Disney announces Avatar 2 title, premieres teaser trailer
At CinemaCon, Avatar producer Jon Landau discussed the “separate, but cohesive” strategy of the franchise
Film News Disney
During Walt Disney Studios’ CinemaCon presentation Wednesday morning, Avatar producer Jon Landau presented the forthcoming teaser trailer for the long-awaited first (of many) sequels to the 2009 blockbuster, entitled Avatar: The Way Of Water. Ahead of the clip, Landau discussed writer-director James Cameron’s strategy in rolling out the films while Cameron remained back in Wellington, New Zealand, where he’s overseeing completion of the film in time for its opening day on December 16, 2022.
Landau started by announcing the forthcoming re-release of the original Avatar, a decision that’s as shrewd as it probably is necessary; there are literal teenagers who weren’t born when the first film came out, so it makes sense to re-acquaint moviegoers with Pandora, or at least refresh their memories. But in his prepared statements, Landau leaned heavily on the timelessness of Cameron’s storytelling. “One of the strengths of Jim Cameron’s scripts are always the universal and relatable themes that he weaves into them,” he said. “And there’s no more relatable theme down at the center of each of our four sequels than the Sully family, Jake and Neytiri’s family.”
Given the repeated shifts of structure and the addition of sequels, Landau smartly emphasized the standalone nature of the films, as well as their interconnectivity—an approach that also gives the filmmakers an out if Cameron’s gamble doesn’t pay off and the studio (or audiences) decide that they don’t want any more Avatar movies before he completes the story cycle. “Each sequel will play out as a standalone movie. Each story will come to its own conclusion, and each movie will deliver audiences fulfilling emotional resolutions in each and every film,” he said. “However, when you look at that as a whole, the journey across all four movies will create an even larger, connected, epic saga.”
Landau then introduced a pre-recorded statement from Cameron himself. He opened by empathizing with exhibitors—an expected sentiment, since CinemaCon’s focus is on the theatrical experience—before pivoting into the technical achievements, and requirements, that will be involved in showcasing The Way Of Water in theaters. “Jon and I are here to work with you—we’re your partners,” Cameron said. “And the best way we can do that is by delivering content that is a must-see experience at the center.”
“With the first Avatar, we set out to push the limits of the big screen,” he recalled. “With the new Avatar films, we’re pushing those limits even farther with 3D, with high dynamic range, with high frame rate, higher resolution, and a much greater reality in our visual effects.” Despite his aptitude for employing cutting-edge technology, Cameron insisted that his effort was paired seamlessly with solid storytelling and great performances. “While I’m making a movie, it’s working with the actors that I find the most rewarding,” he admitted. “And it’s been an amazing adventure to explore Pandora again with our friends Zoe Saldana, Sam Worthington, Sigourney Weaver, and Stephen Lang, not to mention our new cast members Kate Winslet, Cliff Curtis, and this incredible group of extremely talented teenagers, all of whom quickly distinguished themselves in their roles. We wanted our return to Pandora to be something really special.”
“Every shot was designed for the biggest screen, the highest resolution, and the most immersive 3D available. We set out once again to push the limits of what cinema can do. And I think we pulled it off. I hope we pulled it off. I hope when you see the film in December that you’ll agree.”
Dolby provided 3D glasses to showcase the film’s dimensionalized storytelling, and whether or not you find 3D to be an enjoyable or necessary addition to the cinematic experience, it’s clear that technology has improved substantially both in the recording and the projection of those images. The clip didn’t offer a lot in the way of story, mostly revisiting the landscapes (and airscapes and seascapes…) of Pandora, with Worthington’s character Jake Sully and Saldana’s Neytiri at its center. But scenes involving flying, and even underwater, offered glimpses of Cameron’s “Volume”-based filmmaking in unprecedented environments such as underwater.
Without an optimal seat and condensed to a 90-second clip, it’s hard to tell how much of, say, underwater performance capture will mesmerize on the screen in a longer story. But the amount of detail in every image, the vividness of the characters and brightness of each image, offered a perhaps overdue reminder that Cameron always uses his full ass when it comes to throwing himself into projects—and with the muscle of Weta Digital bringing those images to life, Avatar: The Way Of Water promises to be a visual and technical odyssey, whether or not anyone ends up wanting three or four more of these movies after waiting so long for the second one.
