James Cameron hears your rumblings about Avatar‘s cultural impact and says you’re wrong
Disney World's theme park Pandora—The World of Avatar would like to have a few words with the Avatar naysayers
Aux News Avatar
Since the release of Avatar: The Way Of Water’s trailer earlier this year, a discussion online has been brewing: Does anyone even really care about the first Avatar? Well, word has gotten around to filmmaker and lover of all things water James Cameron, who has had enough of the naysayers ignoring Avatar’s importance in the zeitgeist.
In a recent interview with The Hollywood Reporter, the director discussed the conversations around the record-breaking film, citing that Avatar’s cultural impact will grow with time and as more movies come out building on that world.
“There’s skepticism in the marketplace around, ‘Oh, did it ever make any real cultural impact?’” Cameron said. “‘Can anybody even remember the characters’ names?’”
“When you have extraordinary success, you come back within the next three years,” he added. “That’s just how the industry works. You come back to the well, and you build that cultural impact over time. Marvel had maybe 26 movies to build out a universe, with the characters cross-pollinating. So it’s an irrelevant argument. We’ll see what happens after this film.”
Though you won’t see Cameron plotting out an Avatar multiverse in the future, there’ll be enough Pandora lore to fill up two future sequel films. Avatar 3 has finished filming and is scheduled for a 2024 release date, with Avatar 4's first act already completed. Even with the future of the franchise seemingly planned out, Cameron noted to THR that any sequels beyond The Way Of Water will depend on its success with audiences and the box office (which apparently needs to be the third or fourth highest-grossing film ever just to break even).
“We’ll probably finish movie three regardless because it’s all shot,” Cameron told the outlet. “We’d have to really crater for it not to seem like it was worth the additional investment. We’d have to leave a smoking hole in the ground. Now, hopefully, we get to tell the whole thing because five’s better than four, four’s better than three, and three’s better than two.”
We’ll wait and see if five Avatar films are enough to prove Pandora’s culture staying power (or if three films will get the job done) when Avatar: The Way Of Water releases in theaters December 15.
169 Comments
The more people deny its impact, the clearer its impact becomes. We wouldn’t be talking about it not having an impact if it didn’t have one.
By that logic Zack Snyder is the greatest filmmaker to have ever been born.
Not talking about quality here. And Snyder’s is just a case of a few people being really loud, whereas this is all about casual viewing culture. So no, my logic doesn’t apply that way at all.
Where did I even mention quality? Point is your argument is “people saying something hasn’t had an impact = thing did have an impact” when by that terrible logic people writing that Snyder hasn’t had a deliberate impact on pop-culture means he must’ve had one and at it’s most extreme people saying the Royal Family aren’t lizard people is proof they actually are lizard people.Avatar didn’t have an impact on society or culture in the way Cameron suggests, instead it’s more the conversation about the film did.
Eh, it’s the movie version of being famous for being famous. If enough people engage then it eventually becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy.
But that’s what I mean, there are people famous for being famous.Avatar is the film famous for being talked about. What actually happens in the film is usually less mentioned.
In that case…I agree.
Keeping Up With the Pandorans.
No — the entire thrust of my point is how many people have repeatedly denied it. The scale of it proves the impact. Is that clearer?
Yeah, that’s literally the argument I’m mocking. Just because a lot of people say something isn’t the case doesn’t make the opposite true.If that was the case well then the Earth is flat, vaccines are killing those who use them, and 9/11 was an inside job because there’s so many people strongly denying all three of those things.
People can’t stop talking about him, so he must be good! Also I’m hearing a lot of things about some indie film called the Room?
The Room had an impact — it displaced Ed Wood’s Plan 9 from Outer Space as the pop cultural “worst movie”. Not that either really were the worst movie — they were bad, sure, but there’s plenty worse — look at most of the movies treated by MST3K for example. But most of those aren’t fun at all to watch without the snarky commentary.
Except we aren’t talking about the greatness of the filmmaker. We are talking about the cultural impact of the film. Snyder may not be a very good filmmaker but his films have had a significant cultural impact whether you enjoyed them or not. I don’t think there is much merit to arguing against Cameron’s films having a significant cultural impact. What he is saying is that whether the Avatar films have that same type of cultural impact is going to depend on the success of the sequels.
