Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Avatar 2

Options
189111314

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 148 ✭✭bobbyD1978


    My 8 year old absolutely loved it. Went to see it in cineworld with the full 4d and she was mesmerized



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,433 ✭✭✭Josey Wales


    Well if anyone can confirm where a 3D HFR version is actually playing in Dublin, I'll probably go a second time.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,198 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    As noted by posters earlier, Omniplex Rathmines and Movies@ Dundrum / The Square are advertising 3D HFR screenings… although their respective websites are messy as hell 😅



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,101 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Enjoyed it more than I expected to after recently re-watching the original and feeling that it hadn't stood up at all to the test of time. Main takeaway from Avatar 2 was that it simply didn't need to be nearly as long as it was, especially given the planned sequels, and that style won over substance.

    It definitely looked absolutely fantastic but there were so many scenes that severed no purpose other than to self indulgently show off the visuals. I've no problem with one or two of these a movie but this was so saturated that it took away from the movie as a whole - with the plot barely moving during these nature documentary style scenes.

    I'm normally fine with turning off my brain and there being a few gaps in logic of the plot for these blockbusters but many times during this movie they didn't even make a half hearted attempt to explain situations - from a bunch of characters just disappearing in the finale to the diminishing and sidelining of Zoe Saldana's character.

    It should continue to do great numbers as I'm sure many, like myself, will be telling people to see it in theatres. Having said that, I feel this one will likely be more forgettable and have even less broader impact than the original due to how much of a rethread it is of the first and how little the overall story moved along.

    I can't wait to watch the sequel where they fight the same bad guy after humans find some magic resource but this time on sand.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23 sherrupyew


    I've read a few people comment on Neytiri being sidelined etc. It is true that she is sidelined initially, but isn't that clearly the point?

    A major theme of the film is "fight or flight". It surfaces repeatedly in different ways, but one of the main ways is in the depiction of Jake and Neytiri. Despite having the reputation of a "warrior", Jake's instinct is to repeatedly run/hide/compromise. This frustrates Neytiri, who is sidelined as "the mother" yet clearly believes that they need to take risks and confront the threat they face head on. Both are afraid for their family, and both are right/wrong. There is no easy answer, but the film does take a position.

    As the film progresses, Jake offers to make the ultimate sacrifice in order to protect his family. This goes against Neytiri's instincts, and she finally snaps. The situation escalates and the audience absolutely gets what they have been "missing" from the film up until that point. The "fight" ensues and while it's the right call, everything comes at a price...

    This theme is explicitly reinforced by the final line and shot of the film. The film is ultimately saying that you can't run and hide forever, and you have to fight for your family - safety isn't guaranteed either way.

    IMO Cameron is a much smarter screenwriter than people give him credit for. On the surface, his films appear to have a very basic plot structure, but on reflection they are very sharp thematically.

    I should note that he also wisely recruited the writers of the Planet of the Apes films to assist.

    Post edited by sherrupyew on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    Cameron said he misspoke about the film needing to be in the top 3 or 4 to breakeven, he now says top 10, so would put it at ~1.5bn, it will easily get there at this stage.


    Interesting observation about Avatar , seems true enough



    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users Posts: 23 sherrupyew


    I don't think that's a break even figure, but rather a "success" threshold. That said I imagine break even is success in this case, as it can make a lot more on streaming and future films will be cheaper to produce.

    Search Twitter and you'll find lots of people passionately insisting that they won't be watching Avatar, that they don't care about its box office and that it has no cultural impact due to a lack of memes. It's a bizarre reaction, and not something you see with other films. Titanic had similar treatment in the years following it's release, suddenly it was "the worst film ever made".

    Only a tiny percentage of the population uses Twitter, and its users can have a really distorted view of what's actually happening with something like this. The Glass Onion comparison isn't reasonable. That film was released on Netflix worldwide on the same day, causing a spike in viral mentions. I doubt it had much social media activity while it was in the cinema last month.

    The box office figures do prove that people are talking about it and recommending it. Most big films released these days experience front-loaded opening weekends and then heavy drop off. A slow drop off is rare and means strong word of mouth. This is what happened with Titanic and Avatar and it is now happening with Avatar 2.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    I think Maverick and this are showing a very simple formula: create a movie with craft, precision and detail; show people something or somewhere only a cinema can truly do justice to the images, and people will arrive in droves.

    Is a great shame Glass Onion couldn't stay longer in the cinema but something like a comedy is always going to cause more of a cultural impact given the repeatability of gags and jokes. Avatar 2 has been a visual experience, one best enjoyed in a cinema.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,198 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    We can criticise Avatar all we want (although I‘m much warmer on Way of Water than I was with the original) but it has once again been proven that Cameron knows what the **** he’s doing. This film is a gargantuan hit by any standards, even if they did spend a small fortune making it. Even if it doesn’t hit the first film’s unprecedented levels it is still a massive, massive success.

