Avatar: The Way of Water

[Wor-Gar]

I'll bet! Was he present in the audience for the entire showing or did he only arrive at the end?

What format was the movie in? 3D? IMAX? HFR?

I'm not sure when Cameron slipped in, but he wasn't there when it started. He's done so many of these type things he's probably got it down to a science when he arrives. With the heavy rains last night I was thinking he might not show at all -- but the man came. Honorable.

The screening was in a theater labelled IMAX 3D... the screen wasn't huge though and never changed sizes so I guess it was Lie-max. Cameron said we had just seen it in Dolby Cinema (which he meant as a positive) and I do believe it was HFR at certain times; I did notice the change. Thankfully no headaches. Like the first Avatar, I kind of got used to the "3D" experience after a while and it only kept working when things were floating in front of you like ash or little fish.

 

[Khev]

I'm not sure when Cameron slipped in, but he wasn't there when it started. He's done so many of these type things he's probably got it down to a science when he arrives. With the heavy rains last night I was thinking he might not show at all -- but the man came. Honorable.

The screening was in a theater labelled IMAX 3D... the screen wasn't huge though and never changed sizes so I guess it was Lie-max. Cameron said we had just seen it in Dolby Cinema (which he meant as a positive) and I do believe it was HFR at certain times; I did notice the change. Thankfully no headaches. Like the first Avatar, I kind of got used to the "3D" experience after a while and it only kept working when things were floating in front of you like ash or little fish.

Well it sounds like you were able to have the very best experience imaginable as far as technical presentation. 3D, Dolby, HFR, and Cameron himself, can't beat that!

 

[Neal136]

Yeah I saw an interview where he said the same and I believe you're exactly right that his current rough cut is about 6 or more hours.

I believe I read that the rough cut is currently at 9 hours! That's crazy.

 

[Khev]

I believe I read that the rough cut is currently at 9 hours! That's crazy.

Such a contrast to the business practice of Disney with regard to SW and Marvel.

Cameron: "How do I trim down each chapter of this story that I'm passionate about to a manageable level?"

Disney: "How do we rush to release as much content as quickly as possible?"

 

[Khev]

 

[Misterbadguy]

Forgive me for perhaps missing something here, but how are they managing HFR with Titanic? Wouldn't it need to have been filmed at a higher frame rate to begin with?

 

[Khev]

Yeah I don't know how they account for the missing data between the standard speed frames that but apparently there's some sort of conversion process (digitally I assume.) He already did it for the first Avatar.

 

[jedibear]

The highlight was Cameron showing up of course. It was fun to see "the King" right there in front of you....

But....did he cry?

 

[jye4ever]

With Cameron present Wor-Gar finally broke out a smile…

 

[The Buffinator]

But....did he cry?

Yes, when he spied Wor-Gar yawning lol...

 

[Mr.NoCredit]

Adults love to read their own words, hear themselves talk, sound educated and portray themselves as intellectuals.

Sometimes you just need to put your kid pants on and be entertained. Pretend your twelve and enjoy it for what it is… a movie created for entertainment. Simple.

All of the discussion/dissection gets ridiculous, boring and pointless. It’s just a movie made to be enjoyed. Enjoy the fantasy… or don’t…

I’ll ****-off now that I’ve left my opinion.

 

[Mandible]

Adults love to read their own words, hear themselves talk, sound educated and portray themselves as intellectuals.

Sometimes you just need to put your kid pants on and be entertained. Pretend your twelve and enjoy it for what it is… a movie created for entertainment. Simple.

All of the discussion/dissection gets ridiculous, boring and pointless. It’s just a movie made to be enjoyed. Enjoy the fantasy… or don’t…

I’ll ****-off now that I’ve left my opinion.

If you don't have to take time out of your life, spend money, and are also blessed with the amazing ability to switch your brain into monkey mode - then sure, you've got a point.

But if you're taking your family and spending a stupid amount of money and time in the hope that the film is not just pretty colors and lights splashed on a screen... I'm going to have to disagree with you.

I can still vividly remember my movie outings at twelve years old (or less); E.T. Jaws, SW, Empire, Raiders, Close Encounters, Blade Runner, The Thing, American Werewolf in London... I could go on and on. All far superior films with far superior scripts and I didn't need monkey brain to enjoy them. In fact, they taught me thing about life at 12 years old.

