- Sep 23, 2013
- 4,160
- 3,765
It makes me laugh because of how violent it was and how rated R it is while avatar is a family film lol.
Avatar: The Way Of Water
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
-
Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
It makes me laugh because of how violent it was and how rated R it is while avatar is a family film lol.
I'm not sure if you're referring to the Avatar franchise here, but I don't feel like either movie demonizes the Na'vi or the cultures they are based on. Quaritch and the RDA do want to colonize, yes, and he sees them as lesser than, but he's not the hero, he's the villain. The Na'vi are the protagonists.
To make a comparison to what I mean, Star Wars is based dictatorships/suppressed citizens, but the movie isn't pro-dictatorship, it's about those that are being affected by the dictatorship. It's a pro-democracy film hidden behind pew-pew and light sabers. Avatar is about Pro-Environmentalist and Anti-Colonization, which is great messaging that 99.9% of people would have little problem with if he had just cast certain roles with more care and out of respect for the cultures he is basing tribes on.
TWOW honestly is pushing what would be considered an R by the MPAA. There was a surprising amount of blood that was in the movie and normally blood triggers an R rating, but I guess because they're blue it doesn't count? Also, the people who are boycotting are adults. You aren't going to see too many kids being like "I was looking forward to seeing Avatar 2 until I heard about xyz." If a kid wants to see a movie, they'll bug their parents until they see it (or just go with friends).
People are talking about Prey because it's a revolutionary film in that it has an entire cast that is made up of indigenous individuals (and was dubbed in Comanche), plus it came out in 2022, so it's fresh on peoples minds. But aside from that, try to think of something else that's along those same lines because the only other thing I can think of is the FX show Reservation Dogs. It's honestly hard to think of another movie though. Not saying there isn't any, but there's so few that it's hard to think of anything else.
Last edited:
- Jul 27, 2015
- 9,685
- 47,479
Oh, I wasn’t attempting a direct comparison at all. I was just explaining why First Peoples advocates are fans of Prey.
- Sep 23, 2013
- 4,160
- 3,765
A modern movie franchise that had a big native American cast was maybe twilight In some of the sequels? ( I'm not even making a joke. I always loved that twilight had a big cast with the wolves and their families)
I've always had a soft spot for twilight movies because of that.
I know the focus was always the vampires, but the wolves had a lot of good scenes
- Jun 27, 2017
- 8,043
- 5,224
I don't want to argue but I saw it and none spoilers thoughts
It was wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too long, its a simple story that I think the ending has "too" much going on and what I mean is bad things happens to X character instead of as a group they all run from X....its from different perspectives of the same event but it takes a simple story and just makes it kinda messy at the end.
The tech is also all over the place, the characters and creatures look great but when they move many times it looked like I was watching God of War from my PS5 on a big screen, the movements just felt off.
Acting from some is at the same level as the first film and honestly some of the new cast kill it for what they are given.
I think this film is fine but I honestly would laugh in your face if you think this is better then MCU films...it's at the same level of story telling and epicness.
On Box Office, I think it will do just fine people around me seemed to enjoy it but I think the run time is going to hurt it making anywhere near the first film....that and it will be on Disney plus in 3ish months.
It was wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too long, its a simple story that I think the ending has "too" much going on and what I mean is bad things happens to X character instead of as a group they all run from X....its from different perspectives of the same event but it takes a simple story and just makes it kinda messy at the end.
The tech is also all over the place, the characters and creatures look great but when they move many times it looked like I was watching God of War from my PS5 on a big screen, the movements just felt off.
Acting from some is at the same level as the first film and honestly some of the new cast kill it for what they are given.
I think this film is fine but I honestly would laugh in your face if you think this is better then MCU films...it's at the same level of story telling and epicness.
On Box Office, I think it will do just fine people around me seemed to enjoy it but I think the run time is going to hurt it making anywhere near the first film....that and it will be on Disney plus in 3ish months.
Not everyone is gonna like it. The ending is a lot, but I think it's a lot in a glorious, epic way that isn't really seen much cinematically anymore.
Disney is under no obligation to put the movie on D+ in 3 months if it's still making a decent amount of money. James Cameron's production company is behind this movie and I suspect he already has it in his contract (potentially from prior ownership) that he get's a 90 day release window. I don't think it will go straight from theaters to D+ either and I think part of this just may be Iger. Chapek greatly hurt Disney's two animation houses by putting that content on D+ that, while Lightyear was bland and idk yet about Strange World, it was the type of crap Disney used to be able to crap out and make boatloads on. Many of the streaming decisions Chapek made were detrimental.
Also, unless you're still holding onto a 3D TV, you can't watch this in 3D on Disney+. To undersell how big of a draw 3D is for the Avatar franchise, especially internationally, is a fool's errand as the 3D/visuals is the draw for many people. Of course there's also countries like France where it will just play for forever because due to outdated laws there, a movie that goes to theaters has to wait 18 months to go to streaming services.