“Having an impact” is a pretty neutral statement. It doesn’t specify good or bad, just that it was memorable.So, yeah: regardless of your feelings, Zack Snyder has a clear and definitive style that is memorable and impactful. There are plenty of “bad” superhero movies, but people still feels ways about Batman v Superman. How fast did society forget about, like, Rise of the Silver Surfer or Affleck’s Daredevil or Reynolds’ Green Lantern?
No, context is key. Here James Cameron is clearly suggesting Avatar had a cultural impact in that it fundamentally altered the way films tell stories.Except that’s not the impact the film had.In the same way, Zack Snyder did not have a cultural impact on how tales of superheroes are told. Instead his films are remembered as ways not to do it (unlike the Marvel films).
There are plenty of “bad” superhero moviesParticularly the ones made by Zack Snyder.
I haven’t forgotten about Ryan Reynolds’ ‘Green Lantern’. I still wake up screaming…
People talk about the Zune and Betamax too…
Because they were awesome.
We’re talking about it now because Cameron hasn’t made a movie in 13 years and this has the potential to be the biggest boondoggle in cinematic history. Just the break even costs are fucking astronomical. Nobody would be talking about the first Avatar in the history of cinema’s cultural impact if not for Cameron’s second bite at the apple. The first one had no cultural impact beyond the 3D tech.
Exactly. We wouldn’t be talking about it at all if there wasn’t another movie coming out.
And even then, the 3D tech was cool, but passing.
People are mostly talking about its weirdly small cultural footprint given that it was the highest grossing movie of all time and because they’re spending the GDP of Samoa to make a bunch of sequels, which feels like it could be a recipe for the biggest cinematic disaster in a generation. Like sure, it had more impact than whatever Adam Sandler dumped to Netflix last year, but based on the money it made, it should’ve been another Star Wars. I actually do think it had more impact than people realize, but it’s almost all technical and on the production side, not as a major cultural touchstone.
I doubt it TBH; would anyone really be talking about Avatar in the year of our Lord 2022 if they weren’t making another one?
Actually, the only reason we’re now talking about it not having an impact is because the next installment is coming out. We weren’t talking about it before that, not for a long, long time. Because it had so little impact.
Okay James.People are only talking about it because the new Avatar is coming out. It’s not as if people were talking a lot about it before now. People only talk about Avatar in the context of Avatar 2. From 2010 until about 2020 Avatar was not a big topic of conversation. This logic makes no sense.
We’re talking about it because a sequel is coming out. If a sequel wasn’t coming out, nobody would be talking about it.
“When you have extraordinary success, you come back within the next
three years,” he added. “That’s just how the industry works. You come
back to the well, and you build that cultural impact over time. Marvel
had maybe 26 movies to build out a universe, with the characters
cross-pollinating. So it’s an irrelevant argument. We’ll see what
happens after this film.”
I think I watched it twice and the only thing I really remember was how weird it was seeing Joel David Moore in an action-y role.
You know what they say. If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a blue dragon.What I mostly remember is “man, Ike Clanton got ripped!”
Avatar did have impact, just not in the way his ego clearly thinks. It didn’t revolutionise filmmaking, tell an unforgettable story, or set a new standard for the industry.What it did do was create one of the most infamously failed fads of modern media, that “3D” was something people wanted to experience and was here to stay.I’m fully expecting Avatar 2 will make a decent amount at the box office, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it fails to beat Top Gun: Maverick and the series is quietly axed after the third installment.
The 3D experience for Avatar was integral to the enjoyment of the film and he incorporated the 3D in the best way anyone could have at the time. It’s not his fault that the industry didn’t understand how to use it properly.
This is such a ridiculous statement. Using 3D “properly” doesn’t change the fundamental quality of any movie. At all. It’s just a visual technique. If you taught Neil Breen how to “properly” use 3D he’d still make batshit insane nonsense.
I don’t 3D is an essential component of the medium, not essential enough to motivate filmmakers to use it “correctly”. It seems storytelling is adequately engaging at the 2D level, and the language of film works within, and thrives, in that format. 3D also places a degree of magnitude more requirements on the viewer. It’s not as scalable as audio or visual definition, it requires special hardware, and many users find it intolerable.I think different experiences are better suited to “3d” and similar immersive technology and that’s still bneing worked out.
