Will Avatar 2 Be A Failure?

[torukmakto4]

Originally Posted by discounthobo159

I agree with this. The first Avatar - although a real feat for digital effects and motion detection - the story line was about as bland as a ryvita cracker.

That is an opinion, and I don't agree with it. There is absolutely nothing about Avatar (2009) that is, in any way, "bland" to me or ever has been. It is classical/monomythical, and highly effective for doing it well and using the strengths of those traditions to their best, like Titanic before it, but it is absolutely the inverse of "bland". More like your analogical cracker was full of ghost pepper.

If you really do see it that way yourself, that is fine, but since this thread is about the prediction of Avatar 2+ success, this position also happens to be the one of an internet minority that has failed repeatedly at predicting the success of Cameron's massive late era films and are mostly just salty that they did succeed and the masses don't agree with their views.

Special effects, please. Given the success, and specifically the extremely protracted success of Avatar over multiple months in its theatrical run (similar to Titanic once again, which was not terribly effects-driven) it does not fit the pattern of a film that pivots on flash no matter how hard anyone tries to deny that Avatar's storyline worked.

Originally Posted by discounthobo159

I mean as much as I like how the film looks, the plot is undeniably (dont argue with me on this people) a rip-off fern gully/ dances with wolves.

I'm sorry, but I am going to argue. That is a played-out, battered generic argument which fails to say anything of true merit, because it is a reductio ad absurdem. It holds water at a paragraph or less summary's level of generality discarding all identifying and unique elements. There are also far greater number of filmed and written works going back to the earliest recorded history that contain the same archetypes than just these three, and given that, singling out and faulting Avatar among them all is daft. Either the archetype is worth demeriting most all of them (definitely modern examples like Dances with Wolves, and before anyone ever says Poca-you know what that was released after Project 880/Avatar was written) for being present, or it is not. And the correct answer is that it is not. The archetype is an archetype for a very good reason i.e. it works.

This is to say nothing of expanding the criticism to archetypes in general which would imply faulting nearly every blockbuster and many classics i.e. Star Wars is a Campbell monomyth, Titanic is Romeo and Juliet on a boat, and the like.

Originally Posted by discounthobo159

Typical American dude goes in and does what the natives do *best*. Which is ironic for a film that happens to have an anti-colonialist message.

Short version, nothing about him that is "American-ish/Western" is actually critical to his success as a hero, aside from the obvious tactical advantage of being a defector with inside knowledge on the alien enemy.

I just got into this in another place recently about "cultural superiority" implications and message dissonance in "rebellion from colonialism" storylines and the conclusion was more or less that the root of this perception is audience bias and hypersensitivity to this notion, and that it is arbitrary and idealistic/unrealistic to demand of writers that a protagonist never cross cultural lines because that might be misinterpreted. It is also overly idealistic to expect cultures to be presented always as a black/white value judgement and not as a series of independent strengths and weaknesses, which can include aspects like, say, Jake's USMC training having merit that prepares him for unforeseen challenges.

Originally Posted by discounthobo159

Also people keep saying that JC would never let Avatar 2 be a failure, and has a "perfect track record" on films. ermmmmm who directed Piranha and Piranha Part Two: The Spawning? Go on. Tell me. JC isn't perfect and neither was Avatar.

Check your facts here. JC is not involved or credited on Piranha 1. He did not direct Piranha 2. He was hired, attempted to clean up the mess that was going on at the time (I recall it involved him breaking into the editing room) and was then quickly fired, and yet was credited.

Originally Posted by discounthobo159

What I mean by "bringing more to the table then special effects" - is well... exactly that.

That's what JC did with Avatar.

If I cared about special effects I would be on a forum for some comicbook explosion fest flick. Instead I am here 8 years later for something that hit me like a thousand freight trains at once.

Originally Posted by discounthobo159

George Lucas, hired a whole crew of a** kissers to work with him on Star Wars: The Clone Wars and look how that turned out? We got 2D characters and Jajabinks

Cameron is not George Lucas, and you neglect to mention in your Star Wars example that the films following ANH are generally much better regarded and much better constructed than the reboot prequal trilogy, and that is where Avatar is, in Star Wars's 1979.