LogFAQs > #922099494

SaccharineSmile posted...

Avatar's push for 3d, cinema screen/projector innovation, groundbreaking cgi, motion capture, etc. directly affected out culture in many ways. There are plenty of blockbuster movies with no cultural impact whatsoever, but Avatar is not one of them.

Lord of the Rings already beat Avatar in the bolded categories almost a decade earlier. In fact, part of the reason I hated Avatar at the time was due to certain airheaded critics gushing over Avatar's mocap like LotR had never existed. As for 3D, I suppose you can consider it 'cultural impact' to put the squeeze on theaters to accommodate a zombified gimmick that people aren't much more excited for now than they were in the 1950's. I can't make an educated comment on cinema screen / projector innovation, so I won't knock its importance.

The problem with Avatar leaving no 'cultural impact' isn't just a problem compared to other blockbusters; it's a problem compared to nearly every other movie James Cameron ever made. Think of Aliens, Terminator, Titanic: genuinely think of how deeply these movies wove themselves into the cultural fiber. They were inventive, they were quotable, they gave us ogles of memories (for the record, I loathed Titanic when it released and part of me still does, but I'm not above giving it its due credit). They told you a rich story and didn't just fall back on the pretty visuals to do so.

If Avatar had come from any other director, I might not be inclined to be so critical of it. But when a story as uninspired as Avatar's comes from the man who previously gave our culture such huge inspirations, it sticks out like a sore thumb.
---

Simple questions deserve long-winded answers that no one will bother to read.