Avatar is coming out in the cinema….again….
Less than a year after Avatar hit the big screens and tried to prove that 3D wasn’t all naff gimmicks and balloon like people, it’s coming back with a “Special Edition.” And, of course, it’s returning in 3D.
“The biggest adventure of all time.” Well, I’m taking issue with that for starters. But, is it just me or does this smack of “let’s squeeze as much money as we can out of this one before something bigger and better comes along?” Don’t get me wrong, I’m one of the few bloggers who didn’t trash Avatar, but having recently decided that I actually prefer it in 2D, the part of me that wont stop ranting about why 3D technology is ruining cinema is getting all agitated again.
If Avatar wasn’t a 3D movie there is no way it would be getting a second cinema release. It just wouldn’t happen. I’ve got nothing against Special Editions, Director’s Cuts or whatever you want to call them, in fact I have a few of them on my DVD shelf, but that’s where the re-jigged versions belong. They’re made for the uber-fans who will actually notice that a particular character stayed on screen for 3 seconds longer than before and raised his eyebrow in a slightly different way to how he did in the original cut. These people tend to remain indoors, where they have the safety of other important geek tools: slo-mo, pause and zoom.
Which brings me back to my point. Avatar isn’t getting a second coming because this new version is so spectacular it needs to be seen on the big screen. For starters it doesn’t have that kind of fanbase. It’s going back on the big screen because they can charge twice as much to sit you there in a pair of those Carl Fredrickson glasses, and if they whip the hype up again like they did before then some people just might do it. (Incidently, if you take the glasses of during the showing, the screen looks very similar to how it would look if I take my own glasses off during any 2D movie).
Call me cynical, but this isn’t about bringing a new interpretation to a movie which would benefit from a few extra scenes. It’s about greedily squeezing even more money out of the highest grossing film in cinema history.
The Stories That Really Mattered 
You’re right, its a cash grab. The extra scenes are a thinly veiled excuse, and I think that most people will see that. And I agree with you no 3D, I hate it. But Avatar is the exception to the rule as I actually quite liked the 3D. It wasn’t distracting me from the experience and opened the world up.
For that reason, many people found Avatar to be one of those movies which should be experienced in the theater. And that’s the reason people will go,; to see it in theaters again, not because of any added footage.
ianthecool
August 28, 2010
Ian: I’m totally with you. I thought Avatar was the first film I’d seen in 3D where the effect added rather than detracted from the movie. But at the same time, when I saw it in 2D, I didn’t miss the 3D at all.
Avatar is definitely a cinema movie, but I think it does translate to DVD. I guess we can’t blame them for realising what they’ve got and making the most of it, but it does just seem so callously greedy.
Katie
August 30, 2010
At least when Lucas did, he waited 20 year. Cameron is actually acting as if Avatar is on the same level as a movie that has been beloved for years, but it’s only been 9 months and most people didn’t even really like it. I also hope that it being released in theaters this year doesn’t make it eligible for the Oscar again, because that would be even worse than just wanting more money.
Darby O'Gill
September 11, 2010
I doubt it’ll get back into the Oscar running. Thanks for your comment Darby
Katie
September 12, 2010