WorstPreviews.com Logo Join the community [Login / Register]
Follow WorstPreviews.com on Twitter
What\ News Coming Soon In Theaters On DVD Trailer,Posters,Pictures,Wallpapers, Screensavers PeliBlog.com Trivia/Quizzes
News/Headlines
Trailer for "Midnight Special" Sci-Fi Film, with Michael Shannon and Joel Edgerton
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Melissa McCarthy's "The Boss" Comedy
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Juan Antonio Bayona's "A Monster Calls"
Nov 23rd, 2015
First Look at "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for "Zoolander 2" Arrives Online
Nov 19th, 2015
Official Trailer for "Now You See Me" Sequel
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Chris Hemsworth's "The Huntsman: Winter's War"
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Keanu Reeves' "Exposed" Thriller
Nov 19th, 2015
First Look at Chris Pine on "Wonder Woman" Set
Nov 16th, 2015
Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel
Nov 16th, 2015
Gerard Butler is a God in "Gods of Egypt" Posters
Nov 16th, 2015
First Look at Liam Neeson in Martin Scorsese's "Silence"
Nov 16th, 2015
New Trailer for "The Divergent Series: Allegiant"
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for "Moonwalkers" Comedy, with Ron Perlman and Rupert Grint
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for Charlie Kaufman's "Anomalisa" Stop-Motion Film
Nov 3rd, 2015
Poster for "Warcraft" Arrives Online, Trailer Coming on Friday
Nov 3rd, 2015
There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster
Nov 2nd, 2015
First Trailer for Sacha Baron Cohen's "The Brothers Grimsby" Comedy
Nov 2nd, 2015
"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas
Nov 2nd, 2015
Final Trailer for Ron Howard's "In the Heart of the Sea," with Chris Hemsworth
Nov 2nd, 2015
New Photos From "Warcraft" Video Game Movie
Nov 2nd, 2015
Lots of New Photos From "Suicide Squad"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for "Dirty Grandpa" Comedy, with Robert De Niro and Zac Efron
Oct 30th, 2015
Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for Jared Hess' "Don Verdean" Comedy, with Sam Rockwell
Oct 30th, 2015
"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast
Oct 28th, 2015
Trailer for Adam Sandler's "The Ridiculous 6" Comedy
Oct 28th, 2015
"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie
Oct 28th, 2015
Another "Monopoly" Movie in the Works
Oct 28th, 2015
"Jumanji" Remake Hires "Con Air" Writer
Oct 26th, 2015
Disney's "Tower of Terror" Park Ride Movie Moving Forward
Oct 26th, 2015
Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"
Oct 26th, 2015
Previous News Stories Next News Stories

"Avatar" Has a $500 Million Budget, Can It Make a Profit?

Posted: November 9th, 2009 by WorstPreviews.com Staff
"Avatar" Has a $500 Million Budget, Can It Make a Profit?Submit Comment
NY Times posted an article about the upcoming James Cameron-directed "Avatar" film, which the newspaper says has a budget that's approaching the $500 million mark. With numbers like that, can "Avatar" make a profit?

Even though their new film is among the most expensive movies of all time, 20th Century Fox is confident that it can turn a profit, mostly because Cameron was the driving force behind "Titanic."

But just in case it doesn't, Fox is still not worried, since it's not the only company involved. Long ago, the studio has decided to reduce their risk by getting outside investors to pay part of the massive price tag.

Cameron could end up taking a hit as well. If he goes over the budget (which he already has), and companies don't make their money back, he will end up losing his stake in the film.

But Cameron has a back-up plan as well. He is planning to sell the new technology he developed for "Avatar" to other companies.

Click here to read our exclusive "Avatar" preview.

