Avatar: Unfortunate Victim of the Titanic Effect

As you might have already heard, Avatar has smashed box office records, overtaking Titanic with a current worldwide gross of $1.8 billion as of this post. As it currently enjoys an 82% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, the perceived experience of seeing Avatar in an 3D screening has seemingly overpowered some of the reported flaws of the film. Even if you actively try, you won't get far on any movie site or blog without mention of the film. I even sat through a 43 minute promotion of the film on Bones, one of my favorite television shows. Yet, in spite of the good reviews and constant promotion, I have no desire to see it.

Now, I can understand its importance in the film-making industry both in critical terms and in the pop culture zeitgeist. James Cameron is an excellent director who has managed to again create a film that is appealing to many demographics of movie-goers, making the film a must-see just to be current with the times. His use of the 3D effects to create the fictional world of Pandora has been lauded as the best aspect of the film and groundbreaking for the use of CGI in film. Even though its been said by many, including our own Digger, that the plot of the film is flimsy, a mere mashup of previous films, it obviously has not hurt the film financially.

So why don't I want to see this film, likely one that will be referenced and copied for years to come? Having heard so much positive about the movie over the past several weeks, I am almost positive if I see it, the over hyped film would fall flat especially with the numerous shortcomings I have read about. While I knew of a new Cameron movie prior to its release, I did not have a concept of the story or concept until the aforementioned Bones episode. As such I was not awaiting its release breathlessly as I was with Dark Knight and that has translated to a total sense of apathy about the movie, even a month after its release.

The final reason is something that I touched on in Digger's review: the Titanic effect. Basically, if there is a movie I do not want to see to begin with that goes on to win awards, critical praise, and break box office records, my desire to see it wanes accordingly. It's essentially a negative correlation between a movie's attention and the likelihood of it getting my money. Does this make any sense for a self-proclaimed film fan and someone who "writes" (and I use the term loosely) for a movie site? Admittedly, it does not. But that's how I feel on the subject.

I liken myself more to being a film slob, one who enjoys watching cheese-ball fair more likely to win a Razzie to an Oscar-winning film about a lonely doctor in the Sahara that is a critical favorite. Now, eventually I will probably get around to watching the high-brow films that I tend not to see just as I will probably get around to watching Avatar. But for now, I would rather spend $8 to see The Wolfman over Avatar.