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

[blenderbus]

I see this dropping in attendance but catching up with inflation... soooo  750-760M domestic in 2016 predict for me. 

Pretty much exactly what I think

[kayumanggi]

This will not drop by more than 100 M from the first. 130 M | 650 M

Edited August 9, 2013 by kayumanggi

[Dilusha Bandara]

I see this dropping in attendance but catching up with inflation... soooo  750-760M domestic in 2016 predict for me. 

650 dom + 1100 OS = 1750 WW

[kayumanggi]

Just 1100 M overseas?

[kayumanggi]

The first one made 2000 M overseas.

[The Futurist]

The asumption Cameron needs a new technology to make the Avatar sequels succesful is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

[lab276]

What it needs is a great story with characters people want to see.

[kayumanggi]

Returning to Pandora alone is enough reason for me to watch this multiple times.

[kayumanggi]

And don't forget the great visuals.

[A Marvel Fanboy]

What it needs is a great story with characters people want to see.

You can bet on that.

[Elessar]

The asumption Cameron needs a new technology to make the Avatar sequels succesful is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

 

Kinda agree. Fans that keep harping on that are undermining their own argument that the first one didn't become the biggest movie just because of 3D.

 

Cameron (and Co) will improve the production pipeline and refine the special effects but there won't be anything "revolutionary" like 3D (even though Avatar wasn't even the first movie in that format), except higher frame rates, which - judging from Hobbit reactions - probably won't go down as well.

 

As has been said, it needs a riveting story and i'm confident that Cameron will give us one again. That said, i doubt the sequel can match the success of the first movie. It doesn't need to.

Edited August 9, 2013 by Elessar

[Dementeleus]

People forget that THE ABYSS had all sorts of new technology breakthroughs: shooting all underwater scenes underwater, recording production audio underwater, designing new workable helmets to showcase faces, a stunning revolutionary CG sequence.... and that didn't really help the box-office (unfortunately).

[Neo]

2000M=2B

[fishstick]

People forget that THE ABYSS had all sorts of new technology breakthroughs: shooting all underwater scenes underwater, recording production audio underwater, designing new workable helmets to showcase faces, a stunning revolutionary CG sequence.... and that didn't really help the box-office (unfortunately).

 

True yet the movie's holding remarkably well now. The romance is as complelling as anything Cameorn did in that deparmtent and the chemsitry between the leads is amazing.

[Dementeleus]

True yet the movie's holding remarkably well now. The romance is as complelling as anything Cameorn did in that deparmtent and the chemsitry between the leads is amazing.

 

Oh, I agree, it's a great movie.... I'm just talking box-office and initial reactions (reviews and WOM were good but nothing great).

[vc2002]

People forget that THE ABYSS had all sorts of new technology breakthroughs: shooting all underwater scenes underwater, recording production audio underwater, designing new workable helmets to showcase faces, a stunning revolutionary CG sequence.... and that didn't really help the box-office (unfortunately).

 

Further proof that the key to Avatar's boxoffice success is far more than the technology side.

[fishstick]

Oh, I agree, it's a great movie.... I'm just talking box-office and initial reactions (reviews and WOM were good but nothing great).

 

It was a bit a head of its time. Made in 80s when the type of a hero that Ed Harris played was not the fashion yet, had a mix of 3d Encounters-like sci fi and Cold War thriller. But it's by far the best Spielberg movie that Spielberg never made, eat your heart out JJ. This is how you do homage to Steven.  

Edited August 10, 2013 by fishnets

[Elessar]

Just bought a 3D TV and the first thing i did was getting Avatar. Reminded me how awesome the movie looks...

[fishstick]

Avatar looks awesome in 2D too, especially on BD it really pops up. But 3D was perfect too so lucky you.

 

I hope they make sequels in HFR. Avatar is perfect for it because HFR makes digital characters really pop up and look real. TH was totally wrong for the medium because of fake sets, make-up and prothetics that aslo popped up. But digital parts were ace.

Edited August 10, 2013 by fishnets

[Dilusha Bandara]

Jim was talking about 60fps years ago, but right now it seems like he is got to go with PJ's 48fps. The problem is that, Jim and Fox fears that if they shot AVATAR sequels at 60fps, there's no clean way to play the movie at 24fps in some theaters! Simply they think 60fps could be too much of a gamble.