Source: NY Times


Bookmark and Share
You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register.
Displaying 91 comment(s) Profanity: Turn On
atn5022 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 6:40:25 AM

daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn
Amrstation writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 6:52:11 AM

crazy!
Jensama writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 6:55:10 AM

Now - Cameron, tell me something:
Seeing how Neil Bloomkamp made District 9 with atleast as stunning effects for "only" $30 million - don't you just feel stupid?
wonderBOY writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 7:03:22 AM

everywhere ive read its been from 250 - 350 million
VDODSON writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 7:11:45 AM

I heard it was closer to 900 million. And that doesnt include the actors pay. What the hell is this guy thinking, spending over 500 mill on a science project? I hope it bombs just to teach him a lesson.
RedSmile writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 7:13:06 AM

It's not going to earn back that budget
wonderBOY writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 7:25:41 AM

its not gonna bomb its jimmy cameron he made aquaman for god sakes
BrundleFly writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 7:45:17 AM

Holy crap
nope.com writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 7:52:03 AM

Pshh sell technology for concepts he stole, nice way to bargain JCam. People went to Titanic for two reasons... a story about Americans failing early and Kate Winslet's bush
atn5022 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 7:52:05 AM

lol @ wonderboy

true, its the highest grossing film of all time, it even beat that filthy spider! even with those rolling blackouts in california
solidkryptonite writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 9:42:08 AM

This is going to sink like the Titanic. (Too soon?)
KatManDu writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 10:03:04 AM

With that amount of money his original statement, "the audience has to want to f*ck her." BETTER BE TRUE. or its all a waste.
CyberpunkCentral writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 10:06:15 AM

Ohly sh*t!
CyberpunkCentral writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 10:06:39 AM

HOLY sh*t!
aphid regress writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 10:08:25 AM

For 500 million, they better make it so you want to f*ck him (whoever that may be)!
warlord writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 10:16:54 AM

no no it wont
Peter Parker writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 10:18:53 AM

Why is Eric Roberts blue in that picture?
victor arroyo writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 10:49:04 AM

Yes, Avatar will make a profit.

Megan Fox will win an oscar.

And they will make The Godfather 4 with Joe Pesci as the godfather.


PEACE!
aphid regress writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 10:58:17 AM

I think, over time, they'll break even. Hell, they may make enough to buy a c*cktail!

(Forrest Gump reference!)
KirkLazerus writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 11:15:53 AM

easily makes its budget in worldwide tickets sales, everyone says its gonna blow but everyone who says that is gonna watch it, sh*t looks gay I'm not gonna contribute my money so the movie can break even,plus the dvd sales and blue-ray will give it extra money
RICKYN85 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 11:25:24 AM

Just plain stupid! This movie will bomb. Its no way it will make that kind of money back. I mean some of the special effects look good but the rest looks like crap. All i can say is it better include some nudity.
TheStig writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 11:36:25 AM

Victor- I'm with you man...
Ranger writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 11:55:14 AM

You have to give Cameron credit.

People always slam Bay for just making explosions in his movies (and in his pants over Megan), and a lot of other directors on here (Raimi) get slammed for being un-original.

So here we have Cameron - going out on the limb.

It's not hard for even a semi-decent film to make $600mil. these days folks. And with the hype surrounding this flick alone should do that.

Also, the HUGE thing here is that Cameron claims to have developed technology to re-sell.

I agree... this will either fall flat, or make Cameron a hero. Either way, kudos to him for laying his balls on the chopping block like this in a business that has gotten do dull with re-makes, re-boots, re-hash... plus he got to throw it into Linda Hamilton for a while. So he's aces in my book.
ACTIONFIGURE writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 12:05:00 PM

500 Million?? Fox deserves to go tits up for not having a better control of Cameron and his "vision". Actaully the movie cost a million to make...Cameron's ego cost 499 million. Hope Fox kept for the recipects.
Ranger writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 12:10:08 PM

@AF - you're probably closer on your ego comment than you realize... lol.

