‘Avatar: The Way of Water’ Trailer Does Ryan Gosling’s Classic ‘SNL’ Sketch Justice

It has been over a decade since James Cameron Avatar became an international sensation. And what a decade it has been. Showbiz has transformed many times since we first went to Pandora to meet the Na’vi and there are a lot of questions about how this sequel, the trailer for which arrived this week, will land in a post-MCU reality. However, never bet against James Cameron – this man created Titanic, Aliens and terminator before Avatar, so he knows his way around the movies. But does he know the graphics?

This question became relevant in 2017, when Saturday Night Live delivered the kind of kebabs that even a filmmaker of Cameron’s caliber can’t ignore. Ryan Gosling starred in the digital short as a man pushed to the brink by AvatarWho’s font choice, as he notes, is basically the Papyrus font. If you haven’t seen it, you’ve missed one of the highlights of Gosling’s career.

You couldn’t ask for a simpler concept, but it really depends on Gosling’s commitment and his friends’ attempts to reason with him. When Chris Redd tries to point out that the Avatar the police are not enough Papyrus, Gosling completely loses it in a way that would make Holland March his devious and deceitful character in The good onesseem reasonable by comparison.

And now that we have our first real look at Avatar: The Way of the Waterwe can see if Gosling’s crusade had an impact or if the powers that be Avatar stuck with their original design “like a thoughtless child wandering through a garden picking leaves.”

See also

Hmmm. Well it’s not identical. Certainly not Papyrus, although it seems to be pretty close in spirit to the first font, so it’s unclear how Gosling will feel about it. Still, it looks like the design team has pivoted from the original logo at some point in the last twelve years, so it’s a small win and hopefully the writer’s room to SNL feel that justice is done. But again, the assessment from 2017 might still hold true today: “whatever they did, it was NOT!” SUFFICIENT!”

Comments are closed.