'Alice in Wonderland' beats the opening of 'Avatar'

[n2doc]

The Tim Burton film takes in $210.3 million worldwide, the biggest Winter premiere of all-time. Much of the take comes from showings in 3-D.

By Ben Fritz
March 8, 2010

Disney ended up picking just the right moment to jump down the 3-D rabbit hole.

As "Avatar" comes to the end of a historic three-month run, Walt Disney Studios' "Alice in Wonderland" took most of the 3-D screens and opened to an eye-popping $210.3 million worldwide.

Much like director James Cameron's mega-hit, Tim Burton's adaptation of the classic tale, starring Johnny Depp, generated about 70% of its opening weekend business from theaters with 3-D screens. It easily beat the premiere of "Avatar" and set a record for the biggest winter opening, even accounting for ticket price inflation, selling a studio-estimated $116.3 million worth of tickets in the U.S. and Canada.

Overseas, it took in $94 million in 40 territories, also setting a record winter opening.

more

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-boxoffice8-2010mar08,0,2858446.story

[YOY]

1. It also is not all that and a bag of chips.

Burton tried but I swear Disney had too many fingers in there to make it truly watchable.

There are so many characters that were omitted...everyone that was in that Disney Cartoon was there though (albeit in Burton's style) all plus the Knave of Hearts, the white queen, and the 3 monsters from the Jabberwocky poem...the only additions.

No where near Depps best performance to boot.

[Mz Pip]

2. I might see it

but the reviews have been terrible.

During the previews of coming attractions before Avatar the theater showed a whole bunch of upcoming 3-D movies and Alice was the only one that looked like 3-D would actually enhance the film. The rest just seemed like 3-D was an afterthought because they could, not because it would add anything.

[YOY]

3. Avatar was shot with a 3-d camera.

Wonderland was not. It was 3-ded afterwards. It does not have the mindblowing visual aspect of Avatar. A few of the usual cheap 3-d tricks...about it.

[Mz Pip]

5. Those parts

must have been the ones that were used for the previews. Guess that's not unusual for productions to put the best stuff in the previews, particularly if they've got nothing else. Doesn't sound like it's worth the 10 bucks to see it in a theater.

[tammywammy]

4. Oh good, I'm not the only one that wasn't thrilled

Plus I admit I was lost for like the first 20 min on what the heck was going on.

I think if I watch it again, maybe when it's out on DVD maybe I'll like it more, but honestly it wasn't really all that great.

[YOY]

8. The ending made me want to barf.

Sure...male victorian society is going to make an exception for Alice being an independent woman...we could only dream so. Even 'independent' women of the time had to jump through hoops so they would not have the appearance of being in control.

Disney pap.

[tammywammy]

9. Yep, I caught that too. n/t

[MadBadger]

6. Alice Cant do Avatar numbers though.

Alice came out at the wrong time and Avatar did. Alice was the first movie to take away Avatar's Imax and 3d screens. Alice will have a few movies in the next month or so that will steal its screens. Also, Avatar came out during the holiday season when kids were off of school and others were on breaks. It benefited greatly because it did some serious business during the week.

[wackywaggin]

7. I thought the movie was great!

Anyone with an immagination could enjoy this movie thoroughly because of its twisted logic and stunning characters created, which come to life on the 3-D screen. I thought the movie was terrific and would see it again.

Heretic Wack