Avatar

[Kotowboy]

Gotta laugh when people who hated Avatar - or never went to see it and instead just parroted the Smurfahontos jokes ad nauseam - say that James Cameron is

money grabbing doing four Avatar sequels - when

• It's been 11 years since the first film

• He hasn't done any movies in between to cash in on his 'fame'

• He didn't re - release Avatar when Avengers Endgame toppled Avatar from #1 All Time.

• If he really wanted an easy pay day - he could have crapped out 3 Avatar sequels in 2011, 2013, 2015 but instead is taking his damn sweet time to

make the films he really wants to make and - allegedly - has always wanted to make - but has been waiting for the tech to be right.

He's not Michael Bay - who would be on Avatar 7 by now.

[Chino]

I can't remember--have you been to Pandora Land at Disney?  If so, what did you think of it and the two rides? 

Personally, I LOVED Flight of Passage.  Best screen simulator ride, hands down, IMO. 

The other one (nav'i river journey, or whatever it's called) didn't do it for me.  Glad I got to see it once.  But it's basically an Avatar-themed It's A Small World, which is cool, but not worth the line wait times.  I would have liked it better if some of it was outside and followed the actual river that is there, more akin to Jungle Cruise, which is what I mistakenly expected.

Yeah, I went in Sept 2017, literally two days after FL got hammered by a hurricane. The park was empty and I went on TFOP 4 times. I bet I didn't spend more than 2 hours in line in total between all the rides.  Subject matter aside, that was hands down the most awesome ride I've ever been on.

The river ride was stunning, but kind of underwhelming. Had I waited more than the 20 minutes I did for it, I would have been really disappointed. Definitely worth at least one ride though, imo. As an avatard, I noticed a lot of cool things sprinkled throughout that ride that most riders likely don't really notice or pick up on.


I will say though, I think Disney had a big swing and a miss when it came to the night time version of the park. I expected way more given the movie and the money that went into the attractions. Then again, the park isn't open that late, so odds are like 90% of the hours spent in that park are done so during the day time. If that's the reasoning, I can understand why it wasn't as big of a focus.

[bosk1]

I will say though, I think Disney had a big swing and a miss when it came to the night time version of the park. I expected way more given the movie and the money that went into the attractions. Then again, the park isn't open that late, so odds are like 90% of the hours spent in that park are done so during the day time. If that's the reasoning, I can understand why it wasn't as big of a focus.

Agreed.  And not just Pandora.  I think it may somewhat be because of the more limited hours, but think it is more the limited crowds in that particular park.  The Imagineers just didn't seem to try as hard in a lot of the lands within that park.  You can really see it in DinoLand USA.  But another kind of tell-tale is that it is barely decorated for the holidays throughout most of the park as well.  It's a shame, because I really enjoy a lot of it.  But it is probably the most neglected, and after having gone there twice, I probably would not go again if doing a Florida Disney trip.

[Kotowboy]

I wish JC had done more films in between the Avatar films because I love all his films and he can definitely direct action.


I re-watched Avatar last year and was a bit worried as i'd not seen it for years and thought i'd hate it now - nope.

I love how JC directs action - it's zoomed out so you can see everything that is going on. Not like a Transformers movie where it's zoomed in shaky cam and it's a confusing mess.

[Chino]

I will say though, I think Disney had a big swing and a miss when it came to the night time version of the park. I expected way more given the movie and the money that went into the attractions. Then again, the park isn't open that late, so odds are like 90% of the hours spent in that park are done so during the day time. If that's the reasoning, I can understand why it wasn't as big of a focus.

Agreed.  And not just Pandora.  I think it may somewhat be because of the more limited hours, but think it is more the limited crowds in that particular park.  The Imagineers just didn't seem to try as hard in a lot of the lands within that park.  You can really see it in DinoLand USA.  But another kind of tell-tale is that it is barely decorated for the holidays throughout most of the park as well.  It's a shame, because I really enjoy a lot of it.  But it is probably the most neglected, and after having gone there twice, I probably would not go again if doing a Florida Disney trip.

I've read that Animal Kingdom kind of gets the shaft at night because of the animals (understandable). It's why that park has the light show instead of all the fireworks like the other parks. Animal Kingdom is the only park I've been to outside of Epcot when I was maybe 19 or so. I really liked Animal Kingdom, maybe even more than Epcot, but I really don't have anything to compare it to.

