I can safely say that, right now, I have zero interest in paying money to see the sequels.

I wouldn't have seen TFA if I was given free tickets.

Haha. Oh Chino.

But I still haven't seen Avatar despite how many times it's been on TV, and never plan to.

[bl5150]

But I still haven't seen Avatar despite how many times it's been on TV, and never plan to.

Ditto - people have even given me the DVD to borrow and by the time it came to give it back I still couldn't be stuffed    I have never seen a movie more than once at the movies either - didn't really know it was such a "thing" until this thread.

Having said that I may need to make TFA the first as it's the first time I have been to a movie that interests me with a 7yo son asking me questions the whole way through (thus missing half of it) 

[cramx3]

Are you guys not seeing the movie (Avatar or TFA) just so you can say you haven't seen it?  Almost comes off that way.  Both are movies worth seeing at least once IMO and that's from a non movie buff.

[Chino]

Are you guys not seeing the movie (Avatar or TFA) just so you can say you haven't seen it?  Almost comes off that way.  Both are movies worth seeing at least once IMO and that's from a non movie buff.

I'm not seeing TFA because I watched episodes IV and V and was bored out of my mind. Maybe once it comes to one of my streaming services, I'll give it a go.

[bl5150]

Are you guys not seeing the movie (Avatar or TFA) just so you can say you haven't seen it?  Almost comes off that way.  Both are movies worth seeing at least once IMO and that's from a non movie buff.

You do realise it's possible just not to care for a particular style/genre/concept/movie without it being some sort of psychological game , right?  Even though it 's considered a classic by many/most.    I haven't seen any Jurassic park movies either......the whole idea just doesn't get me interested and neither does what I have heard re Avatar.

I am not what you would call a movie buff either and rarely talk about movies with family/friends , so I must be going to a lot of trouble just so I can not talk to them about why I didn't go see Avatar    I really don't give Avatar a second thought - the only reason I mentioned it is because of the discussion here (re Star Wars) and the fact that people seem to think my life isn't complete without seeing it and tend to like reminding me about that from time to time.

So it's more a case of me being curious as to why some seem to have an interest in me seeing it than the other way around.

[BlobVanDam]

Are you guys not seeing the movie (Avatar or TFA) just so you can say you haven't seen it?  Almost comes off that way.  Both are movies worth seeing at least once IMO and that's from a non movie buff.

What gain is there from not seeing a movie I'd be interested in to say I haven't seen it? If I wanted to see it, I'd see it!

I haven't seen Avatar because I see movies based on my actual interest in them, not based on how many other people saw it or thought it was good. I need justification to watch a movie, I don't need justification not to. I never saw anything about Avatar that appealed to me in any way, so I didn't watch it.

I generally don't watch a lot of movies, and the cliche Hollywood types are usually off-putting to me. I could name a ton of popular movies I haven't seen, or saw and hated. I don't abstain from them to tell people I haven't seen them or to earn hipster points, I abstain from them because I know what I like and don't like based on everything else I've seen, and because I know my tastes don't line up with the average movie-goer. I'm picky, and don't watch a movie just because. There are many other forms of entertainment I tend to favour, so I stick to movies that I think I'll enjoy enough to justify 2-3 hours of my time.


bl5150, we should start a movie night or something.

[cramx3]

Are you guys not seeing the movie (Avatar or TFA) just so you can say you haven't seen it?  Almost comes off that way.  Both are movies worth seeing at least once IMO and that's from a non movie buff.

You do realise it's possible just not to care for a particular style/genre/concept/movie without it being some sort of psychological game , right?  Even though it 's considered a classic by many/most.    I haven't seen any Jurassic park movies either......the whole idea just doesn't get me interested and neither does what I have heard re Avatar.

Of course, hence why I said "almost comes off that way" because of the wording and because of the thread the discussion is in although it's not relevant to have seen either movie to speculate/discuss the money made.  I think you hit the nail though, these movies are considered classics by many, hence my surprise.

I haven't seen Avatar because I see movies based on my actual interest in them, not based on how many other people saw it or thought it was good. I need justification to watch a movie, I don't need justification not to. I never saw anything about Avatar that appealed to me in any way, so I didn't watch it.

I would have thought someone who is artistic and does animations to think the technology used for the visuals would be worth seeing.  For me, that was enough reason to see it.  It's the story that did not have me coming back. TFA also had very good visuals, but obviously was not know for being the visual spectacle that Avatar was.

[TL]

For me it's like ano association thing. The only time in the past I'd see 60fps live action videos are on a home camcorder. So when I see movies like that, my brain thinks it looks cheap for some reason. That's probably something that can be unlearned, but I bet that's a problem for other people as well.

