Apparently only James Cameron can defeat James Cameron.
Avatar sinks Titanic...
- Thread starter Data Holmes
- Start date
I actually seem to remember that happening at Titanic, which I think I saw six times in the theater.
That is until the backlash in a year, like Titanic, where everyone you talk to has always hated it. Despite $2 billion, everyone always hated it.
I think there are definite similarities in theme between Titanic and Avatar, though I definitely think Titanic's story and characters were far, far more interesting than those in Avatar. I imagine the backlash when it comes will be similar to Titanic's...
Yeah, the backlash is probably inevitable. It happens with things that are brilliant--like nuBSG--and things that are pretty mediocre but wildly successful, like Avatar. I really have nothing against the movie--it was pretty and told a decently entertaining story--but it didn't have an original thought or an ounce of depth to it. Which might be why I'm puzzled by all the love for it.
Awwww, I loved Starship Troopers! That was a great film. I know a lot of women who like Avatar... I'm just not really one of them.
In NYC, the going rate is 12 bucks (may be higher now, as this was last year). For IMAX its 17Good. I liked Avatar a lot much more then Titanic.
I'd like to know how things compare when adjusted for inflation, and also how many bums on seats in theatres there were compared to others.
Well, one thing going for Avatar is that its tickets cost almost twice as much as Titanic's did 10 13 years ago. Titanic's release in 1997 ticket prices were hovering around, IIRC, $9. Avatar's ticket prices are around $15 for the 3D version.
Adjusted for inflation, wordwide grosses are very, very different.
Forgive me, but where the hell are you people going to the movies that it's $15 a ticket? Even in the bigger cities around here it's still $9.00 tops.
I liked Starship Troopers - it was funny and it subverted Heinlein's propaganda.
What I remember about the backlash against Titanic's success was the later determination of hard-core SW fans to see the take for "The Phantom Menace" pass it as the all-time earner. Needless to say, it stalled and failed. That was mediocrity.
I think Avatar is a brilliant film without regard to the story, which nonetheless does what the story needs to do. And I like the characters very much - they're broad, particularly the villains, which was also true of course of Titanic and all of the SW movies (well, McDiarmid did manage to bring something interesting to his performance in ROTS despite a lame script and dull direction).
What I remember about the backlash against Titanic's success was the later determination of hard-core SW fans to see the take for "The Phantom Menace" pass it as the all-time earner. Needless to say, it stalled and failed. That was mediocrity.
I think Avatar is a brilliant film without regard to the story, which nonetheless does what the story needs to do. And I like the characters very much - they're broad, particularly the villains, which was also true of course of Titanic and all of the SW movies (well, McDiarmid did manage to bring something interesting to his performance in ROTS despite a lame script and dull direction).
All i have to say is that this was a rigidly formulaic popcorn movie. Also: Dances with Wolves in space.
Wow, Dances With Wolves?
Really?
I had not heard that comparison before.
I stand in awe.
Actually, Dances With Wolves is only ten years old - there's not a thing original about its retelling of this story either, so I'm not sure why it's the preferred trite reference.
S
Stone_Cold_Sisko
Guest
There's a certain density to Cameron's films that's kind of an intangible. I didn't love Titanic or anything, but when it was over (the first time), i felt weary almost, like I'd been through this big long grueling adventure almost. The attention to detail and environment I think contributes to this.
I felt the same way with The Dark Knight, which was also a mega-success. It almost felt like you could literally feel that this movie was made with the kind of obsessive care that you don't see a lot. I dont think Avatar is super-amazing, but I think it has that density to it. I think LOTR movies did too.
I felt the same way with The Dark Knight, which was also a mega-success. It almost felt like you could literally feel that this movie was made with the kind of obsessive care that you don't see a lot. I dont think Avatar is super-amazing, but I think it has that density to it. I think LOTR movies did too.
Exactly so. Cameron's simply a better commercial filmmaker than most anyone working in the business.
I thought Avatar was good, but not super-spectacular-awesomeness. Though, I have developed a greater appreciation for it after one of the posters on these boards wrote a point by point essay on how Avatar is a vicious and unwarranted attack against conservative principles.
Admittedly, one positive thing I can say about Avatar was that it felt like a movie of the 90s as opposed to a movie of the past decade. And that's a good thing.
Dances With Wolves came out in 1990. That was twenty years ago.
According to Box Office Mojo:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/
average ticket price in the US was $7.35 last year. Keep in mind, that's the average among all tickets sold....including matinees, kids tickets, senior discounts, etc.
Yeah, I think I generally pay about ten - and of course, since I usually do the buy-the-ticket-online thing you can add a buck or buck-fifty to that.
Saw Avatar again last night, there was a mother with like a 12-18 month old! What the fuck is that loser thinking? I also told some bitchy little brats to shut up because they came in 10-20 minutes later and missed where they explained everything. "Why is he is a wheel chair, how did they create the Avatars? On and on.... stupid stoned teens left a little after i yelled at them.
