New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Avatar Bump sounds like a computer virus

Kim Hollis: This is two straight weekends in a row that Zoe Saldana has been in middle-of-the-line films. Why is she not getting the Avatar bump that Sam Worthington seems to be receiving?

Josh Spiegel: Is Sam Worthington getting an Avatar bump? I would be skeptical of that claim. If, say, Terminator Salvation had opened to far better business post-Avatar, then I might consider it. As it stands, he's been in one movie since Avatar, said movie was in 3-D, the movie was hyped ever since Avatar, and that movie had the benefit of Worthington being the lead. Saldana has had the weird phenomenon of being in two movies, week after week; one is an ensemble comedy, and she's not featured that heavily. The other is more in line with her previous action movies, but she's not the star of the film (or, rather, that is my presumption from the ads). Let's put Saldana as the lead in an action movie (one, unlike Avatar, where we see her face) and see how she does. Until then, she shouldn't be too worried.

Michael Lynderey: The Avatar bump may inspire casting directors, but I don't think it translates to audience interest in any discernible way. Worthington and Saldana (and Stephen Lang, by the way) will get some good roles in the next few years, but how those films are treated at the box office won't have much to do with Avatar. That's one way in which Avatar is different than Titanic - there's no equivalent to Leo-mania this time around. Just 3-D mania.





Matthew Huntley: I don't think most audiences are even aware Zoe Saldana was in Avatar. Like Michael suggested, that wasn't the type of movie where the actors played a huge role in its box-office success. If Saldana is to become a commodity and household name, she has to have a breakthrough role in which she actually plays a human and acts beyond generic archetypes. Death at a Funeral and The Losers don't give her that chance (not that they're bad movies, per se, but I don't think they really require her to stretch her acting muscles). It may sound sexist or perverted to say so, but I think Saldana would become a much bigger box-office draw (and obtain a popularity bump) if she starred in a movie where she played the sex symbol. That would easily draw her comparisons to Halle Berry and Angelina Jolie. I could easily see Saldana as the next Bond girl. After that, I think it would be just a matter of time before she starts receiving top billing.

Tom Macy: This is a pretty unique situation. She starred in the biggest movie of all time and a lot of people still wouldn't recognize her. Even though we saw Sam Worthington's face I'm much more intrigued by Zoe's future given her performance in Avatar. I thought she was totally solid in Star Trek too. Truly talented pretty faces don't grow on trees (that would be weird).


I think a film has to be crafted to showcase her more for audiences to start to gravitate towards her. And I'm positive she will get more than one chance. Now that they're choosing projects post Avatar it will be interesting to track the careers of both Saldana and Worthington.

Jason Lee: I agree with Tom and Michael. There were no star actors in Avatar - that's not what you noticed. If anything, other directors might have taken note of Saldana's fine work in Avatar, but I doubt many moviegoers knew who she was. As a result, I could see her taking the Amy Adams route: lots of directors eager to work with this young actress due to one breakout performance, which results in better roles and better box office performance (though not necessarily due to her).

Continued:       1       2