I really, really enjoy 3D movies. Especially my copy of Fury Road. But to your point, the only way I’m able to watch them is with my PSVR. Which is not exactly the most comfortable movie watching experience.
It was a failed fad because (script aside) everyone thought Avatar looked incredible in 3D, and then none of the filmmakers jumping on the bandwagon wanted to put in the effort and expense that it takes to make 3D look that good.
3D looks good for the first 10 minutes, until my brain forgets it’s 3D and it just looks normal.
It made me nauseous. But I’m prone to motion sickness so seeing it in 3D was my dumb mistake anyway.
Well one did, Peter Jackson. Say what you want about the Hobbit movies, they were umm not great, but the 3d was outstanding, and done in TRUE 3d, using 2 cameras spaced an wyw width apart. While the 3d in Avatar was great, it was also SUPER easy. Since 90% of the movie is fully CGI making it 3d is really pretty simple, compared to filmimg live on set in 3d. And yes I know they were mo capping the actors, but once they went full blue kitty it’s all virtual cameras and you can do anything you want with a virtual camera.
the series is quietly axed after the third installment.
James Cameron after having explored and filmed the ocean floor for ‘research’ for this film.
I hate 3D. I like seeing movies early in their run, which usually means the 3D version is what’s showing, and I’m stuck with those stupid glasses. As a glasses wearer, I’ve no desire to do the glasses-on-glasses thing and actually have daily contact lenses that mostly get used for things like going to the movies.
The 3D fad failed so hard and so infamously that to this day virtually every major blockbuster released after Avatar is also in 3D.
It’s especially impressive that no one can remember the main character’s name since it’s spoken about every ten seconds, mostly with weird accents.
See now that’s the kind of prompt I need. Thank you, now every time I think of Avatar I’ll think of Jake from State Farm and remember the main character’s name! What a breaktrough.
I can, but each time I do it’s with that accent in mind.
I’m also not saying it right now because I’m hoping for an indignant response.
What next, people forget character’s name John but remember character’s name Glup Shitto ?
Jake’s….Ully.
Here’s something more up your alley. I have a ball. Would you like to bounce it?
Jake Soo-Lee.
I can name THREE characters from the movie: the hero was Jake, Na’vi was the dinosaur he rode on, and the bad guy was Unobtainium
This is the worst time for cinema in history. There’s no movie stars anymore, it’s just Avatar this and Avatar that.
I’d actually love to hear QT’s take on Cameron and Avatar.
Betty White this and Betty White that. Finally, someone who’s not talking about Betty White. – Creed Bratton
lol
I thought Avatar was just a really expensive Ferngully remake.
But Ferngully’s box office couldn’t match Avatar’s single day take.
Damn you really out here licking james cameron’s boots lmao
You seem to forget movies are a business, and Disney shareholders all want this movie to succeed. Disclosure: I’ve never seen Ferngully, but I’ve seen Dances with Wolves and Pocahontas, and sure, they are similarities, but I wasn’t thinking about any of them while watching Avatar. I’ve never understood why Cameron is hated by some people. Maybe because he’s Canadian and doesn’t deserve all the American praise? Maybe you would care to explain. Why do you want him to fail?
I’m a Disney shareholder and I assure you, I could care less.
Why do you want him to fail?Obviously, they’re just haters. That’s the only possible explanation for their criticism of this filmmaker.
You seem to forget movies are a business, and Disney shareholders all want this movie to succeed.None of which refutes the post you replied to. So what? It probably will be an enormous financial success, just like the first one. And just like the first one, it will only be significant for the technological achievements that trickle out into the rest of the industry, in films made by people who can actually tell a story worth remembering.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA“Maybe because he’s Canadian”I’ll remember that the next time AV Club praises Cronenberg.Jesus Christ, you stans….
On the other hand, everyone hates *me* for being Canadian.
