Avatar 2, 3 and 4 or how James Cameron stopped worrying and pulled The Hobbit on us

[Jurassic Shark 9331]

46 minutes ago, GerateWohl said:

They could call that final episode "Battle of the Five Armies".

 

Lame title.

[Jay 30970]

So this film is now out but, there isn't any need for a Spoiler Talk thread for it, right?  This thread is fine for whatever people want to say about it?

[leeallen01 2003]

Perhaps. But maybe give it until after the weekend to openly discuss spoilers. Then a simple SPOILERS added to the title would suffice.

[greenturnedblue 258]

Whats the bet Jake turns back human in this one?

[Disco Stu 15468]

A while back I bet fake money on the question “Will 'Avatar: The Way of Water' gross more than $650 million domestically by January 31, 2023?” with my money on NO.  We’ll see if I lose all my fake money.

[Thor 5793]

Pretty much all screenings of the film here in Oslo have been sold out until New Year's. Even the expensive IMAX ones, the distibutor told me me.

[NL197 361]

9 hours ago, leeallen01 said:

Perhaps. But maybe give it until after the weeknd to openly discuss spoilers. Then a simple SPOILERS added to the title would suffice.

 

 

Fixed

[Naïve Old Fart 7511]

For those who have seen THE WAY OF WATER... how big a leap, technically speaking, is it, over AVATAR?

[Jurassic Shark 9331]

There's A LOT more water.

[Thor 5793]

13 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

For those who have seen THE WAY OF WATER... how big a leap, technically speaking, is it, over AVATAR?

 

Considerable.

[Damien F 975]

I really like the first one even on the small screen. I watched it at home this week for the first time in ages, and even though I remembered the main plot beats, I was still drawn into the story and adventure. I think Saldana's excellent performance as Neytiri is the key to the first film. She is probably the only character that feels properly fleshed out rather than a mere trope, such as Ribisi's "evil corporate asshole" or Lang's "evil military asshole" (although I did enjoy Lang's scenery chewing performance). I don't quite think the sequel has the same amount of heart that Neytiri brought to the first one.

 

This sequel looks spectacular. Aside from the scenery and underwater stuff, there are some close-ups of Neytiri that look astonishingly real. The new teenage characters walk a very fine line between being tolerable and annoying, and it doesn't help that they refer to each other as "bro" in practically every scene they are in. That might work for LA surfer dudes but it doesn't quite work when the people who are saying it look like the Na'vi.

 

I still prefer the first one, and I think I'd enjoy the sequel more if it wasn't three hours. There is loads in it to enjoy but there is also a lot of padding.

[crocodile 6853]

It starts soon. I am hoping for recent entertainment at least.

 

Karol

[leeallen01 2003]

12 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

For those who have seen THE WAY OF WATER... how big a leap, technically speaking, is it, over AVATAR?

 

I watched the first Avatar again before the new one, and the new one is a ridiculous step forward. It's mindblowing just how real they have achieved it visually. The water scenes are actually unbelievable. 

[Edmilson 4497]

3 hours ago, crocodile said:

It starts soon. I am hoping for recent entertainment at least.

 

Karol

Well, if you're looking for recent entertainment, I guess the best choice is indeed a movie that came out this week, instead of, like, 1959's Ben-Hur.

[crocodile 6853]

It was quite enjoyable actually. Formulaic as hell but very well executed. On par with the first one, perhaps even better in some ways. Cameron knows how to deliver a spectacle and this is definitely yet another example. The score was pretty good actually, definitely better than I anticipated.

 

As for the running time... Let's put it this way, I had some coffee not long before the showing and wanted to pee 20 minutes into the film and enjoyed myself regardless. If that's not praise, I don't know what is. 😄

 

Overall, it's sort of exactly the kind of experience like Top Gun: Maverick. You know exactly what you're getting and yet you're still having a good time.

 

This guy definitely knows what he's doing.

 

Karol

[Naïve Old Fart 7511]

You take satisfaction, in holding back your urine output? Strange.

