Difference being many find a way to do it in a refreshing way. Let’s put it this way, aside from the introduction of a few characters, you could have missed the first movie and it wouldn’t have mattered.
Avatar: The Way of Water (aka Avatar 2)
- Thread starter Brian in Mesa
- Start date
I actually saw it with someone who didn't watch the first or knew much about it, they had no idea what was going on for the majority of the movie, other than trying to follow story at hand. An active movie goer that is.
My comment was about both movies in general. Refreshing way is certainly subjective though.
Just to be clear, I don't believe either of these movies are any way groundbreaking storywise.
My favorite one daughter didn’t see the first one until after. She understood everything except the back story on the two main characters and the colonel.
They could have changed 20 minutes of this movie introducing some of the concepts and you would have been fine. Bad corporation exploits planet, local population fights back, bad military guy. I just described both movies.
Yeah I know, I could also sum most movies down to it's bare bones as well. There's really a limited amount of stories told and nothing is original. Yes, the window dressing is different sure, but it's all just reruns. I say if you make that criticism, it should be done for all.
Like an example might be critiquing plot holes in x movie, but completely give a pass to y movie because...reasons?
Avatar is nothing groundbreaking by any means, but was any movie that came out last year original?
Agree except some are better than others and making it feel fresh.
Well Cameron is basically all about evil corporations, so maybe the criticism is that he just likes that.
I would have to think about it but I think he has used that to some degree in every movie he has done.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,355
- Reaction score
- 68,427
Barbarian.
Banshees of Minisherin (or whatever it’s called)
Everything, Everywhere, All At Once
Speak No Evil
Tar
Last edited:
Barbarian is another abuse/trauma film, and with a horror genre it's gotta have something "pop," so they have
an underground/deformed/imprisoned monster (is that really original? as essentially a physical manifestation of said abuse/trauma.
In a similar vein of 10 Cloverfield Lane and Jennifer's Body off the top of my head with different window dressing. I'm sure there's dozens in and out of the horror genre with similar concepts. I don't mind of course.
Haven't seen others yet, but I'm sure same can be said for them.
It's much easier to either enjoy the movie or not based on specifics, not broad criticisms that can be applied to basically everything. My opinion anyway.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,355
- Reaction score
- 68,427
Lol. Okay.
the “everything’s been done!” defense/criticism of others opinions who dare for at least SOMETHING different within familiar stories is lazy and too lame to continue the conversation.
Honestly, it feels like you’re just defensive over your own opinion of the film and somehow feel your movie IQ is threatened by opinions contrary to your own.
Last edited:
How nice of you to interject into the conversation by responding to a question not directed at you, then get into a hissy fit that I responded to your response? The f**k? Seems like you came up with examples and I was just responding, not trying to show you up. You sure your "movie IQ" wasn't threatened? Why the hostility?
The criticism of it's been done before that I am doing apparently is literally the focused criticism of everyone is doing on Avatar (i.e, the story has been done before, bad, boring, blah!) You know, everyone's a critic, yeah?
I was just providing some perspective, which it seems you could surely use some by the looks of it.
It's fine. I saw first Avatar in theatres over a decade ago and most likely will not see the 2nd one again this decade. Nor do I ever have any intention of owning the Blu rays, not even in the $5 bins.
Nice one man. You totally got it figured out. Sorry in advance if I triggered you again.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,355
- Reaction score
- 68,427
So, watched the first 30 minutes at home on my flat screen. It’s obviously not the Theater experience but Jesus,.. the images Cameron puts on screen really are breathtaking at a very base level.
This experience is making me want to see it again at the Chinese Theater IMAX.
And it’s also made me realize jf Cameron wants to keep screwing my eyeballs for the next three movies over the next seven years, who the hell am I to argue, regardless of how great the story may or may not be.
No one does spectacle like Big Jim.
Also, Spider still sucks. Real bad.
This experience is making me want to see it again at the Chinese Theater IMAX.
And it’s also made me realize jf Cameron wants to keep screwing my eyeballs for the next three movies over the next seven years, who the hell am I to argue, regardless of how great the story may or may not be.
No one does spectacle like Big Jim.
Also, Spider still sucks. Real bad.
Ouchie-Z-Clown
I'm better than Mulli!
As a character or an actor?
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,355
- Reaction score
- 68,427
Both?
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,355
- Reaction score
- 68,427
@Devilmaycare looks like you were on the money and then some.
