• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

James Cameron sets 'Avatar' 2 & 3 as next films

Status
Not open for further replies.
Erigu said:
I actually said "impressive tech demo" and "entertaining-but-not-that-great movie".
And yeah, that's what I think. Sorry.

And you're including T1&2, The Abyss and Aliens in that, right?

qy901x.jpg
 
Scullibundo said:
Oh man I can't wait to see all the deleted scenes. The Ribisi and Lang scenes. Fucking all of them. This blu release is going to be epic.

Ribisi is my favorite actor in Avatar. By far. By farrrrr.

No you didn't, you were too busy looking at the monitor!
 
Puddles said:
And you're including T1&2, The Abyss and Aliens in that, right?
I don't have a problem with the Terminator, far from it. It had a nice little time travel plot.
If anything, I'm baffled that the guy behind that plot then went ahead and shat all over it with the sequel. 'Guess he really loves them special effects. Again, 'goes to show where the guy's priorities lie.

I can't say I really care about the Abyss.

And Aliens was entertaining on its own. Just not a very good sequel (better than most of what followed, sure, but that's not saying much).
 
brandonh83 said:
Ribisi is my favorite actor in Avatar. By far. By farrrrr.

No you didn't, you were too busy looking at the monitor!
He does a ton of little nervous/twitchy stuff that had me in stitches in the movie. :lol
 
Avatar 2 will be start with Jake being asked to lead the Na'vi, but some other Na'vi who thinks he's more worthy will kill the queen and have Jake think he did it. Jake runs away only to return and help the tribe fight off some evil.

Avatar 3 is actually Avatar 1 1/2 where we see Jake spend his time with two lovable Pandorian animals.
 
Cameron himself says both movies will be self contained:

James Cameron said:
In the second and third films, which will be self contained stories that also fulfill a greater story arc
 
Yes, that was in the press release. I'm really hoping he doesn't pull some deux em and brings back Lang's character somehow - as much as I love him. Its pretty much confirmed already that
Grace will make an appearance through Eywa
.

Either get Arnold or the Biehn machine in that bitch. Though I do hate it when Biehn is a bad guy.
 
Scullibundo said:
Yes, that was in the press release. I'm really hoping he doesn't pull some deux em and brings back Lang's character somehow - as much as I love him. Its pretty much confirmed already that
Grace will make an appearance through Eywa
.

Either get Arnold or the Biehn machine in that bitch. Though I do hate it when Biehn is a bad guy.
Biehn makes an awesome bad guy in Tombstone and Abyss though!

Arnold should mocap a cameo as a Na'vi, for shits and giggles
 
Dead said:
Biehn makes an awesome bad guy in Tombstone and Abyss though!

Arnold should mocap a cameo as a Na'vi, for shits and giggles

Its more that I love rooting for Biehn's character. He plays a better hero than bad guy.
 
Wii said:
Does anyone still think Avatar is one of the best films of all time?

Never did. Modern copy of Dances With Wolves but with more special effects and less content. 7.5/10. Solid movie, but not worth owning (maybe if I had kids).

Business wise why wouldn't you make sequels. They'll probably suck, but like Star Wars episodes 1-3 they'll make hundreds of millions. And the technology engine is basically 100% reusable is it not? Basically free money.
 
Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
Terminator 2 is one of the few 'better than the first movie' movies.
It was a terribly impressive action flick. A revolution, as far as SFX are concerned.
But plot-wise, it was stupid and shat all over the previous movie.
 
Cameron had plans to make Avatar as a series of movies since before even shooting the first one. There would have probably been a sequel or two even if the movie made only 1 Billion instead of nearly 3 Billion.
 
Ironic how for a 3d movie Avatar is pretty darn flat Story and character wise.

I saw it once and I'm not going to waste the time to see it again. Totally over rated.
 
Stage On said:
Ironic how for a 3d movie Avatar is pretty darn flat Story and character wise.

I saw it once and I'm not going to waste the time to see it again. Totally over rated.
Your wit is about as original as Avatar.

BAM!
 
aceface said:
Won't go see the sequels unless the Navi somehow become the villains.

I bet Na'vi would be quiet during a movie at a theater.

Humans text, answer their cell phones, laugh at everything, talk loudly, and generally very rudely interrupt the film.

As far as I'm concerned, humans are villains. It's just that Avatar isn't afraid to say it.
 
So are we coming back with some Agent Orange in the second one or what? I was pretty psyched along with most folks when Avatar came out, caught it in 3D and when it didn't utterly alter my life as Cameron kept assuring me it would I sort of...got over the whole Avatar thing. I gave it another watch at home and fell asleep through several bits of it.

Humans bad, blue people good, mech with giant knife. I get it already. Put your directorial talents to some better use now...
 
I was reading earlier in this thread and I saw people shitting on Back to the Future 2 & 3.

This makes me sad.

Also to answer this question:

Wii said:
Does anyone still think Avatar is one of the best films of all time?

I thought the CG and 3D were amazing, the story not so much. For this reason I think the movie won't be able to stand the test of time. It'll be remembered more for being the movie that ushered in 3D than actually being a good movie.
 
brandonh83 said:
I bet Na'vi would be quiet during a movie at a theater.

Humans text, answer their cell phones, laugh at everything, talk loudly, and generally very rudely interrupt the film.

As far as I'm concerned, humans are villains. It's just that Avatar isn't afraid to say it.

:lol The whole first movie I wanted some damn evil Navi. Just give me evil Navi! I want them fighting wars with millions of dead Navi on each side.
 
The original theatrical cut made the Na'vi out to be too docile, but the Special Edition goes a ways to changing the notion thanks some of the additional scenes, especially the scene where the Navi retaliate and massacre a troop of humans in retaliation for the willow glade being bulldozed. The added hunt scene also helps by better establishing them as Warriors.