[crocodile 6853]

Just now, Naïve Old Fart said:

You take satisfaction, in holding back your urine output? Strange.

It's a great way to test how much do you care about long blockbusters.

 

Karol

[Naïve Old Fart 7511]

I know where you're coming from, bro.

The same thing happened to me, when I saw HEAT. I was crossing my legs, at the end, but I was so engrossed in the film that I couldn't leave. Yep; it is the sign of a good movie.

[publicist 4635]

But i say IMAX 3D really helps.

[Jurassic Shark 9331]

13 hours ago, crocodile said:

As for the running time... Let's put it this way, I had some coffee not long before the showing and wanted to pee 20 minutes into the film and enjoyed myself regardless. If that's not praise, I don't know what is. 😄

 

Bring back the intermission!

[mstrox 5673]

Do they actually say “the way of water” in the movie?  And if so, what is the way of water?

[Jurassic Shark 9331]

On 16/12/2022 at 11:44 AM, Naïve Old Fart said:

For those who have seen THE WAY OF WATER... how big a leap, technically speaking, is it, over AVATAR?

 

Technology has finally caught up with Cameron's imagination. 

[Thor 5793]

46 minutes ago, mstrox said:

Do they actually say “the way of water” in the movie?  And if so, what is the way of water?

 

They do, yes, although I'm not sure there's any huge signficance to it other than signalling a way of life.

 

These things always remind me of this FAMILY GUY skit:

 

 

[WampaRat 1095]

17 minutes ago, Thor said:

 

They do, yes, although I'm not sure there's any huge signficance to it other than signalling a way of life.

 

These things always remind me of this FAMILY GUY skit:

 

 

Always think of this clip every time someone says the title!

 

This is also a good one when there’s an excessive amount of opening studio logos😆

 

 

[Jurassic Shark 9331]

The way of water is downwards, so they should have named the movie Avatar: Downwards. 

[filmmusic 1246]

To anyone who watched the movie: Do you really long for other Avatar sequels?

 

[mrbellamy 5622]

I don't long for it but I'm more convinced he can make it work. He's still got his directorial flair and he's clearly not afraid of making his universe insane so I give in. Let James Cameron keep making Avatars. Good movie.

[greenturnedblue 258]

Id rather have Avatar than the next MCU movie, ad nauseum

[Bayesian 993]

6 hours ago, greenturnedblue said:

Id rather have Avatar than the next MCU movie, ad nauseum

Those are exactly my sentimonies. I just left the theatre and what amazed me most about this film wasn't the 3D (which was stellar, by the way), but the way it just works as a worldbuilding adventure, as a family-focused story, and as an action film.

 

Allow me to dwell on this last point because I think it speaks to a key reason why this movie might get a lot of repeat viewing from audiences. Cameron has given us a phenomenally well-made action film. Particularly in the last hour. It's completely engrossing, edge-of-your-seat entertainment, imho, and it's all the more impressive considering that the scale of the action is actually smaller than in the original. Most of the last hour takes place near a single island in relatively shallow water. There's only one giant watercraft involved (you've seen it in the trailers) instead of two or three like the first movie. Everything about the third act conflict is smaller in scale, but all the more absorbing because it's family focused. And because Cameron puts you in the middle of everything and lets you understand how characters get from point A to point B and then to point C. And because, by putting you front and center, you see rich details that make the action actually memorable.

 

By memorable, I mean:

• the human/sky people's technology is rendered with such astonishing complexity and detail, you'd swear it was all real-life vessels, machines, tools, objects that were filmed (and destroyed) over real water.
• Everything and everyone actually follow the laws of physics for once. You can't imagine what a difference that makes for keeping one's attention.
• The way that Cameron sets up the conflict between the two sides is surprisingly nuanced. I don't want to give away spoilers, so I'll save my elaboration on this point for a later post.