Yeah, it looks like it might have a shot at 2.5B now which I didn't think it would hit. The 2B number just seemed likely to me after we saw strong word of mouth after the first weekend coupled with lack of January releases. It was positioned perfectly for it.
Appears the primary driver of the box office is being driven non-domestically. It's still truly amazing anytime a movie hits that number worldwide mind you. However, there are a number of movies more popular that did better domestically include the original Avatar (for now) and the studio makes a larger chunk domestically. Also, people forget the original Avatar did 2.9 billion worldwide last time. I doubt it catches the original but still impressive for JC.
| Rank | Year | Movie | Distributor | Domestic Box Office | International Box Office | Worldwide Box Office |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2015 | Star Wars Ep. VII: The Force Awakens | Walt Disney | $936,662,225 | $1,127,953,592 | $2,064,615,817 |
| 2 | 2019 | Avengers: Endgame | Walt Disney | $858,373,000 | $1,936,358,755 | $2,794,731,755 |
| 3 | 2021 | Spider-Man: No Way Home | Sony Pict… | $814,115,070 | $1,095,933,175 | $1,910,048,245 |
| 4 | 2009 | Avatar | 20th Cent… | $785,221,649 | $2,114,162,453 | $2,899,384,102 |
| 5 | 2022 | Top Gun: Maverick | Paramount… | $718,732,821 | $768,843,144 | $1,487,575,965 |
| 6 | 2018 | Black Panther | Walt Disney | $700,059,566 | $636,434,754 | $1,336,494,320 |
| 7 | 2018 | Avengers: Infinity War | Walt Disney | $678,815,482 | $1,369,544,272 | $2,048,359,754 |
| 8 | 1997 | Titanic | Paramount… | $659,363,944 | $1,548,622,601 | $2,207,986,545 |
| 9 | 2015 | Jurassic World | Universal | $652,306,625 | $1,017,657,016 | $1,669,963,641 |
| 10 | 2012 | The Avengers | Walt Disney | $623,357,910 | $891,742,301 | $1,515,100,211 |
| 11 | 2017 | Star Wars Ep. VIII: The Last Jedi | Walt Disney | $620,181,382 | $711,453,759 | $1,331,635,141 |
| 12 | 2018 | Incredibles 2 | Walt Disney | $608,581,744 | $634,223,615 | $1,242,805,359 |
| 13 | 2022 | Avatar: The Way of Water | 20th Cent… | $597,961,353 | $1,426,000,000 | $2,023,961,353 |
| | |
Last edited:
Those aren't inflation adjusted either so the older movies performed even better relative to the new ones. I've never been a big fan of using the dollar amount as the metric due to that. I really wish it was reported in number of tickets sold instead of dollars. I think it's a clearer number when comparing two movies that came out at different times.
Neither adjusted for inflation nor ticket sales is perfect either. They use data on sales (when available) to determine the "adjusted inflation". I just don't know that it's much more credible. For example, many movies back then were released multiple times over a decade. That happens on occasion now but typically not in a wide release unless it was HUGE. Also, some data back then wasn't available, so they used a projection to determine sales. There are so many studios, independent filmmakers etc. now and back then there were fewer movies the marketplace at a given time (less studios pumping out content) competing with each other. Also, now there is more competition for your entertainment dollars besides movies than there were back then as well. So, I don't know that I put "adjusted for inflation" or ticket sales up necessarily as superior measure. It's always a challenge to compare different eras.
Ouchie-Z-Clown
I'm better than Mulli!
And only actor playing both a green and blue alien.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,355
- Reaction score
- 68,427
I don’t care where the money is printed, for over a DECADE people have been saying Avatar doesn’t matter or have any cultural footprint. Meanwhile, the sequel comes out and it’s is guaranteed to be the 4TH BIGGEST MOVIE EVER. That’s freaking ridiculous, no matter what anyone says.
And that’s coming from a cinefile who wishes Cameron would do anything BUT more Avatar movies.
And that’s coming from a cinefile who wishes Cameron would do anything BUT more Avatar movies.
Until the sequel came out was there any cultural footprint? I think for over a decade those people would be correct. The question is how many people that didn't think that for the last decade think that after the sequel.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,355
- Reaction score
- 68,427
I just don’t know if a sequel makes the 4th most amount of money ever, coming off a pandemic if there was no footprint in the first place, right?
Like none of LIKE the first Avatar. We ALL probably wouldn’t rank it in our top 100 movies ever. Yet SO MANY of us (and many others) came out in DROVES to see WTF this was about.
Similar threads
