Avatar is that big? Wow, where have I been?

Maybe I should go see it...

I can tell you havn't see the movie.

The tech is far superior to anything out yet by a huge difference. You WILL NEVER get the idea of what it actually presents without watching it in 3D at the theater. Have you gone to any of the newer 3D movies? They're phenominal and Avatar is the Ferrari of these, only for the same price. You literally feel like your directly in front of the action as a camera man for a news event must feel like during any newsworthy situation.

As for the story/lines/etc. They are actually pretty good. It presents a really well developed world and culture and the human intanglement is clearly identifiable. Granted that part is purely an opinion and mine is probably subjective as I really like scifi fantasy films.

I have yet to hear ANYONE of any background say that going to Avatar was not worth the ticket price. I have gone twice and am irritated that I won't be able to watch it at home with the 3D presentation that I received at the theater, which means I just might go a third time. This is not something I have ever done in the past. I can count on one hand the number of movies I've seen more than once in the theater and this would easily be the first movie I ever see a third time.

While I agree with you on the idea of taking modern movie revenues in context, it doesn't really matter. The real list is actually ticket sales, just as we focus on single unit sales for games on this site. In ticket sales, if Avatar gets multiple releases like Gone With the Wind and Star Wars, it too would eventually lead that list. Its that good.

I'm wondering what movies have better CGI and FX than Avatar, according to thismentiel..

To those saying that growing inflation and population are balanced, somehow, by the fact that "people today have other options" and increasing piracy and whatnot... I say take a look at the OP again. The top of the list is *dominated* by movies from the 2000s, including such timeless treasures as Hancock and Sex and the City.

Why? Because we're living in the golden age of cinema? Because, like Avatar, each of those films "deserves" it? Nope! Because the population has grown, and the ticket price has gone up and up and up, and so any successful movie of today has a decent shot at that list.

In ten years, the list will be dominated by movies released from 2010-2020, and not because the films themselves will necessarily be any better--or have sold more tickets/been more popular--but because the ticket price will have gone up some more.

Yes, I have seen some of the new 3-D movies.  One of them being Ice Age 3-D.  The effects look the same as the commercial I saw on TV, only in 3-D.  While this does make for an enhanced viewing experience, it can't make up for everything.  I may have a more discernable eye, so Avatar still looks fake to me.  Which is one reason I don't buy into the hype surrounding the movie.  Don't get me wrong, it's not horrible looking, just not as awe-inspiring to me as some think.  I have seen CGI on the same level in previous movies.  Their expressions look really good, but they make the same mistakes that many make.  Two major ones are muscle movement and lighting.  I've seen quite a few clips of the movie, maybe even seen half of it if it was all added up (ok probably not that much).  Watching them move/talk it looks more like their body parts are just moving and not controlled by an underlying muscle structure.  There is some muscle movement, just not enough to make it look natural and real.  Lighting is the worse mistake many animators/directors make.  Instead of displaying the correct amount of lighting (especially when covered in shadow or dark) they seem more concerned with if people can see their "spectacular" effect.  Again, Avatar is definitely not the worse offender, but when they are covered in shadow it still seems to have been made brighter than it should be. 

You may think my standards are too high, but really they aren't.  I still love watching 80's movies even though they don't have effects that hold up to today.  Can't really blame them since they did the best they could, plus sometimes it adds to the movie.  Maybe if the story was more original or the dialogue better or it wasn't touted as "the movie that will change how we view movies" and "make it so we can't tell what's real or fake onscreen", I'd be more into it.  But given its current state, I'm not very interested in seeing it.  Ever.  And like I said before, I think within 10 years, when effects have truly evolved until we can no longer tell what's fake onscreen, Avatar will mainly be remembered for its spot on the top money-makers list.

it will not reach 2b$ easily.it will cross titanic for sure.

and no if James Cameron did a aquaman movie,it wouldn't reach 1b$.Avatar is doing so well cause it was Cameron's long time project since Aliens movie 25 years ago and in that 25 years,he did create alot of noise about it and hyped it to the extent

It interesting to note that district 9 which was last on THAT list is prolly better than 70% movies there...

I am disturbed by the amount of hate towards Avatar in this thread, it's also very obvious that everyone who is badmouthing or trying to downgrade its success hasn't actually seen it.

This happens with every movie that becomes popular, it becomes 'cool' to hate it. At least watch it people before you form an opinion (and this isn't for everyone of course).

Well this movie will spark the beginning of movies that don't have a good story and will still sell a lot more than they deserve. I never watched a movie because of it's visuals (even though i wasn't impressed with Avatar's visuals). I've watched movies for their story and character development and how well the actors act. Most of the characters in Avatar felt dry half the time.

wow i never imagine that one film will be so close to titanic.