Jump to content
IGNORED

Avatar 2 - The Way of Water Dec 2022

Goose

By Goose
in Film, TV & Radio

 Share

Recommended Posts

glb

glb

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Gambit said:

Looks dull.

 

I don't know man, is this going to one of the biggest box office bombs ever? Do people care about Avatar any more?

 

Doubt it will bomb given Cameron's track record, but the goalposts may well shift in terms what a bomb looks like in relation to Avatar 2. Assume surpassing Top Gun: Maverick's $1.4b is the benchmark based on how cinema trends have gone in the last few years, and think it'll generate enough US interest to get half of that. Key is the global take; the first film had a simple story backed by quite ridiculous visuals that were easy to understand even if English wasn't the audiences' first language. Even the recent re-release earned another $76m globally ($51m of which was from international markets), which is pretty impressive for a 13 year-old film .

 

Also, the landscape has shifted so much in terms of revenues. If this makes a healthy profit at the box office, which it will, how many people it prompts to sign-up for Disney+ down the line will also be key, alongside the commercial tie-ins of which there will be a metric fuckton. Expect it to pip Maverick once it's done in theatres, and have a super-long tail in terms of how much revenue it generates over the next few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Loik V credern

Loik V credern

Posted
Posted

Shot at 1:47 is great. The rest to me is as broad and generic and earnest as it's possible to be, I was bored watching Avatar at the cinema and I will be with this, spectacle goes within five minutes as you adjust to the big screen, I don't pinch myself regularly at the cinema telling my brain how much more incredible it is because the screen is larger than what I'm used to.

 

Same with 3d, it doesn't matter if the characters and dialogue are shit. I've had so many tedious oh god why can't it just end chores at the cinema, i'm not sure where peoples capacity to tolerant boredom comes from, I wish I had it. Each one becomes 'I'm not doing that again'. 

 

Every line of dialogue is earnest tripe. There will never be any wit, any humour, any complex character with shades of grey, no illuminating lines, no lines that might have bite, every line will be there to re enforce the eye rollingly obvious themes. 

 

Basically to me half of the success of Avatar (and the re release and this next one because with the success of the re release I am convinced it will be) is it takes people away from the concrete cities they're trapped in, it's more escapism than other blockbusters. 

 

A lot of podcasters and film writers lately have been asking why Avatar never had any cultural impact for something so successful and it is that it was too bland to even be bad. At least with Titanic people can recall the music, the drawing scene, king of the world, the dancing, the falling guy bouncing off the ship, the spit, Leo being handcuffed, the rising water, the 'she's made of iron sir. I assure you she can sink and she will'. Lots to enjoy there even if deep down in your soul you're aching that the man who made Terminator delivered this. 

 

I don’t get Cameron's commitment to hoovering up money past the point he's made all his deep sea dives in delivering films that avoid trying to be interesting, you'd think the years he's putting in and the world he's invested in that he'd see it as an opportunity, like when directors think 'oh finally I can do my Bond film' (Nolan with Inception) or 'finally I can do a prison escape, I've always wanted to but it's never fit any story' (Wes Anderson probably) ...etc. When Avatar had mechas you just think..well you did that with Aliens but you want to do that again..ok. Titanic had a love story..you want to do that again ok. 

 

anyway. no avatar 2 and james cameron didn't run over my dog.

 

hope the action is good 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cubik

cubik

Posted
Posted

It’s a shame that Iron Man 3 opened with it because Blue by Eiffel 65 would have been a great match for that trailer. 
 

The first one was vivid and colourful but blue people in blue water isn’t a great look. Blandora 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IcEBuRN

IcEBuRN

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, jonamok said:

I think everyone’s VASTLY overstating how much of a visual improvement this is over the first. It’s clearly fucking not. There’s bugger all in that trailer that Cameron couldn’t or didn’t do in Avatar.

I think you are VASTLY overestimating the quality of the previous film. I recently watched the 4k HDR remaster of the original, and while it "holds up" impressively well considering it's 90% CGI, it doesn't really compete with a modern star wars, or...whatever the CGI has in store for us in this case, which you absolutely cannot see from a terribly compressed 720p upscaled to 1080p, down compressed for youtube trailer.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Loik V credern

Loik V credern

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Nick R said:

One shot in the trailer looked very familiar...

 

Screenshot_20221103-001316_resize_40.thumb.jpg.5d76422178176d953d2e00830a8156a4.jpg

 

titanic_006544.thumb.jpg.7581151f1e2869bdd37bcaf0633a14cb.jpg

 

So he's taking the tensest and best sequence from Titanic and remaking it for Avatar? Excellent!

 

I didn't notice that! That's even worse recycling from Cameron. (I realise the mechas and space marine stuff from Avatar was less recycling and more homage to Aliens so not exactly showing a lack of new ideas. And of course there's The Abyss and whatever is in that that re appears in this water edition of Avatar).

