"See you on the 27th! Bring money!"
The hype is starting to build very slowly for the August 27th re-release of Avatar. There will apparently be some previously unseen footage added to the film to offer an added incentive to going to check it out. It having been a very successful film, even by James Cameron standards, it’s unliklely that there are many out there who would find this to be there first viewing – although I do count my wife as one of them. Are you feeling the need to don your 3D glasses and revisit Pandora? Does the film still hold wonder for you, or was it driven by the novelty of the new wave of 3D that has since worn off?
I understand why the studio is re-releasing the film, but I have no idea why any one would go see this movie twice.
Watching it at home repeatedly is one thing – you can talk on the phone, email your friends, eat a big steak – but heading out to see it again with an even longer running time? JC (and/or Fox) has gone mad with power.
I saw it the first time at home in 2D. The story bored me so much so, I dozed off by the time the humans start bulldozing Pandora. No amount of “interesting” unseen footage would be able to make me like the movie. I do admit I’m curious how it looks in 3D but to pay and sit through that story again…nope. If I got a free ticket. I’d probably stay for a couple of minutes and step out.
Ooooh! Token freebie visit? Ouch! It really is an experience seeing it in 3D, but it’s an experience that will soon be duplicated by too many movies coming out in the next year or so.
BTW: Welcome to The Film Cynics!
Yeaaa…..no. The hubris of re-releasing it less than a year from its original re-release is mind-boggling, too. Between this and the two DVD releases (which I know you’re a big, big fan of hehe), you’d think Cameron/Fox was in a race to grab as much money as they could in a 12-month period, as if all rights to the film expired afterwards. Weird.
Seriously. It makes George Lucas’ franchise milking seem perfectly reasonable by comparison. It also seems rather sloppy an obvious of the marketing folks at Fox. Shouldn’t they have timed out a release like this (which is only 8 minutes longer BTW) until a midway point between the first film and it’s forthcoming sequel? Maybe they do sense the fleeting fascination with 3D and want to get some money while the getting’s good.
No…I don’t think so. Too much money for a movie that I have already seen in 3D at the theater. And just like Fletch said, they’re milking it way too fast! What if they released Titanic with bonus footage, and converted it into 3D???? Interesting thought…haha.
PS: I know I’m changing the subject, but I just saw the movie ‘Lo’ on Netflix Instant play. It was such a strange film, yet interesting. You might like it, and it’s about 80 minutes long!
Alright Josh, Lo is on the list. 80 minutes is more than reasonable to take in a “different” flick.
The kicker will be that not only will they be releasing the special edition bluray of Avatar in time for Christmas, they’ll probably have a whole other release for the extended version of the film.
Even though I enjoyed “Avatar” the first time around, I really have no immediate desire to see it again. The “extra footage” hook doesn’t do much for me either.
Yeah, there’s all kinds of movies that I enjoyed seeing in theatres, but I don’t see me rushing to the theatre to see them all over again. And as an enticement, footage that didn’t fit the film the first time around isn’t very effective.
Uh, no….3D movie price for 8 minutes of footage for N’Bai sex…uh, no!
It didn’t even occur to me that a sex scene makes up part of the 8 minutes of new footage. Yeah, I’ll pass. I’m about as interested in that as I am in a sex scene from Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
N’avi…whatever…
Whatever indeed, Peter!
The answer is no. I saw it twice when it first came out and that’s enough for a while. It’d take a few more years before it’ll look ‘fresh’ and novel again in my eyes.
I think that history will eventually look back at Avatar as a pretty good movie that got on using the technology early. But yes, in the meantime, I think people have had their fill and are happy to move on to the next box office juggernaut.
You know — I remember a time when 3D was popular before… Anyone remember Ice Pirates and Friday The Thirteenth III? (I think it was 3 anyway lol) I distinctly recall NBC showing ICE PIRATES in 3D on TV — and before the movie starts you get this guy dressed up as a robot character from the movie telling the viewers that if you didn’t have a color television and 3D glasses, you would not be able to watch and enjoy this “masterpiece of theatre.”
Wow. I just totally dated myself. Ouch.
Just say NO to Avatar. 3D or otherwise. Anti-American, Anti-Christian, and far far too Neo-Politically correct: making America AND Corporate America out to be “The Great Satan.” (While I might agree a bit with the Corporations) — We all know that it was all about the Native Americans and how the Europeans, and later, Americans treated them, and even still treat them. While this is a decent, well made film, it’s message is a sign of the times. You cannot judge an entire country and her military on the actions of a few. Regardless of their power levels. But that would mean they would have to have common sense. I cannot recall anyone in Hollywood ( with a few exceptions) having anything close to resembling common sense.
Welcome to The Film Cynics, MMI!
I have some hazy recollections of Ice Pirates… I think. I have clearer memories of Captain Power that tried to make use of other gimmicky technology to bring in the viewers. My issues with Avatar have little to do with the politics – the story being told in there has been told hundreds of times before, so I wouldn’t single it out for casting anything in a worse light than movies like Dances With Wolves, Last of the Mohicans or Paul Blart: Mall Cop.My issues with Avatar have related to its marketing which really is on a level unprecendented as far as greed and callous disregard for fans and collectors.
