Blog
Avatar: The Weight of Expectation
You're only as good as your last film. Well if your last film happens to be the most successful film of all time, with 11 Oscars AND $1.8 BILLION dollars at the box office, you're pretty damn good. Cameron once described titanic as an accidental film. He set out to make a movie. Like True lies fun, interesting with some great action and hopefully a story that people would enjoy. He says, and the 11 Oscars would seem to back him up, that he ended up making a film. A film being the worthy, high art level of movie making that transcends just entertainment for entertainment's sake and becomes true art. Of course there are plenty of people who don't like Titanic, given the enormity of its reach it would be foolish to expect otherwise. But the fact is it remains a colossal success as both a commercial movie and an awards strewn film.
![]()
So what can we expect now? 4 years ago, this very month Peter Jacksons beautiful remake of the classic movie King Kong opened around the world. Jackson was in a similar position to Cameron having come off what is the most successful run of films a director has ever had with the Lord of The Rings saga. Despite shameful political shenanigan's keeping Oscars minimal for The Fellowship of The Ring and The Two Towers, Peter Jackson and co received a barrel full of Oscars for The Return Of The King and had seen an amazing upward streak at the Box office. Having earlier decided to direct a nice small, Heavenly Creatures type, movie to follow on the years of hard work on Lord of the Rings Jackson ended up doing what Cameron is doing now. Making a film that was close to his heart. Being possibly the world's biggest King Kong fan Jackson just couldn't step away from the chance to make the film anew. But here's where things looked like going wrong. You see when Kong opened in the US it only made $50m on its opening weekend. The hacks immediately seized on this as a sign that the film wouldn't be a hit. $550m and brilliant DVD / HD-DVD & Blu-ray sales later the film has certainly been a hit, but you have to wonder if the negative spin given to the film in its first week nudged a little bit of the potential cinema audience away.
There was so much pressure, so much expectation as to what Jackson could follow the Rings films with. When you've made three films with a combined take just shy of $3b is $550m a disappointment? The 32nd highest grossing film of all time a little poor?
No, not really, but it does show the problem that Avatar, or rather Cameron faces now. What is going to be good enough critically? If there are only technical Oscars (guaranteed winners, I promise you), will that be a step backwards? More importantly will it be SEEN as a step back? Some commentators have suggested the story allied to the execution could hint at least a nomination for best film, especially now that the number of nominations for best film has doubled from five to ten.
Given the cost of the film (47 hours to render 1 frame or in easier to understand numbers 1,128 hours for EVERY SECOND of footage) would $550m be a disappointment here. Probably, yes. Jackson was making a big movie that would be well told and hopefully fun to watch. Which it was, but it was also very gruesome in parts and the incredibly blah Lion The Witch and The Wardrobe was a nice, clean, safe movie that people felt more secure taking their kids to see. This film has been billed for years as a game changer; the film that will change cinema in a way not seen since Star Wars in 1977. The film to finally take 3D away from being a gimmick and into another tool for the filmmaker, like the steady-cam, the reverse zoom but most akin to the advent of talking pictures and Technicolor. Originally just tricks to make Cinema more profitable than the radio or the theatre; then better than television and now better than surround sound, high def TV and gaming.
Of course, like Kong, Avatar has a longer running time than a lot of the competition. Cameron conceded to limitations, especially at IMAX and made the film shorter than he might otherwise have done. Cinemas are still unfortunately not being up to the task, in numbers, of serving a large enough audience in 3D (read more about the current state of 3D in the cinema here).
I'll find out for myself if Avatar is worth the hype on Wednesday. To be honest I consider James Cameron to be one of the greatest directors of all time. A master of making movies that the un-initiated can see as pure popcorn munching fun but the more discerning realise are filled with subtext innovative directing style and some of the hardest, most feminine, kick ass strong female characters in history. Cameron's Ripley and Sarah Connor could easily be numbers one and two in the strongest female movies characters of all time.
You didn't really think the director of The Terminator, Aliens, The Abyss, Terminator 2, True Lies (popcorn but high class £1,000 caviar encrusted popcorn) and Titanic would let us down did you?
You are The Resistance!
Comments
Indeed Met.
I'm with Everton. I really do see 3D as the way forward for [blockbuster] cinema. Anyone who still considers it to be a gimmick clearly hasn't seen a current generation 3D movie. Try and see it at the IMAX. It will be worth it. Pete
Well you 're probably right about Ripley and Connor. This will be very interesting to see. I really dislike going to hyped movies though. It's always better when you don't have any expectations. But in this case it seems impossible./Met
Everton are you going to watch the movie in 2D or 3D?
Just seen the film. Too much to say I'll gather my thoughts and send in a full review tonight, well it's 00:24 so technically this morning, but you knew that.
Pete is right. There's a few people in my family who have never been to an Imax and I've promised to take them. So as well as watching Avatar in 3D tomorrow I'll be taking them to see it in stunning IMAX at the weekend.
>> 47 hours to render 1 frame or in easier to understand numbers 1,128 hours for EVERY SECOND of footage










@7:20:55PM 12/14/2009