Avatar: The Way of Water | 16 DEC 2022 | Don't worry guys, critics like it

[TomCruiseTop]

Just now, Lucas said:

That's where things can definitely differ because this was not a 3D showing, they just played the footage like any other 2D film. I don't think it'll win over many uninitiated who just casually see the footage at a regular showing.

Oh. That's a shame. Yeah, it's like them projecting a roller coaster ride onto a flat surface and then expecting people to get excited.

 

Did you see the original in 3D?

[Macleod]

22 minutes ago, JamesCameronScholar said:

Oh. That's a shame. Yeah, it's like them projecting a roller coaster ride onto a flat surface and then expecting people to get excited.

 

Did you see the original in 3D?

 

They are clearly testing the market now again with pushing 3D for Dr. Strange II, and they will refine things further so that audiences are prepared again for this option come December.  

[Lucas]

31 minutes ago, JamesCameronScholar said:

Did you see the original in 3D?

I first saw it in 2D back on its opening weekend, they didn't yet have 3D capabilities at my local theater at the time. They did get it a few months later so I went back to see it a second time. I can't say it made me like the movie any more, and I came to despise 3D in all movies after that (some very rare exceptions), but I thought it looked very good with Avatar. Now that 3D has faded, I definitely will see Way of Water in that format as a novelty gimmick, and because it's what Cameron wants.

[IronJimbo]

9 minutes ago, Lucas said:

I first saw it in 2D back on its opening weekend, they didn't yet have 3D capabilities at my local theater at the time. They did get it a few months later so I went back to see it a second time. I can't say it made me like the movie any more, and I came to despise 3D in all movies after that (some very rare exceptions), but I thought it looked very good with Avatar. Now that 3D has faded, I definitely will see Way of Water in that format as a novelty gimmick, and because it's what Cameron wants.

?

It's intended to increase the viewing experience, make the film better. How is that a gimmick, is colour a gimick?

[Lucas]

1 hour ago, IronJimbo said:

?

It's intended to increase the viewing experience, make the film better. How is that a gimmick, is colour a gimick?

As I said, it didn't make me like the first movie any more, 'nor any other film I've ever seen. The themes and the characters aren't gonna be stronger for me because things are flying by my head. It can make the experience of being there a little better, but so does popcorn. And in the end, it's a one and done kinda deal, I won't be sitting with the 3D thoughts for much longer afterwards, just what the impact of the actual movie has on me.

Edited May 4, 2022 by Lucas

[AniNate]

One could make the case that 3D has become less of a money-grubbing crutch now that it's become a charming novelty once more, but I do wonder if that'll still be the case when Avatar 3 comes out, or if audiences will be able to tell the difference between the Avatar legit 3D and the last-minute conversions of other movies.

[Eric Burnett]

I'm very much of the belief that if a movie needs to be seen in 3D/IMAX/Dolby/whatever, then that's a sign the movie doesn't hold up or stand on its merits, and that it needs a bunch of bells and whistles for you to get something out of it. I saw Avatar for the first time a month ago off my TV, no 3D or anything, and I loved the movie, because it's just entertaining and exciting, regardless of what format it's on. That's the same case when I saw Gravity on TV, Dunkirk and Dune in standard 2D, and so on.

 

Even disregarding the premium costs, if you need these extra bells and whistle to actually enjoy a movie, then does that mean the movie's actually good? I know this is a very unpopular opinion, but that's how I've always felt with this whole format discourse.

[Wormow]

I rewatched the first Avatar movie and wow, the first movie's visuals really do hold up. Testament to how special it was back in the day. And so seeing the trailer for 2 before my MoM screening, I was a bit underwhelmed. The story needs to be good because the visuals aren't going to carry the movie like they did for movie 1.

[AniNate]

Sure, I mean, I've always felt "This movie MUST be seen on a big screen!" is not the endorsement people think it is. In the age of home video/streaming, every movie's ultimate legacy is going to be how it plays on small screens. 