I don’t hate James Cameron, I pretty much love all of his movies to one degree or another, from The Terminator on, nothing but bangers. I know a lot of people retroactively dis on Titanic, but I even love that one, sure, some of it is corny, but in a good way. That’s why it’s so disheartening that he got so hung up on this Avatar bullshit, it’s fine, but other than the visuals, it’s a mediocre movie, a pleasant enough time waster that I would never watch again. It’s just annoying that it’s all he wants to do, he rarely makes a movie anymore, and all he wants to do is give us sequels to, by far, his weakest movie, about characters I forgot about ten minutes after seeing it. It’s because I love Cameron’s work that I’m so hard about him on Avatar, I really wish he had moved on and given us something else.
I’ve never understood why Cameron is hated by some people.
Because he’s an arrogant asshole.
“Maybe because he’s Canadian and doesn’t deserve all the American praise?”lol When has that ever been a thing? Also people don’t hate Cameron. People love Cameron. They just thought Avatar was boring as shit, which it was. You can like a person and still think his movie was boring as shit.
https://thenerdstash.com/top-10-ways-avatar-and-ferngully-are-the-same-movie/ it was all i was thinking when watching avatar: https://www.la.utexas.edu/users/bump/35017/Avatar%20vs.%20Fern%20Gully.pdf
People don’t hate Cameron. They hate Avatar.
I think you misunderstand most people. We love Cameron, his 80’s and 90’s films are iconic and amazing. But the super technical Cameron that redefined 3D forgot all of the lessons he used in making those early films, and has doubled down on this new James Cameron.
More like deepthroating Cameron’s boots.
*The Last of the Mohicans remake
Dances With Wolves, also.
Two things I will say in Cameron’s defense. He makes hit movies, and he’s probably had sex with at least one ocean.
He’s one of history’s most accomplished seamen.
I bet it wasn’t the Arctic. I hear that one’s frigid.
Or the Dead Sea. That would just be gross.
Ew, necrohydrophilia.
This is an underwatered comment
Or The Red Sea, but they would have to be pretty serious at that point.
But wouldn’t all that salt in the Dead Sea make it more, like…tactile? Or something? You know, provide more friction? idk
Wasnt the Red Sea, wrong time of month.
Billy?
James…you made The Terminator. Titanic. Aliens. The Abyss. True Lies. Why, why do you have to hang your hat on this uninspired, boring franchise? You fuckin’ went into the Mariana Trench for fuck’s sake, and the thing you want to be remembered for is Avatar?
Almost wonder if James Cameron is the reason or one of the reasons Tarantino is so hesitant to actually make the “Tenth Film”.Dude had an almost perfect filmography and then just had to do that “one last project”.
Tarantino would probably be happy to make the most successful of all time.
I personally just don’t get the deep obsession or why he thinks it needs 5 epic-length movies.In case anyone hasn’t checked yet, Avatar 2 will be 3hr and 15m long. Good luck selling that to today’s audiences.
Heh, this right here
Lesson 1: Movie making is a business. It’s all about the money. Disney wants it; Disney shareholders want it. End of lesson 1.Lesson 2: If you have fun and enjoy what you do, keep doing it. Enjoying work means work won’t feel like work. Mr Cameron, do as you wish.
1: Cameron started working on this before Disney ever entered the picture. This is a passion project of his, that needs to make a couple billion dollars to even break even, so I’d say this is less “Disney/shareholders want it” and more like “Disney/shareholders anxiously hope this movie doesn’t flop”. Especially because Iger famously overpaid for Fox in 2019 and is back at the helm, so if this movie doesn’t become a soaring success, he’ll be in the hot seat again and shareholders will not be happy. (Thanks for the reminder that mOvIeMaKiNg iS a BuSiNeSs, though, I’d almost plum forgot).2: Cameron has made some of the greatest blockbuster films of all time, and also, Avatar. He reserves the right to make whatever he wants to (what a useless statement) but hot damn if I’m not disappointed that an artist of his caliber would decide that he wants to spend the tail-end of his career producing unnecessary and unimaginative sequels to an equally unnecessary and unimaginative film. I shouldn’t have to say this, but: if an artist you admired decides that instead of making new things, they just want to start turning out the same old shit over and over until they die, you’d probably be miffed too.
