SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Remember when we finally had the first bit of artwork from the first film leak? Those were the days.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Avatar sequels officially begin filming Sept 25. Are standalone sequels.
- Thread starter SCULLIBUNDO
- Start date
Remember when we finally had the first bit of artwork from the first film leak? Those were the days.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
It's being shot in HFR. He's explained it will be a variable framerate. Kind of like how he can dial the depth of 3D up or down depending on the shot or scene, he's taking the same approach to HFR. So it's likely HFR for certain action shots, but extreme close up inserts won't look like that weird shit in the Hobbit.
Last we heard, it did sound like he was going to pull back to 48fps, instead of the 60fps he once talked about. This would almost certainly be due to increased budget/rendering of all the extra frames for what may be negligible difference. But we also know how much Cameron will fight for negligible differences, as to him, that's usually what makes the difference. So who knows.
I hope he pushes 60fps.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Sigourney gives another little update.
http://www.mtv.com/news/3026653/sigourney-weaver-parkour-avatar/
Guess that underwater perf-cap tech has worked out.
http://www.mtv.com/news/3026653/sigourney-weaver-parkour-avatar/
Guess that underwater perf-cap tech has worked out.
Remember when we finally had the first bit of artwork from the first film leak? Those were the days.
Ah yes, the days when we only had that and your weekly Avatar threads.
I don't understand how is performance capture gonna work underwater. Why is this even necessary. And I wonder what kind of parkour is 67 year-old Sigourney doing.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
It's necessary because the scene in the first film with Sam Worthington escaping the Thanator by jumping in the river and riding the rapids down was accomplished by putting him in an office chair and rolling him across the soundstage while he flailed about.Ah yes, the days when we only had that and your weekly Avatar threads.
I don't understand how is performance capture gonna work underwater. Why is this even necessary. And I wonder what kind of parkour is 67 year-old Sigourney doing.
Also don't forget that Cameron took Saldana and Worthington to the forests in Hawaii for he first film and made them dress in loin-cloths so they had the sense-memory for how it felt to walk through that environment when on a bare soundstage for months on end.
At the end of the day, Cameron isn't going to accept underwater movement looking anything short of the real thing when the sequel will spend a considerable amount of time underwater. The dude still wears scuba club t-shirts to set.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
So did Stephen Lang. Big deal!
To be fair, there's a pretty good indication of how Weaver can return, given she was technically transferred to the collective consciousness of Pandora aka Eywa.
Stephen Lang / Quaritch is going to be a more interesting death to solve.
http://www.cinemablend.com/new/How-It-Possible-Sigourney-Weaver-Avatar-Sequels-70098.html
Weaver has apparently confirmed that she isn't playing the same character as in the first film.
I suspect Stephen Lang will probably be playing a different character as well......and that the both of them will just be mo-capped Na'vi, rather than humans.
NipplesAndToes23
Member
These shits are taking too long to come out. I don't even care anymore.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Lang won't be playing a different character. In a long-ago interview when they announced Lang would return for the sequels, Cameron explained he would essentially be this saga's Darth Vader.
Weaver seems to be a good bet to return as the visual embodiment of Eywa. She'll essentially be serving as the mouthpiece for a god. Nobody expects her to return as Grace.
Edit: Here's the Lang announcement : http://deadline.com/2013/10/james-cameron-has-found-avatars-darth-vader-its-stephen-lang-617426/
Yeah, James Cameron..... not that rich......
peanutbutterlatte
Member
I mean I'm sure I'll be proven wrong and all, I still have no idea how the original was so successful, but I just can't see the desire for this.
Go look at past avatar threads on GAF. They consistently get hundreds of responses.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
I still don't understand people not understanding the desire for this. You have a film that is by FAR the most successful movie of all time by a good margin, that everybody and their dog went and saw multiple times. Then you get people going 'but where's the desire for this?'
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!
Member
This script better surpass fuckin War and Peace with the amount of time Cameron spent on it
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Four scripts. In between extensive research and development, deep-sea expeditions and diving to the deepest point on Earth solo.
