|
excited for another thread in which aggressive stans decide that everyone is against them for liking a movie
|
#
¿
May 9, 2022 21:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 09:35 |
|
|
I post in CD sometimes! I shared the release schedule for Memoria in genchat a few weeks ago (Memoria: good movie, not great movie, imo) my non poo poo post opnion about Avatar: The Way of Water is: The stuff in the trailer didn't excited me but I will retain an open mind. In particular I would like to know about the plot of the movie. Teagone, you clearly have been following this stuff - has Cameron discussed the plot at all (this isn't a weird dig or anything, I'm genuinely curious).
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2022 21:59
|
|
|
teagone posted:Something of note is that Avatar 2, 3, 4, and 5 were developed to be standalone, so there won't be any cliffhangers or sequel hooks between them. Each film will be a self-contained narrative that has a clear ending. So, separate stories that share an overall arc beginning with the first film. Thanks for the response. This is interesting to me—that Cameron believes that Pandora is interesting enough as a setting that it itself will be attractive to audiences on its own for four separate movies. Do the Avatar Stans ITT agree? Personally in terms of sci-fi settings I find it much less interesting qua setting than the Star Wars universe, or that of The Expanse, or Foundation or even, hell, doctor who. I guess it just feels quite limited, like I’m not excited to ~explore~ Pandora. Maybe it’s just a question of taste, but I’m curious what people find compelling about the setting given that’s the constant in these sequels.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2022 00:16
|
|
|
Related to what James Cameron thinks of Avatar: there's an argument that goes like: 1. People all over the internet say that Avatar isn't very memorable 2. The fact that people are saying this, and thus *talking about* Avatar, proves that it is, in fact, memorable. This seems faulty to me. People keep talking about Avatar, not necessarily because it is a memorable movie (although it may be!), but because it was made by James Cameron, who is worth billions of dollars, and who has used some of that wealth to keep Avatar in the cultural conversation by producing these sequels.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2022 00:55
|
|
|
I think the more interesting question is: what constitutes success for movies like this? Wikipedia indicates that the budget for this was $250 million, roughly on par with the first one. Obviously Cameron's wealth insulates him somewhat from minor losses, but will he keep going if the movie "only" makes $500 million? Of course none of us knows, but it will be interesting to see it play out.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2022 01:18
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:Then again the Star Wars sequels bombed loving hard for what they are and their expectations. https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt2488496/?ref_=bo_se_r_1
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2022 01:27
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:I internal leaked rumors i've heard is that Disney was at least happy with TFA, but disappointed with the rest. So that is why LucasFilms axed a lot of their theater movie plans and changed some stuff around to be TV shows. Obi-wan for example was going to be a feature length big budget movie originally. But honestly i'm glad that one is going to be a 6 part TV show instead. And then there was that planned trilogy with the writers of Game of Thrones that got axed. Obviously I don't want to poo poo up the Avatar thread too long with Star Wars chat but didn't a lot of the shifting strategy have to do with how hard Solo flopped?
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2022 02:01
|
|
|
Xealot posted:This is true, but I also think it is more memorable than the average blockbuster-y sci-fi action thing. I think this is a misperception, at least if I take a fairly tight interpretation of "similar event movies" Looking at Avatar's budget, here's a list of the 20 movies that are closest to it in inflation-adjusted budget, from costliest to cheapest: Avengers: Endgame Avengers: Infinity War Titanic Spider-Man 3 Justice League Tangled Harry Potter 6 John Carter 2012 Waterworld Pirates of the Caribbean 2 BvS Solo SW: TFA SW: RoS SW: TLJ King Kong 2005 Spider-man 2 Furious 7 The Chronicles of Narnia 2 X-men: The Last Stand I would bet that for most people, Avatar is not more memorable than any of these (with the caveat that I'm talking about people who actually watched the movie for stuff like John Carter) e: maybe not F7? Like, taking your list of memorable items, I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure most people would remember the a) main character's name b) central conceit of the film and c) the setting for all of these movies. So I argue that Avatar is not more memorable than similarly-sized blockbusters. I'm open to being convinced otherwise though. smug n stuff fucked around with this message at 02:28 on May 10, 2022 |
|
#
¿
May 10, 2022 02:23
|
|
|
Prolonged Panorama posted:The most striking thing about this list to me is that only Waterworld is an original IP. If Avatar has characters and a setting as recognizable as as bunch of deep-into-the-franchise sequels and movie adaptations of previously popular media, I'd say that's a point in its favor. It is not the case that Jake Sully and Pandora are as well-remembered as the franchise movies on that list (imo). The poster I was quoting said that Avatar was *more* memorable than similarly-sized blockbusters, so I wanted to compare it to movies with similar budgets, and show that those movies were *at least as* memorable as Avatar. I also think that the “cultural impact” arguments need to be seen for what they are: as you say, a comment on the planned existence of the sequels, not on Avatar itself. It’s to say “isn’t it strange that Cameron’s spent so much time and money making these sequels?” Not “Avatar was bad,” necessarily. I think if you ask these people how they feel about Avatar outside of the context of the sequels they would respond positively if not like incredibly enthusiastically. Most people liked the movie!