And yep... this is a 'make or break' project I suspect.
JaCKsWaS7eDL1Fe writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 12:16:06 PM

this movie is gamechanging, if this new technology is as good it seems to be

(honestly how could you compare these visuals to district 9, if there is one thing Avatar is at the pinnacle of, its special effects)I am absolutely psyched for this movie, and most the complaints I here are story related about how no one cares or can relate to aliens, but after you spend all your time complaining how hollywood just recycles old ideas and then you spit on a new take...

they could become the EPIC games of cinema, think of how many games used the unreal engine. This movie is gonna make money on its own tho, its simply too huge to fail (haha now I sound like the government) Of course it will make back 500 million globally, it shouldn't even be a question, its the most massive sci fi venture in years, possibly unrivaled at anytime.
KatManDu writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 12:19:14 PM

I'm thinking, if they arenít human, would it bestiality? NAH...anything blue is worth doing over and over again. SEXY BLUE SKIN AHHHHHHHHHH *boing*
BigUnit writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 12:26:09 PM

Iím pretty confident that this movie will still make a profit, one it comes out 12/18 around Christmas, a time where everyone goes to see movies including families, and people are for sure going to pick this movie over other films this time such as nine, Sherlock holmes, and Alvin and the squeakuels any day. Two, its James Cameron! terminator(s), aliens, titanic, enough said. And Three there has already been so much hype and will continue to be so much hype for this movie itís going to turn into the new dark knight, and we all know how well that movie did at the box office ;).
jeffw1978 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 12:27:42 PM

This will make a profit if:
They kill Lohan
Give the twilight vampire AIDS
Have Alba is some BSDM
Have Kunis and Portman Anally Fist each other
and last but not least have Cameron graphically f*ck the blue aliens 70s porn style.
Ted Mosby writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 12:29:20 PM

@ Ranger- I couldn't agree with you more, yeah it's a redic budget amount but still have respect for Cameron. He really is putting his balls on the chopping block and their flipping a coin.
TRUEMAN writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 12:31:12 PM

the boat is sinking and you know it Cameron and is all beacuse of Sam W.!
Ranger writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 12:31:28 PM

I know!

I mean, humping something 'til it turns blue is one thing. But these little ladies are already blue.

What a time-saver!
Ranger writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 12:34:11 PM

@jeff - agree 100%! But you should have put your ideas in at the beginning my friend!

@Ted - thx. Yeah... I think Hollyweird gives us enough REAL crap to gripe about. And I know all on here is just conversation... but let's give Cameron the benefit of at least respecting his track record.

If this fails and he kills himself... that will take the spotlight off of Lohan for a while anyway.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 12:38:55 PM

HOLY CHRIST 500 MILLION FOR THAT?! I mean it looked great but I don't know about 500 million great. That's half a billion f*cking dollars! WHAT THE f*ck?!
Ranger writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 12:41:30 PM

No... this article is poorly detailed. Much of that was to create this 'new technology' for the film. So while it may be true that half a bil. was req. to get it to the screen... there's still the technology to re-sell.

Which brings about a question... and any/all to answer. We all know Lucas made a killing when he devised THX Sound. How's that doing these days (seriously... I'm asking)? I don't recall seeing it in any movies of late. Is it still being used, or did that 'fad' tank after a while?
jeffw1978 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 12:49:00 PM

THX is in the fad tank I think everything is Dolby Digital now.
Peter Parker writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 12:49:25 PM

Kevin Costner is crossing his fingers for this to be an epic fail...
RationalOne writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 1:00:46 PM

I didn't realize so many of you had stock in 2oth Century Fox. Because that would be the only reason to get upset if this film did not turn a profit. Hoping that the movie and James cameron fail is just immature and silly. Why hope for the film's failure? Is it because you lack the courage to take such risks? Or is it because you lack the courage to pursue your own dream and make a film of your own and it pains you to see others like Michael Bay, James cameron, George Lucas and others actually living their dream? You slam Hollywood out of one side of your mouth for not taking risks, but out of the other side you slam a filmmaker for taking a risk. The ammusing thing is that those that are saying that it looks like crap and don't support it will probably be the first ones in line...so the film will almost certainly make a profit.
ACTIONFIGURE writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 1:06:29 PM

