ROTTEN TOMATOES: Avatar: Gambling on Film's Future Comments

Avatar: Gambling on Film's Future

by | November 16, 2009

Summary

James Cameron has a history of confounding expectations and coming up big in high-pressure situations. For "Avatar," being billed as the most expensive movie in history, some pundits are saying he needs to do nothing short of save Hollywood. Back to Article

(1-20 of 128 posts) | Reply

Don't Tase Me Bro writes:
on Nov 16 2009 05:06 AM

It would seem whether people love or hate 'AVATAR', Cameron seems to be doing a decent job 'saving' film.

With Del Toro "blown away", Spielberg and Jackson using Cameron's technology on their forthcoming projects, I'd say though the stakes are high...I wouldn't be surprised if he pulls it off. Cameron [apparently] knows when to hold 'em and fold 'em (waiting for years on the tech for 'AVATAR').

Even if he has to settle for breaking even, I'll be intrigued to see what Spielberg and Jackson come up with...

(Reply to this)

Gordon Franklin Terry Sr writes:
on Nov 16 2009 05:58 AM

I really wouldn't worry about it either; AVATAR will earn back its money.

The "preview" of AVATAR at 2012 looks amazing.

On Cameron's concern of having his CGI creatures convey emotion:
Making CGI creatures convey emotion or conveying emotion via CGI (computer graphic imaging) has been problematic in recent years (with KING KONG and the LORD OF THE RINGS TRILOGY). Neither of Peter Jackson's aforementioned endeavors "moved" me emotionally;

and probably with AVATAR, seeing one blue-man crying over another blue-man won't be emotionally engaging either. To Learn how to Convey Emotion via CGI more Study needs to be made of how Emotion has been conveyed in other art-forms.

In my Rotten Tomatoes Slide collection, "around slide 50" of EDVARD MUNCH'S THE SCREAM (1893), we see how the Entire frame (the ENTIRE CANVASS) is Dedicated to emphasizing the titular "Scream--every shape/every brush-stroke is expressionistic-ly "wavy;" "languidly or liquid" in nature.

AND around slide 916 "SOUND" by Frank Franzetta, the "emotion" or "sensation" of Sound is "heard" in the mind's eye because of the Shaft of Light starkly bathing the warrior blowing into his horn. Abstractly, The Light Shaft Becomes (or Represents) a sound that we cannot physically hear but in stead can mentally or spiritually hear.

Speilberg's ET conveys emotion;

"The Space Bug" in Cronenberg's THE FLY onveys emotion;

Al Pacino's Anguish resonates off of the screen in GODFATHER III;

and also in Boorman's DELIVERANCE when the rapist is struck with an arrow and staggers around breathlessly conveys emotion.

Ultimately, James Cameron can certainly trust in his directorial instincts AND AVATAR IS "only one movie" in a Historically renowned career-legacy of movies.

Win or loose: there's always TRUE LIES 2. life goes on. do not be overcome with worry. especially over a movie.

"They've" been making movies since 1894, man.

(Reply to this)

LEGION writes:
on Nov 16 2009 06:03 AM

Avatar leaves me blue, dude. Just blue.

(Reply to this)

Evan_H writes:
on Nov 16 2009 06:38 AM

I really hope Avatar is NOT film's future.

Pixar's Toy Story became the "new face of animation", leading to years of bad CG animated movies from other studios! Hollywood attributed Toy Story's success to the technology, not the story and talent.

If Avatar becomes the "new face of filmmaking", we'll have to endure years of bad 3D motion-captured movies. Hollywood will no doubt falsely attribute Avatar's success to the technology. Cameron's previous movies pushed technology, it was the story, actors, and characters that made them hits.

(Reply to this)

Escapefromalcatraz writes:
on Nov 16 2009 06:41 AM

I am feeling lots of negativity on this thread.

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on Nov 16 2009 06:48 AM

In reply to this comment (#2561686)
Spurts of negativity and extreme skepticism are inexorable to this sort of thing.

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on Nov 16 2009 07:06 AM

I sense a great disturbance in the thread. Yes, the negativity is strong with this one.