179 Comments
At least they seem to realize that the world may not be ready for that much more Avatar.
Cameron has surprised everyone before — I remember when Titanic was expected to be a flop and was the butt of jokes before release — but man, this seems like a big gamble.
It’s difficult to bet against Cameron since pretty much every project he’s been behind has had advance predictions of doom and gloom and turn to out to be blockbusters. I’m sure he’ll have some visual trickery that usually is pretty boundary pushing to get people into the seats. Honestly, I like Avatar mostly just for it’s sorta quasi-Aliens sequel vibe, at least with the humans technology. And Cameron has made, y’know, Aliens and Terminator 2 which are some of the best sequels ever. So I’ll buy a ticket at least.
Cameron seems to have a penchant for defying the odds. But has he finally pushed his luck? Even these sequels are unlike any of his past situations.
I feel like a lot of the “Who wants more Avatar??” knocks are based on the fact that no one has seen it in theatres for over 10 years.Dumb as the story was, Avatar in IMAX 3D was a damn religious experience.
I gave it a watch recently on Disney Plus and AMC. It cuts out the shot of Jake and his Na’Vi’s girlfriend head-tail connecting sex shot but they still go at it. That shot was always kinda weird ahahah. Anyway, yeah, returning Cameron vet Sigourney Weaver is always good (honestly, I’m waiting for Cameron to bring in Arnold but hopefully he’s saving him for like President of Earth in Avatar 5 or whatever) and freakin Quaritch/Stephen Lang is gold.
As someone willing to take a Ryanair flight to England to pay £15 to see OG Avatar in IMAX…I honestly don’t understand why anyone would watch it at home.Shit’s like watching Go-Pro footage of a roller coaster.
My thought exactly. I thought the original Avatar was mostly an opportunity for Cameron to play with and showcase his latest visual effects but obviously it resonated with a whole lot of people. The guy manages to deliver over and over.
As this point I genuinely have no idea. The original Avatar made an unholy amount of money, and Cameron of all people knows his way around a sequel. I didn’t particularly like Avatar, but I didn’t particularly like most of the MCU movies after Avengers, so what do I know?
A big,stupid,loud cartoon with a cringe inducing script doesn’t sound very interesting to me either, but last time I went to Vegas there were a couple hundred rubes staring at a fucking sprinkler like it was magic, so it will probably make 100 billion or something.
because like how do they even get the water to be different colors right
I’m such a fucking rube when it comes to the Bellagio water show.
I just look at it and think “Man, the poor bastards that keep that thing running”. My work always,always puts me in a room facing that fucking thing and I like to keep the doors open to get a break from the incessant HVAC.
Ha, I have the exact same thoughts. I look at tiny fountains in front of a restaurant that can’t keep their jets evenly pushing water four feet in the air, then wonder how the hell they can keep it level and parallel 80 feet up while in motion.
If you’re running down the Bellagio fountains, they’re 1) free, 2) outside and a respite from clouds of cigarette smoke and 3) one of the few low-key things to do on the Strip.
Folks aren’t “rubes” for enjoying them.
It’s amazing to me that for as enormous as this movie was at the time and as huge a cultural thing it was, it seems to have left really zero mark. I couldn’t be less interested in going back to this world and even after seeing the first one, which I enjoyed well enough, I had no desire to ever see it again. For Cameron’s sake I hope I’m wrong—I don’t begrudge him any kind of success, and Sam Worthington can certainly use the paychecks—but yeah, big gamble especially this many years later.
Yet, they’re a huge part of Disney World – a large part of Animal Kingdom is Avatar land.
I’ll have to take your word for that! The last/only time I was in Animal Kingdom was in 2017 and I don’t remember an Avatar land at all but maybe we missed it or I skipped it because idgaf about Avatar. lol
People always talk about it being the best movie to see in 3D – that’s apparently the only real ground-breaking triumph it had. It was, apparently, the movie to see in 3D.But 3D died in the arse. I know; I was trying to flog TVs around the early 2010s – peak 3D – and no one gave a shit about it. It ranged from ambivalence, to “I don’t wanna pay an extra $300 for some fuckin’ goggles for shit I’m never gonna use”. It got to the point where we started leaving off 3D on our marketing – because it just reminded people of a feature they were paying for but never intended to use. Beyond that? It was, literally, Fern Gully. Sans Tim Curry aural pornography.
