Jump to content
IGNORED

Avatar 2, 3, 4 & 5 - Part 2 delayed to Dec 2022


Goose
 Share

Recommended Posts

So in January 2023 we should all brace ourselves for James Cameron’s disappointment that people didn’t remember what happened in Avatar and didn’t turn out in record numbers to watch his latest movie...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I grudgingly turned up to Avatar 1 after being put off by the 20 minute preview, because I figured I needed to know what the fuss was about, and you can bet that same shit will happen again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always wondered if Avatar would've been even half as popular if it didn't release as a 3D movie. When it was still in cinemas most people I knew only spoke of "the insane 3D effects, this is the future". I always struggled to warm to the 3D tech, even more so on consumer TVs. It turned out to be a fad, thankfully, but it'll be interesting to see wether the next Avatar movie can generate even half the hype of the original. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rayn said:

I've always wondered if Avatar would've been even half as popular if it didn't release as a 3D movie. When it was still in cinemas most people I knew only spoke of "the insane 3D effects, this is the future". I always struggled to warm to the 3D tech, even more so on consumer TVs. It turned out to be a fad, thankfully, but it'll be interesting to see wether the next Avatar movie can generate even half the hype of the original. 

 

I dunno, I watched it twice. Once in 3D and again in 2D to see the difference, think lots of people were doing that as it was such a big experience at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Rayn said:

I've always wondered if Avatar would've been even half as popular if it didn't release as a 3D movie. When it was still in cinemas most people I knew only spoke of "the insane 3D effects, this is the future". I always struggled to warm to the 3D tech, even more so on consumer TVs. It turned out to be a fad, thankfully, but it'll be interesting to see wether the next Avatar movie can generate even half the hype of the original. 

Try telling Disney it’s a fad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Flanders said:

The discussion in this topic and more generally around the new film’s trailer encouraged me to stick on the first Avatar last night - I’ve never watched it since seeing it in the cinema, never seen it in 2D. Just wanted to plonk it on for 20 minutes with my tea to see what it is like in 2022.

 

The answer was, it looks shockingly good. In terms of pure visuals, action and spectacle in a big budget blockbuster I can only really think of Fury Road and the later Mission Impossibles that have come out since that can match it for a sensory rush. And it really, properly flows with a cracking pace, I ended up whizzing through half the film before I had to head out. 
 

I found it such a tonic compared to what so many modern blockbusters are like - even some of it’s obvious weaknesses are oddly refreshing in 2022. The plot is really simple, proper one sentence outline - but to be honest, I’ve gotten so tired of how over-plotted modern blockbusters are. Any MCU film I’ve seen in the past few years has felt disjointed and overstuffed, like bits and pieces squashed together into something that usually ends up extremely incoherent when you think about it for more than 10 seconds. The Star Wars sequels were like this as well.

 

And yeah, for sure the characters are really barebones. It’s a limited script that I think the actors do a very underrated job to bring some life to - for all that it’s cool to rag on Sam Worthington I think he brings across a very charming sense of joy when he’s in the Avatar body, which I think is a clearly deliberate contrast to the morose one-note soldier man he is as a human. And Zoe Saldana is just really fucking good at shining in big budget sci-fi films. She is able to fully commit and project sincerity so well, which is why I imagine she was also used for a lot of the emotional heavy lifting in Avengers Infinity War. 
 

Overall though, I couldn’t get over how well this film looks and moves. I think response to the sequel could go in two ways - 1) people who are conditioned to the (oddly) more character-centric and plotty MCU style will shit all over it or 2) people will go apeshit crazy for it when they see how good a mega millions blockbuster can actually look if you’re not racing to finish it to fit into a franchise deadline. 

 

Every MCU film is merely an advertisement for the next film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Festoon said:

Every MCU film is merely an advertisement for the next film.

 

Oh, I think you're being unfair!

 

Some of them are an advertisement for the next TV series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, just rewatching avatar now. It doesn't look quite as good as I remember, but dang, it's amazing that a film that's over 12 years old and is mostly CGI, still completely holds up today, and is in some instances, better than what we get now.

 

Put the bloody coal in that hype train baby!

 

Choo Choo!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LaveDisco said:

Even if it's still Disney.

 

It's only Disney because Murdoch sold off his non-news assets for whatever reason and they were the highest bidder (unfortunately, I'd rather WB or NBCUniversal had bought Fox instead to not concentrate power quite so much, the other Hollywood studios couldn't afford to compete which ruled them out).

