James Cameron says Avatar 2 will beat Endgame.

[Gaastra]

Avator is a odd film. It was the highest grossing film of all time yet after it left the box office it just died. No one cared about it anymore. They had Halloween costumes for it that year then after that no one dresses up in them. Star wars, Beetlejuice, ghostbusters and others still have costumes every year. The toys died and so did the video games. It's biggest thing right now is a ride at Disneyworld!

Harry potter is over 20 years old but has two parks areas, toys, video games, legos, shirts, clothes, books and movies. Avator has a new movie and a cool ride at Disney and that's it.

Also ask anyone on the street to name someone from avengers, or star wars or ET and they can tell you. Even rose and jack from titanic are still known. Can anyone on the street even name anyone from avator? It just was gone and forgot just like that!


The trouble is it's big claim of fame was 3-D and it's cool cg. The plot was a rip-off of dances with wolfs and ferngully so nothing there. It was the 3D craze. Alice came out right after and also did well.

Alice 2 came out and bombed. Why? 3-D craze is over!

I'm sure it will do well but it will never be as big as the first unless the plot is incredible and they make some new gimmick like 3-D without glasses. It might make a billion but without a gimmick I doubt it will make endgame numbers.

[mburns]

The person who posted this thread did not understand what Cameron was saying. He is not saying Avatar 2 will beat End Game. He is saying when the original Avatar gets a re-release prior to the opening of Avatar 2 it will retake the box office crown and he is right. The difference is so small that a re-release of the original Avatar will put it right back on top.

As for how Avatar 2 will do, I would not underestimate it. No one thought the new Jurassic World movies would do well either and they are huge successes. Avatar 2 may not do anywhere near as well as the first Avatar but I expect it to at least beat the $1.6 billion Jurassic World did. I think Avatar 2 will end up between $1.7 to $2 billion.

[AndrewCrossett]

The person who posted this thread did not understand what Cameron was saying. He is not saying Avatar 2 will beat End Game. He is saying when the original Avatar gets a re-release prior to the opening of Avatar 2 it will retake the box office crown and he is right. The difference is so small that a re-release of the original Avatar will put it right back on top.

And at some point, Infinity War and Endgame will get a theatrical re-release as well. I guess it's a game Cameron and Feige can play until the Grim Reaper comes for one of them.

Or until some random movie blows past both of them, since $2 billion movies will soon be as common as $1 billion ones.

[Mr.B]

Never seen Avatar.

[Kirby101]

Never seen Avatar.

Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Are you proud of that, or regret it?

[Nate Grey]

I thought the ending was creepy. Like, what did they do with his old body? Is it effectively dead so they buried it?

[Zero Hunter]

He better hope it does since they are already making 3, 4, and 5. If Avatar 2 doesn't hit big it could hand Disney one of their biggest financial disaster in the history of the company with the amount they have already spent on it and its sequels.

I personally have pretty much zero interest in the movie. The first one was just a bunch of pretty pictures with no story.

[WebLurker]

My gut reaction is that Avatar can't beat Avengers (or the MCU as a whole), not the least of which being that Marvel Studios has done a heckuva job keeping the brand relevant and popular, while Avatar 1 proved to have a short shelf life and the sequel is getting more "why does this exist?" reactions then not (anecdotal, but still). Still, I think it all depends on how the sequel does, if it can get people jazzed for "Dances With Wolves...IN SPACE!" like we were in back in '09, if it's good as a film, etc. Cameron has every chance of competing with Marvel, after all.

(My bias; I never got the Avatar hype in the first place and would rather be getting Alita 2 then a sequel to a movie I don't think was "good" in the first place, but that's just me.)

[EDIT: In regards to Cameron's intent to release Avatar 1 and thinking that it could retake the record it lost to Endgame, yeah, I could see it happening. That said, I'm more curious how the release will compare to the original run; a lot of people, myself included, think that the Avatar franchise lost all relevancy it had after the original came out and suspect that the sequels aren't going to catch on the way stuff like the MCU and Disney Star Wars has (I mean, even if Disney Star Wars has gotten on the bad side of certain fans, people care enough about it to argue for and against it, which you do not see with Avatar. I don't think the release will be the be all, end all answer, but it would be interesting to see what clues it gives us to the franchise's odds of surviving and thriving.

I think it creates an interesting rivalry with Avatar and Avengers since James Cameron hoped audiences would get tired of Avengers over time.

If that was his gamble, I don't think it's panned out yet.

Anyway, the only real winner here is Disney.