3D for TVs was always going to be a hard sell, but 3D for theaters will probably always at least stay in the peripheral, and will likely get popular again, possibly even for a while after this movie. I just watched The Bad Guys in 3D (Mostly to reacquaint myself with it) and have tickets to Dr Strange in IMAX 3D next week. Part of the draw of doing that is because that particular showing is like a quarter full, as opposed to the regular IMAX and Dolby screenings, so clearly it’s still not quite as popular as it could be. But my theater still regularly shows quite a few 3D showings for many big budget movies, usually animated but not always.
Of course, I wouldn’t bother with any of this boondoggle bullshit without my A-List subscription, so that’s another factor to consider. A regular ticket is like $11.49 full price, which more than I’m usually willing to pay for a single movie, so I certainly wouldn’t be up for a $16 ticket for something barely noticeable or outright distracting. Avatar, to its credit, was neither of those but obviously a lot of other movies were.
Related fact: I’ve seen Avatar many, many, many, MANY hundreds of times because of that same TV-flogging gig. Haven’t heard it, but I’ve seen it – Avatar was the only authorised demo movie we were allowed to play on the Samsung TVs because – no kidding – Samsung TVs sucked at reproducing any colour other than blue. Not a joke. The Sammy rep used to drop by and grill us over it. “Why’s that one playing the cricket? Where’s you Avatar disc?” Well, numbnuts, watching Avatar is gonna be only a teeny, tiny fraction of a decimal of a percentage point of what people are gonna be using their TVs for. True facts. So I did appreciate that it’s well done for a 3D film – it doesn’t have the distractingly obvious foreground-midground-background deep-focus, and “IT’S COMING OUT OF THE SCREEN AT YOU!1111!!” cinematography like, say, Hugo did. It’s perfectly serviceable as a 2D film.
But yeah. I’ve watched on film in 3D, and that GOTG, and it was…fine. My normal glasses didn’t help, and I wouldn’t pay extra for it again.
I’m someone who would pay $15 for an IMAX 2D ticket, rather than suffer through most 3D crap…but Avatar in 3D was goddamn magical, haha.
That’s an absolutely fair point, and I said elsewhere that he made it a decent 2D movie as well. It wasn’t just an excuse to flog a $3 pair of glasses or an up-priced ticket, nor did it affect the actual film or cinematography in a way that was done only to serve the 3D part.
I honestly think it’s the only movie that anyone should watch in 3D, haha.
I really liked sports in 3D. When it was an option, I would almost always opt for the ESPN 3D broadcast. I wish it had caught on.
Eh, I’d say it was also Gravity. I was the one person who didn’t catch Avatar in the theaters, so Gravity is my high-water 3D experience. Aside from that, most of the time, 3D didn’t add anything, to the point where I wondered if they’d made a mistake when they gave us the glasses. Some of the time, it made me nauseous, or gave me a headache. Every time, it made my movie ticket more expensive.
The only reason people kept trying to make 3D happen is how brilliantly Cameron used it in Avatar, weaving it holistically into the experience and the storytelling, rather than just tacking it on as a gimmick.
The biggest problem with the post-Avatar 3D trend was that Avatar was designed to be in 3D from the very beginning, so everything had a sense of true depth to to it ( the depth “rounded” correctly with appropriate depth of focus blurring and what not). Pretty much everything after that was filmed in 2D and (for all practical purposes) they just photoshopped each frame to a foreground, mid ground, background layer and said “TADA! 3D!” which just results in a campy pop-up book 3-d style, and it makes you eyes hurt, because the placement of things in the 3D space aren’t really where they visually belong.
Yeah. Cameron clearly worked this shit through before shooting, rather than just making a 2D film and 3d-ising it. I think a big mistake with art is thinking that simply adding technology can save – which is the case for a lot of 3D (and HDR. And HFR. And…) use in movies.Simply chucking 3D in your flick isn’t automatically a good thing. Features aren’t benefits – they can make benefits if they’re used well, but simply shovin’ in there isn’t a good thing in and of itself (which, yeah, is something I learned floggin’ TVs as well, but works here). And, of course, used poorly, those same features can be drawbacks.Frankly, I think it’s more trouble than it’s worth – it’s expensive, and its more shit the end-users (moviegoers and cinemas) have to foot the bill for – and doesn’t really add anything for the reasons we watch films in the first place.