This movie isn't without faults (paper-thin plot and some clunky dialogue chief among them), but I'm astonished how little any of them matter in the face of such remarkable worldbuilding and filmmaking. It's the greatest of ironies that the most cutting-edge CGI tech the film industry has ever seen was developed to serve the needs of a filmmaker who is so fundamentally old-school and old-soul, at least in the action genre. Avatar TWOW has got the exact same earnest heart beating at its core as Top Gun Maverick does. And as Waterworld, Die Hard, and Raiders do.

 

About the worldbuilding: yes, the Pandoran sea is diverse and wonderful to look at, but just as mesmerizing are human/sky people elements we get to enjoy a closer look at. The maglev. The new base. The whaling ship. The crab suits. The subs. The exo-suits. I could watch 20 hours of that shit. It's flabbergastingly wonderful to see actual realistic fucking sci-fi again. Please please PLEASE let this movie make enough money so that Cameron gets to finish Avatar 5 because I badly want to see how he visually renders a dying Earth and we supposedly will get to see that in the fifth one.

 

Go see this movie. It's worth the 13-yr wait.

[p0llux 293]

10 hours ago, filmmusic said:

To anyone who watched the movie: Do you really long for other Avatar sequels?

 

I'm indifferent. I care very little about the characters, story, or even music(unless Horner is still around). It's pure eye candy made with the latest tech. Sometimes it's nice to have some candy in moderation.

[Yavar Moradi 1689]

12 hours ago, filmmusic said:

To anyone who watched the movie: Do you really long for other Avatar sequels?

Here’s the thing: I didn’t think much of the first Avatar… it was super derivative and predictable, even if it had some strong elements like Saldana’s performance. It was my least favorite Cameron movie and I didn’t want any sequels.

 

My wife absolutely HATED it… and was even annoyed at me for dragging her to the theater to see it because of all the hype.

 

But this time, she read a NYT article that made her interested in the spectacle of the thing, so she actually asked ME to join her and see this today to my surprise…

 

And we both really enjoyed it! Great world-building. Amazing effects, way better than the original! Lots of new characters who we found to be compelling additions to make the world a lot more complex and interesting.

 

This isn’t just Dances With Smurfs or Disney’s Pocahontas in Space any more. This was a lot better IMO. Hell even Worthington’s performance was better.

 

Everything was better — a lot better — except the score (solid, but clearly written by more of a solid craftsman than an iconic if flawed genius) and Zoe Saldana (still great, but a bit less screen time), honestly.

 

And unlike the first film, this sequel won me over to the point of being interested in more sequels. There are many plot threads I want to see developed further, especially concerning Sigourney Weaver’s character.

 

Oh, about the 3D though….We didn’t much like the 3D in the first film and probably would have enjoyed the film more if we’d seen it in standard 2D.

 

But we both really loved the 3D in both Hugo and Tintin! Somehow it just really worked for us in those two films even though we disliked it in the original Avatar and any other time we’ve tried it.

 

So this time we gave the 3D showing of Avatar 2 a try. We made it about eight minutes in before mutually deciding to leave… it was the opposite of immersive. It was distracting and unpleasant, and distanced us from the film. So we went to a standard 2D showing a couple hours later (technically Cinemark XD I guess). And we were SO much happier; it was totally immersive and enjoyable for us in 2D. So I’ll strongly disagree with the notion that one needs to see this in 3D to appreciate it.

 

Yavar

[Jurassic Shark 9331]

2 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

It was distracting and unpleasant, and distanced us from the film.

 

Interesting. How would you say it was distracting and unpleasant? Did it strain your eyes?

[leeallen01 2003]

Did anyone else think the 3D in the 1st act (the forest scenes) was weirdly...cheap looking? I don't know if my eyes just needed to adjust or not. But the forest 3D didn't wow me at all and was kind of like a post production add-on in a cheap horror film. 

 

Then the 2nd and 3rd act was sensational 3D though, so not sure what was wrong with me.

[Naïve Old Fart 7511]

11th biggest opening of all time. Is that good?

[JNHFan2000 1365]

Not as good as it should be for a sequel to the biggest film of all time

[blondheim 1020]

Cameron’s movies never really open to huge numbers, it is all about their staying power.