    Part of me wonders whether the novelty will have worn off when we get a third film in a mere 24 months (as opposed to 13 years or whatever), but there’s clearly a a massive audience for these films and no amount of internet snark or skepticism can overwrite that. Cameron bet big, and it has paid off once again. The man has the sharpest commercial senses of pretty much any working director… and it doesn’t hurt that he also makes pretty damn good films most of the time too.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    I wouldnt say Titanic reinforces your point, I still see tickok videos of people reenacting the bow scene, its a reference movie in stand up comedy and there has been all kinds of discussions over various bits of the movie.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    So what if people aren't talking about the film on Film Twitter? Twitter is bollix.

    I openly admit to really doubting the likelihood of this film succeeding; had a whole segue with someone pages back about it, but money doesn't lie. 1 billion bucks and once again we have completely underestimated Cameron.

    James Cameron will deliver and audiences, the people who count, will arrive to reward something that astounds. Now, if the numbers drop off sharply in the new year then maybe that's the lack of viral traction - but as Top Gun Maverick showed there's still space for a film to run and run, slowly chip away at the numbers.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    I dont think the point was about Twitter as such apart from the guy making his point Twitter. It seemed a reasonable assertion though , that these Avatar movies will come and go but not leave an impression "culturally"

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,101 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    The point was to push her into the background? I get it can be seen as a driver to send her over the edge but there are plenty of times she's in the background and seems perfectly fine with it.

    In the first movie she is a strong character who has grown up in a royal family but pushes back on expectations to make her own decisions, has a great knowledge of everything on Pandora, and a great warrior too. This sequel she is completely subservient to Jake throughout the movie even in situations where it should be much more natural for her to take some form of the lead, like when arriving meet the ocean tribe leaders having spent all her life on the planet.

    It cant even be seen as an alien cultural thing once they find a mate, the ocean tribe queen is portrayed as much stronger in her relationship.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,101 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    You've left out the whole 'member berries' aspect of both Maverick and Avatar 2 which is heavily relied on in their success.

    Both rip off plot points, themes etc of the original movies in as bad or even worse ways than other recent sequels that got absolutely slated for it.

    It works for these long awaited sequels which is fine but they are really one off event/experience movies but there is nothing really beyond that.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,814 ✭✭✭silliussoddius


    On Twitter everything is the biggest thing ever until the biggest thing ever comes along the next day. I’m still waiting for the Tiger King film.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,198 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    I don’t think you can really accuse Avatar 2 of being a nostalgia bait ‘member berries’ sequel. It’s similar to the first and regurgitates some plot points / characters, but only in the ways sequels naturally are going to be broadly similar to the original. A nostalgia bait sequel is where the whole thing relies on callbacks and ‘hey, remember this!!!’ moments. That’s things like The Force Awakens or, even worse, Ghostbusters Afterlife.

    You can certainly accuse Avatar 2 of relying a bit too much on the basic formula of the first film (especially with its main antagonist being resurrected for… reasons?). But it moves the story / characters on, has fresh storytelling / thematic interests, and plenty of new locations and ideas to explore. I mean, it’s a sequel to Avatar at the end of the day so ain’t exactly a departure… but I definitely don’t think it’s the sort of nostalgia-dependent filmmaking a lot of modern ‘legacy sequels’ over-indulge in.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    How is 2009 memberberries? I think that's selling both films short TBH and what it was that both films did.

    Blockbuster film has been starved of the exact kind of thrills and spectacle both films delivered. No doubt Top Gun traded on some nostalgia but the final film was of a quality far past a cheap nostalgic cash in.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,717 ✭✭✭SuperBowserWorld


    Being stereoscopically challenged, I saw this in 2D HFR just now.

    The action sequences are magnificent. Nobody comes close to Cameron. He has put down the gauntlet to wannabe CGI action jockeys out there. Hands down the best CGI action scenes I've seen.

    There is one long brutal section that is actually quite painful to watch with a huge payoff. Brilliant.

    The HFR really worked for me. I felt I could process the action sequences more easily, or maybe they were just so well done anyway.

    It's too long and story wise not up to much. But THAT DOESN'T MATTER. It's pure escapism. Definitely a movie to see in the Cinema Vs at home.

    Post edited by SuperBowserWorld on


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    yeah, its the nature of the film to a certain extent, it is what it is, that commentor is over defending though suggesting its a bad thing for a film to enter the cultural memory, by implication shading films like Star Wars.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,717 ✭✭✭SuperBowserWorld


    Avatar 3: Dances with Wolves ☺️



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,779 ✭✭✭speedboatchase




  • Registered Users Posts: 19,306 ✭✭✭✭Drumpot



    Twitter…. What a load of hysterical narcissistic bollox. The only time I read sh*t from it is when others send me links or on here.

    I hope Elon destroys it and then moves onto Facebook. What a pox those things are, future generations will look back at how damaging they were (how much damage they will cause is yet to be realised) and how nefarious characters used them to sow discord.

    Humans corrupt everything, we are just the worst.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    If it weren't such a dumping ground I'd feel sorry for any film scheduled for January and February.

