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

[IronJimbo]

1 minute ago, Deuce66 said:

I don't think they'll be happy with this result....

 

why did they put the lowest numbers ?

[Borobudur]

33 minutes ago, adaros said:

 

3 HR 12 MIN | PG13

DEC 16, 2022

ACTION

LFG
Avatar: The Way of Water at an AMC Theatre near you. (amctheatres.com)

Is this runtime final? This is 2 min longer than initial report!

[adaros]

2 minutes ago, Borobudur said:

Is this runtime final? This is 2 min longer than initial report!

It will be final when Cameron stops messing in editing room, probably day before release 

[Alexdube]

25 minutes ago, Reed121 said:

Something I don’t understand is how Avatar 1 didn’t receive an A+ Cinemascore considering the legs it had.

Wouldn’t Avatar 2 need an A+ this time to beat Maverick domestically?

Cinemascore isn't some precise scientific tool, it's not always reliable.

[XXR vs XXR]

37 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

why did they put the lowest numbers ?

Covers themselves. Anything over is handled by the “+”  

[Deuce66]

40 minutes ago, Deuce66 said:

I don't think they'll be happy with this result....

 

 

Avatar: The Way of Water 20th Century Studios (Disney) December 16, 2022

Please note that early tracking ranges listed below are considered highly volatile given the wide range of factors in play for this release. Current pinpoint forecasts lean slightly toward the cautious end of models for the time being.

PROS:

Avatar was one the highest grossing film of all time in the domestic market thirteen years ago, since only surpassed by Star Wars: The Force Awakens and Avengers: Endgame.

Its impact on many audiences at the time varied between those who were drawn by the revolutionary visual effects and 3D, casual viewers who appreciated the story’s adventure and/or were swept up in the hype and societal thematic relevance of the film, and the die-hard fans who embraced James Cameron’s world-building aspects as part of a new science fiction franchise. Cameron has been busy working on multiple follow-ups to his original Avatar for more than a decade since its record-breaking global run, with multiple sequels in the pipeline and numerous delays in that timespan leading up to this long awaited release.

The filmmaker has often had his long-in-development cinematic projects underestimated in the past, including Avatar itself and 1997’s Titanic. His own confidence and prior success in delivering crowd-pleasing films should be weighted in expectations. With theatrical rebounds in the post-pandemic era of moviegoing relying on premium screen experiences and large-scale films such as the Avatar franchise, this is exactly the kind of film that could bring the less-than-frequent moviegoer if reception is strong and captures the zeitgeist in any way. Competition is minimal with the remainder of December and most of January serving as a long holiday and post-holiday runway for The Way of Water to capitalize on its inevitably strong demand in IMAX and other PLFs. This should result in strong sales for all formats, though there is some volatility to expectations here as Disney has not announced whether or not 2D showings will be evenly offered to cater to those not wishing to view the 3D version. Cameron’s films typically draw a diverse audience across gender and ethnicity, which should be another strength for this sequel as minorities have become an increasingly larger share of the moviegoing population and he is known to create universally appealing characters. Although its domestic release alone should achieve “hit status”, the international appeal of Avatar and Cameron’s fan base will be even more significant for box office receipts — even without a confirmed release in China. The first film drew 73 percent of its original $2.744 billion global haul from outside North America, and its re-release this past September drew a comparable 67 percent of its $75.5 million worldwide gross from international territories. Since Avatar‘s original 2009 opening, theatrical ticket prices have increased due mostly to natural economic expansion. Average prices for that film were between an estimated $10 and $11 due to 3D surcharges at the time. With today’s current base averages and an expectation that Way of Water will again lean heavily on PLF ticket sales, and at least decently so on 3D, average prices will likely reach $14 to $15 or higher for this film. Despite the first movie’s lack of perceived cultural staying power since the end of its theatrical run, this sequel could defy the odds again.

In an era where consumers have certain kinds of movies more readily available to stream at home, while big blockbusters generally work across the board with a preferential choice to first be seen in a cinema before repeat viewings at home, is Avatar perhaps the kind of spectacle-driven movie on the extreme end of the spectrum that only truly works for the mass audience in a theatrical setting?