[JNHFan2000 1365]

That's true, but the last time a Cameron film came out the movie market looked very different.

People have a lot more choices now, especially with streaming (and a lot is coming out in the next 2 weeks), the pandemic is still going on and a lot of people aren't really sold anymore on 3D (however how good it is in the film).

And to be honest, there are also a lot of people out there who are not big fans of Cameron.

I think the film will gross between 1 and 1.5 billion. But it won't make the 2 billion mark

[crocodile 6853]

I also thought the story was stronger in the sequel. I think some of it felt indulgent and didn't add as much other than the "immerse in the world documentary" factor. But I did enjoy myself overall.

 

By the way, does this movie hold the current world record for the number of times you hear the word "bro"? I think it might. 

 

Karol

[Jay 30970]

Any idea why Cameron wanted to bring back Quarritch to be the villain for all the sequels, instead of coming up with some fun new villains for each film and get some more good actors in these things? 

[Thor 5793]

No idea, but it is an interesting philosophical prospect -- that the avatar tech basically secures eternal life.

[saulocf 60]

But limited the scope of the universe tremendously. The humans couldn’t find another villain?

[Jurassic Shark 9331]

Avatar 2: Man dies of heart attack while watching James Cameron’s new film

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/avatar-2-heart-attack-man-dies-b2247753.html

[JoeinAR 1851]

Well I didn't die but I will neither confirm nor deny that way the water rolled down my face is any indication that I had a fun time.

 

 

There needs to be a special Academy Award for achievement in special effects. There is not competition. This is a leap forward. 

 

 

 

Its just a shame Horner is gone. He would have made the film better.

[LSH 777]

Going to see it tonight! Excited.

[Jay 30970]

9 minutes ago, JoeinAR said:

Well I didn't die but I will neither confirm nor deny that way the water rolled down my face is any indication that I had a fun time.

 

 

There needs to be a special Academy Award for achievement in special effects. There is not competition. This is a leap forward. 

 

How early was your showing this morning!?

Oh, or did you see it last night

[JoeinAR 1851]

Saw We saw it Saturday morning at the 11:35 showing. I will go once more and see that the IMAX theater but I want to be in the middle

[Bayesian 993]

5 hours ago, saulocf said:

But limited the scope of the universe tremendously. The humans couldn’t find another villain?

It makes sense to have Quaritch return as the villain because the first Avatar can be seen (in retrospect) as being all about setting up Quaritch’s personal vendetta against Sully and that needs payoff. In that regard, TWOW feels like the perfect extension of that storyline and, indeed, it’s clear that it can (and will) continue into the third Avatar. 
 

As for Quaritch’s presence in the fourth and fifth Avatars, I didn’t know that was confirmed or anything. I can see how the same vendetta-driven conflict could get repetitive by then, but I have confidence in Cameron and his story team that they know what they’re doing.

 

I said it earlier and I’ll say it again: I hope this movie earns enough for Disney to greenlight Avatars 4 and 5. The moviegoing public deserves the chance to see this story played out in full.

[schultz.kevin1972 16]

So happy to see it underperform this weekend. Sorry to be grinchy, but I am. 

 

I wonder, did they re-use James Horner's "Glory" theme? -- Er, uh, I mean "Avatar" theme?

[TolkienSS 184]

Don't know what's wrong with me. This still doesn't grab me one bit. I'm still put off by the fact that despite the movie having been in the works for a decade, it's still only all about James Cameron.

I have a hard time sitting down watching a movie in a theatre, where I feel like watching the director masturbate for 3 hours and watch me over my shoulder if I enjoy it.

[crocodile 6853]

8 hours ago, Jay said:

Any idea why Cameron wanted to bring back Quarritch to be the villain for all the sequels, instead of coming up with some fun new villains for each film and get some more good actors in these things? 

Think he just wanted to work with Lang again. And same goes for Weaver. Even though both are explained in the film, neither makes much sense.

 

Karol