 

off topic.. my favourite 'lets insert a prison break into this film because it will be fun' is in Men In Black 3. 

 

also..Avatar to me was always Fern Gully more than Dances With Wolves, it seems everyone just forgets all about Fern Gully. Even when talking about Robin Williams.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
JohnC

JohnC

Posted
Posted

Cameron acknowledges it's going to be difficult to be successful in a GQ interview, calling the movie "the worst business case in movie history." "You have to be the third or fourth highest-grossing film in history. That’s your threshold. That’s your break even."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jammy

Jammy

Posted
Posted
On 02/11/2022 at 20:12, jonamok said:

I think everyone’s VASTLY overstating how much of a visual improvement this is over the first. It’s clearly fucking not. There’s bugger all in that trailer that Cameron couldn’t or didn’t do in Avatar.


Whilst there are visual improvements, it’s more likely that VFX software/hardware evolution means it’s a hell of a lot cheaper and easier to do now than when he did the first one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Loik V credern

Loik V credern

Posted
Posted

I saw the other day that The Truman Show made more than a quarter of a billion worldwide and was surprised. With a budget of $60m. I don't think about the money a lot of films make but really so many more make more than I expect. Obviously nothing like a billion because you'd know about it but then just adding a handful up you reach a billion made quite easily.

 

I watched a film called Pandorum the other day, or tried to. It was recommended to me, I thought there was some sci fi twist, maybe there is. It's set in space and 25 minutes in I decided I just can't watch films set in space anymore because they're so limited in what they can do. The same scenes re done in a slightly different way, I mean thrillers that lean on the survival aspect of being in space.

 

I watched Outland with Connery and the recent Stowaway in the last few years which I liked because they're about things other than crawling through small spaces or something else has gone wrong we have to fix it quick. I also hated Gravity. But maybe Gravity is a good comparison, I thought it was an empty and boring rollercoaster ride but a lot of people seemed to be thrilled by fancy camerawork in space as though they've never seen space before or fancy camerawork. It's all a bit like babies transfixed by the visual stimulation of bright colours. I don't get the obsession with visual fidelity as the primary pull. 

 

I think if the re release was successful this will be too, but it's become even more pointless if it has to make that much to even break even. All the Pirates films and Transformers film make $600m to a billion. People aren't that discerning are they, affection for Avatar doesn't come into it, it's a bright cgi fest on the big screen. 

 

I stopped watching Pandorum and put on Dog instead which was better than I expected. Why did I not watch this earlier, I like dogs, I like Channing Tatum, I like road trip films. Straight away with it showing pictures of the dog and its owner it was just..some life, personality again. I've never thought about military dogs, let's look them up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IcEBuRN

IcEBuRN

Posted
Posted

Considering the great efforts Cameron went to with the underwater filming, I'm expecting some ground-breaking water shit in this one. You can get a little glimpse of the seemingly photoreal water in this, but it's difficult to tell with the compression these trailers suffer. Youtubers can put out 4k60 videos, 2x a day, and Cameron can't put out a decent bitrate trailer...<_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hmm

hmm

Posted
Posted
On 02/11/2022 at 21:53, IcEBuRN said:

I think you are VASTLY overestimating the quality of the previous film. I recently watched the 4k HDR remaster of the original, and while it "holds up" impressively well considering it's 90% CGI, it doesn't really compete with a modern star wars, or...whatever the CGI has in store for us in this case, which you absolutely cannot see from a terribly compressed 720p upscaled to 1080p, down compressed for youtube trailer.

 

Saw the Avatar trailer in the cinema before Black Adam and it really wasn't any more impressive there, to be honest. Sure, side by side with the original Avatar, maybe you'd see the improvements, but relative to current standards - unflatteringly, even the cutscenes rendered in realtime in COD MW2 when I played it recently - it was deeply unimpressive visually.

 

(It wasn't impressive in any other way either, but the visuals certainly were the most underwhelming part; I didn't exactly anticipate a gripping premise.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ork1927

Ork1927

Posted
Posted

I saw the trailer before BP2 Sunday, and it looked really nice, but not jaw dropping and there were a few bits where the blue people were running or wrestling where it looked ropey.

 

My memory of the first one was that 3D showings were dominant and 2D showings in the minority.  I'm sure seeing it on the biggest best screen possible is going to massively be the best option for this, but will customers go for that and can cinemas offer enough showings anyway given the runtime and 3D not really being a thing anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ork1927

Ork1927

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, IcEBuRN said:

I'm guessing most cinemas still have their 3d setups. Well, assuming they didn't just chuck out all their secondary projectors.

 

Yeah - Cardiff Cineworld must have kept hold of them as normally nothing is in 3D bar the 4DX screenings.

 

This is opening day - I make it 10 or 11 screens out of 15 showing it in the middle of the day.

 

 

image.thumb.png.2d496d6f997fe41c276e3a3fe0cda3c5.png

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
Go to topic listing

  • 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.

  I accept