Killer Queen
Banned
Because nobody saw Avatar because they heard it was a great movie. They went to go see it because of the visual spectacle, CGI and 3D and that's why people went to go see it numerous times. Its visuals broke new ground for the time.
10 years later, CGI spectacle is standard and overblown and even past CGI franchise Juggernauts like Transformers aren't making as much as they used too.
3D is also on its way out too.
So what you're left with is a mediocre film that did some cool groundbreaking things for its time visually that have now become the standard in the box office and again as shown by Transformers diminishing returns and BvS inability to break 1bil big CGI spectacle in a boring movie just isn't going to cut it anymore.
So unless Cameron has unlocked the fourth dimension and has yet again found away to reinvent the cinema going experience I doubt any of these sequels will come close to doing what Avatar did, and maybe even also continue the trend of diminishing returns if it's just more Avatar.
Outside of visuals and art direction the franchise really doesn't have anything worthwhile going for it.
Transformers and BvS were both criticaly terrible films though.
The difference is that Avatar was a good spectacle film. Plus, the action in Avatar shits all over those two films.
Killer Queen
Banned
Critical reception didn't stop Transformers from making billions of dollars before, don't see why it would have now.
Avatar is just an okay film with pretty visuals. Which is fine. No more no less.
Why are you so intent on rewriting history?
Most reviews for it were overwhelmingly positive. Tons of people love and enjoyed it for more than just a 3D spectacle considering it set blu-ray records as well.
Chezzymann
Member
I'll blow some peoples minds: Avatar has a better metacritic rating than The Dark Knight, Civil War, Logan, GOTG, any of the planet of the apes reboot movies, Arrival, Zootopia, The Force Awakens, or basically most of the well received blockbusters of the past 10 years.
The plot was super standard and predictable but the world building, soundtrack, visuals, etc were amazing. I still remember that huge high I had after watching it and wanting to consume myself in that world. I have to admit its boring re watching it now but I still remember that magic when it came out. If Cameron can make the story interesting and bring back that 'holy fuck' factor CG that hasn't really happened again since, I think we could have something special on our hands.
The plot was super standard and predictable but the world building, soundtrack, visuals, etc were amazing. I still remember that huge high I had after watching it and wanting to consume myself in that world. I have to admit its boring re watching it now but I still remember that magic when it came out. If Cameron can make the story interesting and bring back that 'holy fuck' factor CG that hasn't really happened again since, I think we could have something special on our hands.
Killer Queen
Banned
Did you mean to quote Scullibundo or was that comment self reflection?
Not sure where I'm rewriting history by stating my personal opinion along with talking about my anecdotal experience with the film.
I remember quite vividly the time when Avatar came out, the buzz was that it had life like CGI, beautiful alien visuals and amazing 3D. That's pretty much why I and most people I've ever spoken to about the film bothered to watch and rewatch it.
That's why it got the attention it did, the same way The Force Awakens (a movie I love quite a bit) only got as much attention as it did because it was a new, sequel Star Wars film, and it wasn't terrible.
The last Jedi won't do as well as The Force Awakens because of that. The people that went to go see it to be part of the spectacle alone probably don't care to drop in enough for the sequels. Avatar will be the same, except it can't even piggyback off of the momentum from the first film since it's been a decade.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Explain all the repeat watches and it holding the highest 2D home video sales until Frozen's release.
I swear it's never a James Cameron movie unless you have people sharpening their knives for his next film failure, only to be proven wrong every time.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
People seem to misunderstand why this film will do well.
It's not because it's a sequel to the highest grossing film of all time or because it will have a ridiculous budget. None of that has a bearing on why these sequels will succeed. It isn't because James Cameron is a recognisable name, either.
It's precisely because James Cameron knows how to craft an audience pleaser that people want to watch again and again. The man knows how to make films, no matter the subject matter, that audiences connect with on a wide spectrum.
It's not because it's a sequel to the highest grossing film of all time or because it will have a ridiculous budget. None of that has a bearing on why these sequels will succeed. It isn't because James Cameron is a recognisable name, either.
It's precisely because James Cameron knows how to craft an audience pleaser that people want to watch again and again. The man knows how to make films, no matter the subject matter, that audiences connect with on a wide spectrum.