Well, TBH, I’m old, and if we get new good movies and tv shows, good. If not, then, whatever. Can’t really expect more. I’m pretty sure I won’t be around when the next Star Wars feature makes it to cinemas, so I’ll take what they have, and Mr Cameron doesn’t disappoint.
Well…that’s all perfectly reasonable and understandable, and a much more positive “glass half full” approach than I can muster, so. Carry on, and enjoy the cinema 🙂
He’s always been about advancing the ball technologically, so I’m sure continuing to innovate in support of producing Avatar has him all riled up. But he didn’t really refute the fact that no one knows the characters’ names.
Avatar McAvatarface? That’s gotta be one of the characters, right?
The female lead was called Ava Tar, I believe.
“It’s amazingly ironic how the production of Terminator 2 required so many technological breakthroughs, that it advanced the very science it warns us against!”
Well, if nothing else, I’m curious to see what 14 years of waiting will bring us for technological advancement. If it just ends up being advances in underwater green screen, well, peace out.
I can’t say this one looks appreciably different from the first.
I agree, but I’m going to keep an eye on reviews. Unless 3d is so good I can eat the food they’re eating, I probably won’t care to see it in the theater.
Many Avatars. 6 or 7 he says. Though he says he’d have to teach people how to make Avatar movies, since he seemingly accepts that he won’t to live to 120 years old.
“It’s my hill and I’ll die on it if I want to…”
Avatar… isn’t that the blue people thing from a decade ago that is more memorable as an artifact of the brief 3D fad?
Well, probably the instigator of a brief 3D fad. 3D fads come around every couple of decades.
The issue with Avatar is that the only allure was it’s visual effects. That’s it. Uninspiring story. Boring characters. It’s all sizzle and no steak.
The trailers for the new one aren’t exactly refuting the notion that this sequel is literally just more of all of that.
Oh, look, another regurgitated piece rehashing the boring non-debate about Avatar’s cultural impact.
Good thing you didn’t participate.
In fairness, I think if anybody’s allowed to weigh in on it it’s the guy who made it.
Oh, he can weigh in. But he can still be wrong.
I used to think Avatar didn’t work because of its generic plot. I don’t think that anymore, though. John Wick is equally generic, but it’s got enough style and personality to pull it off.I think Avatar would have been much more memorable if it had had at least one of these elements:- Memorable storytelling style (direction, editing, etc)
– Charismatic cast and characters
– Sheer galloping insanityMad Max: Fury Road has all three, which is why it’s such a great film. Guardians of the Galaxy and Thor: The Dark World have virtually the same plot, but Guardians of the Galaxy has better characters (and better art design and music), which is why it’s the better film. Why do you think people remember more details from Flash Gordon than from Avatar? Flash Gordon was campy as hell and utterly ridiculous, but those things stick in your head better than “A special orange dragon? Wow, I bet nobody is special enough to ride that!”
It also helps that Vultan’s Theme from Flash Gordon was turned into the main theme of the 1981 video game Vanguard.
The whole notion of judging a movie by its ‘cultural impact’ is kind of dumb in my opinion, especially because a lot of the people who criticize Avatar for not having one are the same kind of pretentious people who think any movie that ever turned a profit is too ‘mainstream’ or whatever. Avatar was a fun sci-fi movie with a creative environment and incredible CGI that made a shit ton of money and then went away. We’ll have to wait to determine the quality of the next one.
It’s just funny that the most fiancially succesful film of all time is so unmemorable, you’re putting way too much thought into it
Every time someone says it’s made the most money of any movie ever, I keep thinking it’s because they charged extra for the tickets.
I mean it is pretty funny, I just think that it is kind of dumb when people try to actually criticize it on those grounds.
It’d be dumb if you’re talking about technical achievement or financial success. If you’re talking about what makes a movie worth watching, cultural impact isn’t a dumb metric at all.I have no doubt these Avatar sequels will be a grand technical achievement. But will they be stories worth watching?
I mean, quality is subjective, but I think we can agree that a lot of popular movies/shows aren’t necessarily good. I really don’t want to sound pretentious or anything, but shows like Supernatural or Teen Wolf have huge fan bases, and I wouldn’t say either of those are great. Maybe I just have a different/incorrect understanding of what cultural impact is.
