By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
thismeintiel on 21 June 2018
Edit Thread
HomokHarcos said:
thismeintiel said:

Cameron is a good director, but is very unoriginal.  He really hasn't written anything good since Terminator 2.  And his biggest box office successes have more to do with luck than his films.  Titanic came at the height of Leonardo DiCaprio fever, so teenage girls were seeing the film over and over.  I wouldn't say it's a bad film, but I haven't felt the need to watch it in more than a decade.  I would have personally preferred something based on fact concerning that tragedy, not a fake love story. 

As for Avatar, it was all the 3D hype surrounding the film, not the film itself, that made it a big hit.  That and the newly emerging Chinese market was thirsty for any big spectacle film.  If that film launched today, when there is no 3D hype and the Chinese are more selective, it would probably have done half of its original take.  I mean, it really left no impact on society.  No one knows the characters names, except maybe the general name of the aliens, Navi.  There are no memorable lines from that film, either.  I have yet to see a kid dress up as a Navi for Halloween.  I think it's funny that Cameron thinks he can finish out his days making umpteen sequels to such a forgettable film, as if it will be his SW.  Especially when said sequel is 10 years too late.  Avatar 2 probably won't hit $1.4B, half of the original.

For how much money Avatar grossed it seemed to have barely any cultural impact. It actually seems forgotten today.

Yep. That movie is only mentioned when talking about how much it made. Other than that, it has basically been forgotten. James Cameron has not created a really memorable character since T2. Cameron is very much like Lucas, his work is better with the input of others. Avatar, however, was all him. And when he's mostly by himself, his characters are very one dimensional. Same thing with many of the characters from Titanic, which was all him, as well. They're either evil or good. No nuance to them and 100% forgettable if not for the actual actors who portrayed them.

irstupid said: 
thismeintiel said: 

It's pretty obvious why they like Johnson. He agrees with their politics and he's a good little boy who will put anything into the film they ask for. I guarantee that it was Lucasfilm/Kennedy that wanted the cute animals in the film to sell more toys. Unfortunately for them, it backfired. 

I just don't get why they trusted him with STAR WARS. I just looked at his resume and it's not worth the risk, imo. Is identity politics really worth risking billions?

I mean what his best movies is Looper and Brothers Bloom? your gonna put that on your biggest franchise.

I see his did a couple tv episode that were praised, but TV and movie are completely different. You can always tell when a director is/was a tv director. The movies just come off with a sort of tv/soap opera drama, or this cheesy closeup views that they use on tv. Makes you feel like your watching some tv show season finale versus what should be a big budget holleywood movie.

For SJWs, it's always worth it.  It agreed with their world view, so they were fine with it. They just figured all the SW fans would come to watch it no matter what. They were wrong. 

I do agree with the TV thing. Even the plot of the film (running out of gas in a snail race) would only work as a SciFi show plot, which there it would only take up about 15 mins. After watching it for 20-30 mins, your mind just starts picking apart the obvious flaws in the plot.