I wish JC had done more films in between the Avatar films because I love all his films and he can definitely direct action.


I re-watched Avatar last year and was a bit worried as i'd not seen it for years and thought i'd hate it now - nope.

I love how JC directs action - it's zoomed out so you can see everything that is going on. Not like a Transformers movie where it's zoomed in shaky cam and it's a confusing mess.

The thing though is that it's not like JC was just sitting around. The 4 sequels have been in the works since the first film came out. At the beginning the plan was to make three more movies, and after about a year in the writers' room with the team, it was decided that there was too much material and a fourth film was needed. 2 and 3 were filmed together, and 4 and 5 are in the works now. He couldn't have made another film if he wanted to. From what I understand the second movie is 100% finished and ready for theaters. It's in Disney's hands now. The third film is done filming and is now getting the post-production treatment. 

Didn't he have a cave diving movie of some kind come out after Avatar?

[lordxizor]

I will say though, I think Disney had a big swing and a miss when it came to the night time version of the park. I expected way more given the movie and the money that went into the attractions. Then again, the park isn't open that late, so odds are like 90% of the hours spent in that park are done so during the day time. If that's the reasoning, I can understand why it wasn't as big of a focus.

Agreed.  And not just Pandora.  I think it may somewhat be because of the more limited hours, but think it is more the limited crowds in that particular park.  The Imagineers just didn't seem to try as hard in a lot of the lands within that park.  You can really see it in DinoLand USA.  But another kind of tell-tale is that it is barely decorated for the holidays throughout most of the park as well.  It's a shame, because I really enjoy a lot of it.  But it is probably the most neglected, and after having gone there twice, I probably would not go again if doing a Florida Disney trip.

Huh.... we loved animal kingdom. Rivaling magic kingdom as our favorite park there. To each their own I guess. I thought the theming was pretty amazing throughout most of the park. I do agree about dinoland though. That was a little underwhelming and could use a redo (Zootopia land maybe?). We didn't make it over to the Pandora land at night, so I can't comment on that, but it was pretty awesome during the day and the rides were great. Flight of Passage was of course amazing and I liked the other ride a lot, but I'm a sucker of Disney dark rides even though they're not terribly exciting.

[Kotowboy]

From what I hear - Jim Cameron plans to release Avatar 2 & 3 at least - then if they do well enough - then he will finish up 4 & 5.

But he's going to wait and see how well 2 & 3 do first..

Maybe we're looking at a future where 4&5 go to streaming or 3D Blu Ray only - if 2 & 3 don't go as well as hoped.

[bosk1]

@xizor: Oh, I'm not knocking it.  It is a great park.  I'm just saying it suffers in comparison, that's all.  Actually, now that I think about it, I guess I wouldn't just not go.  But I wouldn't go for a full, standalone day.  I would do it with a park hopper and go hang out at another park for part of the day too.   That's what I did the first time I visited:  Animal Kingdom until sunset, then dinner outside the park, then Magic Kingdom until it closed.  THAT was a great Disney day!

[Chino]

From what I hear - Jim Cameron plans to release Avatar 2 & 3 at least - then if they do well enough - then he will finish up 4 & 5.

But he's going to wait and see how well 2 & 3 do first..

Maybe we're looking at a future where 4&5 go to streaming or 3D Blu Ray only - if 2 & 3 don't go as well as hoped.

Nah. You're referencing an old article (I remember the interview you're talking about). That's no longer the case. All 4 movies were officially greenlit and have been written. 3 and 4 are well underway and were been being filmed for pretty much the entirety of 2020 (minus a Covid pause), and Disney has already slated them into their future schedules. No way 3 and 4 don't get made at this point.

[faizoff]

The Pandora world for sure is a treat to walk through, the pictures simply don't do it justice in terms of the scale of the park and setup. I actually really liked how it was in the night time, it had a very ominous look to it.


We couldn't go on the Flight of Passage ride as the waits were insane and we went in December right before Christmas because of family visiting. I find Animal Kingdom quite enjoyable, they tend to be not so crowded as the other parks. Apart from the Pandora ride everything else doesn't take a lot of time.