CONS:

The original film drew 80 percent of its gross from 3D showings, leading to a brief industry boom that saw studios and high-profile features attempt to piggyback off that success. While it worked for a brief time, moviegoers quickly gravitated away from the format as ticket sales declined and began favoring traditional and other premium formats over what many now view as having been a short-lived fad.

The 3D format grew so unpopular with most moviegoers that studios began abandoning it as a release option within just a handful years following Avatar‘s release. Only a select few major films utilize the format today, with Thor: Love and Thunder and Black Panther: Wakanda Forever recently drawing just 10 and 11 percent, respectively, of their opening grosses from 3D shows.

Will audiences be enticed to try 3D once again knowing that it’s James Cameron’s creative vision? At a reported 3-hour-and-10-minute runtime, The Way of Water is 30 minutes longer than its predecessor. Cameron is no stranger to lengthy narratives becoming box office behemoths, and audiences will go along for the ride when pacing is strong (see The Lord of the Rings, Avengers: Endgame, Titanic, and others), but such a length will limit showtimes per day — particularly in the premium theaters that will be highly important to this film’s box office ceiling. More than five years ago, the Avatar brand expanded into the theme park arena with its Orlando, Florida opening in 2017. Otherwise, the original Avatar has often been criticized for lacking a memorable or sustained pop culture footprint in the way of Star Wars, Marvel, and other franchises.

While it could be an oversight to say interest won’t spike again for Cameron’s first film in over a decade, this is justifiable cause to expect a run by Way of Water that will likely be less front-loaded than a typical franchise sequel as audiences from varying generations re-discover the brand. The unknowns. Marketing has been very quiet outside of a teaser trailer and trailer, both of which reveal minimal plot details to the masses. This could serve to amplify the selling point of mystery, but social media sentiment so far suggests there is still work to be done in highlighting the broader aspects of the sequel that will help make it another massive event.

The first film and its trailers also featured a balanced mix of human actors in the largely CG film, the former of which are not near as obviously present in early marketing for the sequel.

[interiorgatordecorator]

44 minutes ago, Reed121 said:

Something I don’t understand is how Avatar 1 didn’t receive an A+ Cinemascore considering the legs it had.

Wouldn’t Avatar 2 need an A+ this time to beat Maverick domestically?

 

sometimes it just down to luck

but I imagine they tried to get a 50/50 split for 2d-3d screenings, I assume itd happen gotten an A+ if they went for majority 3d screenings

wonder how theyll do it for 2

 

[Alexdube]

1 hour ago, Reddroast said:

While that is true I think your forgetting that those films have been managed in a much better way then avatar has. 

I don't know what's that supposed to mean

[Alexdube]

3 hours ago, Deep Wang said:

I think it's kind of impossible for Avatar 2 to have Avatar 1's word of mouth.   By virtue of being a sequel, there won't be that surprise factor of not knowing what you are getting yourself into.  

people had no idea what that they were getting into when they saw T2 for the first time 

[Deep Wang]

8 minutes ago, Alexdube said:

people had no idea what that they were getting into when they saw T2 for the first time 

 

I don't think that's really applicable here.  T1 > T2 was a huge, revelatory step forward in VFX.   

 

Avatar was so far ahead of the game it still looks amazing today.  Not sure where it can go from already damn near perfect.

[Sophia Jane]

I am always believe Avatar will doing Incredible number but this IronJimbo guy here acting in this thread make me fell bit weird....He is just too....

Edited November 18, 2022 by Bruce

[M37]

2 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

what is this based on? This goes against what my guts says completely for how films have been doing as sequels after 13 years. Seems rather baseless honestly.

Off the top of my head.
Incredibles 2

The Force Awakens

Jurassic World

You sure this is a U curve?

 

• It was 22 years from Jurassic Park - the peak of initial popularity - to Jurassic World. By the time of JP3, it was already well on the downslope
• Was also 22 years from Star Wars to Phantom Menace, and though only 16 more to TFA, but with a content product on its third iteration that's been in the public consciousness for 40 years, it gets a little messier
• Family/animated movies are a different beast, because their popularity isn't as exclusive to theatrical release, because of home viewing, as more kids age into viewing range.
• Transformers hit their peak cartoon/toy sales in 1984-87, and the movie came out in 2007
• It was 35 years between Top Gun and TGM ... but, the audience skewed about 10 years older than one would expect for a blockbuster of this size.

