AVATAR Update

Opening Weekend

It's official: Avatar is the #1 movie in America. It opened up with a cool $73 million--not spectacular, but slightly more than I expected. My theater only had about 50 people attend the midnight show on Thursday. Friday was slow all up until the evening when I left work. Business picked up on Saturday. All day we had people calling in, asking if the show was sold out. It was funny to me because people didn't call the theater this much for New Moon, and when they did call, their worries were valid. James Cameron did such a great job marketing this picture that people thought it would be huge, like the second coming of Star Wars, when this wasn't the case at all. People seemed flabbergasted, almost disappointed when they came into the theater early to buy tickets for a later screening and didn't have to contend with long lines and sold out shows.

As Saturday became Sunday, the traffic increased. Not only that, the crowds seemed to be more enthusiastic. I remember feeling sorry for Cameron during Friday because no one (aside from my managers) gave any indication that they liked the movie. They just shuffled to the bathroom with their eyes glazed over from 3+ hours of 3D. But by Sunday, our matinee totals nearly doubled Saturday's, and crowds couldn't wait to get their seat. For first time since I heard James Cameron was making another movie, you could actually feel the excitement surrounding this film. The masses showed up for a good time, and they didn't leave unsatisfied. Both showings in the big screen enjoyed applause from the crowd. People were talking about it as soon as they came out of the doors. "Wow, that was really good!"

Either the people in the Sunday matinees were feeling blessed from their morning mass, or they were just excited having an excuse not to watch the Bears get pummeled again. Here's my theory: The people who came out to the Friday and Saturday shows were more of your die-hard Cameron fans like myself, who just couldn't wait to see the movie. They had their hopes set so high, there was no way it could reach them. The Sunday crowd consisted more of families and larger groups, so right there you've already got a higher level of excitement. But then when you consider that these folks are just looking to see a matinee for family entertainment on a Sunday afternoon, without all the expectations and preconceived notions, their margin for enjoyment is exponentially larger than that the previous crowds'.

Ya Know What Really Grinds My Gears??

I myself still haven't seen Avatar, otherwise this post would be a review. I have however, seen a good chunk of the movie from doing 'walk-throughs,' and I've come to two conclusions:

A. I still don't like CG

B. And I don't like 3D

Right at the beginning of the film, Cameron tries to 'wow' you with this insane corridor shot consisting of about 50 different levels of depth. If you plan on seeing this movie, heed my advice: wait to put on the glasses. This shot will hurt your eyes and give you a headache. I'm sure it would look great if your eyes were adjusted to the 3D already...but they're not. And instead, it's like getting stabbed in the eye. Although there are some beautiful scenes in the film, the 3D barely enhances the experience. As I mentioned earlier, 3 hours of 3D is 2-much. If you want to see the 3D in IMAX, I'm guessing that would be awesome. But if its just in your garden-variety theater, try to find a screen playing it in 2D, or wait to see if the studio releases it in 2D. Otherwise you'll spend half the time cleaning your glasses and squinting to distinguish the background from the foreground.

And lastly, my rant about CG. Ya know what really grinds my gears?!

CGI. Computer-Generated Imagery.

Here's what I want to know: If they can make the characters' faces look so realistic, why did they have to skimp on the body? I mean, seriously. The faces look unbelievable. But then the body looks like a bad instructional video from the 90's. They're just blue and lifeless. They don't move anything like a human! And don't tell me "that's because they're not human." They are played by human actors. If they can motion capture the faces, why couldn't they do it with the body as well?! Is it because they're supposed to be 10 feet tall? That's no excuse. They've been making people look tall and short for as long as there's been cinema--they could've done this and done it well. But instead they chose not to. Maybe to save time or money...I don't know. All I do know is that it makes me much less excited to see this movie. I don't care how good this movie is, it will never be great because of that one major flaw. I can totally buy in to the rest of the film. It all looks fantastic and feels like a James Cameron film. You feel like you're in Pandora. But then you see the na'vi and the whole fantasy is ruined. It's like having a dream about the girl of your dreams, and then right before you're about to score, she turns into your mom. Thank you, Buzz Killington.