They’re not great, but they have characters, themes, situations, world building that excites people and makes them want more. Some stories, whether they’re high art of pulpy trash, become a part of us. They can change the way we speak, shift entire swaths of the population’s perspective, alter our perception of situations and imagery decades later. Did you know there’s no record of people using the phrase “(X) is toast” to mean “they’re dead” before Bill Murray ad-libbed that line for Ghostbusters? People who lived through a certain decade can’t read the words “Did I do that?” without hearing a specific voice. Our modern use of the word “Gaslight” comes from an Angela Lansbury film. The term “MILF” was practically unheard of before it was popularised by American Pie, and now it’s in such common use people forget it was ever an acronym. The “CSI Effect” causes people to believe forensic science works in ways very different to reality. Police forces, intelligence agencies, and the military work hand in hand with the entertainment industry because they know our fiction colours our perception of reality.Good or bad, an impactful story sticks in people’s imagination, in the very way that inspires people like James Cameron to become film makers. Avatar rolled out of our minds the minute it was over.
You’re right. No one quotes Avatar, barely anyone wanted to become a filmmaker because of it. It had a huge effect on the use of CGI in movies (for worse in my opinion, though I don’t necessarily think it’s Cameron’s fault), but other than that it was pretty unimpactful.But also, like you said, bad things can have cultural impact. I just don’t really see the point in arguing if something is good or bad based on its potency.
Be careful around AV Club. Lotta hot takes, it could set your straw man on fire.
Maybe it was a straw man, it just seems that there are more people talking about how overrated Avatar was than people who… liked avatar.
I think that’s a reasonable assessment. It was more the ”pretentious” comment that felt like a straw man. It is possible to enjoy populist cinema and think that Avatar is mediocre at best.
Yeah, that’s a good point. Plus, now that I am thinking about it more, I don’t even think it is the same type of person. When I said ‘pretentious’, I was mainly talking about people on letterboxd who use unnecessarily big words in their reviews like ‘dogmatic’ or ‘pernicious’ or ‘avatar’.
So, a couple of things. I don’t know that anyone is “judging” Avatar by its cultural impact, or lack thereof. People are just questioning whether more of them are needed since no one cared about the first one after seeing it. Nobody’s mad that it’s “mainstream.”Which brings us to the second thing. You think it was a “a fun sci-fi movie with a creative environment.” But a lot of other folks thought it was a boring retread of an old story with flat performances and no style beyond the visuals that they aren’t interested in revisiting. That’s what they’re “judging” it on.
Yeah, the mainstream thing was a poorly worded aside. I wasn’t trying to say that people thought Avatar was too mainstream. It just felt like people who argue that Avatar is bad on the basis of it’s cultural relevance are the same kind of people also try to actively not like mainstream things. It was a dumb argument.Maybe no one is judging Avatar by cultural relevance, but it kind of feels like judgement from my vantage point, and as I said, I don’t think judging something by cultural relevance is a great idea.
Fair enough, though I can’t speak for everyone but I like a lot of mainstream things and still think Avatar was boring as hell and generally a bad movie (and I like a lot of “bad” movies). And I’m not saying it’s boring and bad because it has no cultural relevance. I’m saying it has no cultural relevance AND (or maybe because?) it’s boring and bad. That’s the distinction I think you might be misinterpreting it. No one is deciding if it’s good or bad based on its cultural relevance. They’re saying it’s boring and not a good movie that also had no cultural relevance. It’s two separate things. Anyway, it’s just different strokes and of course you’re allowed to have liked it, and you’re in great luck because Cameron is making 800 more of them for you and its other fans. lol Me? I’m gonna save myself those wildly inflated 3D ticket prices and the nausea and buy myself something pretty.
Its difficult to put into words how little I’m interested in the Avatar series. Its incredible something so boring and lifeless could cost so much.
Man, my 7yo saw a commercial for the re-release of the first one and she said she wanted to see it. I was like ugh babe I don’t think I can sit through that again. Luckily she immediately forgot about it.
thats what Avatar does to you
Ha, that’s true.
