Something I must disagree with you on is that fact that you said film today have a shorter time at the theaters. I’m not so sure if that’s true. Since films used to be shown in double features with others, no one could ever be sure just how well a movie itself was doing, and the theaters changed out their movies quite frequently. Maybe I’m wrong here (which is very possible), but I think many films are in the theaters longer now than they were back in the day.
That being said, I won’t bow down to James Cameron ever… ;)
Savvy
Ryan Braithwaite
Perhaps this blog may have been better suited last year with The Dark Knight or perhaps earlier with Titanic, but with Avatar’s monumental success, it seems this is the perfect time to reflect on the pros and cons of what has and will define success for films both in the past and in the future.
Much has been made in the past several weeks that despite Avatar out-grossing Titanic in dollar value worldwide and here in the states that perhaps it shouldn’t count because of inflation with both ticket prices and, oh dear god, the price of sweets at the concession stand. And Avatar has benefited greatly from the price of 3D screenings, but even so it has its disadvantages, just Gone With The Wind has its advantages and disadvantages.
Look, Gone With The Wind has always been, and in all likelihood always will, be the king of ticket sales. For those of you who subscribe to this side of the coin, let it be known that, not to get Jack Sparrow on you, but I was on your side. But until I looked at the entire history of cinema and technological advances it’s made (I’m not talking about special effects) both Avatar and Gone With The Wind are pretty equal.
The disadvantage GWTW has is that it was made 70 years ago and did not have to contend with inflation and overpriced tickets. What advantage it does have however is that it was released at a time before Beta, VHS, HBO, DVD, Blu-Ray, and any website that lets you view and download the film for free. (Not to mention that little theater in Georgia that still, to this day, plays it everyday) That alone has allowed GWTW to continue grossing and accumulating tickets that any other film cannot contend with. (Citizen Kane, where you at?) Even Titanic has the advantage over Avatar because back in ‘97 few of us were familiar with downloading movies over the net. We’re talking about the “Golden Age of Dial-Up,” pre-historic by today’s standards. The same thing I’ve mentioned goes for the almighty Star Wars (I refuse to refer to it as “Star Wars: Episode IV-A New Hope”), once again people had no choice but to go to the theater again and again because it wasn’t available at home.
So, despite the disadvantage of inflation in ticket prices Titanic, The Dark Knight and Avatar have all earned their place in history because of the quality of the work in all aspects (writing, directing, acting, SFX, etc.) TDK and Avatar have beaten the odds against downloaders, shorter times in theaters (as compared to the classics I mean) and VHS, DVD and Blu-Rays.
So bow down, Cameron is the man. The only director, IMO, who has a clean slate and has never delivered a film that disappoints, (granted I never saw Piranha 2, but everyone had to start somewhere.) In the film community, if anyone deserves a BJ that was historic and written in the stars, it’s Cameron (jk :P a little sick humor for you, I’m sorry.)
I guess the point I’m trying to make in this blog is the age-old cliche that the more things change, the more they stay the same. Avatar has earned it’s top spot.