So yeah, in the theatrical cut, the Na'vi get their sacred ground torn down and just stand around doing nothing until the Humans attack (without provocation), while in the Special Edition they straight up obliterate the Humans they find simply due to those trees, while in the process giving the humans the excuse they needed to attack the tree.

Its kinda funny, its not even that long of a scene, but removing/including it fundamentally changes a key part of the movie.
 
They should have the next ISV ship that is already on its way to Pandora crash-land in the forest. Jake climbs aboard and finds all the humans inside are coccooned with a nest of eggs in front of them.
 
I never really got the "Dances with Wolves" thing. The plots are completely different unless you reduce them down to one sentence descriptions. And if you do that, then just about any movie ever made can be a "modern day copy" of some earlier film.

Guy finds a valuable stash belonging to an organized crime syndicate, steals it, and ends up fleeing for his life.

Yep, No Country For Old Men was a modern day copy of True Romance.
 
Puddles said:
I never really got the "Dances with Wolves" thing. The plots are completely different unless you reduce them down to one sentence descriptions. And if you do that, then just about any movie ever made can be a "modern day copy" of some earlier film.

Well, Dances with Wolves was the first to come to mind, which was about the time we saw the girl for the first time. She was totally a Native American, and Sully was totally Kevin Costner, and then she invited him over and then conflict with his old kind came up and then fights and battles and misunderstanding, and ended with Sully staying with the Indians, so Dances with Wolves stayed as the main inspiration from my end.

A lot closer than Pocahontas for sure.
 
Puddles said:
I never really got the "Dances with Wolves" thing. The plots are completely different unless you reduce them down to one sentence descriptions. And if you do that, then just about any movie ever made can be a "modern day copy" of some earlier film.
Eh, I'm sure Cameron did take cues from it, kinda hard to ignore, but more than anything else, Avatar is an E.R. Burroughs type story, and Cameron has always brought up Burroughs and John Carter as some of the primary inspirations for the film, and its pretty obvious that that is it's most direct lineage.

I mean, Im sure Cameron was thinking more Dejah Thoris, and less Pocahontas, when creating Neytiri.
 
Erigu said:
It was a terribly impressive action flick. A revolution, as far as SFX are concerned.
But plot-wise, it was stupid and shat all over the previous movie.

It had better acting, writing, visuals, music, and storytelling than the first movie. Granted, trying to piece the time travel plot together makes it not make sense, but all film requires suspension of disbelief on some level; hell, even with it not making sense, it does a pretty wonderful job of capitalizing on the "no fate but what we make" line from the first movie.

It's not just an impressive action flick; it's one of the few action flicks that crosses the line into the territory of legitimately great art.
 
Dances with Wolves is a very clear comparison, it even uses the same story element to warrant narration and the admittance of compromise. He writes a journal, we get his voice over, the journal is found and shows his changed stance on the situation, which leads to the battle, the exact same thing happens in Avatar.

Cameron tried to suggest it was closer to At Play In The Field Of The Lord, but I really disagree. The similarities to it are there, but they're also in Dances, and in much greater numbers.
 
Story 1: A disillusioned soldier seeks solace and isolation in a remote outpost. After some period of time during which he is completely alone, he meets a band of natives who he eventually comes to befriend. He is so interested that he takes the time to learn their language and culture. He falls in love with one of them. Towards the end of the story, he learns that his people are planning a raid on the natives, and he helps them escape, killing a few of his former people in a brief skirmish.

Story 2: A disabled man is sent to infiltrate a native tribe in order to learn about their weaknesses in preparation for an anticipated battle over mining rights. This forces him to transplant his mind into a body that resembles one of the natives, giving him the ability to walk again. In order to gain their trust, he must train in their ways, which eventually pushes him to not only walk and run, but fly. He keeps jumping back and forth between the two worlds, but eventually he realizes that the world he was sent to help destroy is far more fulfilling to him than the world he came from. He falls in love with one of the natives and defects to her side, helping the natives completely defeat the invading force composed of his former people.


Some similarities there, but a lot more differences. The Pochahontas essay with the words crossed out and replaced was better.
 
Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
It had better acting, writing, visuals, music, and storytelling than the first movie.
Better writing and storytelling?

Granted, trying to piece the time travel plot together makes it not make sense, but all film requires suspension of disbelief on some level
The second half of your sentence doesn't excuse the first half... The first movie was, naturally, also a movie, and its time travel plot "worked". But that time travel model and the ending it led to weren't exactly sequel-friendly, so let's shit on them both with a plot that's a silly rehash, a mere excuse for more chases and explosions (much, much bigger budget).

hell, even with it not making sense, it does a pretty wonderful job of capitalizing on the "no fate but what we make" line from the first movie.
It sure did a pretty wonderful job at making people believe that line was in the first movie at all.

It's not just an impressive action flick; it's one of the few action flicks that crosses the line into the territory of legitimately great art.
Whoa.
No. Just no.
 
Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
It had better acting, writing, visuals, music, and storytelling than the first movie. Granted, trying to piece the time travel plot together makes it not make sense, but all film requires suspension of disbelief on some level; hell, even with it not making sense, it does a pretty wonderful job of capitalizing on the "no fate but what we make" line from the first movie.

It's not just an impressive action flick; it's one of the few action flicks that crosses the line into the territory of legitimately great art.

.

The only flaws are that 1) the kid who played John Connor wasn't a good actor, and 2) it's thoroughly dated in the 90s because of all the slang and pop-culture references.
 
Avatar 2 will be about a new alien species race (planet) attacking Pandora.

Avatar 3 will be about Pandora and Earth working together to defeat the new species.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom