What can we expect from the sequels...

Not even an edgy contrarian but I wasn't very impressed by Avatar, it was definitely visually stunning but it didn't have particularly good plot, dialogue or memorable characters IMO

How many of you can honestly even remember the names of any of the main characters without Googling it?

Neytiri, Jake Sully, Quatrich, Grace Augustine,

what else is there left to tell in the narrative?

film 1:
- whitey exploits the blue man
- blue man fights back with nature
- whitey is sent packing

seems complete.

film 2:
- whitey returns with bigger guns
- blue man is defeated
- whitey does the Dance of the Happy Capitalist

film 3:
- nature isn't dead, it was pretending
- comes back to life
- defeats whitey again
- whitey sent packing again, because nature is gracious / nature never learns

You forgot about films 4 and 5.

If the movie was about colonialism and how bad is it n'shit then you can still do it by going because avatar was only about US colonialism in the west, you still left.

>English colonialism
>Turkish colonialism
>Greek colonialism
>Spanish colonialism

And there you go, 5 movies that can be called sequels.

Well its not like James ever cared about storytelling.

>kys

*whispers gently in your ear*
All redditors must hang

I figured he had given up on Avatar.

It's been 7 years?

there isn't enough MATERIAL for five films! what's he going to do, have Jake father some blue children and hand the whitey vs blue storyline over to them?

Sam Worthington will have work again?

I came to Cred Forums right when the first teaser released.

I came here to discuss television and film.

user I..

variety.com/2016/film/news/james-cameron-avatar-sequels-toruk-cirque-du-soleil-1201853970/

>There are clues about the “Avatar” sequels to be found in “Toruk,” the Cirque du Soleil “Avatar” prequel that lands tonight at Barclays Center in Brooklyn for a four-night run. Let James Cameron tell you what to look out for.

>“I love some of the costumes and hairstyles, so we might create a resonance there where you actually see some of the things that you see in ‘Toruk’ come into the design of the films,” said Cameron, the “Avatar” filmmaker who’s at work on a four-movie series of follow-ups. “We’ve got most of the sequel stuff already designed, but I like this idea of weaving back and forth between the two worlds, the live world and the film world.”

>The plot of “Toruk,” which is named after the giant, dragon-like creatures seen in the film, won’t tie into the movies, Cameron added — but there’s some unexpected overlap there nonetheless. “The storyline in the sequels really follows Jake and Neytiri and their children,” he said. “It’s more of a family saga about the struggle with the humans. But thematically, ‘Toruk’ manages to land very very closely to the feeling of where the sequel stories are going.”

God forbid a director spends years to make sure what he puts out will amaze people rather than shitting out a sequel every other year since 2011.
I'm sceptical as fuck but hearing him say how he is willing to delay everything (which he did 4 or 5 times now) until he's satisfied with the story and everything has been written to his satisfaction is reassuring.
Cameron is a master filmmaker and while Avatar was just okay but I respect him a lot for standing his ground and true to his vision for his entire career. He won't let himself be pushed or stressed. It's done when it's done. I really hope he will shine again and give us some amazing sci-fi goodness.

>Well its not like James ever cared about storytelling.

What makes you say that? I mean I get that it's cool nowadays to hate on Cameron but saying he never cared about storytelling is the most bandwagony thing ever.
>Avatar was bad = Cameron has always been bad

pls

Ferngully 2: The Magical Rescue

>What can we expect from the sequels?

Wonderful and imaginative worldbuilding that evokes a sense of alien adventure and exploration while still being reasonable and making sense within the universe. Don't go all Star Warsy with retarded nonsense.
I expect an epic feeling regarding the entire narrative. I want exciting yet realistic designs for the sci-fi parts like human tech. I want awesome new alien creatures. And most of all, I want grandios, epic action scenes the way only Cameron can deliver. No other director can do grand scale action, especially sci-fi action, like him. Gunships, mechs, marines, missiles, dragons, space tigers, etc. and all that staged and orchestrated perfectly. The Cameron way.

>wasting 10 years of prime Cameron for Pocahontas 2-3-4-5
It's better be a fucking good saga or quickly cancelled.

>What makes you say that?

Well, have you ever seen an innovative structure, balanced characters, well suported plots or anything that is not an excuse to show how carefully mastercrafted his movies are visually?

I thought he was out or at least isnt confirmed anymore

>10 years between sequels
Sigh 2018/2019 better have some fucking good movies because this year was so shit

Avatar's story was pretty much pocahontas, which there is nothing wrong with, but it was pretty simple.

Hopefully the second's story is a little more complex. Also, HFR, thank god, I can't wait. I'm going to see this movie just for that.

>"Episode 7 will finally beat that big turd Avatar in the box office"
>"Episode 7 will break $3B cap this"
>nerds pay for multiple viewings of the steaming pile of shit that is farce awakens
>disney pushed marketing on literally every medium possible
>have it open over christmas holidays where everyone is off, bored with nothing to do so watch farce awakens again
>still couldn't get close to Jim's record
lmao

>innovative structure
A movie doesn't need an innovative structure to be great. Many movies that are considered all time classics and masterpieces have a fairly simple plot. There is nothing wrong with that.

