By Jay A. Fernandez

The rare female screenwriter working in non-romantic comedy genres, Læta Kalogridis has had her hands on a diverse array of scripts in the past 15 years — “Scream 3,” “Tomb Raider,” “Wonder Woman,” “Something Wicked This Way Comes,” “Night Watch,” and “Alexander,” to name a few. Friday, Paramount releases the Martin Scorsese-directed “Shutter Island,” her adaptation of Dennis Lehane’s paranoia-soaked Cold War thriller. And this summer Fox will let loose its action tentpole “Knight and Day,” which Kalogridis co-wrote. She also served as an uncredited helper on James Cameron’s record-busting “Avatar.” Here, Kalogridis talks about the bloody inspiration in Greek myth, female superheroes and the appeal of the “unbelievably, incredibly, outrageously violent.”

How exactly do you pronounce your name?
It’s Læta, with the diphthong—it’s Latin, actually. If it were Greek it would be Lay-eta. But it’s Latin, so it’s like Caesar.

So your ethnic background is Greek?
On my father’s side.

By Jay A. Fernandez

It’s an unpleasant business, but calling attention to those talents overlooked for deserving Oscar recognition is a standard part of the awards circus. And this year has its share of snubbed also-also-rans. Well, according to me.

First in my mind are Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber for their “(500) Days of Summer“ original screenplay (and not just because I was wrong in predicting its inclusion). Their peers in the writers guild honored it with a nomination, and it represented a truly original take on a worn-out genre that delighted a lot of viewers and inspired a rookie director, Marc Webb, to show off his talents. On the other hand, original screenplay was an unexpectedly tight field for a change, and only five could fit, so Neustadter and Weber will have to make another run at it down the road.

By Jay A. Fernandez

Tuesday morning the Producers Guild of America announced its Darryl F. Zanuck Picture Producer of the Year Award nominees, the equivalent of its Best Picture award. Here they are:

“Avatar”
“District 9”
“An Education”
“The Hurt Locker”
“Inglourious Basterds”
“Invictus”
“Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire”
“Star Trek”
“Up”
“Up in the Air”

The PGA often matches the Academy in its noms — and this year both groups expanded to ten from five — but the PGA just as often steps away from Oscar with its winner.

Like the Academy, the PGA picked “Slumdog Millionaire” and “No Country for Old Men” in 2008 and 2007. But in 2006 it chose “Little Miss Sunshine” over “The Departed,” in 2005 it chose “Brokeback Mountain” over “Crash,” and in 2004 it chose “The Aviator” over “Million Dollar Baby.”

If we compare the PGA ten to those of the Broadcast Film Critics Association, which announced its picks for the Critics Choice Awards December 14, we notice that the producers swapped in “District 9″ and “Star Trek” for the critics’ “Nine” and “A Serious Man”:

“Avatar”
“An Education”
“The Hurt Locker”
“Inglourious Basterds”
“Invictus”
“Nine”
“Precious: From the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire”
“A Serious Man”
“Up”
“Up in the Air”

Does that mean anything? Mm, maybe. “Nine” has been kind of doomed (though only a fool would ever count a Harvey film out of best picture contention), and “A Serious Man” has seemed a little too fringe.

But three science fiction films up for a best picture Oscar? I’m all for breaking with tradition, but somehow I don’t see that holding up when the final Oscar ballots are sent around.

Regardless, give or take a film, that PGA list is what the Big Night is going to look like.

By Jay A. Fernandez

OK, so “Avatar” is fiercely clawing its way up the box-office charts. It burst into the top ten grossers of the decade Sunday, and seems poised to push well into the all-time list within the week, when it passes “Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith” at $380.3 million.

But given how long it took to reach the decade list at $341.8 million – 17 days – can we predict just how high it will go?

Cameron’s “Titanic,” which opened December 19, 1997, took almost eight weeks to cume $341.8 million in mid-February 1998. Granted, “Titanic” ran for three hours and 14 minutes, which minimized the number of shows theaters could jam in each day. Tickets were also cheaper then, of course, but the film’s tragic romance beckoned repeat viewings unlike any film had before.

More comparably, “The Dark Knight” – the No. 2 all-time grosser – opened July 18, 2008 and crossed $341.8 million on its 13th day, July 30. On Day 13, “Avatar” was still at $268.9 million. It took Cameron’s film another four days to cross the $341.8 million benchmark. “Avatar” is only 10 minutes longer, so running time won’t make a difference, and both films – for different reasons – encourage repeat viewings.

