Main Menu

Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 10:30:25 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Avatar expands

Started by Alberon, August 02, 2013, 10:31:35 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Alberon

Avatar will now have three sequels. They'll be filmed in one go and released in the December of 2016, 2017 and 2018 seemingly in the same production style as Lord of the Rings and the endless padding out of The Hobbit.

QuoteFox Studios have announced there will be three sequels to Avatar, after director James Cameron found two films "would not be enough".

Not enough shit maybe.

The first one really disappointed me. Here's hoping the three sequels will have room enough for some plot this time.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23546537

checkoutgirl

The first one was about 3 hours long and had a terrible script and a pretty shit story. I assume they'll progress from blue things that say awful shite like "I see you" to green things that say "My feet point towards you" and eventually we'll get to a planet of purple things that say things like "you are a soup starter and I am the steak main course" or something equally ludicrous. It's funny how Cameron spends years of his life and millions upon millions of dollars developing new cameras and god knows what kind of NASA like technology and then when it gets to the script he just scribbles something on the back of a fag packet and thinks, that'll do. He really needs to get in a few decent writers and see what they come up with. I get the feeling that Cameron gets final approval on the script but he really is weak in that regard. He's a lot like George Lucas. Maybe he makes the sript really shit on purpose because he wants to please as many people world wide as possible and you have to use baby talk to get the bums on seats in China and Mexico. I dunno. It seems to work purely financially because the last one made 2 billion dollars which is a ridiculous amount of money.

I might be tempted into the cinema for one of these sequels because I didn't see the first one in the cinema despite being urged to by a couple of people because it's supposed to be the best 3D experience you can get but bad dialogue and cheesy plots are a pretty big turn off for me.

Avatar automatically qualifies for one of the worst films ever on sheer wasted potential with the technology. Also, the bit where he gets on the flying thing and goes 'wooooahhhh' then not a moment later he's riding it perfectly. Insulting.

Retinend

In this league - the big big league - what other wholly original films have there been? Films that aren't a remake or an adaptation or anything.

Blumf

That's an awful lot of cloying bullshit to fire into the audiences eyes, will he be able to deliver?[nb]Yes[/nb]

CaledonianGonzo

The real difficulty will be securing Sam Worthington's involvement.

MojoJojo

Quote from: Retinend on August 02, 2013, 11:09:08 AM
In this league - the big big league - what other wholly original films have there been? Films that aren't a remake or an adaptation or anything.

Inception. Waterworld. The Matrix.

Sorry, they just popped into my head.

Jim_MacLaine

Quote from: Retinend on August 02, 2013, 11:09:08 AM
In this league - the big big league - what other wholly original films have there been? Films that aren't a remake or an adaptation or anything.

It's definitely not original story wise using the 'soldier goes native' trope as it does.

Thomas

QuoteFox Studios have announced there will be three sequels to Avatar, after director James Cameron found two films "would not be enough".

If an hour and a half wasn't enough for the first film's story (the collector's edition is two minutes off three hours), what's he going to try and tell in three sequels?

And the CGI, seemingly one of the main attractions, wasn't as good as people said. Jurassic Park is still better on that front.

madhair60

I will never watch avatar.

Noodle Lizard

Oh fucking hell, THREE sequels?!  There is quite literally nowhere for that story to go, it felt done almost as soon as it had started.

I mean even the most die-hard 'Avatar' fans, if such a thing still exists post-2009, aren't exactly pleading for a sequel, let alone fucking THREE.  Who's this for?

Noodle Lizard

Quote from: Retinend on August 02, 2013, 11:09:08 AM
In this league - the big big league - what other wholly original films have there been? Films that aren't a remake or an adaptation or anything.

What's your point?  How would that justify a bad movie?  And considering how insanely wealthy and powerful James Cameron is in the industry (still the most bankable director, I believe), it's hardly an achievement for him to get any old shit made.  And, to answer your question, most of James Cameron's other films.

But yeah, as others have said, Avatar's not wholly original at all.  In fact, it's less original than some self-professed adaptations.

Retinend

Quote from: Noodle Lizard on August 02, 2013, 01:03:25 PM
What's your point?  How would that justify a bad movie?

I meant just in recent years. Second half of the last decade on. When at this level of the industry nothing is original, at least Avatar is.

Jus' sayin'

WesterlyWinds

I've had the misfortune to watch it twice. The second time, however, I was so drunk I don't really remember watching it. Vastly improved my enjoyment, highly recommended.

Shoulders?-Stomach!

I didn't find Avatar disappointing at all, it was a very good looking film with a story that was standard derivative fantasy animation. It was exactly what I thought it would be.

It's an easy target because of the cunt director and overhype but there isn't really that much difference between it and Disney's middle-fare 1990s output (Mulan, Pocahontas). It might have been the Papyrus font for the subtitles that hints at this, but I think despite the HD 3D wank it was a pretty retro film.

