Why should I blog for Sports Page Network?
Use your current website or we can provide you a free website and we will host it for free!
We want you to focus on writing, while we focus on bringing sponsors and advertisers to you.

View Video
Does Avatar Really Deserve $2 Billion? Does it Really Deserve the Oscar for Best Picture.
The year was 1997, the movie was Titanic.  Made on a very high budget with two fresh, young leads and a director who had predominately given us some great Sci-fi, Titanic was hardly a sure thing when it was released.  But unlike the historically epic-fail of a ship it was based on, Titanic went on to clean up at the Oscars and earn the highest gross of any movie (when not adjusted for inflation.  Otherwise, its Gone With the Wind, another romantically centered, period epic).  To this day, some people don't get how Titanic did it.  I don't think its hard to understand.  Even as a naive, immature junior high boy, I enjoyed the movie when I saw it in theatres (and not because of the drawing scene that snuck its way into a PG-13 movie, you pervs).

Titanic essentially as it all.  It has a rich, historic base and feels very authentic on this part.  The ship looks fantastic, even today.  The movie also ends in a very Roland Emmerich disaster movie fashion.  People are screaming and dying, things are blowing up and sinking in freezing cold water.  Everyone loves a little destruction.  And yes, at the movies heart is this romance that goes beyond social classes (not to mention cross-cultural).  At the very least, Jack and Rose's romance seemed less boring and forced than your standard rom-com characters.  Also, I have to mention the music.  No, not the Celine Dion song but the Academy Award winning score by James Horner.  With its almost Celtic flair, the music truly is beautiful.

Now, we have Avatar, a movie by the same director, James Cameron.  Its funny that I originally had a post entitled "Should you Care about Avatar?" when now that doesn't seem to be a question at all.  At the time, I feared Avatar might be under appreciated but it would seem, in a cruel twist of irony, Avatar has become over appreciated.  I liked Avatar.  I saw it twice, once in 3D.  But seriously, I'm not seeing the big deal.

Yes, the 3D is fancy (and also brings in more money than traditional theatre tickets which could partially explain the abnormal gross this movie has had).  The effects are pretty and all, but does it seem that much better than Transformers 2's effects?  Or, dare I say, the top video game cutscenes out there?  And even still, good effects does not a great movie make (and yes, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, The Matrix, and even Titanic were about much more than their special effects).

If Avatar is supposed to be a romance, its alright but hardly anything spectacular, original, or surprising.  If its supposed to be a thinly veiled critique on current politics and wars, its awfully one-sided and far-fetched.  If its an eco-friendly, environmental movie, then its actually not as forced as they typically are.  Still, the world of Pandora is a bit different than ours (unless we have yet to discover how to plug into earth) and its hypocritical in the fact that its taken great advances in technology for this movie to even be possible.  Finally, the music, while pretty, its basically a sampler mix of everything James Horner has done over the past 20-30 years.

Then there is all the talk about it winning best picture at the Oscars.  I never expected this to actually happen until it won the Golden Globe for best picture.  Its not the best movie of 2009 (I would personally say Hurt Locker...or just about any of the movies nominated for best picture).  Its not even the best Sci-Fi movie of 2009.  That goes to Star Trek which had more interesting characters, a much sharper script, a better villain, more emotional moments, and just as pretty of effects.  Seriously people, its not even James Cameron's best movie (I'd go with Terminator 2).

Now I liked Avatar and it is an impressive, roller coaster spectacle.  Maybe that's enough for it to be the highest grossing movie of all time.  But it isn't enough for people to say its the best movie of the year (much less all time).  Great movies are often defined and remembered by specific moments.  Even Titanic had its "King of the World" and "Never let go Rose".  Cheesy?  Sure, but don't tell me you haven't stood on top of something, spread out your arms, and shouted out you're the king of the world.  What's to be remembered here?  I see you?  You're like a baby?  When the flash has faded and our eyes re-adjust, what will we really remember about Avatar?

Well...I've seen better movies. But Avatar is my favorite movie of all time. I just LOVE this movie and I really don't know why.

Now, I'm going to stop analyzing why I love Avatar so much and go see it again and be entertained like I have never been before.
Apart from learning the difference between "its" and "it's," the author here should do a bit more research. The Best Picture nominees include "The Blind Side," and if you think that that film could/should beat Avatar (or The Hurt Locker, or any other acclaimed nominee), you come across as being, well, barking mad.

Forgive my ad hominem. Your taste in film may be a bit unusual, 3-D might not have made an impact on you (though the video game comment is a little strange: what games have you been playing that have film-quality graphics...?), and you are perfectly entitled to your opinions about films, James Cameron and James Horner. (Keep in mind, though, that there are a lot of people who don't think Horner has written anything original since the '70s.)
"Deserve"?

The $2 billion is EARNED. I don't see how you can see it any other way.

You didn't quite "get it", but apparently over 100 million people did.

It was a 2:40 experience (that you were willing to experience twice). It's not a movie's job to solve world piece or do anything beyond entertain you for that 2:40. Avatar succeeds brilliantly.

I apologize for the typos. Never was very consistent at proof reading my stuff (it is a blog after all). And I agree completely that the Blind Side doesn't deserve Best Picture, but its only on there because the nominees were extended to 10 (which is something I might give an entirely separate post for. Avatar has a legitimate shot at winning. I'm not sure it should. I feel that by the end of my post I agreed that Avatar has maybe earned its $2 Billion. I'm more so baffled at the fact that its this movie that did it and not something like The Dark Knight or Iron Man or other recent blockbusters (outside of the 3-D). Maybe I came off overly negative. As far as entertaining me for the full 2:40, I'm not sure it did. It lost me here and there a few times. But hey, thanks for the comments.
I found Avatar more moving than Star Trek, probably because I think I've seen so much Trek that it truly is hackneyed (though it was interesting and fun to watch how well the cast mimicked the Original Series actors). For people new to the Trek franchise, the "reboot" must have been more exciting than it was for me. Especially when Kirkland has to get Spock emotional to solve a crisis... the exact same scenario occurs in an episode. But I digress.

When you ask "Did Avatar Deserve $2 Billion?" you are essentially asking "Do People Have the Right to Enjoy Film?" An absurd, condescending, generally bigoted question, regardless of your opinion on the movie.
To TM,

You are completely right on the title. I mostly put the deserve in there to attract attention. You caught me...congrats!

As far as Star Trek, I've watched the original movies ever since I was a kid. I was a big fan of them going into the new one which is part of the reason I liked it so much. Still, I can understand how that could have the opposite effect.
Comments :
Name :
          
Email :
URL :
Security Question :
81 + 7 =
Comments :
Allowed Tags :<A>, <B>, <I>, <BLOCKQUOTE>