Avatar 2: The Way of Water

[Corvinus85]

The thing I appreciated the most about the first one was the attention to detail, both for the human technology and for thinking up and bringing to life an entire alien ecosystem.

[Werthead]

Most of the criticisms of the idea of a sequel hold water (so to speak) but there's also the James Cameron factor to consider. His last two sequels were Terminator 2 and Aliens and he has spent all but 20 months of the last 25 years as the highest-grossing director of all time.

By every metric this film should not do as well as the first, but the Cameron factor is so huge you can't write it off.

Also, this film apparently uses a more advanced form of 3D than the original. The theatre chains I think are pretty nervous about re-investing in 3D after the last bubble, so it'd need to be really impressive to get them to buy into it. That might be why they made 4 sequels, so even if other studios are slow to jump on board again, they know they've have four event moves airing every other year from this year until 2028 to get on board.

Edited May 10, 2022 by Werthead

[Heartofice]

The ‘going native’ trope was a tired one even before Avatar rolled it out again, and Cameron even admitted how big and influence Dances with Wolves is. 
 

8 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

And, as I've said before, after a decade of massive cash and endless praise being heaped on franchise reboots and endless superhero stuff, "Lack of  originality" isn't a criticism I take very seriously. 

That’s also very faint praise for making a new franchise from a creatively void movie. Hardly an endorsement 

[sifth]

More like Dances With Blue People, if anything, lol

I just never understood the love the first film got. Don't get me wrong Zoe Saldana was awesome, like she usually is and Stephen Lang played a fun villain, but aside from that, I think I hated everyone else in the cast. Even Sigourney Weaver was underused.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

I have yet to see a James Cameron film that I actively dislike.  There are some I like more than others but none I didn’t enjoy to some degree.

[sifth]

26 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I have yet to see a James Cameron film that I actively dislike.  There are some I like more than others but none I didn’t enjoy to some degree.

Did you ever see Piranha II?

[Heartofice]

35 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I have yet to see a James Cameron film that I actively dislike.  There are some I like more than others but none I didn’t enjoy to some degree.

He’s not exactly prolific though .

I have to say I actively dislike Titanic, it’s really not for me.

[williamjm]

4 hours ago, sifth said:

Has Sam Worthington learned how to act, in the ten years it took to make this film.

I felt that he was more convincing as a 10-foot tall blue alien than he was portraying a human being.

[sifth]

5 minutes ago, williamjm said:

I felt that he was more convincing as a 10-foot tall blue alien than he was portraying a human being.

I mean playing a human isn't easy. Just ask Tommy Wiseau and Neil Breen.

[Veltigar]

3 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

James Cameron is a titan of fantasy film making and a pretty damn good director. Also one of the few big budget film makers who can credibly claim to be an "auteur". We need more of that. ALSO ONE OF THE FEW BIG BUDGET FILM MAKERS WHO MADE ME CRY! You know when. 

When you realized his creations eventually led us to Terminator Genysis and Dark Fate?

Edited May 9, 2022 by Veltigar

[Heartofice]

3 minutes ago, Veltigar said:

When you realized his creations eventually led us to Terminator Genysis and Dark Fate?

He also produced Dark Fate. Don’t forget that.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, sifth said:

More like Dances With Blue People, if anything, lol

I just never understood the love the first film got. Don't get me wrong Zoe Saldana was awesome, like she usually is and Stephen Lang played a fun villain, but aside from that, I think I hated everyone else in the cast. Even Sigourney Weaver was underused.

Because it was visually groundbreaking. I had never seen anything like it with the exception of one short movie at Disneyworld. Yeah the plot isn't that great on rewatches, but that first time in the theater was incredible. My GF at the the time and I probably watched in three times in the first two weeks it was out. 

[Myrddin]

47 minutes ago, williamjm said:

I felt that he was more convincing as a 10-foot tall blue alien than he was portraying a human being.

So many things they can fix in post.

Hey... maybe that's why they got rid of his human body in the first one...