[Kotowboy]

From what I hear - Jim Cameron plans to release Avatar 2 & 3 at least - then if they do well enough - then he will finish up 4 & 5.

But he's going to wait and see how well 2 & 3 do first..

Maybe we're looking at a future where 4&5 go to streaming or 3D Blu Ray only - if 2 & 3 don't go as well as hoped.

Nah. You're referencing an old article (I remember the interview you're talking about). That's no longer the case. All 4 movies were officially greenlit and have been written. 3 and 4 are well underway and were been being filmed for pretty much the entirety of 2020 (minus a Covid pause), and Disney has already slated them into their future schedules. No way 3 and 4 don't get made at this point.

As I recall - he's making all 4 sequels but might hold back on releasing 4 & 5 until 2 & 3 do well. We'll have to find the article...

[Kotowboy]

In an interview with Vanity Fair, Cameron admitted that if Avatar 2 and 3 don't perform well at the box office, plans to release the fourth and fifth instalments could easily change.

"Let’s face it, if Avatar 2 and 3 don’t make enough money, there’s not going to be a 4 and 5," he said.

"They’re fully encapsulated stories in and of themselves. It builds across the five films to a greater kind of meta narrative, but they’re fully formed films in their own right, unlike, say, The Lord of the Rings trilogy, where you really just had to sort of go, 'Oh, s--t, all right, well I guess I better come back next year.' Even though that all worked and everybody did."

Of course this was nearly 4 years ago now.  Also i'm glad each film is a complete film in it's own right. James Cameron and I both think cliffhangers are really cheap ways

of getting you to keep coming back.

[Chino]

New concept art for the Metkayina village has been release 



It reminds me of the ceilings in Mohegan Sun Casino

[Kotowboy]

Avatar 2 is either going to be f---ing jaw dropping and a billion dollar movie - or it's gonna be about the same as the first one and do nowhere near as well.

However - Aliens, Judgement Day - He has a good track record for sequels.

[Kotowboy]

For Chino

Nga yawne lu oer...

[Kotowboy]

Slight non-sequiter - BUT :


I just realised that - people still rip the piss out of AVATAR for having a formulaic and predictable script -

when pretty much all the MCU movies follow the same formula for the most part. But nobody mentions that.

I stand on my soap box that - if Avatar was just a decent hit - say $850m instead of $2.7bn - it wouldn't have had so much hate.

For some reason - if something is massively successful - people have this need to PROVE it was actually shit.


Not a diss on the MCU as I loved it and an amazing accomplishment - building a movie franchise over a decade - that mostly improves as it goes along.




----

That being said - the MCU Phase 4 movies i'm excited about are :

• SpiderMan 3

• Guardians 3

• Doctor Strange 2 ( although I dont like Sam Raimi's style )

• Thor 4. Hope it's as good as Ragnarok and they don't double down on everything that made that film great - and over do it.

[Zook]

People shit on Avatar because it was Ferngully and Pocahontas. You're always generalizing with the "people hate stuff because it's cool" crap. I'm in the group that doesn't like Nickelback. I don't like them because I think their music is awful. Not because it's the cool thing to do. I've never seen Avatar so I can't comment too much, but I just never bought into the hype. It didnt look interesting to me.

Marvel movies have the formula of heroes vs villians. Just like the comics. Sometimes those villians are just the opposite of the good guys. Like what was pointed out in the movie Unbreakable.

[ariich]

I've no idea where this idea that Avatar is hated and "shit on" has come from. It has a very respectable 7.8 average on IMDB, better than a lot of (perhaps most) MCU movies, and comfortably higher than almost all of the early MCU films.

[jammindude]

I do think the hate on Avatar is overhyped, but I also get that even people who like it seem to mostly see it as a achievement of SFX and cinematography.   

There's derivative, and then there's borderline plagiarism.  Example.   Much of what is classified as progressive rock tends to wear their influences on their sleeves quite a bit.   When it's done as an homage of something that works, it tends to be workable, but you can also forgive it for being a bit derivative.    But once in awhile, something crosses the line into being an obvious rip off.    I still really like Grendel by Marillion....but I still can't figure out how they pulled off that ending section without getting sued by Genesis.   It's such a blatant lift of the Apocalypse section of Supper's Ready that it's amazing to me there wasn't a lawsuit. 