The No. 4 all-time grosser, “Shrek 2,” also got there in less than three weeks in the summer of 2004. So did “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest” (#7) in 2006, and “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” (#9) got there on its 20th day, July 13, 2009.

“Spider-Man” (#8) took more than three weeks. “E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial” (#5) took almost a year in 1982-83, and the original “Star Wars” (#3) required two re-releases to get there. “The Phantom Menace” (#6) took almost five weeks in 1999 and “Revenge of the Sith” (#10) almost four weeks in 2005.

Had Imax 3D theaters been more widespread these last three weeks, “Avatar” undoubtedly would have gotten there faster – Cameron’s film grossed just $2 million less in its second weekend than in its first, indicating that demand was constant. With its additional word-of-mouth appraisals (e.g. “you have to go see it”), “Avatar” is likely to continue a fairly lengthy climb with less-than-typical drop-off each week.

My prediction? Top five of all time, easy. With a nice nest prepared for it at No. 4, just under its inspirational ancestor, “Star Wars.”

By Jay A. Fernandez

Well, it looks like we compiled those Top Grossing Films of the Decade lists too soon.

The Na’Vi’s flight into the floating mountains of the box office universe began in earnest today as “Avatar” broke into the top ten grossers of the decade.

Sunday afternoon, James Cameron’s magnum opus passed “The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers” as the 10th highest-grossing picture of the Aughts. While “Towers’” $341.8 million haul was mighty, “Avatar” now sits with a domestic gross of $352.1 million. Just ahead of it in the decade ranks is Mel Gibson’s 2004 juggernaut “The Passion of the Christ,” which grossed an unexpectedly messianic $370.3 million.

But wait a minute.

When the decade officially ended – at midnight December 31, 2009 — “Avatar” was still only at $283.8 million. But if we mark it from when EDI, the box-office tracking company, determines the official end of the 2009 box office tally, then we count the weekend of January 1-3, as well.

Which puts “Avatar” at… $352.1 million.

So what do you think? Is “Avatar” part of the Aughts? Or is it the first huge achievement of the new decade, the Tens?

By Jay A. Fernandez

I’m finding the picayune back-and-forth over whether the “Avatar” numbers were good, or good enough, or snowed under, or inflated, or whatever, just a little vaporous. The truth is, this movie was going to need long, Na’vi-like legs to make its bank from the very beginning.

As such, $77.3 million is a plenty fine opening.

Yes, the East Coast snow probably dented the haul by a few million, but word of mouth is what will carry Cameron’s film forward into the black.

If anything is keeping the box office numbers from bursting through the multiplexes like one of those ornery Pandora rhino-bugs, it’s this: People are waiting to see it in 3D.

Much more than any other 3D film to date, “Avatar” demands to be seen in its full dimensions. The nature of its depth and immersiveness has been part of every review — professional or amateur. And audience members — even those dying to see this new cinema universe — are not going to settle for a 2D version.

Given that the full Imax 3D treatment is still under-represented in the exhibition space, not everyone who wanted to see it this weekend was able to. Seats were filled. So others are waiting for their chance to see it in full-blown 3D.

Christmas weekend will be the real test. My prediction is that Fox and Cameron will see less-than-normal fall-off as new audiences flood in to get the premium experience.

As they should. Two dimensions of Pandora is decidedly one dimension too few.

By Jay A. Fernandez

I saw “Avatar” Monday night, as did a lot of people. I won’t go into detail about the film. I’ll just say that while it has some of the typical Cameron storytelling flaws, it is a completely immersive, fascinating, astounding cinematic work that anyone who loves film should see.

Trust me, even if you catch every last J.Lo romantic comedy or Meryl Streep cute-fest, you will still connect to the story at the core of this extraordinary movie.

I plan to see it again, and I will be far from the only one. So here are some drinking games I’ve devised for those engaging in repeat viewings:

Yet another day of Cameronology (for a certain set) as the “Avatar” trailer premieres. Unlike previous teaser material, which did more to mystify than to reveal, this one goes for exposition, explaining who Sam Worthington’s character is, what he must do and why he must do it. Some of that is welcome — the fact that the movie is based on Cameron’s own creation and not an existing mythology requires Fox to start ’splainin’ — but some of it feels a little too spelled-out for a trailer meant to dazzle.

Also noticeable: the generic military dialogue (”they can take whatever they want but we will send them a message”), which somehow stands out more given the originality of the images. And that grab-you-by-the-collar score is just a little too insistent/melodramatic. Check out a fuller take on THR’s Heat Vision blog, where you can also watch the trailer.