It was a big movie, but I think the stuff that made it a cultural thing were the special effects and 3D that, for once, looked like more than just a gimmick. I don’t remember people referencing the story or any of the dialogue all that much when it was out—even to make fun of it. It didn’t have an “Hasta la vista, baby,” or even an “I’m the king of the world!”Cameron’s a great storyteller, and I won’t bet against him finding another worthwhile story to tell on Pandora. But the first movie didn’t leave much room for the audience to imagine what those stories might be, which is a big part of why it sometimes feels like one of the biggest movies of all time never happened. It captured our attention, but not our curiosity.
The fact that it’s going to feature the same main cast raises a LOT of questions about what stories they’re going to be telling exactly. Avatar pretty well covered the entirety of the humans’ time on Pandora.Which reminds me – does Worthington remaining a big blue guy permanently mean his regular body lives forever in a pod? Details are blurry.
At the end of the movie, his soul or what have you is successfully removed from his physical body to his Na’vi avatar at the Tree of Souls, so I hope for everyone’s sake they just buried the corpse afterward lol
Given that he turned on them, they probably just dumped him down the trash chute.
His regular body dies. IIRC, the pod was damaged by Colonel Freddie Lounds and his human body got lethally exposed to Pandora’s toxic atmosphere, so the only option for him to survive was for the Magic Tree to transfer his consciousness into his awesome blue avatar body.I’d be worried that the original cast coming back meant time travel, or that the first movie was just a simulation, but that’d mean I’ve been thinking about or caring about Avatar, which I honestly haven’t.
Avatar seems destined to be an answer to a bar trivia question that surprises people.
It’s an okay story with effects that weren’t yet good enough to feel fully immersive, so I’m not stunned that it hasn’t left more of a cultural mark. It was something that at the time most people seemingly felt they needed to see for whatever reason. It’s definitely best on a big screen.
Yeah that’s the real crux of it. It was huge because everyone felt it just had to be seen in theaters, but in theaters is the only way it’s remotely interesting because visuals is all it has to offer. It’s not the kind of thing you’ll watch over and over at home afterwards. You see it once, go “that was neat,” then never see it again.
I don’t even stop flipping channels when coming across it, which is a pretty low threshold for me.
I once saw it was on and was was like “oh yeah that was a movie.” I had completely forgotten about it. lol And yeah I definitely flipped on by.
For real staying power a movie needs to be watchable at home, and without the 3D all you’re left with is the story, which was being mocked even when it was in theatres.
It’s amazing to me that for as enormous as this movie was at the time and as huge a cultural thing it was, it seems to have left really zero mark.I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, for the vast majority of the movie’s fans, it really seems like for them the appeal all comes down to how it felt the first time they saw the alien world on the big screen (especially if they saw it in 3D). Either Cameron’s going to have to find a way to top that or offer something else equally grabbing with the sequels — and I’m not saying he can’t, but I am saying that the list of directors capable of pulling that off is an extremely short one. And ‘capable’ is not a guarantee.
Cameron has a history of surprising us. Many thought Aliens would be a stinker. T2 as well. Avatar was also given a 50/50 chance of either greatness or a flopThat being said. I’m skeptical of these sequels
I’m old enough to remember the Slate essay predicting that “Avatar will suck” because “cats with human boobs suck.”
“Cats with human boobs sucking” is my favorite porn hub tab
They were right.
And of all those examples, you didn’t mention Titanic, which so many industry papers spent months of ink with iceberg puns with its protracted, troubled production thinking it would be DOA and then, well, it destroyed all historic comers. No one bets against him if they value their proverbial money
I’m not even sure it’s Cameron’s fault I’m skeptical. Hollywood’s overall track record with world-expanding tangent projects isn’t exactly stellar (Harry Potter and Star Wars two primary examples, though I’m among the major defenders of Rogue One).
I have no doubt this movie will make a bunch of money. But the first one was just okay (IMO, its biggest achievement was just rehashing the plot of Ferngully in a way that didn’t suck), so I won’t be one of the people contributing *to* that bunch of money.
So Cameron is banking on visuals again? That’s it? What’s the name of all the characters in the movie? Who’s your favorite character in the Avatar franchise? Do you have your Avatar movie poster? Action figures? How is that Avatar cosplay going? What about that Avatar lore? It’s fascinating stuff!