- Jun 27, 2017
- 8,043
- 5,224
We will see
I'm not saying it wont make money but as much as the first? I just doubt it.
Things have changed, many people still dont go to the theaters much and the first film saw people seeing its 2-3 times and this is a 3 hour film, unless your like a super fan most people dont want to put aside 4 hours in a day to go see a movie they already saw.
As for the ending, its about what I expected. Lots of action but....I personally felt like the first film had a better ending. It was just simple and the fight was kinda built up....this film is just more of what the first film did. I remember seeing the first film and waiting for the Mech vs Jake fight. It was fine but no empire strikes back or terminator 2 in terms of interesting/better sequels
Oh no, not as much as the first lol.
I've stated already what I think it will make based on it's current trend that it is holding to of mirroring Rogue One. Rogue One made $532M domestically, but that was a 50/50 domestic/int'l split. The Way of Water is running at a 30/70 split. So if Avatar continues on the path it's on and makes close to what Rogue One (give or take some), the the worldwide total is still looking like $1.7B based on that 30/70 if it continues to follow that. The movie also has a giant runway from now until mid-February when Ant-Man 3 comes out where it has no competition, so it could easily show strong legs simply because there's nothing else to see.
$1.7B is no $2.7B like the original had during its original run, but that was also just a ludicrous amount of money never seen before and only seen again one time in the 13 years since. I think they'd be perfectly fine with $1.7B, as the margin where the movie starts to become profitable is around $1B. If it can push into $1.9 like NWH or even into $2B, i'd be ecstatic if i'm Disney. Any movie that can make $1.7B (if it does push that high) shows extreme audience interest and it would be the #7 highest grossing movie worldwide of all-time.
This is the last film to be released under the HBO deal, but it's also the first one to be a big enough hit where Disney is going to want to play this for longer than 45 days since they changed the terms of the HBO deal last year, so we really haven't seen it tested. 45 days from the release of the movie will be February 5th (which is the Super Bowl, so it's not coming out that day), but the film should have made most of it's money by then, although there will still be roughly two weeks before Ant-Man 3 releases.
I *assume* that Disney put a clause in there that if a movie makes over a certain amount of money, it triggers the film to stay in theaters for longer than 45 days, much like how Universal's deal with AMC theaters works. Zaslav and WBD seem desperate for money. I'm sure Iger can throw a few million over his way if the contract situation does state it has to go on HBO after 45 days and Disney wants to keep it theatrically exclusive.
If it was me, i'd want to run the movie at least through Presidents Day Weekend (which is when Ant-Man 3 releases) and then put it on streaming in either late February or March. This would of course all.
- Sep 23, 2013
- 4,160
- 3,765
One thing that I've seen dividing people with this is whether or not they can connect with the family aspect.
Some people call it corny, or cheesy. Too corny. With Jake being a dad. Head of the family
But other people find it charming and uplifting.
I still haven't seen it so I don't know
Some people call it corny, or cheesy. Too corny. With Jake being a dad. Head of the family
But other people find it charming and uplifting.
I still haven't seen it so I don't know
Jake and Neytiri had kids. If that’s corny then so is life.
That said, it’s also not even a thing anyone is making a big deal about. First I’ve heard of anyone having an issue with that very basic plot point.
Anyway, TWOW is looking like it has a good chance to get to around $1.3B by the end of this coming weekend and will pass Maverick shortly thereafter in early 2023.
The Way of Water will have passed $1 Billion by the time all of the numbers come in from Tuesday's box office, passing the mark in 13 days in release from some international countries and 12 days since the Global rollout. This will mark it tied for the 6th fastest movie to reach the milestone behind only Endgame (5), Infinity War (11), The Force Awakens (12), No Way Home (12). Jurassic World (13) stands alongside it at 13 days. This will bump down Furious 7 (17), Fate of the Furious(18), The Last Jedi (19), and Avatar (19) on the Top 10 all-time list and knock out Deathly Hallows Part 2. Rogue One comp is still fairly remarkably spot on as far as what it made over the Holiday period (the calendar was aligned the same that year), but comparing Top Gun: Maverick and TWOW domestic numbers at this point in its run is starting to become a remarkably similar comparison.
Analysts believe that the film needs $1.5B to break even, which seems like a sure lock at this point. I do wonder what Iger will decide about the franchise however. On one hand, both films will have easily eclipsed $1B and it's not out of the realm of possibility that TWOW pushes towards $2B (although as i've repeatedly said, I think it finishes around $1.7B). General movie goers seems to love this, especially the international movie going market and people have shown they are willing to pay for 3D specifically to see movies in this franchise this year (both with the original's re-release and the sequel).
