I’m sure that with the screwy, Machiavellian Hollywood accounting practices, the bean counters could figure a way to say that Avatar actually didn’t make any money. I mean, it’s not going to benefit from that post-Oscar Best Picture win, now is it? It’d be no surprise that James Cameron and all the guys involved in the flick could be heading for the welfare line sometime in the near future. So it’s heartening that Fox has decided to help out Cameron and all his gang by re-releasing the film, with some extra footage likely, this summer, in an effort to get a few more bucks and hopefully get into the black with this thing…
OK, so yeah, that whole notion is horseshit. Avatar made an assload of coin and I’m sure $700 million + and counting is a hell of a consolation prize for the lack of gold statues. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t more money to be made, which is clearly why Fox is going for this. And why not? Re-releases have been pretty good to franchises like Star Wars after all. The thinking behind this move for Fox is to expand upon the film’s 3D / IMAX take, which was hampered by the release of Alice in Wonderland in 3D. Avatar’s current slice of its total record-breaking take in that medium is around $127 million to date.
Concerning the extra footage to be included, the THR.com article speculates thusly: As for how much additional footage Cameron might add to “Avatar,”
the guessing began early Thursday when Imax CEO Richard Gelfond
said during a Gabelli & Co. investor conference in New York
that Cameron had about 40 minutes of additional material that
didn’t make the theatrical cut. He also predicted a rerelease,
which he said probably would occur in the fall. Cameron had said that he had 10-12 minutes of extra scenes that he
cut and could quickly put through postproduction and have ready to
add to a director’s cut for a theatrical reissue or as an extra on
the DVD release. One scene has to do with Jake Sully’s avatar
proving himself to the Na’vi people; the other involves a native
festival during which tribe member Tsu’tey gets drunk.
So how extra money are we talking about? Cameron was in New York this
week for a demonstration of 3D TV and told USA Today, “The word
we’re getting back from exhibitors is we probably left a couple
hundred million dollars on the table as a result.” So let’s hope that they can make up that money and feed their families and such.
10 comments
Oh sure Devin, just once more chance to take a swipe at.. what? David who?
David Oliver, another one of the great assets to chud.
The new scenes need more CCH Pounder or something. The movie was beyond terrible, but seeing Claudette Wyms in full on blue furry mode was kind of funny.
This has probably been said a billion times, but what would Avatar's box office been had the movie only been 2D?
I'm guessing $70 million, tops. And 80% of that would be from Cameron's name recognition. I just can't see people flocking to this thing had it been a regular, run of the mill 2D movie.
The hatred is almost guaranteed to begin on this flick when it comes out on DVD/Blu Ray. No 3D gimmick is going to make most people realize this movie was horrendously mediocre.
It's not just Fox, I read a lot of theater owners didn't want Alice taking over also, because Avatar was such a sure thing. AND, you do realize there are a lot of moviegoers that loved Avatar, right? And they are excited about a directors cut being released in theaters? It's not like Fox and Cameron are doing this despite the deafening pleas of people begging them not to.
star wars re-release was succesful because it allowed people who never had a chance to ever see star wars in the theatre to see it on the big screen, although altered.
Theatre owners get increasing percentages of the ticket sales for each additional week a movie plays, so Avatar was probably making them way more money than Alice. Also, allegedly, Return of the Jedi is still in the red due to Hollywood accounting.
They're actually going to make this fuckin' boring turkey LONGER?!? It was torture to sit through at its current length. Some people are gluttons for punishment…
We can all whine about it, but I'll give any business entity (yeah, it's a business in the end) credit for extending the release of an existing product (or, in this case, slightly augmented product) because there was still money to be had. If they were frantically recutting because of pre-release testing, my opinion might change. But regardless of our opinion of this film, it took in a lot of cash, obviously much of it repeat biz. Regarding the 3D vs. 2D, I think if all the screens available were 3D ready, and ticket prices were the same as regular 2D ticket prices, Cameron would have preferred everyone see it in his 3D process. I think that it was his intention for this to be seen in 3D (unlike Clash of the Titans, which I'll see in 2D, thanks anyway). I saw Avatar for free in 3D (thanks for NOT taking my money) and I sure as hell wouldn't sit thru it in 2D… but the 3D effects and CGI were undeniably fantastic. Jim, please spend more time on the story next time.
#6: I thought the writer of this article was talking about the ORIGINAL re-releases of the 'Star Wars' films which would usually occur shortly after their initial theatrical runs. This was common practice back in the '80s. It was one of the things that allowed 'Star Wars' fanatics to go back and see the films again and again in the days when VHS and cable were not that wide-spread.
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.