Avatar 2

Re: The Avatar Trilogy

Well, I think this thing, which was years in the making, is LONG overdue for a reboot.
We can get some fresh faces in there and update the designs of the ships and the aliens. It would be great to see done with an updated effects team, maybe a few lens flares...

We can only hope!
 
Re: The Avatar Trilogy

Well, I think this thing, which was years in the making, is LONG overdue for a reboot.
We can get some fresh faces in there and update the designs of the ships and the aliens. It would be great to see done with an updated effects team, maybe a few lens flares...

We can only hope!

And Ewoks or Gunguns.
 
Re: The Avatar Trilogy

Wow....

Boxofficemojo reports Avatar topped Book of Eli for the 4-day holiday weekend at $54 million vs $38 million for Eli.

It has just topped The Dark Knight's record of fastest to $500 million.

Dark Knight - 45 days
Avatar - 32 days

I think this film WILL top Titanic now. The weekly totals are not letting up by much at all. At most by very small percents. I don't think I've ever seen this much strength of consistent box office force in a film so far!

I'm just wondering by how much will it top Titanic by?

Amazing that the last 2 films Cameron has made have been in the now top 3 grossing films of all time (not adjusted for inflation of course).
 
Re: The Avatar Trilogy

If you look back at popular culture in the past, you'll find that the stuff that was hugely successful and made a fortune usually isn't the stuff that everybody remembers as being good.

People harp on about the greatness of rock in the 70's, but when you put it next to the top 50 there is hardly any trace of it.

So the true lithmus test will be if everybody still remembers Avatar in 25 years time.
 
Re: The Avatar Trilogy

So, just because it's old means its okay just to re-hash it? Why not do something a little more original?

The way Star Wars was original? Or The Matrix? Or District 9? Or Forbidden Planet? Or 2001:A Space ODYSSEY?

I hate to break it to you, but many, if not most, of the classic science-fiction films are "re-hashes" of old myths, stories, and legends. What makes stories like these endure (i.e. worth re-telling) is that they convey themes that have withstood the test of time in terms of what they have to say about the nature of good and evil, right and wrong, crime and punishment, love and hate, etc.

Again, it's not what a filmmaker steals, it's what he does with what he steals that matters.


I wonder if there was this much flapping when Shakespeare offered his interpretation of the Hamlet story...

You better believe it.

More to the point, classics like King Kong, The Wizard of Oz, 2001, Planet of the Apes, and Star Wars (just to name a few) have all been called “mediocre” at one point or another. Avatar is hardly the first sci-fi/ fantasy film to be dismissed by critics as being a disposable piece of pop entertainment, nor will it be the last. In the grand scheme of things I suppose the critics have a point, but for the time being some of us seem to enjoy films like A L I E N well enough (just to name another highly derivative re-hash).

The thing about the sci-fi/ fantasy/ horror genres is that they’ve always been easy targets for critics. In the past hardcore fans like yours truly have embraced movies like Jason and the Argonauts, Day the Earth Stood Still, Fantastic Voyage, and War of the Worlds (for example) in spite of their flaws. These days so-called genre “fans” (i.e. fanboys) will trash a filmmaker for failing to achieve perfection, and they’ll do so with the sort of venomous passion previously reserved for Nazis and child molesters. God knows we’re each entitled to our opinion, but if I judged every sci-fi film by the lofty standards held by some on this board I’d never have become a fan in the first place.

I have no idea if Avatar will withstand the test of time to the extent of the films mentioned above, but I wouldn’t bet against it. I’ve seen a lot of sci-fi/ fantasy movies over the past 40 years and only three have teleported me so utterly and completely into another world that the viewing experience was akin to embarking on a physical journey: 2001, Star Wars and Avatar. Each of these pictures has flaws, to be sure, but in each case I find the strengths far outweigh the weaknesses.

As for the prospect of sequels, if they turn out good I’m all for them. I mean, I’ll take a decent flick where I can find one. Flaws and all.
 
Re: The Avatar Trilogy

The way Star Wars was original? Or The Matrix? Or District 9? Or Forbidden Planet? Or 2001:A Space ODYSSEY?

I hate to break it to you, but many, if not most, of the classic science-fiction films are "re-hashes" of old myths, stories, and legends. What makes stories like these endure (i.e. worth re-telling) is that they convey themes that have withstood the test of time in terms of what they have to say about the nature of good and evil, right and wrong, crime and punishment, love and hate, etc.

Again, it's not what a filmmaker steals, it's what he does with what he steals that matters.




You better believe it.

