web
counter
 

Let the Avatar Sequels Begin

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Trade News | Comments (51)



jamescameron-3d.jpg

Avatar has been out exactly 10 days now, and I’m sick to death of it. I’m sick of the hype; I’m sick of the backlash; and I’m sick of the backlash backlash. I’m tired of hearing about its box office grosses, how much it costs, and whether it will make its money back (it will, a couple of times over, before it’s all said and done). And I’m frankly kind of taken aback at how seriously those who love or hate Avatar take their love and hate. There’s barely a middle ground here, one where we can appreciate the visuals but not the script. The baby is thrown out with the bath water, and then stomped on repeatedly. And given the vast wasteland that is January, and probably the inevitable Best Picture nomination (the Academy loves CGI wizardry), we’ll be hearing about Avatar well into February.

And then we’ll be hearing about Avatar 2. James Cameron has already stated that there will be a sequel — probably a trilogy, and that he’s got the stories mapped out for the next two (though, no script has yet been written). It makes financial sense, too, to re-use the $300 or $400 or $500 million investment that Fox has put into the first movie for sequels, which probably won’t end up being much cheaper anyhow, but will be quicker to the screen, since so many of the sets have been made and the technology has been established. As Cameron told ComingSoon:

Actually, when I pitched this to 20th Century Fox four-and-a-half years ago, I said, ‘You know, we’re going to spend a lot of money and time and energy creating not only a process but the assets, the CG assets, we call them - all the models of every rock and tree and plant and creature and the muscle rigs for all the creatures and the facial rigging for the main characters and all that’… huge, millions and millions of dollars. So it really makes sense to think of it as the potential start of a franchise, if you will, or a saga that plays out over several acts, each movie being an act of that saga.

But here’s what really annoys me, for some reason. Avatar has created another one of these fanboy worlds with practically a made-up language, and for years, I’m going to have to listen to nasal-drippy geeks speaking this new form of Klingon, and talking about this goddamn made-up world as though it’s real, and taking this shit way too goddamn seriously.

But hey! Maybe that’s just me.

Welcome to the New World Order, folks. James Cameron owns your ass.

(Background Source: Slashfilm)









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



Best of the Decade From Around the Web | Nine Review









Comments

"one where we can appreciate the visuals but not the script.."

The story is EVERYTHING, bub. If I wanna appreciate visuals I'd rather go to a museum and appreciate them there not have this asshole jack my ass.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 28, 2009 11:11 AM

No. Goddammit, NO. No fucking sequels! You made one good Sci-Fi flick, leave it at that. Do not fucking Matrix this thing!

Posted by: Jeremy Feist at December 28, 2009 11:12 AM

Meh, I somewhat agree, but shit could be way worse. At least we aren't talking about the fucking Transformers franchise anymore.

Posted by: Seany D at December 28, 2009 11:14 AM

It's not just you. That's part of what bothers me about the comic book fandom too, arguments that start by saying things like, "Superhero X would NEVER ..."

Come to think of it, I tend to skip most fantasy and sword/sorcery type movies and books for pretty much the same reason, though I can buy into good science fiction occasionally. I don't want to have to learn the rules of new worlds and new languages. I have enough trouble keeping the rules of THIS world straight.

Posted by: , at December 28, 2009 11:18 AM

I have enough trouble keeping the rules of THIS world straight.

Posted by: , at December 28, 2009 11:18 AM

--------------------------------------
Such as having TWO testicles?

BAM!

Ah, see what I did there?

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 28, 2009 11:24 AM

You slammed one of his testicles??

Posted by: Magiel at December 28, 2009 11:29 AM

I love the smell of NapalmSlim in the morning.

Posted by: , at December 28, 2009 11:31 AM

Not too irked about this news. See, we'll rarely run into those Avatar fanboys out in the world because they'll be the type that never leave their mother's basements. ..Unlike those Twihard tweens running around babbling about their obsessionlove in those emo-vamp tshirts they never clean.
Sure Avatar would be best left as a stand-alone film, but isn't it just a given now that anything that tops the box office will birth a sequel?

Posted by: gee. ay. at December 28, 2009 11:48 AM

Why wait for such trivial things as the release of the first Avatar when you can preemptively start the work and hype on the second? Amateur move, Cameron.


Such as having TWO testicles?
BAM!
Ah, see what I did there?

Slim, you give that nut more attention than Mrs. ,.