@Ranger-I don't think this will be a total bomb. However, even if this thing cost 225 million (which is the last report I've read), Making a real profit from this will be hard. Even if this thing bombs, there will be more movies like this. There hasn't been a real killing made off of Zemekis's "Mo-Cap Trilogy" but he still cranks them out. So, this looks to be the next big thing...Making big blockbusters for the sake of the technology but are still mediocre/decent movies at best (Beuowolf was good not great).
I want this movie to rule like a "mudda-f*ckka" but I don't know...I feel a tremour in my taint.
Jedimax writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 1:28:01 PM

This is to Actionfigure: Trust me motion-cap is going to make huge bank on Tin-Tin. I can guarantee that the foreign market for tin-tin alone will make it one of the highest grossing films of all time.... Ok I am a little bias cause i saw Spielberg speak last week.
rabid writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 1:28:02 PM

It'll be good, I'm sure. I could give a rat's ass if it makes a profit.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 1:39:58 PM

I think it's important to care if movies make profit because if they're good and they don't make profit you won't see the franchise again.

Now if this doesn't make a nice size profit (if this 500 number is to be believed it would need 1.5 Billion to be a REAL success), but it turns out to be the technological marvel Cameron hopes it to be, Cameron might not get another zillion to go and make his next film with all the tech bells and whistles (some will say this is a good thing).

The X Factor is the media because if this doesn't hit big, say 100+ million opening weekend and it launches kinda soft say 40-60 or 70 range, the media and sites like this will be all over Cameron. "He took all these years off and spends all this money and the film doesn't even make such and such" That will affect his credit in the hills and could also prevent him from getting zillions again. Profit is very very important, at least to me as the guy who plans on directing some movies before he croaks.
kmccarney88 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 2:19:23 PM

Jensama, not offense, but I'm sick to death of people like you not using common sense before writing statements like that. First off, there is no doubt that James Cameron's Avatar is a bit on the expensive side, perhaps too much so, but anyone who compares it to District 9 is just straight up retarded. The ONLY thing that was digital created in District 9 was a few Aliens and a Space Ship, the entire rest of the movie was South Africa's natural landscape, shacks, buildings that really exist and real, UNKNOWN, actors. In Avatar the WHOLE F$&CKING PLANET is digitally created! The vehicles, tons of aliens, creatures, plants, trees, leaves, floating mountains, spaceships, all of which had to be digitally created. There were only 600 relatively small (a few medium) visual effects shots in D9, there are well over 1700 HUGE visual effects shots in Avatar.
Now I'm not saying that D9 didn't look amazing, because it did! I'm also not saying that its wasn't a good movie, because it was! But STOP comparing the two movie's pricetags because in terms of production they are not even in the same league.
ACTIONFIGURE writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 2:51:22 PM

@Jedimax-I hope that it has a place in filmmaking and not just to show off what can be done with a computer. I just think that the writing shouldn't suffer at the hands of this technology and to date, I think it has. Until then, I sure that Brett Rattner will, for no actual reason, Mo-cap the balls off of "Beverly Hills Cop 4" just to keep up with the jones.
Ranger writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 2:51:46 PM

Good post KM. Well said.
Ranger writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 2:56:50 PM

All I can say is: THE EXPENDABLES!

BA-BOING!!!
rocketman writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 3:02:55 PM

I don't care how much it cost,bottom line is it looks sh*t,from what i've read about the story it seems like a cliche retread of many films that have gone before,crap ones at that too.I simply can't be arsed to travel 10 miles to my local fleapit for a cross of Dancing with wolves(yawn) and the Phanton Menace,i'll stick with playing Modern Warfare 2 on the old xbox.
Last Acting Hero writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 3:05:23 PM

@Kirklazerus...you're probably right, bur RR is still a gay guido.
@Ranger....agreed
@trueman...you have some funny comments even though you're english is horrible.
@rationalone...you're a gay.
KatManDu writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 3:15:47 PM

Wow you guys really want him to stop waisting money, but lets just say if you had to make a movie and you could have 500 million, no offense but I would probably do the same thing. everything CGI. Look at Sky Captian, NO real anything. except cloths and people. I mean sure it wasnt the greatest story, but it still was decent enough.