Well I agree on the marketing. You’re mistaken about Last of The Mohicans. Watch it again.
As for the politics in Avatar, as a professional political analyst I cannot ignore something that it is my job to analyze in the first place.
Is that to signify that I was actually on the money about Paul Blart: Mall Cop? That kind of accuracy is impressive considering I was just trying to be glib. Although I would argue that LotM makes a strong stance against the strong arm of the government and the military.
Political analysis is a tricky thing when it comes to movies. It’s hard to suss out where the writer’s intentions end and the director’s begin – I guess with James Cameron doing both, it makes it easier. Then you have to consider the political climate at the time, against when the film was actually conceived. If I’m not mistaken, the idea from Avatar was hatched back in the 90s. Do you think that the film would have been as compelling if told from a different political perspective? Tough question, for sure, but I’d really like to hear your thoughts on the matter.
I have not seen Mall Cop. Sorry. I could not get past 10 mins. Put me to sleep, so you would definitely know more about that one than I would.
I will have to look it up, but from what I understand it was around the same time as the “Contract with America,” give or take a year and a half. It was updated to match current events, like most television shows try to do for the realism aspect. The problem with the movie is that the “marines” represented our military — via they’re all ‘private security,’ IE; Mercenaries bent on making a profit rather than defending — or protecting. An image that many a progressive in recent memory spread and continue to spread like a virus. Thus making it Anti-American. The main villain you might say could be any one main current official in either the previous or current administration. My bet is that the villain is a cross between Carl Rove, Glenn Beck, and a few others. (Personality and perceived manipulation)
With the above in mind, trying to do Avatar from a different political spectrum, say from the right, — just would not work. Simply put, it would be nearly impossible to do, even from liberal conservatives. The Right recognizes that the USA is a Christian nation. While Hollywood is a loud mouthed spoiled child that wants attention so they can say different in every possible way.
However I am unwilling to give Cameron too much credit for “Avatar” — as nothing more than mindless worship of Nature, being “Green”, and so on. Keep in mind though, that the bible says “…blessed is he who has not seen, yet believes…” Avatar’s God was not only physically present in the trees and what not, the people could see their God too by hooking up to the great tree. Who needs faith when you can just attach your hair? The movie is an example of Collective Salvation ( the idea that one cannot gain salvation without saving everyone else at the same time ) run rampant with hatred for America’s military, Corporate America, (Although a lot of these American corps are insidious at best.) and the American People in general — showing all of us to be greedy power and war mongers. Not to mention the movie is anti-Bush and anti-republican — and proudly so.
The story of Avatar is not one of triumph over evil. Its a story of hate. Freely and openly. Ultimately, the movie’s point of view cannot be reproduced for fundamental reasons for far too many Republicans/Conservatives and Independents and some Libertarians simply do not agree with the idealogical mind sets of the left, and of Hollywood. Not to mention the idea of “collective soul-meshing” ( attaching their pony tails to plants and animals.) is a pagan idea. A combination of Druidic and Hinduistic ideas and beliefs. Humans have dominion over all of the Earth. Not the other way around. Suffice it to say, its a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Like a pack of smokes put in boxes that would attract a child to it. Cartoon characters and so on.
I have yet to meet a single Repub, Conserv, Indie, Liberatare who believe that collective soul-meshing, and collective salvation. Christianity to be precise. While I will grant that there are those Americans who fit the above bill to the letter, it’s a minority. Too many on the right simply don’t agree with the Progressive ideas and could not do Avatar. That is not to say however that the right cannot do a movie similar with the same effects, only on the GOP’s side of the fence, with, or without the actual persons involved directly in Politics. Compare the deity in Avatar to how Jesus was portrayed in Mel Gibson’s movie. Avatar is The Passion’s complete and opposite answer. That’s all for now. Its 2 am. I am off to bed. Let me know what you think of my 5 min analysis.
Very insightful! For a five minute analysis, I can tell you’ve given the matter plenty of thought. It sounds to me like you’ve made a persuasive argument for why those on the right had best leave movie making to the professionals. Having to be bound by Christian precepts in the subtext seems to limit one’s options as far as storytelling and reaching a wider audience.
Any thoughts on what a “Tea Party Avatar” would have looked like? Perhaps it would ressemble Aliens?
sorry for word skips…lol. haven’t slept in a whiiiillllleeee
Tea Party Avatar? Whatever you’re smoking my friend, please share so we might all stare up at the dark red sky.. wondering when Hollywood was going to make a GOOD Original movie again; that is NOT in 3D… ugh.
Tea Party Avatar? How about Tales of the Body Snatcher instead? Of course there are fine candidates for that on BOTH sides of the spectrum. We just have to make sure that they’re not in constant contact with Randy Quaid. At least until Post Pro.
Besides no one really wants to see his …marbles, infect anyone else. Although if he and his “lady” end up dead with “odd circumstances” ALA Hong Kong, or Ledger, than perhaps there’s more to his nuances than we thought? Nah. Probably not.