On the other hand, you have the third movie in post production and scheduled to release in 2024. I'm sure that movie will make a bunch of money as well, but you could round off a trilogy and leave it to where if no more movies get made it's a satisfying ending, but also leave it to where there's still a potential for sequels if the third does well enough. That's what i'd be worried about if I was Iger is sort of the Star Wars effect where you saw a drop off in box office with every sequel film every two years. I think what needs to happen (and probably what will happen if Avatar 4 & 5 happen) is we'll see the release dates moved back to December 2027 & December 2029 (or '28 and '30) so that there's sufficient time to film those movies and then do all of the post production work + it allows audiences to take a break and for Disney not to run the franchise into the ground by releasing a new one every two years.
Analysts believe that the film needs $1.5B to break even, which seems like a sure lock at this point. I do wonder what Iger will decide about the franchise however. On one hand, both films will have easily eclipsed $1B and it's not out of the realm of possibility that TWOW pushes towards $2B (although as i've repeatedly said, I think it finishes around $1.7B). General movie goers seems to love this, especially the international movie going market and people have shown they are willing to pay for 3D specifically to see movies in this franchise this year (both with the original's re-release and the sequel).
On the other hand, you have the third movie in post production and scheduled to release in 2024. I'm sure that movie will make a bunch of money as well, but you could round off a trilogy and leave it to where if no more movies get made it's a satisfying ending, but also leave it to where there's still a potential for sequels if the third does well enough. That's what i'd be worried about if I was Iger is sort of the Star Wars effect where you saw a drop off in box office with every sequel film every two years. I think what needs to happen (and probably what will happen if Avatar 4 & 5 happen) is we'll see the release dates moved back to December 2027 & December 2029 (or '28 and '30) so that there's sufficient time to film those movies and then do all of the post production work + it allows audiences to take a break and for Disney not to run the franchise into the ground by releasing a new one every two years.
Last edited:
- May 26, 2012
- 1,941
- 2,682
Interestingly Part 4 already had some sequences filmed (Cameron said he wanted to avoid 'Stranger Things Syndrome' where the kids have aged faster than the actual timeline). I assume that would mean 3 and part of 4 have no time jump since the kids will be the same age in both films.
The part that they filmed for "Avatar 4" could also just be a potential alternative ending to Avatar 3 if 4 & 5 don't happen.
- Apr 14, 2014
- 51
- 111
He said they filmed the first 25 pages of the Avatar 4 script, then there's a 6-year time jump, which is where they will pick up filming, if it's green-lit.
Here's the quote:
"Anything that had to be done with a specific actor, we did all the scenes for 2 and 3 together — and a little bit of 4. Because once again, I had to shoot the kids out. They're allowed to age six years in the middle of the story on page 25 of movie 4. So I needed everything before then, and then everything after, we'll do later.' "
From this article:
James Cameron Has Already Shot Footage for Avatar 4
The franchise's future hinges on the success of Avatar 2 and Avatar 3, James Cameron says he's [...]
So basically the only reason this was filmed was so the kids would still look the same age as 2 & 3 and then do time jump after the first mid-movie.He said they filmed the first 25 pages of the Avatar 4 script, then there's a 6-year time jump, which is where they will pick up filming, if it's green-lit.
Here's the quote:
"Anything that had to be done with a specific actor, we did all the scenes for 2 and 3 together — and a little bit of 4. Because once again, I had to shoot the kids out. They're allowed to age six years in the middle of the story on page 25 of movie 4. So I needed everything before then, and then everything after, we'll do later.' "
From this article:
James Cameron Has Already Shot Footage for Avatar 4
The franchise's future hinges on the success of Avatar 2 and Avatar 3, James Cameron says he's [...]comicbook.com
- May 26, 2012
- 1,941
- 2,682
The decision on 4 & 5 will most likely come AFTER 3 is released, so it's unlikely it could be used as a tag.
This is my thought process as well simply because these are extremely expensive movies with breakevens at $1.5B minimum. TWOW will hit that, but I think they'll want to wait and see if there's any noticeable drop off between 2 & 3 before handing Cameron two more big checks. My thought as I believe I stated above is we'll see 4 & 5 pushed back a few cycles to around 2028 and 2030 since filming these movies (presumably back to back if they happen) will take awhile anyway
Then again, Iger could surprise and approve 4 & 5 now so that they can get to filming those if he deems this one enough of a success, although I think they probably would like to see it cross $2B in order for them to do that after this movie (which is on the higher end of where it might ultimately end it's run at). It is currently holding on very strong though and does maintain a shot at $2B although i'm still doubtful. The specific end I see in sights is getting a bit higher though.
‘Avatar: The Way Of Water’ Tops $810M Overseas On Way To $1.3B+ Global Through Sunday
James Cameron’s Avatar: The Way of Water continues to splash out at the global box office, reaching $1.169B through Thursday
deadline.com
