Talk:Avatar (2009 film)

Box Office Error

There seems to be a box office error, stating: "Avatar is the second highest-grossing movie of all time after Gone with the Wind with a total of more than $3 billion.

Gone with the Wind actually grossed over 390 million worldwide, as opposed to 3 billion. 216.30.159.210 (talk) 12:10, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Discussed at Talk:Avatar (2009 film)/Archive 26#Star wars. DonIago (talk) 13:35, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 July 2022

Please add the following template to the article:

2601:241:300:B610:7D07:2974:4F71:665E (talk) 02:50, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

 Done WelpThatWorked (talk) 15:22, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Whitespace?

Is anyone else seeing a lot of whitespace between the lead and the Plot section, possibly due to the TOC and infobox considerably narrowing the margins? Not sure whether it may be specific to my viewing conditions. If it's not specific to me, do we have options for cleaning that up a bit? DonIago (talk) 16:12, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

@Doniago: I only see whitespace to the right of the TOC. Is that what you mean? It's normal when the TOC is longer than any right-floating content like an infobox and image. We generally don't display article text to the right of the TOC. {{TOC limit|3}} would remove two subsections of "Box office" in the TOC. That would be OK with me. I wouldn't like {{TOC limit|2}} to also remove all level 3 headers. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:51, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure why it bothers me in this case in particular (which isn't to say it bothers me that much)...perhaps because the TOC is particularly lengthy. In any case, I didn't observe that setting the limit to 3 made much difference, but I'm a little out of my depth here. Definitely not a big deal. DonIago (talk) 20:08, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

So I’m gonna add United Kingdom and Hungary as the countries of production due to the fact that Ingenious is a British company and there’s a Hungarian distributor for the 4K re-release

Can I do that? Leo of Monterrey (talk) 18:34, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Having a Hungarian distributor doesn't make it a Hungarian film. Betty Logan (talk) 12:17, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Ok Leo of Monterrey (talk) 01:56, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Movie release date is wrong.

It says on this page Avatar was released ‘December 18, 2009’ but that is false. It was released on December 17, 2009 worldwide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.43.160.30 (talk) 20:49, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

3rd highest grossing film

In the opening script the sequel is described as the fourth highest grossing film. It is now the third. 2601:444:482:7F50:C062:1B17:890:492B (talk) 15:14, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Wrong article. The first Avatar is the highest-grossing film of all time. Its sequel, Avatar: The Way of Water is the third highest-grossing film of all time as of recently, despite Titanic recently returning to theaters. Edwordo13 (talk) 17:14, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 March 2023

Please update the number of RT reviews. 27.58.14.185 (talk) 16:50, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Source [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.58.14.185 (talk) 16:57, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done Mike Allen 17:00, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

"Avatar (2009-10 film)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Avatar (2009-10 film) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 21 § Avatar (2009-10 film) until a consensus is reached. ★Trekker (talk) 13:35, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 September 2023

I believe that we need an indigenous perspective in the "Reception" section, which frame this movie about an indigenous people and culture in an entirely different light. Jesse Wente, an Ojibwe film critic from Canada, has written about Avatar in his book Unreconciled: Family, Truth, and Indigenous Resistance (Penguin Canada, 2021, ISBN 978-0-7352-3575-5). He should be quoted here. These are his words:

The Na'vis' only chance of defending themselves and their way of life comes in the form of a white man who uses advanced technology to remotely operate a lab-grown Na'vi body. He is literally wearing Indigeneity as a costume. This revolting form of "going native" climaxes in the inevitable way, with the white saviour out-Na'viing the Na'vi. He taps into their ancient spirituality in a way none of the Na'vi themselves seemingly can. .... The film itself ... is an expensively rendered colonial fairy tale. It reduces the Indigenous peoples of the Americas to a prop that showcases white excellence and capability. It reduces our identity to a garment that a white person can wear so convincingly that it fools even us. It reduces millennia of spiritual practice down to something a "well-intentioned" white person can comprehend better than we ever could in just a matter of days (p. 140). 2600:1700:ADE2:3800:8580:3FBA:5E33:BC16 (talk) 03:34, 11 September 2023 (UTC)