 

Cameron has never worked for Disney on his films, he nearly always went with Fox for his blockbusters and these are what came with the deal when Fox got borged into the mouse house. It'll be interesting to see if he sticks with Disney going forward once they get rid of Fox entirely, which I assume they will do at some point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Loik V credern said:

 

Lying.


watching it now, and there’s a fair amount happened - cohesively - after twenty minutes. Including a bit of cathartic running.

It’s certainly better than the first twenty minutes of Multiverse of Madness, to choose something not at random.

 

a few “look it’s 3D scenes” though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To quote the most ironic* line in movie history:

 

Quote

Beginning. Middle. End. Facts. Details. Condense. Plot. Tell it.


I was extremely not in to the particular story Avatar was telling but there’s a level of baseline plot structure and storytelling competence that Hollywood has generally decided it doesn’t need.

 

By modern standards it’s not even that long.

 

Spoiler

*(Transformers 2.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thinking about it, the only 3d film I've seen at the cinema was Avatar.  Part of that was due to being a specs wearer. The other part was that very few films are shot and designed with 3d in mind so why bother.

 

I think I'm going to see this in 3D, despite the annoyance of the specs.  Some of the shots in the first one are fantastic.  Particularly love the emerging from the sleep pods bit and for some reason the screens in the film being 3D, in 3D . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, monkeydog said:

Thinking about it, the only 3d film I've seen at the cinema was Avatar.  Part of that was due to being a specs wearer. The other part was that very few films are shot and designed with 3d in mind so why bother.

 

I think I'm going to see this in 3D, despite the annoyance of the specs.  Some of the shots in the first one are fantastic.  Particularly love the emerging from the sleep pods bit and for some reason the screens in the film being 3D, in 3D . 

 

I saw a few films in 3D (Coraline, Avatar, Toy Story 3, Gravity, the second Hobbit film (in 48fps), and Dr Strange), and never had an issue wearing 3D glasses over my own. Most of those films were ones where a big part of the marketing was that they were designed with 3D in mind from the start - the exception eat Dr Strange, which I only saw in 3D because there was some technical problem with the 2D showings on opening day.

 

For me the most memorable shot in Avatar for showing off 3D was one where Col. Quaritch is seen through the canopy of the main flying vehicle - I think when the military is on its way to destroy the tree. It was the dirt and reflections on the foreground canopy, combined with the multiple layers of other craft in the background, that made it stand out.

 

I hope that my local cinema shows Avatar 2 in high framerate 3D. When I saw The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug in 48fps, it took some getting used to in the more subdued dialogue scenes (e.g. the one near the start where Gandalf leaves the group outside Mirkwood), because it made very slight motions feel like they were speeded up. But otherwise, it was an enjoyably novel sensation, and I'd like to experience it again... and then about once per decade after that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I don't know why he hasn't shoved them to other directors already and just taken a producer role, i think they'll all be as broad as Avatar, i'm not sure how much play and improvisation is left past concept art and the pre production phase, story boarding. I think they'd be a marginal difference with another director, unless it's Colin Trevorrow.

 

I don't put much trust in '4 is a motherfucker' from Cameron, I expect the same themes repeated broadly again and again, repackaged in slightly different settings.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno, I don't know that the list of directors who can show up and simply get a movie on this scale in the can - never mind the creative aspect - is particularly long. And a lot of them are people who are creatively probably not going to want to make a movie off a blueprint. Zack Snyder's Avatar, anyone?

 

Actually...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Alex W. said:

I dunno, I don't know that the list of directors who can show up and simply get a movie on this scale in the can - never mind the creative aspect - is particularly long. And a lot of them are people who are creatively probably not going to want to make a movie off a blueprint. Zack Snyder's Avatar, anyone?

 

Actually...

 

Avatar is a little more complex it seems, but studios do hire directors to do the biggest most complex cgi green screen films that previously have only done modest indie stuff before though, I always wonder how they cope and how well oiled the machine is that someone with no experience of any of that can be expected to do it. I always mention Trevorrow, but the Russo brothers. Welcome To Colinwood, You Me and Dupree and then episodes of Community, Happy Endings, Animal Practise, how did they even get a meeting to discuss directing A Winter Soldier. Really...how. 

 

Surely there's less of a leap for someone like Robert Zemeckis who has done loads of motion capture cg films. Maybe weird because he's such a big name, and not young. 

 

The Hobbit sequels didn't benefit from Peter Jackson's direction and guidance, actually it was surprising how much the standards dropped, not Star Wars The Clone Wars or Return of Sith bad but close. Maybe someone else wants to get rid of the flab and doesn't have the power to argue successfully, but then it's left to Jackson to run the Lord of The Rings legacy into the ground..

 

I don't think Rodriguez is a bad shout. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.