More to the point, classics like King Kong, The Wizard of Oz, 2001, Planet of the Apes, and Star Wars (just to name a few) have all been called “mediocre” at one point or another. Avatar is hardly the first sci-fi/ fantasy film to be dismissed by critics as being a disposable piece of pop entertainment, nor will it be the last. In the grand scheme of things I suppose the critics have a point, but for the time being some of us seem to enjoy films like A L I E N well enough (just to name another highly derivative re-hash).

The thing about the sci-fi/ fantasy/ horror genres is that they’ve always been easy targets for critics. In the past hardcore fans like yours truly have embraced movies like Jason and the Argonauts, Day the Earth Stood Still, Fantastic Voyage, and War of the Worlds (for example) in spite of their flaws. These days so-called genre “fans” (i.e. fanboys) will trash a filmmaker for failing to achieve perfection, and they’ll do so with the sort of venomous passion previously reserved for Nazis and child molesters. God knows we’re each entitled to our opinion, but if I judged every sci-fi film by the lofty standards held by some on this board I’d never have become a fan in the first place.

I have no idea if Avatar will withstand the test of time to the extent of the films mentioned above, but I wouldn’t bet against it. I’ve seen a lot of sci-fi/ fantasy movies over the past 40 years and only three have teleported me so utterly and completely into another world that the viewing experience was akin to embarking on a physical journey: 2001, Star Wars and Avatar. Each of these pictures has flaws, to be sure, but in each case I find the strengths far outweigh the weaknesses.

As for the prospect of sequels, if they turn out good I’m all for them. I mean, I’ll take a decent flick where I can find one. Flaws and all.


Well said, Carson.

Point of fact, there were a LOT of people who considered Shakespeare a hack in his day. It was only after he was recognized by Queen Elizabeth (who had her share of critics herself, not in the least for 'lowering' herself to take in something as crass as live theater) that he started to gain notariety, and, for that matter, he wasn't particularly respected by his peers (i.e. playwrites) until quite a while after his death.

Just because something is considered a classic now, that does not mean that it was accepted when it was new. There are plenty of critics who panned Star Wars, Blade Runner, and numerous others that are well-loved classics today.

Personally, I don't think that Avatar -needs- a sequel, but I'll be more than happy to give it a chance when it comes out.
 
Re: The Avatar Trilogy

Personally, I don't think that Avatar -needs- a sequel, but I'll be more than happy to give it a chance when it comes out.

Yeah, I hear you.

Then again, The Godfather, Star Wars and A L I E N didn't need sequels either, but I admit I get a kick out of The Godfather Part II, The Empire Strikes Back and A L I E N S.

American Graffiti 2, 2010: Odyssey 2, and Ghostbusters 2, not so much.

:)

In the case of Avatar I'm encouraged by the fact that Cameron was talking up the trilogy thing months before the first film's release. To what extent he's actually thought the sequels out is anybody's guess, but it's not like he didn't have any time between Titanic and Avatar to noodle the possibilities.
 
Re: The Avatar Trilogy

Sequel would be fine if it's got a story to engage. We already know the visuals are stellar. I could live with or without the sequels, but then again, who's to say Avatar two won't be his "Empire Strikes Back" to the first one???

He's talented as a director and with the right people and ideas, he could definitely pull it off. Just don't expect higher ticket sales unless you have something new to sell.

Dave
 
Re: The Avatar Trilogy

(RPF oldtimer injoke warning)

does this mean we need to change our domain name to avatarvstitanic.com?
 
Avatar Sequels

Here's a bit of news on Avatar:

James Cameron's 'Avatar' sequels may hit theaters by Christmas of 2014 and 2015, the director tells Entertainment Weekly.

"I am in the process of writing the next two 'Avatar' films now," Cameron says. "We are planning to shoot them together and post them together, and we will probably release them not quite back to back, but about a year apart. Christmas '14 and '15 is the current plan."

EW notes the release dates should be treated as strictly tentative, referencing the initial film's pushed-back release date. More on the sequels after the jump.
Cameron says the trilogy will continue with characters from the first 'Avatar.' "Basically, if you survived the first film, you get to be in the second film, at least in some form."

More good news is that a percentage of the 'Avatar' sequels' profits will benefit the environment. "Fox has partnered with me to donate a chunk of the profits to environmental causes that are at the heart of the Avatar world," Cameron says. "I didn't want to make more 'Avatar' movies without a grander plan in place."

'Avatar' star Sam Worthington hyped the sequels to Moviefone recently, speculating on the plot: "I always joked and said that they were married, and Jake Sully got lazy, and Neytiri kicked his butt," Worthington said. "But there is something to [the notion of being] in a genetically-engineered body now, which he is. Is there a 'use by' date on it? I don't know. What's the new dilemma? Is it just humans coming back, or is something even bigger than can threaten them, threaten the world?"
 
This thread is more than 3 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top