>balanced characters, well suported plots
What do you even mean by that? The characters in his movies are among the most iconic and beloved in film history. And the plots are never contrived. His characters flesh out the story while the story develops the characters. I always found the characters in his movies to be pretty relatable and hightened just enough for the movie experience without going too far.

>a movie that creates an emotional response in its audience and entertains like hell does well
After Avatar came out everybody loved it. The characters were awesome, Neytiri was so cool, Quaritch was such a badass, it was so sad when they cried after the humans destroyed their home tree, etc. People loved what Avatar gave them. TFA didn't do that. It was just another SW movie with a marginally better script and better effects. Nobody cared about the characters or the action. Everything was as bland as ever because the Star Wars universe doesn't offer shit.

HFR?

High Frame Rate

>A movie doesn't need an innovative structure to be great. Many movies that are considered all time classics and masterpieces have a fairly simple plot. There is nothing wrong with that.

I'm not saying that he is a bad director, I'm saying that all his plots are simplistic and not really developed, but rather, mere excuses to show off more carefully crafted props and special effects.

>What do you even mean by that?

His characters are almost idealistic representations of what a certain character should be, these characters never drive the plot but rather, they are tools in the hands of the director to move things around and create what he needs while catering to audiences that just want simple stories.

Avatar and Titanic is where this is more obvious, specially Avatar.

So Humans return, capture Jake Sully, and bring him back to Earth to be on trial for Treason, Neytiri follows with the help of Human scientists as an Ambassador of her people to save her love and etc. etc.

>not really developed
Can you name some examples?

And you imply Avatar offers anything but dances with wolves in space and dated effects?

I'm willing to agree with your point on starwars, but putting star smurfs on a pedestal because it looked pretty is wholly disingenuous.

What I described where the reactions of audiences at the time. What about me saying that is disingenuous? People ewnt crazy for Avatar and swooned left and right about the awesome world and the forest and the Navi and whatnot. Avatar did a much better job at world-building and pulling the audience into that world than Star Wars ever did. Audiences were able to connect with the world in Avatar and with the people. Sure the plot is simple as fuck, but creating an emotional response is incredibly powerful. It felt free and vast and optimistic and wild and strange and adventurous and daunting and lovely. None of that Star Wars did. After seeing TFa my response was pretty much meh. It was a SW movies. That's it. And most people felt that way.

Because ypou don't speak for audiences at the time.

People went crazy for the visuals. Even at the time the story was a joke, but 3D was new and cool and sparkly. Avatar was a technical marvel. And people rightly responded to its visuals. But to lie to yourself that the story was engaging is simply pitiful.

I really don't care about your continued Star Wars comparison, its not relevant.

Zulu in space?

>Because ypou don't speak for audiences at the time.
I never claimed that. I just told you what audiences said back then. It's not just me making it up.

>the time the story was a joke
The story served its purpose in pulling the audience into the world of Pandora. It worked and did its job very well. A story doesn't always have to be super complex with twists and turns. It wasn't just the visuals or else every movie with good effects would be as successful. Avatar had heart. You can be a cynic all you want and be in denial about what I say but we both know that I am right. Every measureable metric confirms my claims. Avatar offered a great narrative with memorable and likeable characters.

You're still being disingenuous. Possibly slipping into bait territory.

Look up any review from the time it was released. None said the story was anything but average. The visuals and effects weren't just "good" they were bleeding edge. That was why Avatar was praised. The visuals sold Avatar and we both know it.

First the story was bad now it's average. And by what metric anyway? The story worked. That's it. Do you know what you get when you try to introduce your audience to an alien world while also trying to convey a complex plot? Ever heard of the huge success that was John Carter?
You can't do both. You can't expose an audience to an entire alien world with tons of strange and weird things that need explanation while also putting a complex plot on them as a burden. Keep the plot simple, make them care about the world and the people. Make it first and foremost emotionally engaging. That's what Cameron set out to do and that's what accomplished. He added a plot to a world and it worked. If you don't like those kind of movies where you experience another world in detail but want more plot driven narratives then that's okay as well, but what Cameron did with Avatar worked great.

So you admit it was the visuals that sold it and the plot was at best average.
Pretty much what I was saying lad.

Introducing a world is more than just visuals you dolt. If it were different John Carter would have been a success because it had great visuals. It's about characters you want to succeed, about them experiencing the world, about getting to know the world and finding out what happened before and what caused the status quo. It's about making the world feel like a place that's been lived in by people. Visuals are just a small part of that. It's combination of several things and Avatar did that perfectly.

You don't half fucking waffle and repeat the same shit verbatim.

I figured maybe repetition will make you understand but all I get from you is "JUST THE VISUALS! NO PLOT SHIT PLOT AVERAGE PLOT JUST THE VISUALS!"