 

Obviously if I get a chance to see a movie I love on a big screen I'll try to take advantage of it, but the poor masses need to be able to get into the movie too for it to have a lasting impression.

 

 

Edited May 4, 2022 by AniNate

[fabiopazzo2]

Good teaser i think 

[IronJimbo]

48 minutes ago, Eric loves Rey said:

I'm very much of the belief that if a movie needs to be seen in 3D/IMAX/Dolby/whatever, then that's a sign the movie doesn't hold up or stand on its merits, and that it needs a bunch of bells and whistles for you to get something out of it. I saw Avatar for the first time a month ago off my TV, no 3D or anything, and I loved the movie, because it's just entertaining and exciting, regardless of what format it's on. That's the same case when I saw Gravity on TV, Dunkirk and Dune in standard 2D, and so on.

 

Even disregarding the premium costs, if you need these extra bells and whistle to actually enjoy a movie, then does that mean the movie's actually good? I know this is a very unpopular opinion, but that's how I've always felt with this whole format discourse.

Absolutely!

 

You gotta take a stepback to realise how ridiculous it sounds whenever someone says Avatar only made money because of 3D.

 

Can you imagine sitting in a cinema, and spending almost 3 hours watching an ACTUAL tech demo? Surely that would get boring after 2,5, or 10 minutes...

 

All 3D does is elevate the experience, and Jim is resolute this is the best way to watch Avatar.

 

 

[TomCruiseTop]

50 minutes ago, Eric loves Rey said:

I'm very much of the belief that if a movie needs to be seen in colour or sound, then that's a sign the movie doesn't hold up or stand on its merits, and that it needs a bunch of bells and whistles for you to get something out of it. 

- Eric circa 1910

 

How can you say that something is a novelty when it is an inherently visual medium. 

 

Also you only just saw Avatar a month ago? This just blew my mind, it's like someone saying they only just read the Bible on a Christian theory forum. 

[Menor the Destroyer]

1 hour ago, IronJimbo said:

?

It's intended to increase the viewing experience, make the film better. How is that a gimmick, is colour a gimick?

Precisely. I don't understand the idea that films should be reduced purely to scripts.

[TomCruiseTop]

3 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

I saw the teaser on imax 2D before DS2. Frankly speaking, the CGI during jungle scenes really doesn’t improve much from the original. Maybe because they have reached the limit.

The size of the scenes that we see are far greater in scope than anything we saw sans maybe the final battle in the original. The number of characters moving around too seems to have grown. It seemed obvious to me that they've pushed the size of the volume and the rendering distance to a significant degree. 

[AniNate]

Original Avatar teaser left many people underwhelmed too so not gonna read too much into reactions. I am anticipating the above-ground visuals won't be a huge step up though as I'm honestly not sure what "better" would entail there.

 

 

Edited May 4, 2022 by AniNate

[IronJimbo]

3 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

I saw the teaser on imax 2D before DS2. Frankly speaking, the CGI during jungle scenes really doesn’t improve much from the original. Maybe because they have reached the limit. it is the underwater scenes that wow me and I can only imagine 3d is where it can blow my mind. I am not sure how they can market the underwater tech to mass crowd since people remember avatar as 3d event. To a certain extent, 3d and avatar is almost like a married couple like titanic and my heart will go on. I hope they emphasis the marketing more on 3d for avatar 2. 
 

as for crowd reaction, I can’t tell if people are interested but there were some notable  noise and buzz during the teaser in cinema, clearly people remember avatar.

 

I think when we put them side by side in a week, you'll be able to tell the difference a lot better. I'm looking forward too it!

 

 

[SnokesLegs]

The music in the teaser is very good, do we know who’s scoring the film? 

[AniNate]

It's Simon Franglen, worked as an arranger on the first movie and scored the World of Avatar attraction at WDW.

[Elessar]

6 minutes ago, SnokesLegs said:

The music in the teaser is very good, do we know who’s scoring the film? 

 

Simon Franglen

[AniNate]

I assume they're gonna reuse some Horner themes as well ofc