Do you remember Avatar?
The first movie was really only noteworthy for the 3D experience, I have never had any desire to watch it again, unlike just about every other James Cameron movie. I have AMC A-List, so I’ll probably end up seeing it to fill out my 3 movies a week, but otherwise, I would probably never see this, just no real interest.
I won’t dive into all the reasons why this movie sounds like a bad idea—but The Way of Water? That is one uninspired title. And somehow appropriate for a sequel to a movie I would guess nobody remembers a great deal about.
I’m pretty sure they have been saying this title for years so not sure why the new is reporting on it now. I think the third one is suppose to be “The Seed Bearer”. And the forth is called “Cameron had to mortgage his house to make this because Disney told him to go away”
Avatar: Why in the Water?
Avatar: Wizz In The Water
At least one person in the world is going to buy a ticket thinking this is actually a giant 3D Blockbuster sequel to the gay fish movie that won an Oscar.
I assume Cameron’s just doing some SEO fuckery to fuck with the other Avatar that involved water.You know, like how Disney released a movie called “Frozen” so that when kids googled “Walt Disney Frozen” they didn’t get this:
Didn’t Robot Chicken already do that??
“One of the strengths of Jim Cameron’s scripts are always the universal and relatable themes that he weaves into them”. Well, its for damn sure not the seriously shitty dialogue.
I have zero interest in continuing this story, and I’m sorry I’ll miss out on the technology as a higher frame rate isn’t getting me back in that seat. 3D is played out for me as my eyes start to continuously water after 90 mins max.
Can’t wait to see The Way of Water written in Papyrus font.
It is pretty astonishing that I remember so little about a movie as big at the time as Avatar. I honestly don’t find its world all that interesting, begging the question who really was asking for this other than Cameron. But as noted elsewhere the guy pretty much bats 1.000 so I’m sure it will do great.
“With the new Avatar films, we’re pushing those limits even farther with 3D, with high dynamic range, with high frame rate, higher resolution, and a much greater reality in our visual effects.”You lost me at “high frame rate.” There is no world in which a higher frame rate in a film makes it look more real. We saw it in Hobbit. We saw it in Gemini Man. It doesn’t work.
I think Cameron said it won’t be HFR the entire running time, he’ll use is sporadically (which I think means action / wide shot scenes) and viewed it more as authorizing finalizing tool. So it won’t look wonky in dialogue chit chat bits.
Yeah, I had the same thought. I expect it to look like a (very pretty) video game.
And it’s gonna make people puke.
But with the technology today it will be the most amazing and transcendent puke you ever had.
in dazzling vibrant colors, too
I already puke in 3D.
Not like this. It will be like puking for the first time!
Great! Hang on…
We saw it in Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk. Well, actually nobody did….
Billy was deff worth the two and half hour drive plus 30 or 40 dollar ticket to see it at the NYFF for me. It wasn’t great and it everyone looked silly in it but oh god the 120 FPS 3D was an incredible spectacle.
I would have loved to have seen it in that format but it only screened near me in standard 3D, and even then only for a week.
Yeah, I am repeatedly having to find and turn off that “smooth motion” setting on my TV that makes everything look like an Entertainment Tonight behind the scenes video.
soon to be followed by The Way of Earth, The Way of Fire, The Way of Air and culminating in, you guessed it, The Last Airbender.
The four only elements!
You forgot the element of surprise
Avatar: The Spanish Inquisition
I did not expect that.
The Way of the Unobtanium
No, the Five Elements are Hot, Cold, Spooky, Sleaze, and Stench
Multipass!
“Heart?! What kind of power is Heart?!”
The only reason I know the name of the main character from the first movie is because of all of the articles pointing out that no one can remember the names of any of the characters from the first movie.
Its “Legolas.”
Beef Hardcheese
It’s Blast Hardcheese, you philistine!
Nah I was talking about his brother Beef
I know the name because Jim Scully isn’t that difficult to remember.
No, you’re thinking of Mulder’s partner on X-Files. The character from Avatar was named Jack Tully
I’m pretty sure you’re talking about the actress Jennifer Tilly. She played Chucky’s bride in that movie where Chucky got married.
It’s Col. Quarritch.
