Franchises sustained entirely by repetition and advertising and prominence, not because a single person earnestly cares
-
-
Replying to @qntm
Avatar could still be a huge deal if anybody wanted to make it so. But the numbers didn't work, so it was allowed to cease. Lucky us
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @qntm
Avatar slumbers in blessèd franchise-death, and the world is safe for now
2 replies 2 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @qntm
The really interesting forthcoming moment is when they try to cold restart the thing, having not even kept a pilot light lit this whole time
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @qntm
Letting Avatar go completely dark for five years was a wholly deliberate decision. It might not prove to be a good one, obviously
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @qntm
They're banking on being able to cultivate a "Holy smokes, Avatar is finally back!" reaction. They may get it. Marketing is pretty good
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @qntm
Basically I'm saying that the reason Avatar sank without trace is not that nobody cares about it. Although nobody cares about it
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @qntm
Now, precisely why Hollywood made this decision is an entirely orthogonal question. I blame Cameron's timeline for the sequel
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @qntm
Yeah, I get the feeling JC et al kind of assumed that rabid fandoms for sci-fi franchises are just a given, and that they self-sustain
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
So he planned a schedule under the assumption that people'd want another Avatar a decade later, the way they wanted another Terminator
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I think this is more about him carefully fine-tuning a flick and satisfying himself than raw popularity. I could be wrong, though
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.