hate on me all you want but I just had sex with that hot blue avatar girl. A little spicy, good, but spicy.
darkraven28 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 3:53:32 PM

500 f*cking million dollars!?!! Are you kidding me? Come on, Cameron! I love your films to death but isn't that a little extreme?
darkraven28 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 3:56:00 PM

And while I'm thinking about it, does Cameron just feel he always has to have the most expensive movie ever made for it's current time? First Terminator 2, then Titanic, and now Avatar. He needs to take a lesson from Danny Boyle and try different things. Do that free diving movie for 30 mil or something just so people don't think you're f*cking crazy.
Ryanlawson writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 4:01:37 PM

f*ckin yer ranger, your the man.
i agree with everything you say.
cameran is the man for going out on a limb and giving us something so original.
we wont see another project this ambitious for another decade id say, whether it bombs or not.
mattcl23 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 4:07:51 PM

My god that's alot of money. What's Cameron using, alien technology? I don't see how a movie can cost this much to make. Completly insane!
TeemSelami writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 4:16:47 PM

this is almost double the price of transformers 2 and i don't think it will be hard to be twice as good. plus the avatar trailer alone seems to have more story (even if it is unoriginal) than the whole steamy pile that is transformers.
TeemSelami writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 4:18:40 PM

plus there are f*cking alien pterodactyls... i'll see it twice if there are alien pterodactyls f*cking
murphyslaw93 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 4:19:26 PM

holy sh*t cameron is ridiculous, and i thought it was insane that Inception was going to have a bigger budget than the Dark Knight reaching the $200 million mark. Cameron may have to do a few fundraisers in the near future.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 4:26:11 PM

can't say much that hasn't been said already, but hot damn, can't wait for this movie to fail hard on its face.
polardeficit writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 4:36:49 PM

DA f*ckKKKKK???
thedudeman69 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 5:00:23 PM

uh this is going to bomb...because it would have to have tremendous legs that would take it into march or something like that and it was getting 40 million a week.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 5:13:10 PM

what thedudeman said, and on top of that, this is being released around christmas, I don't think too many adults will even be aware of this movies' existence amongst the barrage of kiddie christmas flicks. That and so many people will think that this is about that anime.
pomme writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 6:00:06 PM

all i want is a good movie but it's very EXPENSIVE!
Tommy D writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 6:09:20 PM

THIS IS A LIE...there's no way its budget can be 500 million cuz if it was, we would have heard about it on other sites
georgecostanza writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 6:19:44 PM

I won't pay to see it

So no
makingcircles writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 6:26:51 PM

Ya know...if I was James Cameron...I would have taken lots of nude photos of Linda Hamilton when I was making T2. More importantly though, I would have taken all this new technology, and my love for cat-man creatures, and I would make a Thundercats movie instead of Avatar.
TheStig writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 6:28:13 PM

What you all need to remember is that it needs to make a profit. period. not a profit when it's in the theatres. not a profit in the US. a profit. total. worldwide. with merchandising and dvd sales and total box office.
Ranger writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 6:42:35 PM

Exactly.

@Tommy D - READ the article. There was some technology developed for the making of this movie.
RickyGabrielBird writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 7:28:36 PM

I heard the budget went towards hiring Nicolas Cage with the CGI work required on his hair. It didnt make the final cut though.
BondMcClane007 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 7:38:15 PM

u cant ignore aquaman.. numbers like those dnt lie.. i dnt believe the reviews were that amazing tho for aquaman
Derp88 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 7:52:15 PM

GAY
Peter Parker writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 8:29:16 PM

I should make a list of better things to spend $500 Million on...
Some things quickly come to mind:

- A 3rd world country.
- Many bitches.
- Micronesia.
- 10 good movie productions.
- More bitches.
- Many humping USB dogs.
- The Hooters chain.
- A casino.
- Bitches for the Hooters chain.
- Bitches for the casino.
vwkombi writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 8:41:55 PM

Well with Cameron selling the technology, whic is bound to go for quite a bit, the fact it was directed by James Cameron, the release date and the positive word or mouth/ stupidity of the average movie-goer i am sure this film will atleast break even at the bare minimum.