Artemis

I agree with Shoulders. I think it generates more criticism than it deserves because it gets more praise than it warrants. It's not an amazing movie but its an enjoyable escape if you can discard the hype. Same goes for Titanic.

Alberon

I actually like the director. The Abyss is one of my favourite films.

The 3D works really well and the FX are great, but the characters and plot (plus the total lack of even the slightest twist in the storyline) renders this a very dull movie.

Maybe it does get more flak because it was so big, and maybe the fact that it cost the better part of a billion dollars (when marketing is added to the bill) explains while the storyline is so very very basic. But it is not a good film. The noble savage and soldier going native cliches are as old as the hills.

What really annoys me is Cameron can do far better than this and he's wasting another five years making more of it and it probably won't be better than the first one.

mobias

Hopefully Yes will do the soundtrack this time and Roger Dean will actually get some sort of full acknowledgement. Though knowing James Cameron he will probably call the first of the sequels 'Avatar Tales from Topographic Oceans' then pretend he's never heard of the band.

checkoutgirl

Quote from: Alberon on August 02, 2013, 06:41:36 PM
I actually like the director. The Abyss is one of my favourite films.

I don't think anyone's having a go at Cameron as was, per se. Terminator 2 has a good claim to being the best sci fi action film ever made. And Avatar has a lot of positives including the innovations in cameras and technology and the effects and some of the camera work. And a lot of critics liked it and expressed approval.

That doesn't mean it doesn't have huge problems. The script is toe curling in places, Sam Worthington is a charisma vacuum and the characters are unsubtle and stereotypical. Plus the story is annoyingly conventional and predictable and mawkish and stupid. The downsides conspire to ruin my enjoyment of the film. I suppose the lesson I take from it is don't watch a big spectacle film with a shitty plot on DVD. It's the cinema with the glasses on or nothing.

BlodwynPig

There has been no good science fiction since the turn of the Millennium.

Alberon


Quote from: BlodwynPig on August 02, 2013, 10:56:27 PM
There has been no good science fiction since the turn of the Millennium.

What about Moon or District 9?

Probably not coincidentally they were both fairly low budget efforts.

BlodwynPig

Quote from: Alberon on August 02, 2013, 11:06:07 PM
What about Moon or District 9?

Probably not coincidentally they were both fairly low budget efforts.

I'll give you Moon, an enjoyable 2001 pastiche. Not that I am that found of 2001. Not seen District 9.

But Moon at least had gravitas, atmosphere and realistic staging and sets.

Look at World's End, Dr. Who (the new one) and you see pretty shoddy stuff. Kiddy-flavoured, basically - no sense of Sci-fi history.

MojoJojo

Has there ever been any good sci-fi, in those terms, on mainstream cinema?

What good sci-fi was there in the 1990s?

falafel

We had Children of Men not so long ago. That was spectacular.


BlodwynPig

I should adjust my stance. From the Sci-fi that I have seen...

Not seen Term'nator Zwei or Children of Men.

MojoJojo - it seems you are correct

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_science_fiction_films_of_the_1990s

Although there are few good ones (Dark City)...plus X-Files, Millennium on TV (the latter is very loosely sci-fi, admittedly).

Replies From View


Replies From View


BlodwynPig

Quote from: Replies From View on August 03, 2013, 11:37:28 AM
How come.

Wasn't interested...didn't know it was on, or something. I even failed and being a nerd. Was it released at the same time as Hook and Batman Returns? If so, then that is probably the reason.

checkoutgirl

#29
Quote from: BlodwynPig on August 03, 2013, 11:34:42 AM
Although there are few good ones (Dark City)...plus X-Files, Millennium on TV (the latter is very loosely sci-fi, admittedly).

Half decent 1990s sci fi (results may vary, obviously)

The daddy Terminator 2: Judgment Day
Robot Jox
No Escape
Predator 2
Universal Soldier
Fortress
Jurassic Park
Death Machine
Screamers
Strange Days
12 Monkeys


1996...eh...

Cube
Gattaca
Starship Troopers
Dark City
eXistenZ
Galaxy Quest
The Iron Giant
The Matrix



And many (a few) more. I mean, there's a lot of rubbish in the genre admittedly but sci fi is inherently tricky to get right because its basic premise is usually so unbelievable. But fuck me was 1996 a bad year for sci fi, not a single decent one can I see. I think that sci fi used to be a more peripheral genre but now it seems to have completely taken over the industry. There's bound to be a lot of shite knocking about.

I'm not sure if you can...well you can comment on sci fi if you haven't seen Terminator 2: Judgment Day but you should realise that a lot of people will be baffled as to how you somehow avoided watching it (especially if you consider yourself a sci fi liker) and will then question the value of your opinion. Of course these people may be wrong.