But if monkey brain is good for you, that's fine and okay. But don't get on your high horse if others expect more from their "entertainment."

 

[Wor-Gar]

I still say, my biggest complaint is the running time. AWOW would be so much better if cut down to 2 hours. No movie needs to be 3+ hours long. No story is that inventive, nor needs "time to open up".

I'll bet a lot of people here who didn't care for this movie would have liked it a lot more with a breakneck clip of 2 hours.

 

[Khev]

I still say, my biggest complaint is the running time.

Same. It should have been three and a half hours!

 

[Wor-Gar]

Same. It should have been three and a half hours!

I know you're joking. I bet even you would have liked it just as much at 2 hours.

 

[Prime Clone]

I can still vividly remember my movie outings at twelve years old (or less); E.T. Jaws, SW, Empire, Raiders, Close Encounters, Blade Runner, The Thing, American Werewolf in London... I could go on and on. All far superior films with far superior scripts and I didn't need monkey brain to enjoy them. In fact, they taught me thing about life at 12 years old.

Maybe that’s the point - all the life lessons have been done to death for the past 45+ years, and it’s time to just sit back and enjoy a popcorn movie.

Still, Cameron manages to insert messages about family and the environment without being overtly woke (just like the good old days).

 

[guyver1]

I believe I read that the rough cut is currently at 9 hours! That's crazy.

Disney + …spring/summer of 2023

 

[Mandible]

Maybe that’s the point - all the life lessons have been done to death for the past 45+ years, and it’s time to just sit back and enjoy a popcorn movie.

Still, Cameron manages to insert messages about family and the environment without being overtly woke (just like the good old days).

2022 - TGM was the perfect popcorn movie, and I loved it. 1980 - Raiders is also a perfect popcorn movie, if not one the best popcorn movies ever made, and I loved that.

Big difference is that these two films had solid scripts, with solid characters, motivations, heart, and effortless story progression that all made sense. So the brain is stimulated at a popcorn level, as well as at a quality film level.

I'm more than capable of enjoying "entertainment," but just because it's "popcorn" doesn't give it a pass to be mindless, illogical, senseless, dumb, fodder.

But again, each to their own... And if that floats your boat, cool.

But this sentence is utter ******** - "Adults love to read their own words, hear themselves talk, sound educated and portray themselves as intellectuals."

 

[MeatHookGekko]

I still say, my biggest complaint is the running time. AWOW would be so much better if cut down to 2 hours. No movie needs to be 3+ hours long. No story is that inventive, nor needs "time to open up".

I'll bet a lot of people here who didn't care for this movie would have liked it a lot more with a breakneck clip of 2 hours.

I believe Cameron is hedging on the issue that it costs more to see his films in superior theater formats, so the padded length is part of justifying the price. I'm not saying that's going to be true for each consumer/viewer, but he's making it clear he's trying to maximize all known algorithms around creating box office revenue ( making the film an event, releasing a film very rarely, offering spectacle and generating international buzz, making the film kid and family friendly, releasing it during the holidays, etc, etc)

I also believe it's his personal way to strong arm the entire industry. By all accounts, he suffered badly in making Titanic. He's just one of those guys that holds a grudge forever.

He has the rare ability, like Tom Cruise, to dictate how he wants things to get made and end up on the screen. So he's going to flex it to show he can flex it.

Chuck Rhoades : "Walk away."
Bobby Axelrod : "I should. But then again, what's the point of having F*****k You money, if you never say, f****k you."

 

[ScoutingForToys]

Watched the first one on D+ yesterday, for the first time since 2009.
It was pretty OK. Entertaining enough without needing to switch my brain off too much.
Oh boy was it's success down to its pretty graphics and 3D.
Effects aside, a movie with that story and script, though I have no issue with it doing well, really shouldn't be number one of all time at the box office.
Do well, make a profit etc sure. But THAT successful?

Didn't convince me I needed to watch its sequel, a 3 hour movie, after waiting through 30 ads, with an 1 hour 30 round trip drive to the nearest cinema, after finding someone to look after my kids for 5 hours whilst I'm out watching a movie.

I'll watch it on D+.
I know it won't have the same impact as seeing it in the cinema, same as Avatar 1 but frankly, if the movie can't stand by its story, script, characters etc and "must" be seen on the big screen, I'm not sure it really deserves my time.