James Cameron's Sequel to "AVATAR" - Part 1

[Lord]

why to many posts are spend on Avatar and how people will remember it in the next years. it is possible that a movie is liked when it is in the theaters and then people move on. Avatar is this kind of movie. Matrix? haha. thats on a very different level. i am one of the biggest Matrix fans.

what makes me angry is that Cameron is able to writte a story that would be as important as the Matrix was. he is intelligent and has enough experience.

but you have to respect him for making a movie that was not trying to be more complex . Avatar is a clear movie that is simple from the beginning to the end. Man of Steel is not smart or complex. its also a simple blocbkuster........that is trying to be smart but fails. but thats modern filmaking. nothing can be simple. everything has to be complicated. or POTC 2 and 3? or Lone Ranger? or f... Transformer movies? where is the clearity and simplicty?

Actually, he thinks he did, and many people even think he succeded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Themes_in_Avatar

With analysis like that of Avatar and even of the Star Wars Prequels i believe some read too much into certain films, i see more different and interesting questions in One Piece than any of these films, and that one isn't even trying.

The Matrix is light years better than Avatar, but to each his own.

I do think a lot of people are underestimating Avatars effect on pop culture. Just look at the amount of 3d films we see today. Its because of Avatar...and people know that. It may not have rabid fans like The Avengers (which has multiple superheroes in it, each with 40+ years of comic book history, so I don't know how its even remotely comparable to a new property like Avatar but whatever) or even Twilight for that matter but there is still a significant fan base.

And having a rabid fan base doesn't necessarily equate to being the most popular among the general public. The thing about Avatar is that a lot of people like it just enough to go watch it in theaters. Now, maybe the Avengers has a lot more crazed fans (who would watch the film even if it was crap) but can it pull in random John Doe who hasn't bothered going to the movies for over ten years like Avatar can?....I don't think so.

I agree, from what i see the general public does seem to remember it, i remember one of my teachers saying it was the only mainstream film in the past few years she enjoyed. While i didn't like Avatar's plot i do apreciate the film for its simplicity, i just hope the sequels can also be more original, as James Cameron proved he can do in Terminator 2 and Aliens.

With Avatar James Cameron says he wanted to make a multimédia franchise, so i find it strange that there aren't any comic books or original novels yet, and there is barelly a vídeo game, the only ones were released at the same time as the first film, and they were just the usual movie to game properties, easily forgetable.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

With Avatar James Cameron says he wanted to make a multimédia franchise, so i find it strange that there aren't any comic books or original novels yet, and there is barelly a vídeo game, the only ones were released at the same time as the first film, and they were just the usual movie to game properties, easily forgetable.

it's because Avatar didn't incur a lasting stranglehold on the general public as much as he wanted it to.

 

[Lord]

It actually did, he just didn't capitalize on that when he should have, with Star Wars you had books and comics being released almost at the same time the first film was released and continued being released, making sure people remember it when the sequel comes out.

James Cameron has been so focused on Avatar sequels and his voyages that he lost sight of the "multimedia project"

 

[Octoberist]

Do you think Cameron dances alone in his bedroom wearing Navi PJs?

 

[Doctor Jones]

I don't see how the highest grossing film of all time is suddenly forgotten by the general audience. It gained that much for a reason. *****ing about the story constantly on the internet aside, which makes up about 1% of the overall box office, people remember aren't likely to forget.

 

[Octoberist]

The sequels will make money no doubt. We're just speculating about the cultural impact it had for the past 4-5 years. And the lack of attempts of keeping the momentum of hype.

 

[dark_b]

the game was a big disappointment. there is a video where Cameron admits it to the camera.
there was also some news for 2 years that Cameron is writting a Pandora bible or some thing bla bla bla bla. i knew back than that writting a book about Avatar was stupid. focus on the sequel you rich smart son of a b.....

Battle Angel
Battle Angel

 

[Octoberist]

Yeah, at this point Cameron should just give Battle Angel to somebody else and just produce the darn thing.

 

[I'm Old Greg]

AVATAR isn't forgetten. On its facebook page they post a still shot from the movie and it gets 60k likes in the same day its posted.
Seems like AVATAR has a strong fanbase.

Maybe Cameron doesn't want to oversaturate people with AVATAR crap it keeps people wanting and keeping it fresh like it will be new all over again.

 

[Lord]

Do you think Cameron dances alone in his bedroom wearing Navi PJs?

what?

 

[Bruce Malone]

AVATAR isn't forgetten. On its facebook page they post a still shot from the movie and it gets 60k likes in the same day its posted.
Seems like AVATAR has a strong fanbase.

Maybe Cameron doesn't want to oversaturate people with AVATAR crap it keeps people wanting and keeping it fresh like it will be new all over again.

