• 90% of the people in the audience for
  “Sex and the City 2” were women
• shrek the only force more powerful
  than those women source

• $27.1
  million amount the non-3D “Date Night” made in its first week in theaters;
  their studio’s happy
• $26.9
  million amount the 3D “Clash of the Titans” made in its second week; their studio’s complaining source

• “Alice” had a good first week, and hasn’t done bad, but it’s not epic. Tim Burton’s latest big-budget hit, which also uses the spectacular 3D technology of “Avatar” (though not as well), looked like it was on the way to a similarly epic run for a couple of weeks. But while it did good this week, it’s now clear that it’ll just be a big hit, not an epic one.

“Alice” in her third weekend

• 45% dip in box-office receipts in weekend three source

• $116M “Alice in Wonderland’s” box-office take after its first weekend
• $209M “Alice’s” second-week mark; receipts dipped 46 percent
• $265M its third-week tally; it managed to stay on top despite competition

“Avatar’s” first three weeks

• 9.8% dip in “Avatar” in its third weekend source

• $77M where “Avatar” stood after its snow-marred first weekend
• $212M “Avatar” after weekend two; it was a huge hit during the week, even
• $352M after its third weekend, it was over halfway to “Titanic’s” $600 million

Why the diverging paths?

• » Did the snow help “Avatar” build staying power? Director James Cameron miraculously had a movie with a similar box-office run to his previous film, “Titanic.” Part of that may have been due to a huge snowstorm which slammed the East Coast in its first weekend, keeping demand for the movie high when the snow was eventually cleared.
• » Blow up, then fade: One of the major differences between “Alice” and “Avatar” is that “Alice” had a more traditional path to success, one that most blockbusters have followed in the last decade. The much-hyped movie with the big first weekend often fades quickly. Some exceptions exist – “The Dark Knight,” for example, came out of the gate quicker than “Avatar” did and had some staying power, but faded by its fifth week. The secret to an “Avatar”-style run? Slow and steady wins the race.

• $32.4
  million the amount chick flick “Dear John,” which is getting savaged by critics, earned in its debut
• $23.6
  million the amount “Avatar” made in its eighth weekend, which is still pretty solid eight weeks in source

• $595
  million “Avatar’s” box-office take in the U.S. after a 7th weekend at the top; it needs $6 million to top “Titanic”
• $2
  billion the James Cameron flick’s worldwide box office take, which is well into the record books already source

• $1.29 billion in worldwide box-office so far source

• Avatar is looking good in its third weekend, dipping just 9% from last week. Not bad for a movie that had a relatively modest launch for a blockbuster. The secret to its success? The same as “Titanic” – staying power. But even if James Cameron’s latest can’t keep up, his trump card might be an even bigger deal.

• Titanic’s track record:
  

• $1.8 billion total lifetime run – in 1998 money (holy crap)

• $200 million budget for what was expected to be a huge bomb
• $600 million in domestic grosses – in 1998 money! Holy crap!

• $28.6M Titanic’s first-weekend box office take – decent, not spectacular
• $35.5M Titanic’s second-weekend take – it went up by an astonishing 23.8%
• $36M Titanic’s biggest week, which didn’t come until week six, by the way source

• How Avatar’s catching up:
  

• $1 billion worldwide already – in just three weeks!

• $280 million the most likely budget for “Avatar”; totals have varied as widely as $250 million and $500 million
• $150 million has been spent on marketing the movie alone, which Fox is taking on the cost of

• $77M Avatar’s first-weekend box office take; it was hurt by snow
• $75M Avatar’s second-weekend take – down only 1.8%
• $352M Avatar’s domestic gross after a $68 million third weekend source

• The 3D wildcard:
  

• $3-5 the markup the 3D adds to ticket prices source

• Big investment Cameron’s film took years to build because of the fact that the technology had to come first, both for filming and in the theater. Cameron paid to build the technology himself along with a bunch of investors.
• Residual effect Fortunately for Cameron, he can sell the cameras to other filmmakers. “Journey to the Center of the Earth 3D” has already used it. Steven Spielberg and Peter Jackson’s “The Adventures of Tintin” soon will.
• Cash for conversions Even better for studios, the technology is relatively easy to build into older films. For $30 million, a popular hit like, say, “Titanic,” can have a brand new life in 3D. It’s like a money machine for Hollywood. source

• Will it beat “Titanic”?
  

• Before inflation, probably. After, it depends. It’s probably not likely that the movie will hold up sixteen straight weeks at No. 1 like Titanic, but it’ll have a good shot of holding on tight thanks to the fact that it’s going to be in IMAX (where it’s made $66 million already) for months. But at the very least, it’s looking like it has more staying power than “The Dark Knight,” the biggest hit of the naughts. Well, before “Avatar.”

• 16 of the 28 films out in 1Q ’10 were shot years ago source

• 2% less – and less snow – than last weekend source

• $75M the take of “Avatar,” which led the pack and held on for its second weekend
• $65M the take of 2nd-place Robert Downey Jr.’s take on “Sherlock Holmes”
• $50M the take of crap machine “Alvin & The Chipmunks: The Squeakuel” source