So in short, even people who like the movie (me for instance) tend to call it out for being all about the amazing SFX and being *extremely* close to plagiarism with the story.    It's still a fun ride, but I'm really hoping the sequels don't just tear pages out of 3 other movie scripts just to save money on hiring people who write things.   

But this argument belongs in either the Avatar thread, or a new thread altogether.

[Kotowboy]

So Avatar was re-released in China ( as they wanted to start showing movies in the cinema again )... So it has reclaimed the #1 All Time spot.

Of Course Avengers fans are saying :"LOLOL Cameron had to re-release avatar four times to get back the #1 spot !!! " **

When all the previous "re-release" ( and there was only 1 ) - was YEARS before even Age of Ultron came out.

Funny though that the 2 highest grossing movies of all time both begin with Av.....


And yes - it is possible to love both films. I can't wait for Avatar 2 - I also can't wait for Guardians of the Galaxy 3, Doctor Strange 2. Thor 4 and Spiderman 3.

 

Really bores me when people can't enjoy something without the constant need to shit on something else in return. It's not like Kevin Feige and Jim Cameron are bitter enemies.




** Disney now owns FOX - and MARVEL - so any re-release would be Disney's call ironically.

[PetFish]

Slight non-sequiter - BUT :


I just realised that - people still rip the piss out of AVATAR for having a formulaic and predictable script -

when pretty much all the MCU movies follow the same formula for the most part. But nobody mentions that.

I stand on my soap box that - if Avatar was just a decent hit - say $850m instead of $2.7bn - it wouldn't have had so much hate.

For some reason - if something is massively successful - people have this need to PROVE it was actually shit.

I say this all the time.

There's a "sweet spot" like:

$0 - $50m = total bust
$50m - $100m = bust, but gets a cult following that makes it good for some reason
$100m - $500m = successful
$500m - $1b = best movie ever
>$1b = worst movie ever

Also, Avatar = Fern Gulley = Pocahontas = Dances with Wolves = Last Samurai = blah blah blah.  Similar stories are told over and over cuz they're great stories.  People can think of them as crossovers or something if that helps.

Just cuz a movie follows a blueprint doesn't automatically make it bad but too many people, sadly a lot of "educated" writers, can't think critically like that and just use it as a reason to hate on something (calling it unoriginal or blatant plagiarism) even though they may just hate it for something else (didn't like the shade of blue they used) but they can't say that so they print the old standard "ripoff" review.

I loved Avatar.  I cried several times in the theater.  Like, snot bubbles and everything.  I was able to get emotionally invested easily, so does that mean I should just think it's shit cuz it follows a model?  These idiot trash-writers think everyone should hate on something just cuz they didn't like it.  They never seem to look at it from other angles or from other points-of-view.

Anyway, bring on the of the sequels!

[hefdaddy42]

Just cuz a movie follows a blueprint doesn't automatically make it bad but too many people, sadly a lot of "educated" writers, can't think critically like that and just use it as a reason to hate on something (calling it unoriginal or blatant plagiarism) even though they may just hate it for something else (didn't like the shade of blue they used) but they can't say that so they print the old standard "ripoff" review.

Or they are rightly criticizing it for a complete lack of originality (at least in the plotting - plenty of creativity in the visuals and world building).  No, it doesn't automatically make it bad, but it definitely disappoints, and beginning with a plot that has already been used 14 times in other well-known films means that, for many people, the movie starts off with one hand tied behind its back.

Also, not sure why you think a lot of educated writers can't think critically.  I don't even know what that means.  I also don't get what you mean by critics claiming to criticize for one element rather than the actual element of the film which bothers them.

[bosk1]

I will second what Hef said.  To those that loved it, great.  For those that didn't, a good many have valid criticisms. 

For me personally, I liked it.  I didn't love it.  I have probably seen it 4 times since release.  Each time, I enjoyed it well enough.  But it fits squarely into "generic summer blockbuster" territory for me.  Good popcorn film, but not much more than that, so I personally feel like it is very overrated.  But again, for those who loved it, great.  I don't and can't begrudge anyone that.