Bluey Widenose.
cut it out all of you his name is Sam Worthintong and his character name is Jake Avatar
It was Sully like in the video game right?
Wasn’t it Lieutenant Dunbar? Or maybe it was John Smith.OH! Was it Zak Young?
Stephen Lang played the only character with any real personality. Hard to believe it’s the same guy who played the sad sack Cowboy in Tombstone, not least because the guy barely seems to have aged in the last 30 years.
The only character I found really all that interesting, Major Message or whatever his name was, didn’t survive…I just hope Cameron has some sense of what not to put in. Ever since Titanic took longer to watch than the actual ship took to sink (and she went down slow), I’ve approached his work with a certain trepidation, not to mention self discipline regarding my liquid intake. The preachy mistrust of his audience has gone up over the years too.
The Terminator was as relentless a 107 minutes as I’ve ever spent in a theater. I miss the James Cameron who could do that.
Oh come on now, there’s no such thing as an Avatar 2, they made that up to scare young critics into behaving. The footage you saw was just a weather balloon.
J.K. Rowling seriously needs to chat with James Cameron for advice with the Fantastic Beast films, woof.
eh, i think James is probably not even taking those calls from JK these days
What even is an avatar supposed to be? How were the avatar bodies created in the first place – were they genetically engineered? If so, how did the scientists genetically engineer them so they had actual working sex organs such that Jake and Natyri could start a family? Did this ever get explained?Why am I even thinking about this now?
actual working sex organs
Why am I even thinking about this now?
John Boner
Some questions answer themselves!
*Ralphs
Don’t forget their sex organs are the same thing they use to “bond” with their, err, mounts.
People joke about this, but this isn’t true. They have junk down below like humans and they appear to have sex in the “missionary” position. We saw this in the film when Jake has a love scene with whatever her name is (even I can’t be bothered to know all the characters’ names) Yes, they intertwine their braids while they have sex, but this is kind of like a “mind-meld” from Star Trek and is the same reason they use it less romantically with their horses and dragons.
Are we absolutely sure it’s “less romantically,” though?
Why the fuck would you put that in there when you’ve clearly showing that ponytail space-docking is how they have sex? Jesus, please don’t ever let Cameron make a Western.“All right, Hank. Here’s your horse.”“He’s a bit wild, ain’t he, Jed? I can’t ride this. Ain’t no sane man can.”“Oh, there’s a way you can tame him…”
And plants. Those animals fucked.
I think SOMEONE needs to go spend a few hours rewatching THE AVATAR
I’m imagining the training program went something like “We’ve created these avatars to have you blend in with the Na’vi. We spent the time to make working sex organs (and working Na’vi sperm and eggs) so you can play the long game. Date one, start a family, and then when the time is right, kill them all to steal the unobtanium! It’s a watertight plan and has no risks of the people controlling the avatars going native and betraying the human forces!”
“Separate but cohesive” is just a pretty way to say “Apartheid.” Boycotting this film, starting a campaign.
Ha, I thought that. Obviously the phrase in this case is harmless but I question the wisdom of stating your philosophy with the words “Separate but…”
I’m interested in seeing AVATAR 2 because he’s had 13 years to come up with all new technology, visuals, etc., so that even if the story sucks, it’s going to be something I’ve never seen before. But with 3 and 4, he’s not going to have any great technological leaps to take advantage of or any rabbits to pull out of his hat, so he’s going to have to rely solely on plot, which was….not the best part of AVATAR.
If he waits another 13 years to release #3, he just might.
And Avatar #4 can be performed by roaming troupes of minstrels that visit the scattered villages of survivors after (pick one or more: global warming, new pandemics, nuclear war) destroys civilization as we know it.
Avatar: Station 13
plot, which was….not the best part of AVATAR.Why not? He stole it from the finest Yoram Gross and Kevin Costner films!
I’ve seen tons of movies with sucky stories, though.
Avatar: The Way of Water! Lol, could a title be any more dramatic?
People like water! The Shape of Water won best picture! Of course neither Waterworld nor The Waterboy did…
Or I Know Water Did Last Summer….
Rereleasing it in cinemas means those who have also never seen Ferngully or Pocahontas will finally get a chance to see it in the big screen, as it was intended.
And Dances with Wolves!
That too.I saw Dances with Wolves twice in the cinema. And Avatar four times. Ha!