Killer Queen
Banned
Who's sharpening their knives hoping the film fails?
Please show me where. Because not once have I said anything even close to that.
Repeat watches come from spectacle and technology
It has the highest home video sales because Blu Ray and nicer, high resolution TVs were becoming more common place. You couldn't walk into a TV store or open a tech magazine without them showing Avatar to promote their product and it was like this for a few years. Obviously you want a film with great visuals to either sell or take home to watch on your new high resolution TV.
Just because you're a Cameron fan doesn't mean you need to take offense to any and all dissenting opinions on The Messiah's work. Believe it or not, not everyone agrees that the film is all that great. That's fine if you do, me disagreeing isn't taking anything away from you or anyone else or get bent out of shape any time any discussion revolving around the film isn't pure praise.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
I'm not a big fan of Avatar, but I can't deny this aspect of it. Out of currently active filmmakers, I would probably say that Cameron, Spielberg and Nolan are the three that know audiences the best.
You're trying to rewrite history when you say
When tons of people watched the film and loved it beyond the 3d. Again: critical reception of the film was overwhelmingly positive and the film set blu-ray records despite it not being 3d. So don't say "nobody saw avatar because it's a great movie" and then claim that you're not trying to rewrite history.
Killer Queen
Banned
Nice cherry picking.
I mean, the other half of that post is you claiming the future with regards to Last Jedi and how that also means that Avatar 2 won't do as well. So that doesn't pertains to the rewriting history gripe that I have.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
When you lump Avatar in with Transformers as a draw that relies solely on visual-spectacle, then explain that those films are all experiencing diminishing returns, it's not hard to see where you're implying that the sequel/s are due to fail. When I say knives out, I'm talking about waiting for the financial failure that so many did before both Titanic and Avatar.
Killer Queen
Banned
I said visual spectacle, CGI and 3D and you pick 3D to attempt to invalidate what I said rather than taking that statement as a whole. You know what that's called?
Diminishing returns== failing.
Avatar 2 won't make as much as Avatar 1, that doesn't mean it'll fail
The Last Jedi won't make as much as The Force Awakens, that doesn't mean it'll fail
That means it'll make less than the previous entry.
If I said Avatar 2 won't make back its budget, that's me saying it'll fail.
Lumping it in with another popular, billion dollar CGIfest blockbuster isn't unfair, and I put it in the same performance category as star wars along with Transformers. You're being oversensitive.
D
Deleted member 22576
Unconfirmed Member
Homey you freaked out on me back in the day formposting this shot!!! Well maybe it was a screenshot from the final production rather than the concept art for it. But it was the same shot:Remember when we finally had the first bit of artwork from the first film leak? Those were the days.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
There is no way this is going to happen.
This series, on this board, has become such a thing that even if the first trailer to the sequel hints at a sublime visual mindfuck, you're still going to get hot takes. And takes in response to those takes.
Not only because this is a discussion forum so it's guaranteed to go down like that, but because there are people here with minimum 5 years (if not closer to 10) invested in having staked out a side on either side of the Avatar divide, and letting that tribal/provincial bullshit go is not going to be easy - and that's assuming people are willing to do so - and many are not.
So yeah, there's going to be hot takes. Because on some level, it's not really about the movie at all. Avatar discussions tend to become, for lack of a better word, partisan.
(which is partially why this movie's discussion often finds itself very, very wrapped up in the box-office results)
Didn't feel like typing out a list since I'm on my phone. But my points still stands so I don't know what your issue with my points are.
Killer Queen
Banned
You have one single point that fails to address anything else I've said in an attempt to invalidate what I said despite the fact that your "argument" falls apart when my statement is taken as a whole. But carry on.
I'm confused, you are claiming that people only saw the film for technical reasons. My counter point is that the film was also critically a hit so you are rewriting history. How does that mean my point falls apart?
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Was it really a critical success though when it lost the Best Picture Oscar to The Hurt Locker? I mean, Golden Globe wins only mean so much.
Everybody still talks about that film, right?
Bobby Roberts
Banned
It's not quite an either/or, really. A large part of the film's appeal was due to the VFX & the implementation of the 3D. That the film also worked beyond just the sheer spectacle was also a key aspect of its popularity, obviously.