True, they do own both. Probably more a question whether both or only one remain worthwhile to the Disney brass to keep investing in. (IMHO, the MCU isn't showing any signs of slowing down; Avatar is still an unknown quantity until we see how the sequel performs.

[Coal Tiger]

He’s gonna have to come up with a new gimmick to sell the sequel, since audiences aren’t really wowed by 3D anymore.

[Beaddle]

He’s gonna have to come up with a new gimmick to sell the sequel, since audiences aren’t really wowed by 3D anymore.

I never interpreted Avatar as a gimmick. Avatar had genuine film making chops, As I and others have pointed out, Cameron did use 3D well. very well, arguably the best to ever do it. it was the post Avater movies that were converting 2d films to 3D that became the gimmick. Audiences are not wowed by those type of 3D movies.

Between Avatar and Avengers, Avengers had more gimmick qualities, we have seen 4 avengers movies that are basically the same thing over and over again. James Cameron made Avatar, one single movie that redefined how people saw visual cinema and he went away for 10 years.


I think the mods added I Don't know in the polls. I can't remember doing that. cool.

[Somecrazyaussie]

He was only a producer on Terminator. His involvement in Dark Fate is being overstated.

He also had input on the story, but that's about it. Plus Terminator was a franchise with 2 great films and 3 mediocre ones. So I think that, plus the bad word of mouth concerning John Connor being killed, is what kept people away.

[Somecrazyaussie]

He’s gonna have to come up with a new gimmick to sell the sequel, since audiences aren’t really wowed by 3D anymore.

Avatar 2 is set mostly underwater. Cameron said that the main reason it has taken so long to do a sequel is because he had to develop a new kind of camera to film the shots he wanted under water. Something about the fluidity of motion. So that will be the selling point.

[Beaddle]

My gut reaction is that Avatar can't beat Avengers (or the MCU as a whole), not the least of which being that Marvel Studios has done a heckuva job keeping the brand relevant and popular, while Avatar 1 proved to have a short shelf life and the sequel is getting more "why does this exist?" reactions then not (anecdotal, but still). Still, I think it all depends on how the sequel does, if it can get people jazzed for "Dances With Wolves...IN SPACE!" like we were in back in '09, if it's good as a film, etc. Cameron has every chance of competing with Marvel, after all.

(My bias; I never got the Avatar hype in the first place and would rather be getting Alita 2 then a sequel to a movie I don't think was "good" in the first place, but that's just me.)

[EDIT: In regards to Cameron's intent to release Avatar 1 and thinking that it could retake the record it lost to Endgame, yeah, I could see it happening. That said, I'm more curious how the release will compare to the original run; a lot of people, myself included, think that the Avatar franchise lost all relevancy it had after the original came out and suspect that the sequels aren't going to catch on the way stuff like the MCU and Disney Star Wars has (I mean, even if Disney Star Wars has gotten on the bad side of certain fans, people care enough about it to argue for and against it, which you do not see with Avatar. I don't think the release will be the be all, end all answer, but it would be interesting to see what clues it gives us to the franchise's odds of surviving and thriving.



If that was his gamble, I don't think it's panned out yet.



True, they do own both. Probably more a question whether both or only one remain worthwhile to the Disney brass to keep investing in. (IMHO, the MCU isn't showing any signs of slowing down; Avatar is still an unknown quantity until we see how the sequel performs.

Its hard to call Avatar a rivalry at direct shot. Avatar is not a cinematic universe with build ups and stand alone movies acting as one. More info, Cameron and Feige have nothing in common. I don't even think Avatar will make it to 5 movies, Cameron will get bored and move on to something else. the rivalry is more about box office numbers, Cameron has more claim to that thrown because of his record and he is a one man visual machine whose movies have redefined visual block buster cinema that only Lucas and Spielberg could challenge. So many will give his Avatar sequel the benefit of the doubt.

I think Cameron is going to be the first person in history that will challenge Disney and keep all his creative freedom.

Avatar 2 is set mostly underwater. Cameron said that the main reason it has taken so long to do a sequel is because he had to develop a new kind of camera to film the shots he wanted under water. Something about the fluidity of motion. So that will be the selling point.

I wonder if this sort of makes some kind of sense of his Aquaman criticism.

[Killerbee911]

He’s gonna have to come up with a new gimmick to sell the sequel, since audiences aren’t really wowed by 3D anymore.

That is not true. Since Avatar nobody has done good 3D other than Gravity. Most things are post production stuff made to capitalize on 3D not movies built with 3D in mind when they are shooting stuff. Audiences aren't wow by 3D because most movies are lazy with 3D. The gimmick is going to work again because 10 years ago he was doing better than everyone else.