 

And yes, this is a thing: there's a known 20-year-rule for fashion, and a similar pattern for entertainment content, but the premise is the same: those who were kids/teens/young adults have aged into middle-aged/older adults and become nostalgic for their childhood, while at the same time a new generation gets to experience something "new" for the first time.

So there is an initial, skyrocketing popularity, which then fades, and is later becomes "new" again - that's a U curve, and with a 20-ish year cycle, 13 years is going to be near the lull/bottom of that trajectory.

 

Its not a coincidence that Hollywood's general MO is to bang out as many sequels to a hit franchise as quickly as they can, trying to ride the curve before it declines too much, then leaving the property alone for 10 years, before eventually working on reboot or sequel of some kind.

[Nero]

2 hours ago, Deuce66 said:

I don't think they'll be happy with this result....

 

Why not? It wasn't going to outgross the first one anyway. 

[Nero]

18 minutes ago, Bruce said:

I am always believe Avatar will doing Incredible number but this IronJimbo guy here acting in this thread make me fell bit weird....He is just too....

Annoying? 🌚

[Nero]

20 minutes ago, M37 said:

 

• It was 22 years from Jurassic Park - the peak of initial popularity - to Jurassic World. By the time of JP3, it was already well on the downslope
• Was also 22 years from Star Wars to Phantom Menace, and though only 16 more to TFA, but with a content product on its third iteration that's been in the public consciousness for 40 years, it gets a little messier
• Family/animated movies are a different beast, because their popularity isn't as exclusive to theatrical release, because of home viewing, as more kids age into viewing range.
• Transformers hit their peak cartoon/toy sales in 1984-87, and the movie came out in 2007
• It was 35 years between Top Gun and TGM ... but, the audience skewed about 10 years older than one would expect for a blockbuster of this size.

 

And yes, this is a thing: there's a known 20-year-rule for fashion, and a similar pattern for entertainment content, but the premise is the same: those who were kids/teens/young adults have aged into middle-aged/older adults and become nostalgic for their childhood, while at the same time a new generation gets to experience something "new" for the first time.

So there is an initial, skyrocketing popularity, which then fades, and is later becomes "new" again - that's a U curve, and with a 20-ish year cycle, 13 years is going to be near the lull/bottom of that trajectory.

 

Its not a coincidence that Hollywood's general MO is to bang out as many sequels to a hit franchise as quickly as they can, trying to ride the curve before it declines too much, then leaving the property alone for 10 years, before eventually working on reboot or sequel of some kind.

There's a pattern here. All the big movies which broke records or were cultural phenomenon like BP, Avengers, Jurassic World, TFA their immediate sequels grossed less than their respective predecessors. It's kinda hard to top it unless it's IW to Endgame situation where endgame was culmination of the MCU. 

[hw64]

4 minutes ago, Nero said:

There's a pattern here. All the big movies which broke records or were cultural phenomenon like BP, Avengers, Jurassic World, TFA their immediate sequels grossed less than their respective predecessors. It's kinda hard to top it unless it's IW to Endgame situation where endgame was culmination of the MCU. 

 

How many of those sequels came 13 years after their predecessor and had a 40%+ higher average ticket price across their run?

[HouseOfTheSun]

Torpedoed exchange rates and a China that is MIA. The numbers will not be impressive tbh 

[HouseOfTheSun]

1 minute ago, hw64 said:

 

How many of those sequels came 13 years after their predecessor and had a 40%+ higher average ticket price across their run?

Or better way Phrase it , how many came 13 years later with significantly reduced exchange rates and a paradigm shifting event that has left the box office permanently crippled. 

[Nero]

2 minutes ago, hw64 said:

 

How many of those sequels came 13 years after their predecessor and had a 40%+ higher average ticket price across their run?

That won't matter.

[Nero]

15 minutes ago, Nero said:

There's a pattern here. All the big movies which broke records or were cultural phenomenon like BP, Avengers, Jurassic World, TFA their immediate sequels grossed less than their respective predecessors. It's kinda hard to top it unless it's IW to Endgame situation where endgame was culmination of the MCU. 

Another pattern if you count Avengers as start of Avengers franchise then all the above mentioned movies were the first movies from their respective franchise which obliterated records and were huge success, their respective sequels however couldn't top predecessors.