[PetFish]

Also, not sure why you think a lot of educated writers can't think critically.  I don't even know what that means.  I also don't get what you mean by critics claiming to criticize for one element rather than the actual element of the film which bothers them.

I think critics are in it mostly for the views and will crap on what's "popular", such as with re-telling of a classic story, cuz that's what everyone is talking about.

However, they may actually enjoy the re-telling* but actually dislike something "uncommon" with the film... such as why the Avatars had 5 fingers instead of 4, or why the Na'vi were all left-handed, or why there was no background/motivation for Quarich that made him just want to kill stuff.

Rather than complain about stuff like that they just add to the pile of what "most" people are complaining about just so they can be a part of it and get views.

Obviously, there are critics that don't do this, but it seems to me that so many would rather just join the bandwagon of complaining about the same things others are rather than offer a unique take on other aspects.

* For me personally, I saw Avatar during a very awful time in my life regarding mortality/life/death and I fell in love with the idea of the Na'vi and the way their souls speak directly to the planet and they become a part of it when their body dies.  I don't believe in God or an afterlife, it'll be great if there is one, but Avatar really gave me the feels even though it's the same old story.

[Chino]

Also, not sure why you think a lot of educated writers can't think critically.  I don't even know what that means.  I also don't get what you mean by critics claiming to criticize for one element rather than the actual element of the film which bothers them.

I think critics are in it mostly for the views and will crap on what's "popular", such as with re-telling of a classic story, cuz that's what everyone is talking about.

However, they may actually enjoy the re-telling* but actually dislike something "uncommon" with the film... such as why the Avatars had 5 fingers instead of 4, or why the Na'vi were all left-handed, or why there was no background/motivation for Quarich that made him just want to kill stuff.

Rather than complain about stuff like that they just add to the pile of what "most" people are complaining about just so they can be a part of it and get views.

Obviously, there are critics that don't do this, but it seems to me that so many would rather just join the bandwagon of complaining about the same things others are rather than offer a unique take on other aspects.

* For me personally, I saw Avatar during a very awful time in my life regarding mortality/life/death and I fell in love with the idea of the Na'vi and the way their souls speak directly to the planet and they become a part of it when their body dies.  I don't believe in God or an afterlife, it'll be great if there is one, but Avatar really gave me the feels even though it's the same old story.

It's a shame. A lot of the criticisms I've seen of this movie have revolved around stuff like that. There were some awesome deleted scenes that really helped tie in some of those character traits. The Survival Guide also dug into a lot of the past and laid the groundwork for much of the first film. I'm hoping that at some point in the next four films, some of that becomes clear.

We already know Quaritch is coming back. I'm really curious to see how that happens. In A1 he said in his opening monolog that the arrows of the Na'vi were dipped in a neurotoxin that will stop a heart in one minute. Well.. he got shot with two of them in his heart, so I'm pretty sure he's toast. There's a chance that what was shot was a human avatar, but I'm not convinced of that because of the scars on his head.

[Kotowboy]

You know nobody has anything bad to say about it beyond lol smurf a hontas because thats the only thing I ever see.

One theory is that Quaritch was an Avatar of himself . Maybe he just liked the scars ( he said he did ) and carried it over.

OR there are actually some bad Navi on the planet who did the soul transferring into a new Quaritch navi Body.

Who knows

[hefdaddy42]

Also, not sure why you think a lot of educated writers can't think critically.  I don't even know what that means.  I also don't get what you mean by critics claiming to criticize for one element rather than the actual element of the film which bothers them.

I think critics are in it mostly for the views and will crap on what's "popular", such as with re-telling of a classic story, cuz that's what everyone is talking about.

However, they may actually enjoy the re-telling* but actually dislike something "uncommon" with the film... such as why the Avatars had 5 fingers instead of 4, or why the Na'vi were all left-handed, or why there was no background/motivation for Quarich that made him just want to kill stuff.

Rather than complain about stuff like that they just add to the pile of what "most" people are complaining about just so they can be a part of it and get views.

Obviously, there are critics that don't do this, but it seems to me that so many would rather just join the bandwagon of complaining about the same things others are rather than offer a unique take on other aspects.