I dunno about cultural impact, but Avatar’s impact on this fan of sci-fi was to enjoy the beginning, the world, Sigourney Weaver, the world building, and then ultimately be disappointed that the whole story turned into a generic goodies vs baddies battle showdown.
I concede it’s been a while since I’ve seen it so I’m probably forgetting a few things, but that’s the impact it had on me. Guess I just like JC’s old stuff better than his new stuff.
I’m old, but I thought Cameron had jumped the shark with Titanic. Why would someone who had created the amazing Terminator movies and Aliens waste his time with a boring love story? There may have been an interesting story to tell about the sinking, but it sure as hell wasn’t the one he told.
Titanic’s a weird one for me, because I distinctly remember enjoying it in the cinema and then seeing it years later on TV and thinking how unimpressive it all was.
I dropped my discourse here a couple of times and I will do it again: Avatar is the closest any filmmaker has been to do a golden age/classic sci fi story. Avatar is Larry Niven, Robert Heinlein, Brian Aldiss. It is a language that no other guy has dared to adapt and managed to make it a mainstream film.
I kinda get where you’re coming from, though while it’s been a while since I’ve read the author’s you’ve mentioned I don’t remember Avatar having the humor of Niven or Aldiss, or even Heinlein for that matter.
I guess I just didn’t find Avatar as clever or ultimately interesting as anything those authors have written.
John Carter is LITERALLY a golden age/classic sci fi story. GTFO.
Nah, John Carter was from before that era.
The era of golden age classic sci fi? Seems like a pretty broad description. So because Burroughs wasn’t a contemporary of Niven, Heinlein, and Aldiss my point is moot? You can also GTFO. Dude is trying to say that Avatar fits a particular tone/mold of sci-fi that “no other guy has dared to adapt and managed to make it a mainstream film” and I’m calling bullshit. Because it is. Complete bullshit.
“So because Burroughs wasn’t a contemporary of Niven, Heinlein, and Aldiss my point is moot?”Not really sure what your point actually is. I was assuming it was that John Carter is an example of the kind of scifi he was referring to being adaptated to the screen. And I’m just pointing out that John Carter is not actually an example of the kind of scifi he was referring to. Cause it’s not.Do I agree that nobody has adapted scifi from that era to the screen? I mean that’s obviously wrong. Phillip K. Dick alone has a ridiculous number of adaptations of his work. I’m just clarifying that John Carter isn’t in that era.
Risingson is trying to equate Avatar with a particular flavor of sci-fi that he names “golden age classic sci fi”. And then he names Niven, Heinlein, and Aldiss. Avatar has much more in common with John Carter than anything by those three. You could charitably consider Avatar pulp. It’s certainly not hard sci-fi. There’s all the naturism and colonialist conversation. Clearly Avatar takes a different approach to the whole White Savior thing, but that’s again a pulp element, not “golden age”, which academically is more hard sci-fi, space opera type stuff.Anywhere you put it, though, Avatar is by NO means written in a “language that no other guy has dared to adapt and managed to make it a mainstream film.” That’s just eye-rolling goofy.
Ah, your point is that Avatar is more like the Silver Age of pulp scifi. Yeah I can agree with that.
I think I accidentally made that point when I intended to make the point that Avatar is by no means unique in its genre trappings and Cameron made a pretty standard environmental awareness action adventure flick.But I appreciate the more accurate description. Admittedly it’s not my area of expertise.
Oh I never intended “this was original”, ffs, you really grasped for something to fight against here.
You didn’t intend the actual words you used? Okay! Probably should have used different words, then.
What was lost in my message is that actually I don’t enjoy that called “golden era of sci fi” (I actually kind of hate the scifi canon), like the 50s-60s, before the new wave shook things up. I sounded like a fanboy of the style and you took that bone and did bite it rabidly, which is ok, I do that too, it’s Internet and I agree with you on the pulpy contents. Thing is, Ringworld, for example, is pure pulp characters with a layer of scientific speculation ramblings, but pure pulp characters and development, and that was the beloved canonical missed scifi. With “no other guy has dared to adapt” I was meaning, honestly, that this is so nerdy that only nerds like us accept those archetypes in order to enjoy the scientific speculation or the isolated great idea that happened on those books. It is super nerdy and niche and it was a success to my surprise. That was my point.Not sure if this is going to trigger some rage from you or not but I am chilled out this morning. I had the company party yesterday and it was very cool and I woke up very happy and I have holidays in two days.