Avatar is what Martin Scorsese the embodiment was complaining about Avatar was "a theme park ride". And people get egotistically in talking about it and forget the basic thing. People line up for theme parks rides and go on the ride over and over. The strength of Avatar is visuals. The movie is an amazing visual ride+ competent movie not great movie. Avatar again on the same formula will make a ton of money. It is movie that you will watch on the highest format you can watch it in 3D or Imax 3D. It is movie that will be probably worth a repeat viewing strictly on the how amazing are the visuals.

Will it make a make more than last Avengers movie? No Avengers product of the build up series of good movies( Ironically it is worth talking about today with Star Wars being out and not sticking the landing). Avatar clearly doesn't have that build up but it is Jordans, Beat by Dre, Gucci product of movies. You are going to watch it in most expensive format and having a great story is not imperative to movie success. Avatar success comes from it is going to sell more Imax and 3D tickets than most movies.

Avatar didn't trick people into seeing it over and over, The strongest thing about Avatar was it was immersive 3D experience in completely alien world. Avatar was theme park safari ride and for some reason people aren't respecting that aspect. People pay to go on real safari and not see anything, People pay to go the zoo and watch animals lay around sleep. Avatar is ride like that but interesting things always happens. If Cameron can immerse people again he will have success. Having a good plot will help but the first movie didn't have a great plot and people enjoy it over and over. People watch movie for different reasons sometimes the acting is amazing, sometimes the action is amazing, sometimes the visuals are amazing. We are use to first two ,we aren't use to a movie being successful on just visuals primarily.

Just a reminder.Yeah Avatar is kind forgettable once you are done with it



but without 3D and despite being 10 years old the movie(and characters) is stunning to watch. And nighttime in the jungle in 3D with proper surround sound in Avatar is one of the best cinematic experience ever and the Avatar 1 had couple moments like that in the film. The point of fantasy movies is to transport you worlds you have never been to and Avatar did that and I think sequel can do that as well.

[Beaddle]

That is not true. Since Avatar nobody has done good 3D other than Gravity. Most things are post production stuff made to capitalize on 3D not movies built with 3D in mind when they are shooting stuff. Audiences aren't wow by 3D because most movies are lazy with 3D. The gimmick is going to work again because 10 years ago he was doing better than everyone else.

Avatar is what Martin Scorsese the embodiment was complaining about Avatar was "a theme park ride". And people get egotistically in talking about it and forget the basic thing. People line up for theme parks rides and go on the ride over and over. The strength of Avatar is visuals. The movie is an amazing visual ride+ competent movie not great movie. Avatar again on the same formula will make a ton of money. It is movie that you will watch on the highest format you can watch it in 3D or Imax 3D. It is movie that will be probably worth a repeat viewing strictly on the how amazing are the visuals.
.

I don't see the theme park complaints with Avatar at all. As I said, Avatar was a one off movie that showed how to use 3D well. nothing much has come out of it for now, no merchandise, no constant toys, no cartoons, no games. Avatar influenced Scorsese's hugo. Him and Cameron worked together to bring that film to life.

Avatar is a cinematic movie that all started and ended with James Cameron, if the movie had failed, it was all on him, if the movie succeeded as it did, it was all on him. Avatar is not a cinematic universe that goes beyond the director. Its James Cameron's own personal little property. those are not basic theme park movie qualities.

3D or no 3D, Avatar looks good, story is meh but it looks good. Avengers is not good in 3D, even the final battle of Endgame, the visual were not the best and the story is meh. Endgame box office was marvel wrapping things up. Avatar's box office was Titanic movie making 2.0.

And at some point, Infinity War and Endgame will get a theatrical re-release as well. I guess it's a game Cameron and Feige can play until the Grim Reaper comes for one of them.

Or until some random movie blows past both of them, since $2 billion movies will soon be as common as $1 billion ones.

Titanic surpassed 2 billion on are re-release.Once again, you see how good James is as a film maker, both Phantom menace and Titanic got re released in 3D, Titanic's 3D was actually good, Phantom menace was not although phantom menace was able to cross a billion.

Endgame surpassing Avatar is only going to drive Cameron to out do himself with his strongest film areas and that is visuals and pushing the boundaries of Movie technical categories. Its inresting that he only produced Alita, I think Alita has more shot of best visual effect Oscars in 2020 than Endgame. Now imagine when James is directing one of his own movies himself. I know he has ego, but usually he gets it right when he is in the director's chair. it would have been very interesting if James Cameron made Avengers. the movie would have done 3 billion with ease, while getting a Terminator sort of story.