    More fool me for ever doubting Cameron.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23 sherrupyew


    I have to laugh at tweets like this and some of the responses. There is an obsessive regurgitation of "nobody cares" talking points from some corners of the internet. Avatarophobia.

    These people are weirdly desperate to insist that the film is not succeeding, or that they somehow know an objective truth regarding people's feelings about the film. Why are some folks so triggered by the success of these films? So interesting.

    The tremendous box office performance is fascinating, particularly given the post-covid/streaming-era context. It is undeniably a global phenomenon. At this point, it is quite clear it will surpass the $2 billion mark. The only question is by how much.



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 17,990 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    Before today, the last time I was in the cinema was in July. I've not felt a need to - I've got a great entertainment set up at home and I don't have to suffer other people.

    Today though, I went back to the cinema for 'Avatar: The Way of Water' because it's that rare beast that I can (short of a few million euro) never re-create at home. It doesn't matter hugely if there's no meat on the script (which there isn't) and it's not a slight to say it's largely about the spectacle when the spectacle is so very sumptuous. Studios rightly love the idea that this visual feast is powerful enough to get people into the cinema, away from home and I'll also go back to the IMAX, or suitably large screen, for the next film. And there's very few other films coming out that I'd even think would entice me out (although the next Mission Impossible film might!).



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,101 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    There are no justifiable arguments against it being a spectacle or having thrills, it is most else that is lacking.

    The only thing that is stopping Avatar from being called out more for cheap nostalgia is the fact that the first movie had so very little impact that most people don't even remember key moments of it. For example, bad guy v2 taming the flying creature in the same spot as the first movie, which even included one of the crigiest attempts at comedic one liners of the year.

    If the movie isnt full of nostalgic call backs then it is filled with pure rip offs of the original - just this time some of them are on water. There is a pretty decent argument that this movie is worse than Force Awakens for it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,101 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    It is a weird thing people do for successful franchises. Most of the movies involved have plenty of actual flaws but some decide to make up things about tangible facts, like box office numbers, to try to add validity to their opinions.

    Happens all the time with Marvel.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    I mean, how can a film be both totally unmemorable but nostalgic at the same time? Reads a little contradictory. Something of a Schrödinger's Blockbuster. Culturally empty but also not?

    Clearly there's something to these movies that has had audiences turning up in droves - 2 billion dollars worth and counting. Flick back through the thread and I was making salty comments about the 2009 films lack of cultural impact, so I do get it. But I'm also wrong. There's some kernel here being missed.

    And maybe it is "just" the spectacle of Pandora and its biosphere; the relatively boilerplate stories within it simple trusses for a world to amaze and astound. It doesn't have to be much more than that.

    TBH that was what the Blockbusters used to tend towards: did people watch and enthuse over ... I dunno, the old Sinbad movies of yore because the lead was such a character - or was it the spectacle of Ray Harryhausen's magical FX? Audiences wondering what monsters and exotic world's they'd visit?

    Christ a far more modern example are the latter-day Mission Impossible movies: they have almost zero plot of note and barely anything resembling characters ... yet they're lauded and financially successful because they entice with the newest death defying stunts by Tom Cruise. Fallout was as close the series got to characterisation and it was like ... Ok? Oh hi Michelle Monaghan, been a while but Who cares. Let's see Cruise halojump.

    Blockbusters have become more character focused, the world's most successful series basically built from a memorable set of Characters (and arguably now struggling to find memorable replacements for its original cast). But those doing it old school clearly still have value.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,198 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    A film being a nostalgia-filled 'member berries' sequel and it being broadly similar to the original are two different things, but they're being conflated here. There's a particular class of sequels whose whole appeal lies in the big reveal of returning characters, familiar needle drops, and other similar tricks aimed primarily at firing up people's nostalgia. Avatar 2 doesn't have that - indeed, most of the characters are reintroduced fairly casually in a pretty rapid succession of exposition-heavy scenes in the first 30 minutes or so and then the film just gets on with telling its own stories. Unlike, say, The Force Awakens where much of the film is built around teasing the audience about the gradual reintroduction of familiar characters - literally right up until its cliffhanger final shot that only works because the audience knows who Luke Skywalker is. To be clear, I like The Force Awakens, but it's an extremely different beast to Avatar 2. As I said earlier, look at Ghostbusters: Afterlife to see a film whose intentions are near-solely about the nostalgic moments, at the expense of any sort of narrative logic or indeed good filmmaking.

    Nobody is arguing Avatar 2 is a radical departure from Avatar 1 story or structure-wise. But like several other great sequels that spring to mind - Evil Dead 2, or Spider-Man 2 - it uses a very similar basic formula to IMO expand and improve on the foundations already laid down. I think this did a much more impressive job of introducing cutting-edge, sharpy-directed spectacle than its predecessor and therefore thought it was a stronger film while happily acknowledging its flaws. And anyway, we're talking two films here, 13 years apart - quite a different proposition than, say, two dozen Marvel films with extremely similar final act battle sequences in the same period of time.



Advertisement