Posted by: branded at December 28, 2009 11:48 AM

I'm firmly middle of the road on this picture. don't love it, don't hate it. I'll watch it On Demand, but not in the theater. I won't eat the Big Mac tie in, but I might eat the large fry. I won't buy the Avatar plush toy, but perhaps the Avatar mudflaps. I'm not going to buy the Avatar offcially authorized novelization, but if James Cameron stopped in my driveway and summarized the plot with hand motions, I'd listen politely. If Sigourney Weaver wanted to whisper her character motivation huskily as an audiobook, I'd at least listen to it during my commute. I'll still think of Pandora as a music service first, but hey I know it's in the movie. What I'm really saying here is it's no They Live, but it's also no Escape from LA.

Posted by: Mrcreosote at December 28, 2009 11:49 AM

Slim, you give that nut more attention than Mrs. ,.

Posted by: branded at December 28, 2009 11:48 AM


------------------------------------------

Jealous much?

/don't hate the playa, hate the game

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 28, 2009 11:54 AM

Charlie Sheen got arrested over the Christmas break for going vietnam on wife’s ass and not a peep out of the pajibians. If it were someone black kicking their wife’s ass the pajibians would be calling for blood. I saw Avatar it was so so.

Posted by: Orrin Hatch at December 28, 2009 11:57 AM

the type that never leave their mother's basements.

Thank you for filling the quota.

Posted by: twig at December 28, 2009 12:01 PM

God damn but you hate yourself some nerds. Were you kicked out of the math club as a kid, or something? Did your friends not share their comic books or video games?

What did we do to make you hate us so much, Dustin?

And for the record, I could watch another five movies based on the Avatar universe if they all looked as incredible as this one.

/nasal dripping

Posted by: Snath at December 28, 2009 12:02 PM

*cleaning dust off Bobba Fett figure*


Rowles is a notorious nerd hater Snath.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 28, 2009 12:11 PM

Rowles is a notorious nerd hater Snath.

And Slim is a notorious nerf herder.

Oh, shut up. I'm a little rusty is all.

Posted by: TK at December 28, 2009 12:26 PM

and I’m sick to death of it.

Moratorium on posts then.

Thanks!

Posted by: Jay at December 28, 2009 12:26 PM

My husband and I had fun watching Avatar, mostly for the visuals but he has a couple of bitches. 1) The sound of the helicopters. He really wanted to hear what a helicopter with four blades would sound like and was disappointed that they used the sound of Huey. Maybe Cameron was trying to draw some obscure Vietnam reference, but it came across as the laziness that it probably was. (Snuggie, my husband would get along well with your bird-call fanatic uncle). 2) The font used for the title and subtitles. Instead of developing his own font, Cameron paid $30 to use Papyrus. Maybe Cameron will fix both of those in the sequels. Lord knows he spent enough money and effort already, what's another couple thousand to make those bits of laziness disappear?

Posted by: stardust at December 28, 2009 12:39 PM

Jealous much?
/don't hate the playa, hate the game

I'm just funning with your ball obsession. I pretend that your comments were shot anamorphic with more lens flares. Much better that way.
/don't hate the Abrams, hate the game

Posted by: branded at December 28, 2009 12:54 PM

Yeah, I'm sick to death of it too. I talked/argued with a friend who's seen it, not too enthused but still thought it was a good escape, about the merit of story-telling.

It's just if I want to be awed by visual beauty of stuff, I'd probably watch the Planet Earth DVD series anyways, but then again they are not in 3D. And there is a big wave that has been developing over decades that's trying to sweep all good stories once and for all because they are not as marketable or bankable.

I could appreciate the visual probably but I don't want to contribute into that type of thinking trying to make story obsolete. To me, saying we need escapist movie that won't make you think more is comparable to Christian right saying there should be equal attention given to creationism. There's already great influx of story-less movies for one thing and though movie can be the medium for visual entertainment, if the work purport to have any kind of through line narrative at all, it does not change the fact that visual magic all have to be in service of story, not the other way around.

Movies do too good at their worst for long enough and they would be no good at all.

Posted by: yocean at December 28, 2009 1:27 PM

I've come to the conclusion that studio movies depend more and more upon the promotion of the movie rather than the quality of the movie in and of itself. Already giant chunks of the movies' budgets are devoted towards their advertising said products as the next great thing rather than taking steps to ensure that it does in fact have quality. It's going to get to the point when the majority of a movie's budget becomes promotion over production. It's next to impossible to show a complex or moving storyline in a 2 minute trailer, but they can make it look pretty, and pretty is where the hooks come from.