AVATAR Preview

Tonight at the Paramount Theater we open James Cameron's epic sci-fi adventure, Avatar. Starring Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana, Sigourney Weaver, Michelle Rodriguez and Giovanni Ribisi, Avatar is the story of a marine and...ah who the hell cares, it's f***in' James Cameron! He not only directed two of the greatest sequels in the history of cinema (Aliens & Terminator 2), but also Titanic, which not only took home 11 Academy Awards, but became the highest domestic grossing film of all-time, with $600+ million! (not accounting for inflation) It's no wonder there is so much hype and such high hopes for this movie.

More than just direct Avatar, Cameron wrote the entire story himself--a project 14 years in the making. So what took him so long to film it? Get this: He wanted to wait until the technology would allow him to create photorealism. THANK YOU! FINALLY, someone in Hollywood with half a brain, who actually considers the audience and sacrifices short-term profits for long-term quality. Hallelujah!

Cameron has used CGI in his films before, but he used it sparingly, and when he did, he did it very well. How can anyone forget the scene where the T-1000 comes out of the checkered floor and stabs the security guard right through the eye? Classic! Or how 'bout during Titanic, when Jack and Rose are at the top of the ship while everyone's plunging to their death, bouncing off of propellers and hand rails like it's going out of style? That's right, no one. Those iconic scenes are forever etched into our psyches. And unlike today's superhero shitfests, he didn't rely only on computer-generated special effects. He actually sank ships and blew up buildings. The set for Titanic included a 17-million-gallon tank of water.

People just don't know how to feel about Avatar. We knew Aliens, Terminator and Titanic would be mega hits. But an original story about blue aliens? Immediately red flags go off in my head. Dreadful visions of Battlefield Earth, Jar Jar Binks and blue penis spring to mind. Does Cameron hold enough sway with the public as he does with Hollywood? Can we keep the faith, or are we all too weary of boys who cry Beowolf?

So like Hitler, I was very skeptical about the CG characters. That was until I saw this next behind-the-scenes preview....

Motion capture is a relatively new technology for filmmaking. Sinbad: Beyond the Veil of Mists (possibly the most expensive direct-to-video movie ever made) was the first feature length film created exclusively using motion capture. Robert Zemeckis brought it into the mainstream in 2004 with The Polar Express, and has continued using it ever since--his latest effort being Disney's A Christmas Carol featuring Jim Carrey. Many have complained though, (myself included) that his films look too cartoonish and unrealistic. While some like to immerse themselves in the computer-generated fantasy world, others would rather play a video game than watch it.

If Zemeckis pioneered motion capture, Peter Jackson mastered it in The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers and The Return of the King. He and Andy Serkis received all kinds of accolades and recognition for their portrayal of Gollum. I think it was a great concept considering the character's huge role in the books, and therefore his involvement throughout the film, but I still didn't like it. I'm just not a fan. I've had some pretty awful experiences with CG sidekicks and blue aliens alike.

But hey, all-blue is not all bad...

It should be no surprise that people aren't taking to Avatar immediately. It won't have the record-breaking first weekend that New Moon had (we sold out 2,000 seats for the midnight shows a week in advance; Avatar opens at midnight having sold less than 100 presale tickets at our location). If you remember though, Titanic spent an unprecedented 16 weeks at #1--absolutely unheard of in modern cinema. Cameron is hoping Avatar will perform in a similar fashion, accumulating buzz and box office numbers as the weeks go on. I think it will do fairly well, but not to the extent it's being hyped. It has some real stiff competition this holiday with The Princess and the Frog still fresh atop the pile and Robert Downey Jr.'s Sherlock Holmes coming out on Christmas Day. Also being released that day are two Oscar worthy heavyweights: Nine and Up In the Air. And don't count out the rest of the pack--A Christmas Carol has been surprisingly consistent, as has Michael Oher's biopic, The Blind Side. The film may pick up steam if he wins the NFL's 2009 Rookie of the Year (keep an eye out for him in the Bears game this Sunday).

If you get a chance to see Avatar, comment back and let me know what you thought. I'm interested to hear your reaction to the blue aliens.