[sifth]

30 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Because it was visually groundbreaking. I had never seen anything like it with the exception of one short movie at Disneyworld. Yeah the plot isn't that great on rewatches, but that first time in the theater was incredible. My GF at the the time and I probably watched in three times in the first two weeks it was out. 

To be honest I wasn't all that impressed by the CGI. To be honest, it sort of reminded me of a video game. I'm glad you enjoyed it, but for me, I just never understood the hype.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

4 hours ago, Werthead said:

By every metric this film should not do as well as the first, but the Cameron factor is so huge you can't write it off.

Not as many moneys as "the highest grossing film on the history of ever" is a pretty low bar. Also the cinematic landscape is somewhat more crowded than it was back in the day. The MCU didn't really exist back in 2009. 

4 hours ago, Heartofice said:

The ‘going native’ trope was a tired one even before Avatar rolled it out again, and Cameron even admitted how big and influence Dances with Wolves is. 
 

That’s also very faint praise for making a new franchise from a creatively void movie. Hardly an endorsement 

Except this is the only one where main character is a total cypher. The thing that's special about him is that there is nothing special about him. It's not like he's going to Pandora to teach the Nav'i how to farm or something.

It's interesting to me that for all the talk of the "white savior" trope, there's never any discussion about how Avatar subverts in the trope in several ways. It's an easy criticism to make because it's so poorly defined.

And, "creatively void"? Come on, man.

3 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I have yet to see a James Cameron film that I actively dislike.  There are some I like more than others but none I didn’t enjoy to some degree.

Same. 

3 hours ago, sifth said:

Did you ever see Piranha II?

I have not but I bet it's the best Piranha movie to ever come out of Roger Corman studios.

Edited May 10, 2022 by Deadlines? What Deadlines?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

17 minutes ago, sifth said:

To be honest I wasn't all that impressed by the CGI. To be honest, it sort of reminded me of a video game. I'm glad you enjoyed it, but for me, I just never understood the hype.

I just can't think of anything that looked anywhere as good up to that point, had haven't seen much since. Gravity's 3D was pretty cool I guess.

[Fez]

5 hours ago, Heartofice said:

The only thing I remember from the first movie is a couple of occasions where the 3D really worked. There are some scenes where you go WOW! Pretty much every other 3D experience I had afterwards only detracted from the movie

So unless there is some new revolutionary advance in 3D technology I see no reason to watch this, that first one wasn’t really a movie, it was like the sort of thing you’d see in shops that sell TVs, to show off the picture quality.. but for 2 hours 

Apparently the big thing this time (and one of the reasons the movie took so long to make) is that all the underwater scenes are based on real underwater motion capture. Which has never happened before, Cameron's people invented the tech that made it possible. Now whether this will translate into underwater scenes that look nothing like anything we've seen before I can't say. But the hope would be that it does; because otherwise, what was the point?

[polishgenius]

I think Avatar's CG and general design was really pretty on a 'what's being shown' level but it wasn't interesting to me in a cinematic way. Like, no particularly great shot composition or anything. Mileage may vary I suppose. 

 

I also just found it aggressively stupid. Like how in all their history none of the Na'vi had ever thought to jump onto the big predator thing from above. Also a big deal was made of the incredible bond between rider and animal once they join, and then Jake abandons his for the new model without a word. Or how the big plan at the end was to let the bomber get so close to the tree that destroying it risked destroying the tree anyway, and also a bunch of forest-dwellers in their own forest decided the best way to face a vastly-better-armed force was to run at them in a straight line. 


And I mean, I like Chronicles of Riddick. Clearly I do not have that much problem with stupid films in general but something about Avatar drove me up the wall.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

9 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

I also just found it aggressively stupid. Like how in all their history none of the Na'vi had ever thought to jump onto the big predator thing from above. 

You fool! They literally talk about how it's been awhile since someone had the balls to do that. 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

7 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

You fool! They literally talk about how it's been awhile since someone had the balls to do that. 

Natyri’s Grandfather was “toruk makto”… so… yeah.