It might come to a surprise to many that studio heads and their minions are very unlikely to have degrees in film making, cinema or writing. They are far more likely to have degrees in advertising, accounting, economics, or marketing. In other words, they really don't care what kind of movies they produce so long as there's a way to promote the bejeezus out of it and make oodles of money. Little golden statues for movies nobody watches will always take a backseat to the mediocrity that pulls in millions at the box office. It's a shame they couldn't try to merge the two more often.

Posted by: bleujayone at December 28, 2009 1:41 PM

Stardust

I love your husband. You snagged a keeper.

Posted by: twig at December 28, 2009 1:58 PM

appreciate the visuals but not the script

Really? The visuals weren't really anything special or original. You see glowing plants and trees quite often in video games, it's something that beginner graphics students do for class because it's 'cool' the first time around. The floating mountains, the glowing tendrils, giant trees that are homes to mysterious creatures have been in Ghibli films for decades already. And the Naveen... Really? they just happen to all talk, act, and look like Native Americans even though they've had no prior exposure to Earth cultures? Geeze, who the fuck writes this stuff? It's like Cameron is coming down with Lucas syndrome.

Posted by: Vi at December 28, 2009 2:01 PM

Avatar has been out exactly 10 days now, and I’m sick to death of it.

Whatever, dude. You were sick of this movie sometime back in July or August or something.

Posted by: ForbiddenDonut at December 28, 2009 2:04 PM

Give me Avatar instead of Harry Poter or Twilight or Transformers any day. Bring it on baby.

Posted by: barf at December 28, 2009 2:04 PM

I would love to see more Avatar movies as long as they can immerse you in that world again. What would the sequels be though? Jake has already become one of the Na'vi. He's already met his life mate, Neytiri. He's ridden the Toruk. The humans have left the planet and he united the tribes...So...what would the new story even be? What, is his avatar (which is technically just him now right?) going to become paralyzed? Because that would just be, well, funny.

Avatar has created another one of these fanboy worlds with practically a made-up language.
Cameron and a Dr. Paul Frommer did actually create another language with a vocabulary of over 1,000 words (that number comes from wiki, the IMDB reports it at around 500 words). So it's not "practically," it is.

But what am I saying? I've already stated I have a hard on for Neytiri so any excuse to see her again is good enough for me.

Did you know in Hinduism avatar "refers to the appearance in physical form, having descended from heaven to earth, of a deity."

Posted by: DeistBrawler at December 28, 2009 2:05 PM

Actually, any sequel will probably take 14 years and ten billion dollars, the first five years in pre-production consisting of Jimmmy boy talking about it while pinching yet ANOTHER loaf over the Titanic shipwreck site.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 28, 2009 2:31 PM

"I’m frankly kind of taken aback at how seriously those who love or hate Avatar take their love and hate. There’s barely a middle ground here"

Welcome to the internet, you new here?

Posted by: Jeff at December 28, 2009 2:33 PM

It's definitely not just you.

Posted by: Cindy at December 28, 2009 2:53 PM

Rowles is just upset that Avatar is far more popular than he will ever be, and more entertaining than any Ryan Reynolds film.

Posted by: Adam C at December 28, 2009 3:37 PM

Personally, I don't think January is going to be a wasteland: I've got Daybreakers, The Book of Eli, and Legion to look forward to. Not to mention in February: The Wolfman, Shutter Island, and The Crazies.

Why yes, I do like bad movies, as long as there's one or more of the following: over-the-top action, gore, monsters, supernatural happenings, apocalypses, zombies, viruses, spooky insane asylums or non-Twilight vampires. So basically, I'm happy as a proverbial pig in poop for the next couple months.

Posted by: MM at December 28, 2009 3:54 PM

Hey Rowles, have you ever heard the term, "Don't shit where you eat?" Of course you have.

I mention it because you don't seem to have any understanding of what it means and how it applies to your website. The overwhelming majority of movie-goers are men. True story. Just look at the different in box offices between Batman movies and Reese Witherspoon movies. We win. The balls win (hold back your burgeoning, phony disgust at this mildly misogynistic perspective).

Because the majority of movie goers are men, I would bet that the majority of cinephiles are men. I would bet that the majority of Pajiba regulars are men. I'm not saying there aren't ANY women here -- thank God there are -- I'm saying they're a minority.

