Quick Twitter Thought

Avatar, James Cameron's first film since Titanic, had initial screenings last night. However, since the film has what is known as a review embargo, no critic is supposed to post or release his/her initial reviews until a specified day, which for Avatar is the day of release. As a result, true "reviews" are few and far between with most writers attempting to stay on the studio's (20th Century Fox) good side. Twitter messages, however, are abundant and it seems as if one of the larger news services, Reuters, is picking that up as their story:

"If initial reviews and Twitter buzz are any indication, it may be money well spent for film studio 20th Century Fox."

"Twitter lit up with comments from journalists leaving the tightly guarded premiere. "James Cameron is a freakin' genius! I can't say much but wow, I loved it," wrote Alex Billington of the movie website FirstShowing.net.

The London Guardian's Mark Brown wrote on Thursday that "Avatar" was "really much, much better than expected, (it) looked amazing and the story was gripping -- if cheesy in many places."

"The terrible film that some had been anticipating had not materialized. It was good," Brown wrote."

I was struck by this line. Since Reuters isn't able to report on enough true reviews to make their story worthwhile, they went to the next best thing Twitter. It is them openly acknowledging that Twitter is the place to go for news. Does this also mean that Tweets will open a new avenue for critics to get their voices unofficially heard prior to the the lifting of the release embargo? If so, this is an important and interesting development for the film community to see how studios come down on writers breaking embargo on via Twitter in the future.

EDIT: The embargo has been lifted. Does it have anything to do with the Tweets?