But to attempt to minimize the story's effectiveness as a story on the audience isn't necessarily fair, but on the flip, trying to say that the 3D novelty (and it was a novelty, at the time) didn't have a big part to play in comparison is also kinda unfair.
There's no real line to draw here. Both factors factored in greatly. You can make an argument that one mattered more than the other, but I don't think the split in either direction could (or should) go past 60/40 at most.
(okay, maybe 65/35)
Cameron knowingly, willingly, purposefully tried to engineer a safe, four-quadrant crowdpleaser. He succeeded at that. He married that simple, effective narrative to multiple technological leaps. The one fed the other, and vice versa. Do I think that if he'd made the exact same movie, but with Stan Winston animatronics and no 3D, that it'd have done the same numbers? No. Probably not.
I think Hobbit 1 more or less killed that particular dream, but if it didn't, Halftime Walk probably did.
Cameron might push for it but I don't know that audiences are going to care.
Gamers do, obviously, because maybe the only thing on this forum more partisan than Avatar discussions are 30 v 60fps debates.
Killer Queen
Banned
I said the film has great visuals, art, CGI and 3D, these were the biggest things that were both marketed and praised and thus resulted in the biggest draw both at the cinema and at home. The story and characters have often been a point of criticism for the film, none of this is "rewriting history" even if you personally don't agree.
I'm not saying people hate the movie or its a terrible film. I'm saying the film did as well as it did largely because of groundbreaking technology and visuals. These are positive aspects of the film, these are what the film is positively remembered for and why it did as well as it did.
Saying that "yeah well, people liked it! And and and people bought it at home too!" Doesn't dispute anything I've said. Its a strawman.
lol I mean I think it's going to drop ALOT from the first one, but it's easily going to hit $1b ww. Come on now.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I think crossing 1bil is very, very likely.
But I also think the worldwide box office becoming the focal point of any/all box-office discussion is fairly misguided, and that's partially because Avatar's numbers were so ludicrous.
Worldwide box-office is important, yes. It's money. Money is money. It all counts. But some counts more than others, and domestic is always going to count more than international, and how much the international is worth is often dependent on factors that have not much to do with a film's quality/appeal, but on things like exchange rates and national economies. Boring, real-world shit.
That's not taking into account the much smaller cuts studios get from that international cash. They're only getting about half of every ticket in the US - they're getting closer to a fourth of the international ones, if not less in some regions.
The big numbers can get gaudy and amazing to behold, but they also get a little more hollow/empty the more they depend on non-domestic returns, too.
Avatar not only upset all that conventional wisdom with it's unprecedented success, it warped people's conception of how the (already semi-artificial as it is) box-office race is supposed to be watched.
Domestic is more important than worldwide.
Exactly. These films will be massively popular.
The Driver
Member
I just wanna know the logistics of shooting 4 Cameron blockbusters back to back.
Like, is he gonna Pirates: DmC/WE this shit and film all 4 concurrently for like two years straight, or is he gonna do something like Infinity War/A4 and film one movie, take a break, film another then maybe stop to edit/promote and release it before doing the same for the last two. I wonder how much Fox is giving him to produce all 4. I imagine it's near a billion.
Like, is he gonna Pirates: DmC/WE this shit and film all 4 concurrently for like two years straight, or is he gonna do something like Infinity War/A4 and film one movie, take a break, film another then maybe stop to edit/promote and release it before doing the same for the last two. I wonder how much Fox is giving him to produce all 4. I imagine it's near a billion.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Didn't you say "nobody saw Avatar because they heard it was a great movie"?
Why are you disconnecting the artistic merits you just mentioned from it being a good movie? They're not independent of each other. Avatar's surface plot isn't amazing. It also isn't the only facet which makes it a movie.
I actually am beginning to become disappointed in the general notion that the talent that goes into creating and choreographing something that's visually stimulating is relegated to tech-demo status and not taken into consideration as part of the makeup of a film itself being good. Film is a visual/audio and narrative medium. It needn't be judged or weighted toward one facet in particular.