Most men, Rowles, like fan-boy shit. Obviously not everyone can speak Klingon, but you don't have to in order to enjoy the new Star Trek movie. Not every man knows the back story of Frodo's glowing vial of whatever, but you don't have to in order to enjoy The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Not every man knows that Tony Stark was transformed into a teenager for a little while in the late '90s in an attempt to boost sales with teenagers, but you don't need to in order to enjoy Iron Man.

Most of the people who come to this site (men) have at least a casual understanding of these things, if not a fanatical obsession. And what do you do? You mercilessly bitch about us. You take every single opportunity to whine and moan and lament our existence -- and for what? Because you're a tough guy? Because you like sports and wine? Because you're hard and nails and we're soft? It's stupid. It's FUCKING stupid.

There isn't a division anymore between fanboys and regular men. Regular men ARE fanboys. As I've stated before, there are varying degrees of fanaticism for the stars and characters (I, for example have absolutely NO desire to suck off Robert Downey Jr. or Ryan Reynolds), but enjoying these types of things doesn't mean someone is ripe for your continuing assaults.

I like it here, but I get really sick of your whiney bitching about fanboys. You don't know what you're talking about and you've got some shit stuck in between your teeth.

Posted by: superasente at December 28, 2009 4:24 PM

I believe the majority of Pajiba regulars are in fact XX not XY. And the difference between Batman movies and Reese Witherspoon movies is that Batman isn't a squinty annoying asshat. Well, with the exception of Val Kilmer.

Posted by: Mrcreosote at December 28, 2009 4:31 PM

Wow superasente...

I'm not going to get into that...mainly because I'm not in the mood. However...I think it has been proven quite often that women are the majority here. Men are in fact the minority on this website.

Just saying.

Posted by: DeistBrawler at December 28, 2009 4:33 PM

I am a meat popsicle.

Posted by: twig at December 28, 2009 4:37 PM

Superasente has hit the nail right on the head, I have known for YEARS that there's a vast conspiracy to cover-up the fact that most "women" are, in fact, men.

/has a newsletter

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 28, 2009 4:49 PM

#1: The majority of Pajiba readers are women.

#2: Dustin kids because he loves.

Posted by: MM at December 28, 2009 4:49 PM

The overwhelming majority of movie-goers are men. True story. Just look at the different in box offices between Batman movies and Reese Witherspoon movies. We win. The balls win (hold back your burgeoning, phony disgust at this mildly misogynistic perspective).

True story? Actually the majority of movie-goers are female, unless of course you choose not to agree with statistics of the MPAA.

This particular "burgeoning, phony disgust" is aimed at citation of phony numbers.

Posted by: branded at December 28, 2009 5:03 PM

This particular "burgeoning, phony disgust" is aimed at citation of phony numbers.

Posted by: branded at December 28, 2009 5:03 PM

So basically, you are here pushing the MPAA agenda.
I call your integrity into question, sir. Yours and your cronies.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 28, 2009 5:32 PM

Pajiba is in a paradoxical situation, the majority of it’s members are female but the majority of movie goers are male. At times pajiba must placate it’s female members in order to keep them happy and to keep them coming back.

I subscribe to the theory that whomever pays your bills you must sing their song and drink their wine. The male movie studio head does not have to put up with such nonsense about trying to appease the female movie goer because there is always another Transformer or Batman movie just around the corner. The movie industry can not survive on female themed movies.


Most of the men here live in a matriarch system, but I live in a patriarch system. In the woods you have the buck which is a male deer, and you have a doe which is a female deer. The buck is not supposed to back up to the doe, the doe is supposed to back up to the buck. The female dollar has never, and will never sustain the movie industry.

Posted by: Orrin Hatch at December 28, 2009 7:03 PM

What ^he^ said.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 28, 2009 7:15 PM

Cameron strikes me as the sort of director who would have made Titanic 2 if he could have. A sequel to Avatar isn't that big of a surprise. Is it? Really???

Posted by: bonbiz at December 28, 2009 7:43 PM

In an Australian interview, Sam Worthington leaked that there are more than two Avatar films in the pipeline.

Posted by: Aria at December 28, 2009 9:23 PM

I thought I read that the other moons in the system were to be the setting for sequels. The sequels may not have anything to do with the Avatar story other than general proximity. Maybe in the end he has an Avengers style tie-it-all-together movie in mind.

