Alice, Avatar: only make cash

Alice, Avatar: only make cash

Former Philadelphia Eagles head coach Buddy Ryan once famously criticized his wide receiver Cris Carter because all he did was catch touchdown passes. The 5,500-plus voting members of the Academy of Arts and Sciences seem to be delivering the same head-scratching sentiment to movies that score the biggest box-office cash.

Scott Hettrick
Scott Hettrick

Showcasing once again the cavernous gulf between Hollywood art and commerce, “Avatar,” the biggest moneymaker of all-time, was shut out of the top Academy Awards categories Sunday, March 7, in favor of the least financially successful movie to ever take home the top honor, “The Hurt Locker.” Meanwhile, on the very same weekend, the newest 3D blockbuster, Disney’s “Alice in Wonderland,” was setting even bigger 3D and IMAX opening weekend box-office records than “Avatar.”

IMAX, which had been put in the difficult position of having to push “Avatar” out of its theaters while it was still doing near sell-out business in some venues (in its 12th week of release “Avatar” generated another $7.7 mil. overall March 5-7 to climb to $720 mil.), enjoyed new record business of its own.

IMAX announced today, March 8, that “Alice” grossed $12.1 mil. at its 188 domestic theaters, a 27% improvement on previous record-holder “Avatar,” and represents 10.5% of the overall box-office despite IMAX representing only 2.5% of total screens on which the film was playing.

IMAX theaters accounted for another $3.1 million from 53 international venues and will open in 29 additional IMAX theatres overseas in the weeks ahead. Globally, “Alice” took in $210.3 mil., and IMAX’s Friday haul of $4.3 million (incl. midnights) for “Alice” is also the biggest in IMAX history, according to Paul Dergarabedian’s Box Office at Hollywood.com.

(IMAX will face another tough situation in three weeks when it is contractually obligated to replace “Alice” with DreamWorks’ “How to Train Your Dragon.”)

The IMAX figures came as “Alice” also set a new all-time high for a March debut in all theaters with $116.3 mil (sixth biggest opening weekend of all-time), rughly 70% of that estimated to come from 3D screens. It’s the first movie to ever open with more than $100 mil. outside if the months of May, June, July or November, and the biggest non-sequel opening of all-time.

Hey, I wasn’t a big fan of “Alice” myself (although the 2D conversion was pretty impressive and 3D always looks best on true giant IMAX screens, my favorite part was the 3D trailers for “Toy Story 3D” and especially “Tron Legacy”), and I didn’t like “Avatar” as much as many others obviously did, but the industry’s biggest awards organization must find a way to honor the movies that clearly resonate with the largest block of their customers and generate the most cash, therefore providing funding for the most industry jobs.

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the Oscars telecast had its best rating in five years for a show that at least included a nomination for “Avatar,” which clearly drew many hopeful fans. The all-time biggest Oscar audience remains the one for “Titanic,” the previous biggest movie ever. But that was in an Academy voter-friendly genre: drama.

So don’t count on the fantastical “Alice” to score any Oscars next year. After all, the only thing “Alice” and “Avatar” are doing is keeping the movie industry alive and creating new 3D markets by raking in tons of cash that pay for little movies like “The Hurt Locker” to earn all the accolades.

— By Scott Hettrick

1 comment on “Alice, Avatar: only make cashAdd yours →

Comments are closed. You can not add new comments.

  1. Actually, the Academy got it right this year for once. Avatar had a lousy screenplay and very poor acting. It had no business being nominated in any writing or acting category, and thankfully it wasn’t. It is an expensive cartoon, and nothing more. If they want to give an Oscar for making the most money, they can always create that category. I, for one, am grateful that money did not buy the awards.