In addition to this, there is actually a difference in the way the brain processes visuals at different framerates.

While things were originally filmed at 24fps, and other low frame rates, entirely due to technical limitations, it was a very lucky accident. At a lower frame rate like that (it doesn't have to be 24, but 24 strikes a really good balance between not being 'too fast' or 'too slow'), your brain actually interprets what it's seeing differently than, say, something you're seeing in person. It's subtle, but it really does make a difference. Because of this, your brain accepts most shows and movies as something different than real life, and so things (costumes, sets, effects, etc) are less likely to look "off".

Once the frame rate gets high enough (and 48fps seems to set this off for a lot of people), the brain interprets it as more like real life. Because of this, any little thing that can stand out does. That's why sets look like sets, and everything looks more 'fake' and 'cheap'.

It's not jarring when used for things like newscasts or live broadcasts, because they're not typically trying to get away with anything 'unreal' visually. It's also one of several reasons why live versions of things that are usually pre-recorded tend to look 'different'.
Higher frame rates also tend to have less of an impact on how we view animated content, or video games, because the brain doesn't typically confuse those with reality, regardless of frame rate.

[cramx3]

That might explain why The Hobbit at 60fps looked incredibly fake

Yet, my fake video games at 60fps look incredibly real 

[BlobVanDam]

I would have thought someone who is artistic and does animations to think the technology used for the visuals would be worth seeing.  For me, that was enough reason to see it.  It's the story that did not have me coming back. TFA also had very good visuals, but obviously was not know for being the visual spectacle that Avatar was.

It's funny you say that, because everyone thinks that I'd be more interested in seeing CG movies because of that.
If anything, I think it's worked in the opposite direction for me. Because it's my interest and work and I'm constantly exposed to it, it doesn't excite me so much, and I judge it differently to most people, more critically.
I am very interested in the technology side, but it's not a motivating factor for me watching a new movie, like Avatar. The visuals for Avatar looked very good, but not "this is the best thing ever and I need to see this solely for the CGI" good. The 3D tech doesn't appeal to me either, because I think it's a fundamentally flawed implementation of stereo vision.

[Chino]

I would have thought someone who is artistic and does animations to think the technology used for the visuals would be worth seeing.  For me, that was enough reason to see it.  It's the story that did not have me coming back. TFA also had very good visuals, but obviously was not know for being the visual spectacle that Avatar was.

It's funny you say that, because everyone thinks that I'd be more interested in seeing CG movies because of that.
If anything, I think it's worked in the opposite direction for me. Because it's my interest and work and I'm constantly exposed to it, it doesn't excite me so much, and I judge it differently to most people, more critically.
I am very interested in the technology side, but it's not a motivating factor for me watching a new movie, like Avatar. The visuals for Avatar looked very good, but not "this is the best thing ever and I need to see this solely for the CGI" good. The 3D tech doesn't appeal to me either, because I think it's a fundamentally flawed implementation of stereo vision.

You'd probably really enjoy the behind the scenes stuff. They go into great detail about what had to be developed and how it was used to make the movie.

It was cool seeing the real world getting rendered into the Avatar world (crudely) in real time.

[BlobVanDam]

The first pic doesn't like hotlinking so it's not showing up.
As I said, this stuff is my interest, so this is nothing new or exciting to me. I watch a ton of CG breakdowns and docos for movies.

[ariich]

Are you guys not seeing the movie (Avatar or TFA) just so you can say you haven't seen it?  Almost comes off that way.  Both are movies worth seeing at least once IMO and that's from a non movie buff.

What gain is there from not seeing a movie I'd be interested in to say I haven't seen it? If I wanted to see it, I'd see it!

I haven't seen Avatar because I see movies based on my actual interest in them, not based on how many other people saw it or thought it was good. I need justification to watch a movie, I don't need justification not to.

I would agree with this (except I did see Avatar, but I mean the principles). I'll check a lot more movies out on streaming services, but even then there are so many that I'd be interested in, I need to prioritise. I don't particularly do so by genre, but by what seems to appeal to me.

[Kotowboy]

The full making-of Avatar is really interesting though.

[Zantera]

I wouldn't be surprised if Chino didn't see TFA just because he doesn't want to give any money to TFA that could potentially dethrone Avatar, but in general I think some big films (like Star Wars or Avatar) will always have those people who don't see it for whatever reason. I don't think staying away from the movie itself if you aren't interested is any weird, but I'm always baffled when I hear people say stuff like "I've never seen any of the Star Wars movies" in the same way you would say "I've banged Natalie Portman". Like there's a sense of pride about being in the dark. There are a few people I've noticed who has done that with Star Wars.

