devilshalo

Back in the day of AOL chatrooms, it was really easy to guess the password of any user that had a screenname associated with Titanic.

I do think it's funny that they're re-releasing Titanic in 3D for its 25th anniversary.

Jaymole

I remember when I first saw Titanic, all the teenage girls kept screaming and crying when Leo appeared. After an hour I could not take it anymore and I threw them out of my apartment.

Why So Blu?

I think it was a good break from MCU. People obviously wanted to see something that broke technological grounds (forget story) and this was and continues to be it.

IBJoel

I definitely did (could have been the edible I popped before entering the theater). No but really, I mostly kept away from any discussion of WoW and I heard nothing but raves about Maverick and I thought it was just a neat plane movie with a bunch of military propaganda like the first one. WoW is also propaganda, but for my team

rennervision

I keep wondering if Avatar appeals mostly to a big demographic that's outside of everyone we know? But this isn't the only $billion+ franchise that perplexes me as to why it's so successful. For some reason, everyone online acts like it is though.

clckworang

That was much the same that I thought about Maverick. I still can't believe the reception it has received.

I know no one who watches the Fast and the Furious movies, but they certainly keep pumping them out. People must be watching them.

DJariya

Has anyone here seen this more than once in the theater? Or was once enough?

Kurt D

I'm a one and done, same as with the first, and that's total viewings in any format. Both movies so far seem like phenomena; like the Super Bowl. Lots of people watch just because it seems like they are supposed to.

I also feel like part of why the movies don't linger in the consciouness after the movies have run their course is because in the end, it's hard to relate to a wide-faced, cat-eyed 15-foot-tall alien.

Why So Blu?

Twice. The first time was in Dolby Cinema and the second time was IMAX.

johnnysd

My prediction was pretty spot on. It was just perfectly timed. I personally totally get the appeal of these movies. Yes the story is simplistic and the themes totally in your face at times, but both Avatar movies show you something you have never seen before. Although they were much better movies it is what made LOTR so popular, and at one point superhero movies as well

fujishig

I only watched it once but I don't go to many movies that regularly so that's actually a lot for us.

tanman

Old people. Don't forget old people. They were seeing it in droves as well. Definitely drew people out that didn't usually watch movies. Titanic was a verifiable phenomena when it comes to movies. I mean there's still such a renewed interest in the Titanic that still continues today that I think would have faded a while ago if it weren't for the movie.

tanman

I was going to mention how Maverick made so much more at the domestic BO then Avatar but Avatar is up to 620 already vs. Top Gun's 718. So it's not as large of a spread than I thought.

I dunno it's a mystery. I think the biggest mystery is how it must be doing repeat business but with a really long run time. I know Endgame had a really long time...Well I guess Titanic had a really long run time as well. You know what, I think that whole theory that a movie can't do well with a long run time is totally bogus. Simply put if you make a movie people want to see it will do gangbusters at the BO.

ViewAskewbian

Case in point: When adjusted for inflation, still the highest BO is Gone With the Wind and that clocks in at nearly 4 hours (granted with an intermission).

fujishig

I mean what else was there to do in olden times?

ViewAskewbian

IKR! Especially without pr0n.

Josh-da-man

Gone with the Wind was from a time before home video and television, so they only people could see the movie was at a theater. I would be that movie had some serious legs, unlike modern movies that play in theaters for a month and then hit streaming, and was probably playing in theaters for years.

bunkaroo

Top Gun’s domestic achievement is much more impressive given its release time - the heart of the summer movie season. As others have mentioned, there’s not much else to see right now. And the 3D premium helps Avatar’s BO. These dollar amount comparisons are stupid IMO. Tickets sold - butts in seats. That’s how you judge popularity.

Avatar is an amusement park ride. People talk about the experience right after but ultimately it’s an ephemeral experience.

bluetoast

“Not much else to see” doesn’t account for making 620 million or crossing 2 billion. And the fact that there’s not much else is precisely because every other movie got the hell out of Avatar’s way when planning their schedules. If James Cameron today decided to release Avatar 3 in the middle of summer 2024, people would be scrambling to adjust their schedules right now.

People aren’t randomly watching Avatar just for the hell of it. Similar to Top Gun but on a worldwide scale, it’s one of those movies that gets people who haven’t seen a movie in theaters in ten years out of the house specifically for it.

Throwing Copper

Do any sites list the tickets sold? I would much rather see that alongside the box office money.

The Cow

This does (somewhat of an approximation), but it looks like it's domestic only.

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/chart/..._gross_to=2022

bluetoast

Boxofficemojo also calculates inflation at the time of release even if the movie has had multiple releases, which will lead to inaccuracies, starting with the inflation adjusted numbers and compounded when estimating ticket sales. This seems especially apparent with Gone With the Wind, which has a drop-down for all releases. It had numerous re-releases several times before 1989, which is the next available re-release figure. Every release combined is then inflation-calculated into 1939 dollars, which makes no sense.

DJariya

The only stories I see these days on Avatar is box office, box office, box office. No one is really talking about the quality of the movie, the characters. Seems like people watch it and quickly forget about it.

bunkaroo

That’s because there’s nothing to talk about. The irony is for a movie made for 3D, the characters are decidedly two-dimensional. This movie wouldn’t be a blip on the radar if it weren’t for the visuals. That can be said about a lot of movies of course.

To me this franchise is “best of the worst” in that regard. It will never touch movies like Avengers Infinity War/Endgame or Lord of the Rings which have amazing visuals AND compelling characters and story.

Michael Corvin

Seriously. Talking like Avatar 2 is some flash in the pan hit that only made money because there is nothing else to see is absurd. Or because there's some $2-$3 up charge on tickets. Just because "you" (in general, not you bluetoast) don't give a shit about Avatar doesn't mean other people don't. Movies don't just accidentally make $2 billion dollars or they'd all make that much. It's an "Event" movie that people want to see on the big screen, just like Maverick before it.

Also, your very last point is valid (at least on an anecdotal level). My daughter works at the theater and she told me she had a family seeing Avatar that had never seen reclining seats at a theater before. We've had them for at at least a decade here. No two ways about it, Cameron puts asses in seats and downplaying it because one didn't like the movie, just makes them look silly at this point.