I mean it's difficult to properly argue with a person that ignorant.

Ignorant of star smurfs "perfection"?
Huh.
Well, good bait, no staying power though.

I can back up my praise for Avatar with measureable metrics. And no, not just money. Also, awards and relevant nominations such as for Best Picture, critical acclaim, and audience acclaim. Your argument consists of saying "story bad" and the support for your argument is you saying "story bad". Grow up.

he's right. avatar sucked donkey dick fresh from a mexican hooker's ass
>b-but the masses thought it was good
the masses are retarded. congrats on being one of them tho

I guess your views must be correct because you said so. Easy to make your minority views and opinions sound correct and relevant when you just shit on the masses and think that's an argument. Bravo :^)

will we see the return of abatap?

Uhuh.
Sorry, was there a point you were making?
I went to have a shit and came back to the same.

Appeal to the crowd is actually fallacious though.

It will be average movie at best. If the movie was great the studio would not move its release, in order not to go toe to toe with Star Wars.

I'm sure you rekt that toilet bruh.

It's not just crowd. It's professional critics and awards as well. Every metric you can take to measure a film's success was extremely positive for Avatar
Also, if you insist on the story of Avatar being shit, what do you appeal to? What is your argument that supports your stance? You keep saying my arguments are wrong or don't count or whatever, but are your arguments?

So ypou compound your appeal to the crowd fallacy with appeal to authority fallacy.

Wanna throw in a strawman for good measure?
Oh wait, never mind I see you already did.

Appealing to a group of experts or professionals is hardly an appeal to crowd fallacy.

And I see you still can't come up with an argument to support your stance. You keep attacking mine (unsuccessfully) and you never put forth a good argument for your own position. I assume it's because there is none and you know damn well.

No, its an appeal to authority. Try to keep up.

>appeal to authority

You don't even know what that fallacy means. That's how ignorant you are. That fallacy refers to using someone or something as an authority that's not actually an authority. But if you use a doctor as an authority on medical affairs then that's not a fallacy because a doctor is an actual authority on that field. If you made an argument about how best to save fuel on air planes and use your doctor as an authority then it's a fallacy.
So when I refer to professional movie critics to backup my stance regarding I movie I haven't commited a fallacy.
You are out of your depth. You don't know how to properly argue and you throw around accusations fallacies as if you learned what they were yesterday and wanna boast like a kid without even knowing what they are about.
Pure ignorance coupled with arrogance.

The irony is your understanding is superbly flawed. Or was that deliberate for more (You)s?

Once again only attacking but no backup whatsoever.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
>More recently, logic textbooks have shifted to a less blanket approach to these arguments, now often referring to the fallacy as the "Argument from Unqualified Authority"[10] or the "Argument from Unreliable Authority".[11]
>A common example of the fallacy is appealing to an authority in one subject to pontificate on another – for example citing Albert Einstein as an authority on religion when his expertise was in physics.[15]

You literally don't know what you are talking about.

Wow, even your source only partially agrees with you.

But again, I'm sure its all for the (You)s.

I think from now on I'm just going to give you a few more yous then leave you to masturbate to blue cat people.

Actually, sod that. I'm already bored.
Have a last (You)

Even if it only partially agrees with me, can you provide me with a single valid argument or source or anything that even partially supports your stance and confirms your claims?

Masturbation jokes? Meh. Kinda low but to each their own.

Give up. James Cameron has literally already won everything.

It will be fantastic, the biggest saga of all time.

...

...

>English colonialism

What are they going to build a railway, implement the rule of law and found a parliamentary system for the na'vi?

Unobteanium.

me neither. I haven't even watched it again since I saw it.

Sometimes I want to imagine that it is impossible to be the greatest film maker of all time,

but james proves me that it is possible and there is only one.

I recently heard rumor, possibly a fan theory, that the Navi are actually a post-singularity society that just lives in equilibrium with their environment, but aren't aware of it themselves, thinking of it as simply their religion/way of life.

If that turns out to be true, there's some potential for amazing stories there. That would mean that what we saw in the first film was just the Pandoran AI responding to our presence with sufficient force to repel the invader. What if it ramps up as we commit more force?

More tripfags.

Actually many reviews at the time praised the storytelling and it being emotionally engaging.

>tfw shooting will begin next week
:3

>Doubting Jim
>Ever

I hope the "be like steel" line is in there.

It's like those retards never learn.

>Titanic will flop!
>Avatar will flop!
>the Avatar sequel made by the king of sequels will flop!

kek

exactly my friend. Its as if they think normies won't flock to the cinema upon the Avatar sequel

Meanwhile Shit Wars isn't a normie film (outside the US)

Humans come back and Nuke Pandora from the orbit
The End

They don't even need to do that. Grab a few objects that can be launched from space with enough mass and energy they can essentially do what a nuke can but without any adverse affects

VENGEANCE.

We want those adverse effects, user. The only thing that matters is the unobtanium.

what can we expect from the theme park?

...

>literal worldbuilding

BRAVO JAMES