Les sums it up pretty well, and the forgetability of James Cameron's Avatar is a reason why Disney's plans for an Avatar land in Animal Kingdom at Walt Disney World never made any sense to me.
And has it only been five years? It seems like a decade ago, it's so receded into memory or mention.
It's only anecdotal, but I don't hear people in my circles talk about how they rewatched Avatar the previous night, or use it in comparison to other films coming out, or list it on their bestest favoritest films.
It may be when the sequels come out that will all seem laughable. But, honestly, I was never so wowed by the original movie that I ever felt the need for sequels, or have any serious excitement about them. Maybe it's just me, but I just don't get it.
Originally shared by +Les Jenkins:
I thought Avatar was a technically impressive movie worth seeing simply for the visuals up on the screen and the good use of 3D, but story-wise it was essentially Dances with Wolves in Space and I think that's a large part of why it's not had as large a cultural impact as you might expect for such a record breaking box office run. It's worth multiple viewings mainly because there's so much to see you can't possibly see it all in one sitting. It's CGI porn at it's best and, much like standard porn, the last reason you're watching it is for the story.
Why ‘Avatar’ Has Been Forgotten Just Five Years Later
James Cameron’s movie was the biggest of all time when it opened five years ago. Five years later, it’s mostly forgotten. Why?
+Daniel Swensen From a genre standpoint, the Harry Potter, Star Wars, Star Trek, LotR, and Alien film franchises still come up frequently in conversation, in and of themselves or by reference. That those are franchises, and, even where the movies have been departed for that long, there's often a business ecosystem around them may make a difference. That Avatar was a singular movie (so far) has maybe caused it to drop off the radar some (aside from perennial sequel discussions and the whole Disney World thing).
That said, here's a list of other genre (depending on your definition) films from 2009:
Star Trek
Inglourious Basterds
HP and the Half-Blood Prince
Fantastic Mr. Fox
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
Sherlock Holmes
Watchmen
GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra
Zombieland
Moon
Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs
Princes and the Frog
Underworld: Rise of the Lycans
Terminator: Salvation
Coraline
I know I've watched several of those again since then, though that might just be me.
No sweat, though, on the grumpy. It sounds like a sore spot.
Sorry, I deleted my comment and am starting my own post so as not to be negative in your stream. The only thing I'd say to that is that most of the franchises with notable "cultural impact" are 25+ years old, with the exception of Harry Potter. Avatar has no book series, no kids' cartoon, no parents to try to get their kids into it. So of course it doesn't have the same foothold. How could it?
But yeah, obviously YMMV, I saw Avatar probably five times… most of the movies on your list, once at most.
+Daniel Swensen 🙂 No problem.
So the question is, does a cultural foothold come because of commercial efforts to create such a thing? Or do to the commercial efforts follow a cultural foothold. Or is it a spiral of both?
Or, more specifically, have most folk forgotten (or simply don't talk much) about Avatar — lacking a cultural foothold — because Cameron and 20th Century Fox didn't push for one (aside from planning sequels several years later and cutting an odd deal with Disney, but just for a park)? I.e., they didn't commercialize it and create books, cartoons, comics, etc., so it's faded into "Oh, yeah, I'd forgotten that" memory? Or was it largely spectacle that didn't have sticking power for most people, and so any nascent attempts to commercialize it simply went nowhere (except for sequels/WDW)?
I don't think there's a single formula, but most often a confluence of elements. For instance, it's often been remarked upon that Star Wars hit at a time when films were generally very dark and we were reeling from Vietnam and people wanted some good old-fashioned escapism. Under different circumstances, it might have just vanished without a trace or become a cult classic.
It may be that the cultural foothold is yet to come, with the sequels and tie-ins you mention — I mean, no one talks much about Marvel's BLADE movies anymore, but now that Marvel's got 10+ films in the pipe and is building a huge cinematic universe, it's kind of tough to get away from it!
+Daniel Swensen And something you alluded to here (and spelled out more completely on your own post on the subject) is that there's a pretty crowded ecosystem out there for properties / franchises to take hold in. It's hard for something new to become a cultural classic in the same way that Star Wars and the DC/Marvel comics properties, etc., are.
That's true even within those franchise ecosystems. In comics, it's very, very rare for a new character to show the lasting power of the classics introduced in the '30s-'70s. In the Disney realm, characters who are only moderately successful practically vanish from sight within months or a few years, squeezed out between core characters and the latest-greatest Princess(es).
So unless Cameron/Fox are going to do a full court press franchise effort on this, coupled with the Disney connection (still scratching head on that), the Avatar the sequels will most likely be big box office hits and then similarly disappear into the vaults/Netflix queues.
+Dave Hill, agreed — and I think it's difficult for films in general to get the kind of cultural traction they used to, because video games tend to resonate a lot more with youth than movies. Movies and games have had a symbiotic relationship since the late 80s / early 90s, but I think we're likely to see more big-budget games being turned into big-budget movies, rather than big-budget movies getting some knock-off games, as has been more common.
I don't think it's impossible that Avatar could still take hold — I guess time and the sequels will tell. I think it really depends on whether they bring something fresh to the table, or if they end up being increasingly-loud, empty spectacle, like the Matrix and Pirates of the Caribbean sequels.
+Daniel Swensen "Increasingly-loud, empty spectacle, like the Matrix and Pirates of the Caribbean sequels" Yes. That.
They seriously have almost the exact same "shape" as movies.
Movie 1: surprisingly decent, considering
Movie 2: A lot of great action sequences, but sort of hopelessly confused and confusing
Movie 3: SPLOSIONS
Not gonna lie, never saw it. Although I do hear people talking about it and referencing it with some frequency–it's just always the punchline.
Can’t help reference Aliens in response to the end
“I say we take off and nuke the whole site from orbit.”
The minerals will be there afterwards.
I never saw Avatar, but I know the story because of this:
http://huff.to/1DnoYhV
I rewatch Avatar every now and then. I skip through some parts to speed it up, since I like the extended cut, and I'm usually watching to enjoy the SFX again, rather than the story.