[Kotowboy]

I've never made it a secret that I'm not a Star Wars fan. But I went to see The Force Awakens and enjoyed it because I took it on its own merits.

[Chino]

I wouldn't be surprised if Chino didn't see TFA just because he doesn't want to give any money to TFA that could potentially dethrone Avatar, but in general I think some big films (like Star Wars or Avatar) will always have those people who don't see it for whatever reason. I don't think staying away from the movie itself if you aren't interested is any weird, but I'm always baffled when I hear people say stuff like "I've never seen any of the Star Wars movies" in the same way you would say "I've banged Natalie Portman". Like there's a sense of pride about being in the dark. There are a few people I've noticed who has done that with Star Wars.

I've joked about not seeing TFA for that reason, but that's not the reason (for serious). Truthfully, I've given Star Wars a chance, perhaps 20+ years too late, and it just simply didn't do anything for me. I'm not against watching TFA, but I'm certainly not going to spend extra money to make that happen. I'm too cheap.

[Kotowboy]

Not cheap enough to see the same movie 10 times 

[Chino]

That's because I wanted to see it. I have friends that will buy tickets to stuff they don't really want to go to all the time. I don't do that. For example, I was offered tickets to go to a UCONN football game last year with some buddies. I like hanging out with them, but I couldn't give two shits about football. I couldn't justify spending $40 on a ticket. If they said "hey dude. Come over. We're watching the game", I would have happily gone.

[TL]

I wouldn't be surprised if Chino didn't see TFA just because he doesn't want to give any money to TFA that could potentially dethrone Avatar, but in general I think some big films (like Star Wars or Avatar) will always have those people who don't see it for whatever reason. I don't think staying away from the movie itself if you aren't interested is any weird, but I'm always baffled when I hear people say stuff like "I've never seen any of the Star Wars movies" in the same way you would say "I've banged Natalie Portman". Like there's a sense of pride about being in the dark. There are a few people I've noticed who has done that with Star Wars.

I've joked about not seeing TFA for that reason, but that's not the reason (for serious). Truthfully, I've given Star Wars a chance, perhaps 20+ years too late, and it just simply didn't do anything for me. I'm not against watching TFA, but I'm certainly not going to spend extra money to make that happen. I'm too cheap.

I don't think it's really a "you had to see them back then" kind of thing. I didn't see any of the Star Wars films until the late 90s.

That said, if you've given them a shot and they're not really your thing, that's fine.

I will say, I think TFA, while better if a person is into the original films too, can absolutely be entertaining in its own right. I know people who either aren't into Star Wars, or who haven't even seen the originals, who enjoyed TFA. Even if you wait for it to be on netflix/on demand, I'd recommend checking it out eventually.

[bosk1]

Not cheap enough to see the same movie 10 times 

Honestly, I don't get spending the money to see a movie 10 times.  It seems silly to me.  But then I have to remind myself that humans are silly creatures, and whatever that thing is that really does it for us, whether it is a sports team, or a movie, or a band, or whatever, we are easily driven to excess and do similar things.  So even though I personally don't get why someone would want to see any movie 10 times in a theater, and especially a movie that I personally don't feel rates even a second in-theater viewing, I do get it on the level that Avatar was one of "those things" for Chino, and some of his repeat viewings were (if I'm not mistaken) going along with others who wanted to go see it.  So if I'm honest with myself, I can't really criticize too much. 

[Kotowboy]

Most i've been to see a film is 4 times.

The 4th times were mainly " it's still in cinemas - i'm not gonna see it on a big screen again and I can afford it ".


With Into Darkness - i'd already *won* my IMAX ticket for the BFI in London. Then my local cineplex in my town was showing at midnight the same day so I went to that too.

Both of those were in 3D so I went one more time in 2D then it was in cinemas for a while and I thought " one more time - what the hell. "

But 5 or more ? nah thanks.

[bosk1]

Most i've been to see a film is 4 times.

Yeah, I think that is the case with me as well.  There are a handful of films I have seen twice in theaters.  The only one that comes to mind that I saw more than that is T2, which I saw 4 or 5 times.  After the first time, I knew I wanted to see it again.  And the other viewings were a result of others wanting to see it and asking me along--compounded by the fact that it was during the time I was in the military, and I was one of the guys who had a car that could drive people off base, so it was a case of, "Hey, give us a ride and we'll pay for your ticket."  For a movie as good as T2, who is going to turn that deal down?    Shoot, truth be told, I'd probably still do it for a much lesser film.

[gmillerdrake]

There's a guy in my office that has seen TFA 15 times already.....and he just told me he's going to see it again on Thursday.