Well to go from that to 3 sequels in 3 years though? That's the thing Avatar's going from this unique experience never before seen in 2009 to 3 movies a year from 2016 to 2018 I predict big public burnout somewhere along that period.

 

[Lord]

Well, the marvel cinematic universe is releasing 2 films a years and a tv show, with more planned

 

[Bruce Malone]

Yeah but that's what people here are comparing/debating, there is a hard core wide spread marvel fan base, the same can be said for LOTR/Hobbit or HP etc.

Avatar at least the first 1 had a very widespread reach but how many hardcore avatar fans are there to make 3 sequels make sense where the fans will come out in droves every year?

You usually need a pretty hardcore fan base to make multiple sequels work.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Maybe Cameron doesn't want to oversaturate people with AVATAR crap it keeps people wanting and keeping it fresh like it will be new all over again.

That is the thing. If Avatar was a persistent pop culture mainstay the director wouldn't have to do anything. It would self sustain its iconography.

 

[Lord]

It actually is, seems to me like people disliking it have gotten the idea it isn't still remembered. I didn't like the plot but the film is without a doubt still popular. Blade Runner doesn't have active fan forums but it's still remembered and there are still many that would love to see the sequel Ridley Scott is planing.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

It actually is, seems to me like people disliking it have gotten the idea it isn't still remembered. I didn't like the plot but the film is without a doubt still popular. Blade Runner doesn't have active fan forums but it's still remembered and there are still many that would love to see the sequel Ridley Scott is planing.

But I do like the film. So i'm not coming from a position of hate and bias. I also acknowledge its immediate and widespread appeal (the post-Avatar depression thing even happened to one of cousins!) in its first year. But since that year, Avatar has been talked about less and less. I haven't seen anyone talk memorably of the film like people still reminisce of Heath Ledger's Joker, five years later, for example.

 

[Lord]

Really? around here i do see people talk about it now and then, and remember it as much as Heath Ledger's Joker

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Really? around here i do see people talk about it now and then, and remember it as much as Heath Ledger's Joker

I don't mean here and the internet. The internet talks about Avatar as much as they talk about cult films from Italy in the 80's. I meant out in the real world.

 

[Lord]

I don't mean here and the internet. The internet talks about Avatar as much as they talk about cult films from Italy in the 80's. I meant out in the real world.

I was talking about the real world

 

[mclay18]

i am still shocked how many movies are post converted to 3D. its a hollywood lie that its easier and cheaper to post convert.

Bryan Singer is using 3D cameras for the new X-men movie. ohhhh yes.

I read an article that says shooting in native 3D can add up to $30M in production costs. Whereas post-conversion is usually in the $5M-$10M range.

So for studios, it IS cheaper to convert. Cameron, Peter Jackson, and Bryan Singer have the clout to film in native 3D because of their track records.

 

[rashad]

Really? around here i do see people talk about it now and then, and remember it as much as Heath Ledger's Joker

Where is here? I kind of doubt that no offense. lol Even still it would be a small minority.

 

[dark_b]

I read an article that says shooting in native 3D can add up to $30M in production costs. Whereas post-conversion is usually in the $5M-$10M range.

So for studios, it IS cheaper to convert. Cameron, Peter Jackson, and Bryan Singer have the clout to film in native 3D because of their track records.

but but ..........
if you shoot with a 3d camera you get 100% quality 3d. lets say that this is 30 millions. for 5-10 millions you maybe get a 40-50% quality 3d.if you get that much quality. for a 100% good post converted 3d you need more than 30 millions.so yes its true that post converted 3D is cheaper but thats low quality.

plus you need also a lot of time for good complex accuare post converted 3D.we are both right. but the problem is that the ticket price is the same.

of course all of this is right if the 30 millions story is correct. and i read this info from 2011 to 2013. but it could also be a lie from studios to justify post converted 3D.

t:

 

[Lord]

Where is here? I kind of doubt that no offense. lol Even still it would be a small minority.

Here where i live

 

[redhawk23]

but but ..........
if you shoot with a 3d camera you get 100% quality 3d. lets say that this is 30 millions. for 5-10 millions you maybe get a 40-50% quality 3d.if you get that much quality. for a 100% good post converted 3d you need more than 30 millions.so yes its true that post converted 3D is cheaper but thats low quality.

plus you need also a lot of time for good complex accuare post converted 3D.we are both right. but the problem is that the ticket price is the same.

of course all of this is right if the 30 millions story is correct. and i read this info from 2011 to 2013. but it could also be a lie from studios to justify post converted 3D.

t:

You only get 100% quality 3d from shooting 3d if the people your'e working with know how to shoot in 3d and you can commit to centering your entire production, including lighting, set design, makeup design, etc around shooting in 3d and adapting to that skillset.

Did shooting in 3d help Resident Evil at all?

 

[Teelie]

Even though I enjoy the RE movies, nothing could have helped the last one.