Posted by: ed newman at December 28, 2009 10:25 PM

Lmao, I'd love to see the sequels but I understand where you're coming from Dustin

Posted by: Candy at December 28, 2009 11:08 PM

superasente, you seem to be laboring under the delusion that action flicks are not attended by lots and lots of women. Face it, neither Jason Statham nor Christian Bale would have a damned career if we didn't pay to watch them flail around and hit things. See also, the previous incarnation of Matt Damon (notice how little money his "comedy" about ADM made in comparison to the Bourne films?), the entirety of Brad Pitt's career, and most of Angelina Jolie's (because a fair number of us would jump the fence to hit that, at least in her prime). I am thoroughly female, and not only do I like flicks where people fly, shit blows up, dudes hit each other, cars go fast, there's a healthy amount of enthusiastic sex and/or death, I also like watching football and seeing my opponent crumple to the ground. Stealing his woman is optional, because most of them don't do a thing for me. So please, please stop assuming that a bunch of boys rubbing up against their superhero/fantasy icons is the only thing that fuels the great movie machine. Some of them rub up against girls who ALSO go to the movies.

Posted by: Reba at December 29, 2009 1:09 PM

In the 1980s India had gone thru a 3-D craze. the first was a well made childrens' film and a super hit. the others thought that shooting bullets and flames and arrows at the audience made up for a lack of story or even coherence. they were wrong and the boom was over. now we have Avatar. these gorgeous visuals will soon become old hat, and very expensive blunders will be made before studios revert to good scripts. Avatar's plot and dialogue is atrocious, but the spectacle disguises that.

Posted by: Rohit Arya at December 30, 2009 12:28 AM

My first reaction was HELL NO!

Bu now that I think about it, maybe it will have a more original or at least less obviously Fern Gully/Dances with Wolves/Pochahantas story line. Then I will consider seeing it.

Posted by: emily at December 30, 2009 2:57 AM

@bluejayone- Oh course studio heads are going to be business poeple. There is a lot more to running a studio than being a film buff/student. Yes, I do wish a savvy film guy with business skills would run at least ONE of the studios to make good films, but companies exist for one reason- to make money. So we look at what the public wants- pretty shiny things that don't make us think, and sophomoric humor that doesn't make us think. Oh, and nudity doesn't help, but the R rating will hurt the boxoffice. But Twillight solved that one with "high school" bare chested lads who "love" their girl in the romance book way.

Given all that, I'm going to see Avatar on an IMAX 3D screen. I've heard the new 3D techniques are pretty great, and this one is the best so far, so why not. I go to like 3 movies a year, and only 1 so far (Transformer 2, err), so I got a mulligan in the wings. But I do promise not to spout off about Avatar.

Posted by: Bryan at December 31, 2009 12:59 AM

I keep hearing that Avatar's story and dialogue is "atrocious". Someone please give me examples of this horrible dialogue. Any movie has a line or two which may be considered "clunky" or "corny" by some; but I've yet to see anyone in the theater laughing or complaining about poor dialogue throughout Avatar. Someone also please educate me as to why SOME people think the story is soooo poor that they need to slam it so bad. Sure, it borrows and stitches elements together which we may have seen in other movies over the years, but it is executed with plenty of originality, and great pacing. All I know is most people who see this film, shed tears as they empathize with the characters, clap at loud during key moments, and can't wipe the smile off their face during most of the film or after. They also want to watch it and visit Pandora again. Apparently, MOST of America (and the rest of the world)are nerds...including most of the critics who raved about this movie!

Posted by: Somedude at December 31, 2009 11:53 PM

First, I concur with Somedude above. I think a lot of "critics" are merely submitting to the urge to condemn the plot material or character development of ANY movie that has a big special effects budget.

Second, anybody who has not seen the movie in 3D (as it was intended to be seen) shouldn't criticize too much before they do. It is a different experience entirely, and though it may seem superficial, the immersive aspect definitely plays into drawing in the audience's attention to the actual substance of the movie, not just the visuals.

Third, has anybody seen Titan A.E.? You know, back in 2000? I noticed a lot of parallels between the two movies. Both were cool sci-fi ideas, fueled with money for special effects, then filled with extended non-dialogue action sequences to show off the visual technology. It was just something I noticed. Though, Avatar did a better job, and the purpose of those flight and action scenes was more aimed towards making the audience fall in love with the Na'vi culture at the same pace as Jake Sully.

Posted by: Sam at January 2, 2010 5:24 PM