* For me personally, I saw Avatar during a very awful time in my life regarding mortality/life/death and I fell in love with the idea of the Na'vi and the way their souls speak directly to the planet and they become a part of it when their body dies.  I don't believe in God or an afterlife, it'll be great if there is one, but Avatar really gave me the feels even though it's the same old story.

I'm not sure why you assume that their motivations are anything other than what they appear to be.  Frankly, the lack of background/motivation for Quaritch is a legitimate criticism.  And if a critic has issues with the same things that other people do, then there is a reason that everyone has issues with that thing, whatever it is.

The fact that you like, or even love, a film doesn't mean that critics are wrong when they take issue with certain things in the film.  It means that you aren't judging the film by the same standards that they are, or that, for you, the film works, despite the fact that it doesn't for others.  This happens literally ALL THE TIME.  There are critically acclaimed films that I can't watch all the way through, and there are films that I hold close to my heart that were critically reviled.

[faizoff]

Just realized that the messages are merged from the other MCU thread which is why the title of some replies say MCU no spoilers.. lol

Anywayw.. huge fan of both Avatar and MCU, more fun for me...

Oddly enough the 1st time I saw Avatar, I didn't much care for it. It was the repeated viewings that really made me a huge fan. Also love all the extended stuff. The theme park is great too.

[Kotowboy]

I thought i'd be the opposite. I saw it in 3D the first time and it was PURE entertainment.  I rewatched it on Blu Ray just recently and expected to

now hate it after so much time. But I still loved it.

And  that's all it's supposed to be. FUN. Something to ENJOY for two hours.

I don't go to the cinema to watch Waiting For Godot. I know Star Trek Into Darkness and The Rise of Skywalker are both big silly action fests - but I don't

go into a movie expecting to learn a life lesson - I go to have fun for two hours and forget about my life.

I don't understand those people who presumably go to the cinema with a Sharpie and a Notebook with the title

" Everything about the film that SUCKS  "


I think because of shows like Half In The Bag and Cinema Sins and Nostalgia Critic etc... Everyone is now a film critic and watches movies primarily to find flaws

rather than just enjoy it.  If you search a movie on YouTube - the majority of videos are : THE PROBLEMS WITH THIS MOVIE.

[DoctorAction]

I think that's a really good point. A positive, forgiving viewpoint can only increase the enjoyment.

[bosk1]

I think because of shows like Half In The Bag and Cinema Sins and Nostalgia Critic etc... Everyone is now a film critic and watches movies primarily to find flaws

rather than just enjoy it.  If you search a movie on YouTube - the majority of videos are : THE PROBLEMS WITH THIS MOVIE.

No, i don't think that's true.  I think there is a cause and effect relationship you aren't seeing.  Because you have watched some of those Half in the Bag videos, etc., your YouTube search algorithms have taken that into account and now tend to show you videos of those types when you search for movies.  There are TONS of videos out there praising every movie under the sun.

[ZirconBlue]

I've only seen the movie on blu-ray, and found it bland and forgettable.  Which, to me, means that while the movie had ground-breaking FX, the story and characters were lacking.  I didn't hate it, just have no desire to ever see it again.

[Kotowboy]

No I don't think that's true.

i'm shocked

[orcus116]

I've only seen the movie on blu-ray, and found it bland and forgettable.  Which, to me, means that while the movie had ground-breaking FX, the story and characters were lacking.  I didn't hate it, just have no desire to ever see it again.

I have the some feeling although I saw it in theaters when it came out. The 3D didn't really do it for me which was part of the draw and maybe it was where I was sitting but I barely remember any immersive moments as far as the technology went. Flat story and characters aside I also didn't find the world compelling at all since I felt I was basically looking at Earth with some CGI effects instead of a truly alien world.

That aside the best thing that came out of Avatar is the Flight of Passage ride at Disney which is by far the coolest ride I've ever been on. I'd line up for that sumbitch any day.

[The Realm]

I loved Avatar in the theater. I thought the 3D was immersive and amazing and added something to the movie which made it special and unique. No other movie I saw in 3D came close. I think this is what kept people coming back to it. Seeing it now on dvd/blue ray, it doesn't have the same visual appeal but I still enjoy the movie.

Like everything that is extremely popular or successful it is going to have its very vocal detractors. The story of course isn't unique, some of the dialogue is clunky but the world building is amazing and James Cameron is the master of building an action scene.