I am pretty sure this thing will make a ton of money. Also pretty sure it will be boring as hell.
We’re getting another round of “never bet against James Cameron”, but honestly… Avatar may have made a lot of money but it could be the worst film he’s ever made. It’s so forgettable. You could’ve asked me ten minutes ago which film are the characters Jake Sully and Neytiri part of, and I would never have been able to answer you. The name “Sam Worthington” was also pretty far down memory lane.It’s probably the biggest gamble Cameron ever took, and I don’t know if he’s aware of that.
I dunno, Titanic is an enormous piece of expensive shit, too.
In 3D?! More nostalgia-bait. 😀
In special theaters, they will also turn on the sprinklers for the true water effect.
And stick a haddock under selected seats for true immersive surround smell-o-vision.
I will accept nothing less than a fully immersive experience.
How long is it going to be? Between the length of modern blockbusters and my tiny bladder, it might as well be called ‘Avatar 2: Which Way to the Water Closet?’ AAYOOOOOO
more like “AVATAR 2: I JUST AVATARTED MY PANTS” amirite guys
The script for the first movie was so weak, I can’t remember a single line of dialogue. The only thing I remember was “unobtanium”. This movie will still make a ridiculous amount of money.
Remember True Lies? Damn that was a good movie.
Certainly made the best use ever of Tom Arnold.’“I remember the first time I was shot out of a cannon.”
It seems odd that they would re-release the original ahead of the new one mainly because previous reports noted the new one was going to be a rehash of the original (including characters who died) so that it would bring people up to speed for the salvo of movies coming.
I predict a visually stunning movie, with a lead male character lacking charism, and a rather so so plot. Then again Cameron is responsible for the best Terminator movie.
You could even say the best two Terminator movies.
The ONLY two.
By the way, as a general public service announcement, if you’re using FernGully as your reference point in regards to Avatar as if you were the very first person to come up with it, you’re nowhere as old and wise as you think you are considering there’s plenty of movies that predate that one in terms of a similar formula and premise. Before you want to lob bombs at James Cameron’s filmmaking, perhaps broaden your own scope on the medium first if that is the extent of your movie wit.
I find it hilarious that he tried to throw shade at the re-release being in 3D!Like, Avatar wasn’t a *function* of the “Every big budget movie should be 3D!” craze.It was the damn progenitor!
Yeah Dances With Wolves is more like it!I saw it not too long ago for the first time in ages, Costner’s acting is…less than good.
so, he’s kevin costner?
Yeah but bad even for him…
I feel suitably chastened for my ignorance, thanks for the scolding.
Or maybe it’s because Ferngully and “Dances with Smurfs” are what people were saying about it back when it was in the theatres.
I will never understand the whole “Avatar is just Ferngully/Dances With Wolves” thing from people who also actively support something like Star Wars while ignoring that it’s Flash Gordon with the names files off.
I love The Matrix, but it’s also every Chosen One/Hero’s Journey told before and after it. But that’s a feature, not a bug; formulas and tropes are tools and it’s about what you do with them.
Avatar 1 was a big leap forward in graphics. But that was a long time ago. Nowadays you can make a lifelike anything as long as you have the budget. There is no big leap in graphics to be had anymore.
Jim Cameron is a pretty great filmmaker, and I think most people don’t give him enough credit. FFS, Aliens and T2, people. He gets written off before every new release as the latest dud that will sink the studio, and every time he proves people wrong.He’s certainly not making high art, but I think at least part of the core of his appeal is that his stories are bonehead simple and very visual- lending well to international audiences. Also, I don’t think there’s anyone alive that does a better job directing action sequences.But I find the predictions of doom and gloom kind of silly, as if all these questions and doubts haven’t already occurred to Cameron himself. I have friends who’ve worked with him, and say that while he’s generally a perfectionist asshole, there’s nobody harder on themselves than him. He works his ass off, even now. Also, he can pretty much do everyone’s job on set better than they can.Will these sequels be a bit cheesy with mildly hamfisted scripts? Probably. Will they be technical masterpieces and print money? Definitely. I’ll roll my eyes when I see the trailer, just like the rest of you, and then see you at the theater.
Vary cogent observations Pit pat. Or should I say . . . Jim Cameron!?
You stay the hell away from me at the theater. I know what you do in there.
