It's been five years since Avatar came out...

[Sawyer]

And we've still not gotten a feature film version of Disney's Gargoyles using the same technology that was used on the Na'vi to bring the gargoyles to life.

Get. It. Together. Hollywood.

 

[Greens]

I hate Avatar because it was a big driving force behind 3D.

 

[Mace Dolex]

Yeah Avatar was just a flash in the pan fluke, before I was about to click on the thread from the title I thougt the OP was asking why it's been 5 years and we haven't gotten any news on James Cameron "supposed" 2-3 sequel follow up.

Get it together Cameron, how long does it take to paint a bunch of extras as Smurfs?

 

[Sawyer]

I hate Avatar because it was a big driving force behind 3D.

The 3D I don't care so much about. I'm talking about the motion capture. Why have they not used that s*** to give me Gargoyles? GIVE IT TO ME, DISNEY!!!

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Don't be in a hurry, there is a bigger chance to get Last Airbender quality out of the movie than it is to get something like a live action Mask of Phantasm version of Gargoyles.

 

[Heretic]

As I watched...and was incredibly disappointed in...Avatar on opening night, I couldn't help but think that we'd be hearing an announcement about Thundercats within a matter of days using that technology.

Years later, it appears that I am no Nostradamus.

 

[chaseter]

And we've still not gotten a feature film version of Disney's Gargoyles using the same technology that was used on the Na'vi to bring the gargoyles to life.

Get. It. Together. Hollywood.

This isn't the community forum...

 

[Donnie Darko]

I hate Avatar because it was a big driving force behind 3D.

So you hate a movie with the best 3D/visual effects ever because a bunch of other movies did subpar versions of it? Seems like you should hate the ones that followed, not the one that lead the pack.

 

[Donnie Darko]

Yeah Avatar was just a flash in the pan fluke

Yep. Because James Cameron has never made a successful movie before.

 

[Greens]

So you hate a movie with the best 3D/visual effects ever because a bunch of other movies did subpar versions of it? Seems like you should hate the ones that followed, not the one that lead the pack.

Let me put it this way... life without Avatar would only be better.

 

[Donut]

Let me put it this way... life without Avatar would only be better.

[YT]zE53MSYefTg[/YT]

 

[Panthro]

I would love to see an Exo-Squad film adaptation using this tech to bring the Neo-Sapiens to life, but it would probably never get greenlit simply because someone upstairs would say "The Neos look too much like the Navi but on steroids and with less hair."

Well, that and it's not a cheesy 80s cartoon that they can dial up to be even more cheesy or just plain stupid.

 

[Octoberist]

Unless there's a high power producer pushing for it, Gargoyles remains (for whatever reason) the red headed step-child at Disney. When was the last time they even acknowledged it?

 

[terry78]

Gargoyles was Disney's attempt to cash in on the BTAS craze that year.

 

[Primal Slayer]

And we've still not gotten a feature film version of Disney's Gargoyles using the same technology that was used on the Na'vi to bring the gargoyles to life.

Get. It. Together. Hollywood.

Disney is not going to ever do anything with that franchise, they just hold it hostage like they do best.

 

[Sawyer]

This isn't the community forum...

And you're not Kane52630, yet I still tolerate your existence nonetheless.

 

[Donnie Darko]

Disney is not going to ever do anything with that franchise, they just hold it hostage like they do best.

How are they holding it hostage, though? Isn't it all out on DVD? Plus I think there have been comic books.

 

[Octoberist]

But the comic books are out of print. If they were from Boom comics that is; I doubt Disney and Marvel will ever continue the line.

I'm with Primal Slayer. I think Disney will just sit on it. They don't care for Gargoyles unless..I don't know JJ Abrams or Brad Bird does something with it.

 

[MadVillainy]

Also, and I think it was you in other threads Octoberist, Disney has no reason to make Gargoyles.I think Gargoyles will really cater to a male demographic and Disney has no reason to try a make a live action movie to appeal to boys anymore. They already have Marvel and Star Wars

In addition to that, while Gargoyles is liked and respected I still feel it's more of a cult show. While some of these other shows that are getting big reboots like: Star Trek, Transformers, Ninja Turtles, etc. are big pop culture staples.

I think a movie would be cool, but I don't see Disney going out of their way to do it unless, as has been said before, some big moviemaker puts his name behind it.

 

[The Shape]

Clever way to get people to click on your thread, Sawyer.

 

[Sawyer]

I don't want clicks, I want a f***ing Gargoyles movie!!!

 

[Mace Dolex]

Yep. Because James Cameron has never made a successful movie before.

Avatar made lots of money because of its 3D and not because people cared for its lame premise.

 

[The Shape]

Avatar made lots of money because of its 3D and not because people cared for its lame premise.

 

[jmc]

What amazes me is just how little a cultural impact it left. Everyone I know has seen it yet nobody owns in on DVD or Blu Ray.

 

[The Shape]

What amazes me is just how little a cultural impact it left.

I'd argue its cultural impact was pretty significant.

Everyone I know has seen it yet nobody owns in on DVD or Blu Ray.

Unfortunately, your friends' DVD collections don't serve as great indicators of cultural impact.