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2022 03:40
|
|
|
teagone posted:reeks of gatekeeping What do you mean by this? Like, who is being kept out of what community or whatever by Gita Jackson
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2022 00:09
|
|
|
teagone posted:The article makes the point of "who asked for this?" wrt the Avatar sequels after making some hamfisted political commentary. And negatively-charged anecdotes are used to suggest any knowledgeable person should feel these are probably bad movies even before they're released. Let people like and enjoy things imo. [edit] Also passive-aggressively assigning moral culpability to consumer entertainment is lame, especially for something with such milquetoast messaging as Avatar. Okay. I guess I don't really think "I have xyz political problems with the movie, and also think it looks silly" is gatekeeping. It's also not really journalism, just a commentary column, but this is just arguing semantics so whatever. I also don't think there's any assignment of blame? They says it has bad politics, not that, like, Avatar caused Trump to get elected or whatever. Gorman Thomas posted:Gita isnt wrong about the appetite for Avatar in her specific online bubble, but it's a bit silly to apply that to international theater goers at large lol. I'm curious - you've made a few comments about the international popularity of Avatar -- is that based purely on the Chinese re-release? Obviously massive success in China would be enough on its own, but is there other evidence of enduring global interest? smug n stuff fucked around with this message at 00:57 on May 11, 2022 |
|
#
¿
May 11, 2022 00:48
|
|
|
teagone posted:They mention the film has problematic racial politics a couple times in their writeup, surrounding its noble savage motif/white savoir themes by bringing up the very rote and tired comparison to Dances with Wolves. Comes across as condescendingly backhanded to anyone who might've enjoyed the film imo. To me this seems like an odd reading of the article. Like they don't say anything about, like, Avatar fans at all? It's all about the text of the movie. Surely it's permissible to say if you think a movie has bad politics, right? It's not automatically an indictment of anyone who liked the movie. I really like the book The Skin, by Curzio Malaparte - if someone pointed out some ways in which his fascism influences the novel, that wouldn't mean I was a fascist, I don't think? e: saw your edit. Yeah I mean it's a 4.5 paragraph piece about a trailer they probably dashed off in like an hour. But it certainly is, literally, film criticism. They're talking about the themes of the movie and why they don't like them. They're specifically talking about what they see as appropriation of indigenous imagery. It's not like they're just making GBS threads on the movie for the pure pleasure of it. smug n stuff fucked around with this message at 01:07 on May 11, 2022 |
|
#
¿
May 11, 2022 01:03
|
|
|
It's definitely mean, but, like, so was Roger Ebert e: I am not saying Gita Jackson is as good a film critic as Roger Ebert. I am saying that being mean doesn't disqualify an essay as criticism. In fact to suggest that reeks of gatekeeping, to borrow a phrase.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2022 01:18
|
|
|
teagone posted:This tweet sums up my feelings rather well. I'll leave it at that. Maybe they edited the piece after the fact because I see no references to Iraq, Jan 6, drones, or generational racism. And it doesn't seem that crazy to reference contemporary racial politics as represented by Trump, Obama, and BLM if you're going to criticize the racial politics of the movie. Imo. But yeah, happy to leave it at that. No need to go too much deeper into the shitpost trailer review. e: Xealot posted:I fully expect the Avatar sequels to be beautiful but extraneous, so I'm not that interested in defending them since I'm guessing they'll be at best Just Fine. But I'm also frustrated by this kind of hyperbole. OP people are treating it as exceptional because billionaire James Cameron is shoving huge quantities of money into these movies. That's not the case for most unnecessary sequels
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2022 01:33
|
|
|
Okay sorry I'm back. I looked at the responses and quote tweets for the tweet promoting Gita's article and maybe I just don't understand stan culture but what in the world? There are like a hundred replies and a hundred quote tweets all theatrically upset at the shitpost article, they've, like, developed internal memes (criticism of Avatar is reddit-as-adjective, etc). I guess I'm just confused as to where they come from? Clearly there are passionate Avatar fans. Have they been this enthusiastic since 2009? Are they especially enthusiastic now because the sequels are coming? And, like, how did they all find this one article? Is there some central Avatar Standom discord where negative press gets shared? Sorry, I guess I'm just surprised at the amount of energy being dedicated to defending the honor of the movie.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2022 02:34
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:I mean, I'm sure someone who disagreed with the article just shared it saying "this is stupid" and other people who saw that did the same. Same way any article makes its rounds on Twitter. Sure, but when that happens for a, like, politics article, it’s because someone is sharing it with their followers who have similar political views. I guess I am just surprised that there is a big enough Avatar fan community on twitter to create that kind of network effect. But, like, more power to them I guess.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2022 04:07
|
|
|
Everyone posted:Best 3D movie I saw was Coraline and most of that was because the effects just deepened the immersion into the world of the movie instead of "Check it! A dude firing a rocket to gun-cum right in your face!" The tunnel extending out is one of the coolest things I’ve seen in theaters
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2022 21:02
|
|
|
Folks it's illegal to not like DBZ
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2022 21:24
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:The online backlash for this, similar to Titanic, is because it's not for nerds, it's girl friendly/GP focused and nerds resent not being catered to. Aliens/Terminator era James Cameron was theirs so it also feels like a betrayal of sorts. Oh yeah it's definitely the toxically masculine Nerds who don't like Avatar. Check out the replies to the Gita Jackson Avatar Article tweet and count the number of women https://twitter.com/VICE/status/1524011470215950336 Maybe due to being female all the passionate women Avatar fans are too shy to get performatively mad about someone not liking their movie.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2022 18:55
|
|
|
Tom Guycot posted:Shouldn't a movie be released and seen first before its nominated for awards? lol Everyone doing the nominating has seen it, and by the time the award ceremony is held it will have been out for a month  .Seems like it'd be silly to wait until next year to nominate it, it would be more than a year after it came out.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2022 18:54
|
|
|
stratdax posted:Award voters vote for movies they haven't seen all the freakin time . Whether this movie deserves the awards or not, this nomination is 100% an industry work. I'll revise my opinion, but I still think that a decent percentage of voters have seen it already, those press screenings earlier this month were pretty huge. Not sure what you mean by "an industry work" given that the voting body for the GGs are all journalists?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2022 19:22
|
|
|
stratdax posted:Lol "journalists". These the same guys that nominated The Tourist for best comedy because they were paid by the studio to and they wanted to hang out with Johnny Depp? Walter Cronkite they are not. The Golden Globes are a complete farce and should not be - and are not - taken seriously at all. It's just a bunch of underpaid no names that write "contribution columns" for trash newspapers or the magazine at movies theaters, who want to pretend to be taken seriously and hang out with celebrities. As tiresome as he is, Ricky Gervais had it right when he completely dragged the awards show when he hosted. It's all just marketing, on both the studio's and the award's behalf. Yes, of course the GGs don't mean much, and the HFPA is ridiculous. I think I must have just misinterpreted your "industry fix" comment, that's all, because usually when I hear people talk about "the industry" they're talking about people who are actually involved in movie/tv production. That was my only "point," here. But you're definitely right, the HFPA want people to watch their show, especially after last year, and nominating Avatar will help with that, as will the Top Gun: Maverick nomination.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2022 23:04
|
|
|
The Telegraph review, which is the only really negative one yet, is a pretty fun read if you aren't like too emotionally invested in people's opinions of the movie. "Watching the film feel[s] like being waterboarded with turquoise cement." https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/0/avatar-way-water-review-james-camerons-sequel-like-waterboarded/ e: interestingly, it seems like the worst reviews are almost all coming from british critics - the four lowest on Metacritic are from the BBC, Guardian, Telegraph, and Cinevue, a british indie review site. smug n stuff fucked around with this message at 18:57 on Dec 13, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2022 18:51
|
|
|
our very own docevil weighs in, in his typically insightful manner: https://twitter.com/fart/status/1602818313884930048?s=20&t=zVRVKnuKdO6OD6oYR5SdQg
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2022 01:19
|
|
|
teagone posted:Most UK critics didn't. Must be the anti-imperialist messaging Mark Kermode is a marxist lol e: classic mark kermode review here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHeQeHstrsc (singing of The Internationale begins at 7:13)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2022 11:00
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:It's underperforming in China but that's not a surprise given what else is going on. China is the biggest problem for its global box office prospects I think—covid shutting Chinese theaters at release, and then there’s also going to be more competition at the Chinese box office than in the US—Lunar New Year is in mid-January and features a number of big releases.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2022 17:13
|
|
|
Saw this movie last night. The obviously gorgeous visuals weren’t able to make up for the poor pacing and dialogue, to me. Definitely not the worst movie I’ve seen this year (that would be Amsterdam). But there’s an unresolved mystery that I would love to get people ITT’s take on: why does Lo’ak speak with a standard American accent, while Neteyam has a vaguely Latin American accent, even though they were raised in presumably the same linguistic environment?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2022 14:59
|
|
|
The REAL Goobusters posted:You thought that was an American accent? Yes? But regardless of what specific accent either of them is, I think it’s pretty clear Lo’ak and Neteyam speak differently, and I’m curious why. I swear this isn’t just a like oh isn’t this a silly movie thing—it seems like it was a deliberate choice, and I can’t figure out what the thinking was behind it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2022 18:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 09:35 |
|
|
Here's an article to get mad about, if you want https://twitter.com/alex_abads/status/1620104436604616704 (it's a clickbait headline but the article is interesting)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2023 19:33
|
|