Even if the film does suck, it's a proven fact that sh*t house films can make a large return *cough* Revenge of the Fallen *cough*
vwkombi writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 8:41:56 PM

Well with Cameron selling the technology, whic is bound to go for quite a bit, the fact it was directed by James Cameron, the release date and the positive word or mouth/ stupidity of the average movie-goer i am sure this film will atleast break even at the bare minimum.

Even if the film does suck, it's a proven fact that sh*t house films can make a large return *cough* Revenge of the Fallen *cough*
vwkombi writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 8:41:56 PM

Well with Cameron selling the technology, whic is bound to go for quite a bit, the fact it was directed by James Cameron, the release date and the positive word or mouth/ stupidity of the average movie-goer i am sure this film will atleast break even at the bare minimum.

Even if the film does suck, it's a proven fact that sh*t house films can make a large return *cough* Revenge of the Fallen *cough*
vwkombi writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 8:41:57 PM

Well with Cameron selling the technology, whic is bound to go for quite a bit, the fact it was directed by James Cameron, the release date and the positive word or mouth/ stupidity of the average movie-goer i am sure this film will atleast break even at the bare minimum.

Even if the film does suck, it's a proven fact that sh*t house films can make a large return *cough* Revenge of the Fallen *cough*
vwkombi writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 8:41:58 PM

Well with Cameron selling the technology, whic is bound to go for quite a bit, the fact it was directed by James Cameron, the release date and the positive word or mouth/ stupidity of the average movie-goer i am sure this film will atleast break even at the bare minimum.

Even if the film does suck, it's a proven fact that sh*t house films can make a large return *cough* Revenge of the Fallen *cough*
vwkombi writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 8:43:28 PM

Ooops, sorry about the repeated posts. f*cking work computer is a pile of sh*t.
goat1202 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 9:01:42 PM

Weird my work computer doesn't hit the "Submit Comment" button 86 times in a row like yours?

This movie looks like Smurfs on crack. Was hoping J.C. was gonna do Titanic 2
Ranger writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 9:03:20 PM

@PP - I'm liking your new style my friend! lol!
Peter Parker writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 9:07:03 PM

@ Ranger: I get like this on Mondays! ;)
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 9:15:47 PM

"Was hoping J.C. was gonna do Titanic 2"

Adapting the futurama version? Now THAT'D be something to spend 500 million on.
Stuntastic writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 9:18:33 PM

I just got one question, what is this so-called new technology they keep talking bout? Will parapalegics really be able to use actual Avatars in real life?
Ranger writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 9:58:37 PM

Not unless we use them for Soylent Green first!
Blink_pimp_182 writes:
on November 9th, 2009 at 10:58:25 PM

No because it looks dumb and even if it is good. I doubt word of mouth would still intice people to see it
kmccarney88 writes:
on November 10th, 2009 at 12:09:25 AM

You know what I find funny, all the people who "claim" they are not seeing it in theaters will be there on the second or third day once the film starts getting positive reviews. You know it, I know it, they know it. The reason is because they are going to want to see for themselves whether the HUGE hype surrounding this movie was really worth it! There is absolutely no getting around it. Plus the people who like it will be watching it multiple times. So yes, this movie will be making it's money back.

By the way, why do some of you WANT to hate James Cameron and his movies all of a sudden? When did he become the bad guy?
Quite frankly, James Cameron is a f*ckin badass and even if the movie is complete and utter sh*t, I'm going to see it at least twice if not more just to help it make the money back so that you whiners can shut the f*ck up.
victor arroyo writes:
on November 10th, 2009 at 12:52:16 AM

Aliens
T1 and T2
The Abyss

Just 4 movies ssssson...he is not a badass

Titanic suckedballs...

Avatar will probably be entertaining for those who haven't seen this sh*tty plot a billion times before or little kids or fags.

But I'll watch it cause I love the movies.

PEACE!
triggax writes:
on November 10th, 2009 at 2:00:33 AM

Do any of you actually care as much as you're letting on?