It’s not super nerdy and niche, though. The “science” of the movie is very easily explained. It’s not any more advanced than the time jumping of Edge of Tomorrow or the DNA cloning of Jurassic Park or the cyborg time travel of The Terminator etc. You’re using a lot of words to make a flat out wrong point.
What the hell is wrong with you? Have I insulted your sisters? Have I had sex with your mom? Cannot you read what I write and see that I agreed with your points and I agree with your point of view and you are just trying to get on my nerves, be confrontational and be, just mean, uniquely mean, absurdly mean, making what it could be a good discussion about science fiction and movies a battle and a war? What are you winning in here? Are you happy now that you made me angry? Really, what the hell is wrong with you, dude, what the hell.And it is niche because the narrative is nerdy. The sci fi books pass through a very mainstreaming filter until they get to the movies so their rough edges are softened, that is what I meant. It is very clear that you are one of those people that I should avoid in life because of the misery you bring, so goodbye and fuck you.
It is so obvious we come from similar positions and similar cultural backgrounds but you decided to make a fantasy where I am I don’t have a clue what. Really. I do understand your point with the movie and agree with it, I don’t know why you decided I don’t.
The way you phrased it originally did not make “no other guy dared to” sound like a criticism. It sounds like praise, like admiration. So that’s just a misunderstanding based on phrasing. But even if it’s a criticism I don’t think it’s true because Cameron is not the only guy who has dared to make something so theoretically niche into a mainstream narrative.I didn’t intend to anger anyone. I did intend to refute your point. If I went too hard in on that refutation it was due to the aforementioned misunderstanding. Mea culpa there. Although to be frank that’s just as much on your phrasing as my misunderstanding OF the phrasing. I very much could have sought clarity, but I didn’t think it was necessary. I thought you were clear. Turns out not so much.
I wonder if Star Wars would have lingered in the public mind if Lucas had never made the sequels or if Empire had come out 13 years after the original. Seems like a somewhat decent parallel with the Avatar situation. If Cameron had released a sequel much faster, then the Avatar “phenomenon” might have been much longer lasting. But 13 years is a long fucking time and a lot comes and goes in that period.
Man, I hate this clip so much. Mythbusters was a show about verifying rumours with experiments; they even made a point every episode of noting that a result is worthless unless it can be reproduced consistently.But what do people remember? An obnoxious soundbite that, taken in isolation, reads as the opposite of everything that made the show special. Ugh.
I hope this helps.
You’ve only made it when you have videos complaining the new film is too woke and ruins the original.
I literally cannot even begin to describe how awful Avatar looks to me. It’s totally unwatchable, corny, garbage CGI. The whole thing just looks too “weird” to me, those awful CGI characters. It’s total unwatchable garbage.
Hey, Avatar launched Sam Worthington’s career into the stratosphere!
Someone alert Quentin Tarantino to the existence of a film that didn’t produce a movie star.
“Four films good, two films bad!”
The jokes about avatar being inconsequential have a much larger impact on culture than the film itself
So am I the only one here, who has seen Avatar many times and enjoyed the hell out of it??
Apparently.
Well. This is shocking. (As an aside, I’d love to know the carbon footprint generated when he makes these $300-million movies about saving the planet.)
Everybody in America knew the names of the characters in “Star Wars” a month after it was released. Just sayin’.
jake sully.
Oh how rude. It’s so embarrassing when someone hears my rumblings. Maybe I gotta stop eating an entire jar of gherkins before bed.
Lol he thinks that Avatar must become the MCU by checking the box of having a lot of films to build out the world? I read very recently Kevin Feige places a lot of importance of focusing on the project in front of them. James Cameron just does not get it at all. And it seems like it’s driving him crazy.
I don’t even care enough about this film to hate watch it. I barely care enough to comment on how wrong he is about it though.
Every time I hear about Avatar, all I can think of is Fern Gully.All Avatar ever did was raise the popularity of 3D. That’s all it was- a copied plot that just looks pretty in 3D.