(Reply to this)

CFM writes:
on Nov 16 2009 07:18 AM

Bigbrother's post made me laugh. Thanks.

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on Nov 16 2009 07:36 AM

Since this is already the most negative depressing thread on here did anyone hear Edward Woodward died? aka The Equalizer. Loved that show when I was a kid.

(Reply to this)

Escapefromalcatraz writes:
on Nov 16 2009 08:35 AM

Dude. That IS a drag. He was so cool. And he drove a Jag which was classy (not being sarcastic).

(Reply to this)

dj Mark writes:
on Nov 16 2009 08:36 AM

"the release of Cameron's Titanic was preceded by a yearlong wave of negative press and skepticism. Then it earned $1.8 billion at the box office."

Yep, the naysayers who were smacking their lips at the thought of watching Cameron crash and burn had to then deal with huge B.O. results and scads of Oscars.

And they really should try and get over it.

(Reply to this)

RoadDogXVIII writes:
on Nov 16 2009 08:37 AM

I've yet to find a James Cameron film that really stunk (that Pirahna film, but that was in the 80's). So far, things look really good. Michelle Rodriguez needs a good film right about now (though I wish Cameron had Megan Fox in the role, since she has alot to make up for this year; sad what MTV and plastic surgery can do to a well-meaning individual like her, but hey, I can dream).

(Reply to this)

RoadDogXVIII writes:
on Nov 16 2009 08:39 AM

In reply to this comment (#2561684)
Not all CGI animated movies were bad. Pixar is still cranking out some quality work. "Up" is said to be getting in the ballots for Best Animated Film at either the Golden Globes or the Oscars. And Dreamworks is known to **** out great films with snarkier undertones and bigger names in comedy (Jack Black in "Kung Fu Panda", Reese Witherspoon's co-stars in "Monsters Vs. Aliens).

(Reply to this)

scarh791 writes:
on Nov 16 2009 08:49 AM

I don't think anything can "save" film-making other than lowering the prices of theater tickets and DVD/Blu-Rays. With these prices increasing, and the average American's ability to make ends meet decreasing we're never going to see people suddenly flooding back to the cinema until a compromise is reached. Most people just can't justify $30 to own a film and $12 to see it once. I should know, I'm one them. For whatever reason, neither film-makers like Cameron or the companies backing their films seem to acknowledge this.
Better effects(and they're NOT by the way, the look the same as the new $60 video games coming out this year) are not going to get me to drop $24 for my fiance and I.

(Reply to this)

screwhead100 writes:
on Nov 16 2009 08:57 AM

scarh791 what video games have the kind of graphics that avatar does?!!? what gaming console supports that kind of realism?!!? i kno my ps3 and xbox360 are years behind, so enlighten us to where u get these ground breaking visual games from and for what console you play them on!?!?!?

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on Nov 16 2009 09:08 AM

In reply to this comment (#2561723)
I think quite a few of us are waiting to be enlightened on that point, screwhead. It's certainly a fashionable enough claim that's been making the boards a lot recently.

So I wait with you, and many others, in eager anticipation of someone, somewhere -perhaps a Moses figure- to log on here and show us the path to finding this amazingly super top secret gaming console.

(Reply to this)

Cutler to the rescue writes:
on Nov 16 2009 09:40 AM

Uncharted 2, Metal Gear Solid 4, Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, Assassins Creed 2, Heavy Rain, Bioshock, Mass Effect 2, etc. All of those plus more have better graphics than Dances with wolves, sorry i mean Avatar.

Isnt it amazing that Cameron took 10 year to make a movie that is pretty much a complete ripoff of Dances With Wolves. Man is that guy not creative.

(Reply to this)

Cutler to the rescue writes:
on Nov 16 2009 09:40 AM

Like always Matanuki has been pwned

(Reply to this)

mike f. writes:
on Nov 16 2009 09:49 AM

this movies looks weird. dances with smurfs, that's all im going to say

(Reply to this)

dj Mark writes:
on Nov 16 2009 09:52 AM

In reply to this comment (#2561725)
Do we really want to be enlightened on this non-point? I think Cutler nicely demonstrated the frivolity of such a request.

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Avatar

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links