Honestly..

Avatar, whether it will f*cking kill at the box office, or completely tank really doesn't make a lick of difference, does it actually? I f*cking doubt it.

I mean in comparison, you can say that the 200 million dollar disaster that was Waterworld, may have destroyed Costners career but he didn't have the highest grossing film of all time on his shelf of accomplishments, the fact is that regardless of how well this film does Cameron is still Cameron and one massive disaster under his belt isn't going to hurt his career, I highly doubt that it would even dent it, especially when teamed with a production company as shaky as fox... If it tanks I can guarantee you that because of Camerons capability and integrity, not too mention the genius that he puts behind his innovations in the industry, his career wont even slightly feel a hiccup. It may completely ruin 20th century fox, but really that's been a long time coming and it should have happened 15 years ago.

The only real thing that will come out of this film tanking will be the slander faggy ass fan boys have floating all over the net and the embarrassment that fox will feel for investing so much into something that didn't work out. Fact is, regardless of how much people like this film, hes made a lot of headway and pioneered a new way of filming in the mainstream.. There was a comment about Tin Tin a few posts up.. Does anyone think that film could be what its capable of being without Avatar..? So you have a few of the biggest directors of our time now, saying they will never film in anything but 3d, based solely on what they witnessed during visits to the Avatar film set... That doesn't count for anything when it comes to studios shelling money out to directors with vision? Especially directors like Cameron..? You think that if Avatar lost all of its money completely, that paramount or disney or universal wouldn't jump at the chance to have a legendary film maker express his vision through their studio? I doubt it very much.. Its f*cking James Cameron.. If spielberg directed a 500 million dollar film and it tanked does anyone think his career would suffer because of it? no.. because it wouldn't.. its f*cking steven spielberg for christ sakes...

These guys aren't kevin costner, they're not Zack Snyder, they're are among the foremost intelligent influential transcendent filmmakers of the last 100 years and 1 flop isn't going to take away their credibility...

I rambled so much I don't even know what I just said...

Ill be seeing this on the 18th.. I want this film to do well because I want to see more sh*t like this.. I dont want to have to sit through 19 saw movies I don't want Rob Zombie to continue making sh*t... I want real filmmakers with real visions going balls out and entertaining me... thats what I want and that's why I love movies...
dandythelion writes:
on November 10th, 2009 at 2:11:07 AM

it's gonna be the biggest bomb in history.
Kara writes:
on November 10th, 2009 at 4:46:05 AM

Dont see it happening.....
joe_6285 writes:
on November 10th, 2009 at 1:06:14 PM

Well I fell guaranteed that this movie will make it's money back but will also have to rely heavily on the mouth publicity too like Titanic did. Then only I think this movie will be able to make it's money back as far as I see that will happen because it's James Cameron' movie no matter what people will say now they will change their opinion once they see the movie in 3d imax that for sure.
Nekros22 writes:
on November 10th, 2009 at 2:23:52 PM

I thought we were in a recession.

WHERE THE f*ck DO THEY GET THIS MONEY?
willythekid writes:
on December 1st, 2009 at 11:21:52 AM

(mostly because Cameron was the driving force behind "Titanic.")
No he wasnt. nobody cared it was a cameron film. titanic was a big hit because of leonardo and the millions of girls that went to see the movie over and over again.
What about other cameron films... not even close to titanic. so f***** cameron

There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster

"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie

Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel

"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast

Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"

"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas

Paul Bettany Responds to Jason Statham's "Avengers" Insult

Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"

"Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Demolishes Pre-Sale Records

Daniel Craig Would Rather Commit Suicide Than Return as James Bond
Lace Wedding Dresses from ViViDress UK online shop, buy with confidence and cheap price.
WorstPreviews.com hosted by pair Networks WorstPreviews.com
Hosted by pair Networks
News Feeds | Box Office | Movie Reviews | Buzz: Top 100 | Popularity: Top 100
Poster Store | About Us | Advertising | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Web Tools | Site Map
Copyright © 2009 WorstPreviews.com. All rights reserved