“ there’s nobody harder on themselves than him. He works his ass off, even now. Also, he can pretty much do everyone’s job on set better than they can.”Ah so he’s still the world’s shittiest boss and has learned nothing. Let’s Jim make these movies by himself then.
Pretty big chasm between “perfectionist asshole” and “world’s shittiest boss.” He’s a fucking pro and expects the best from people that work for him. Is he a bit of a dick? Yeah probably. Is he a rapey, sniveling mysogynist? No, that’s Harvey Weinstein.Working for Cameron is fucking hard but it’s not soul crushing, or putting you in danger of being criminally violated.
“whether or not you find 3D to be an enjoyable or necessary addition to
the cinematic experience, it’s clear that technology has improved
substantially both in the recording and the projection of those images.”
Or maybe people forgot what real 3D looks like, being used to crappy conversion for the last ten years.
So Cameron is banking on visuals again? That’s it? What’s the name of all the characters in the movie? Who’s your favorite character in the Avatar franchise? Do you have your Avatar movie poster? Action figures? How is that Avatar cosplay going? What about that Avatar lore? It’s fascinating stuff!
Do you remember Avatar?
It’s already a better “Fantastic Beasts” movie than anything out of that series.
The only reason I recall much of anything from Avatar is thanks to Funhaus and Elyse Willems. I can’t imagine a project I care about less than Avatar sequels, but I’m sure it will be a huge box office draw no matter what the reviews say. Still, it’s hard to believe Cameron has poured 13 years into production of a series of films no one really seemed interested in.
“…there are literal teenagers who weren’t born when the first film came out…”How Long Ago Was December 8, 2009 (Avatar release date)? It Was 12 Years, 4 Months, 20 Days Ago
https://dateandage.com/date/how-long-december-8-2009
Yes, literal teenagers, as opposed to figurative or proverbial teenagers.Kids, please stop using literally and literal as often as you do. It makes you sound like a complete and total asshole.
I was once an allegorical teenager.
Metaphysical Teenager is a really shitty band name that I wish I hadn’t just thought of.
Better that than Posthumous Teenager.
I was posting as a Rhetorical Teenager?
Came off more like metaphorical teenager.
Kids, please stop using literally and literal as often as you do. It makes you sound like a complete and total literal asshole.FTFY
Down the literal asshole rabbit hole.
“One of the strengths of Jim Cameron’s scripts are always the universal and relatable themes that he weaves into them,” The other strength is the sledgehammer with which he delivers said universal and relatable themes.
Remember when people were suffering from depression because they couldn’t live on Pandora?
Wonder how they all turned out.
They’re all mostly OT IV now.
“universal and relatable themes” = tropey and cliched
IMO the first movie’s story was about an inch deep with dialog that felt like it required another pass or two on the script. It’s of course a beautiful movie to look at- but those two issues I have with it makes for a movie I started to forget as soon as I left the theater. I just have no enthusiasm for seeing another 2 1/2 hour CG cartoon set in a forest. It’s not a compelling enough story. Stupid thing is… I’ll probably see it. It’ll make a fortune.
I like how one side effect of Cameron waiting so long between projects is that people forget it’s a bad idea to bet against him.
I’m personally not excited about Pocahontas In Space: 2, but what do I know.
I do not give a single shit about Avatar. I saw it once in the theater and forgot almost everything about it except a knife fight with a giant robot that implied there was a factory somewhere making giant combat knives for giant robots, and that was very funny and cool and good. Anyway, I don’t give a fuck about this new movie, I think it’s probably going to be very dumb, and completely forgettable after the visual spectacle has worn off, and I will most likely see it opening weekend, and it will make a billion dollars.
Saw this ahead of “Dr. Strange 2.”There’s a part of me that feels I didn’t like “Dr. Strange in the Multiverse of Madness” because this trailer put such an awful taste in my mouth that never went away, but I can’t envision myself trying to see it again but timing it to skip the trailer, so that’s that.But the entire time the trailer played, I kept snickering to myself. It’s not only a big-ass display of the new frontier of computer animation amongst many others — perhaps it’s lone appeal — but it doesn’t change the fact that the character design is still ugly, and the dialogue written still reeks of the most obnoxious forms of cultural appropriation.I really fucking can’t with this. I was happy when the hysteria for the first finally died down. So far, this is met with a “wow, that’s incredible. Too bad it’s too late” kind of vibe.