Exactly so.
The box office dominance of Avatar
- Thread starter Infern0
- Start date
And your post is witty, insightful, and intelligent.
Not Avatar, Star Wars, or MU big money.
Never said otherwise.
Wasn't there a controversy about Cameron possibly ripping off a Russian Sci-Fi author? https://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/jan/13/james-cameron-avatar-plagarism-claim
I actually read the book - and I admit it's not a ripoff, but it seems very likely that Cameron read the book and used it as inspiration. Which he seems to be denying.
I do get more excited when a new IP is announced, whether it be a less popular comic adaptation or an original story. Unfortunately two things end up happening - they don't get good reviews (usually because they aren't good) and they lose lots of money. My theory on this is that the most talented writers tend to write books, not movies...
What, below 1 billion isn't blockbuster anymore?! I wasn't even arguing against your larger point, I was merely pointing out the exception from the rule, Nolan being the one director who still makesregularly big budget non-IP movies that are financially successful.
(IIRC) Cameron has said (But not in these words) that Avatar shares elements with a lot of the things he grew up on. After the Ellison problem on The Terminator, I think he's smart to keep his mouth shut on specific influences.
Thanks! I do get that a lot.
Cameron likes to deny things.
I really don't see much of a similarity between ST: Insurrection and Avatar. In Insurrection they almost immediately let the audience know the Baku aren't a simple race living at a more primitive level then the Federation - they are as advanced as the Federation. Also, it WASN'T 'Aliens' who were invlved, it was their own sons and duaghters who felt wronged.
Avatar was your classic - The Native's are on oil rich land...gotta move them off it and onto a Reservation...
Plus:
If Jake Sully wasn't given the chance to use a fully fit and functional body, and nearly raised to 'godhood' in the eyes of the Navi because he managed to interface with the planet's Apex predator - he may not have turned against his comrades so easily. He wasn't a bad person, but it was pretty clear he was enjoying the power he was feeling after being Wheelchair bound and living in near poverty for somany years. Yes, his Commander promised he'd get his legs back when he rotated back to earth (IF he was successful; but in his mind he already had a working body and a primitive people and a feeling of power.
They're really not similar films at all.
Which one is better?
Story wise, I didn't care for either one.
There's one more thing I think strikes a chord with people about Avatar.
I used to read a webcomic called Kevin & Kell. It's about a world where animals are intelligent like humans, but still retained their original predator/prey relationship, and it focuses on a rabbit and wolf who fell in love with each other and their merged family (Which involves a wolf, an adopted porcupine, and their daughter who is a carnivorous rabbit). When I went to the message board for the webcomic, lots of people posted about how they'd rather live in this world than the real world. When I would mention "Even though people can legally murder and consume you whenever they want?" They'd say things along the lines of "At least you KNOW who your predators are."
The same kind of escapism is offered by Avatar. It's a simpler culture, where life is about surviving and just existing. It's a relief from all the complex stresses of the real world.
I used to read a webcomic called Kevin & Kell. It's about a world where animals are intelligent like humans, but still retained their original predator/prey relationship, and it focuses on a rabbit and wolf who fell in love with each other and their merged family (Which involves a wolf, an adopted porcupine, and their daughter who is a carnivorous rabbit). When I went to the message board for the webcomic, lots of people posted about how they'd rather live in this world than the real world. When I would mention "Even though people can legally murder and consume you whenever they want?" They'd say things along the lines of "At least you KNOW who your predators are."
The same kind of escapism is offered by Avatar. It's a simpler culture, where life is about surviving and just existing. It's a relief from all the complex stresses of the real world.
Which makes it exactly like Marvel's movies, the Transformer franchise, and - Christ, every big action-adventure movie for decades in that the issues for the characters are portrayed in the most extravagant terms but are in essence the simplest possible:
Win or lose, beat or be beaten, live or die.
Avatar's not even remarkable in this respect, much less unique. So its particular appeal must lie elsewhere.
I mean, I think there's a deep-seated desire in many people to just play hooky on real life and go off on some sort of adventure. I really don't think that many people past the age of 14 really just casually imagine they are superheroes. But the main character in Avatar was kinda just an everyman (seriously, I don't even remember his name) making it much easier for the viewer to just imagine themselves in the same situation - exploring Pandora and leaving their own life behind.
That’s a pretty weak argument. In superhero movies the story is simple, the world is the real one with more magic. You can’t compare that to creating a whole different lifestyle to escape from.
Well, the key importance of his "everyman" status to the simple plot was that he knew almost as little about that world as the audience did, and thus the exposition and introduction to things made more narrative sense than it often does in these films.
