Avatar: The Way of Water

[Mister Mets]

Isn't weird that the movies he singles out had women in the director's chairs?

I think that's more because women are more likely to be hired to direct films with female leads, especially in the context of shared universes.

Isn't it ironic puss and boots 2 of all things has a better rt score than avatar 2! That is just so funny! Boots both critic and aud are high 90s while 82 to 84 for avatar 2!

But who cares about that as its time for james weekly "i hate marvel" rant! This time--Wonder woman and captain marvel are not real heroes as they never fought bad guys while pregnant!

Ironic thing about that is captain marvel / ms marvel DID fight bad guys while pregnant in avengers 200!

Oops.

https://comicbook.com/movies/news/ja...aptain-marvel/




I have family that can't see 3-d with their eyes. Not everyone can. Some just hate 3-d or get dizzy or have glasses and don't like wearing 2 glasses at once. Some just don't want to spend an extra $3. Thats why they have 2-d showings.

Maybe Puss and Boots 2 is really good? It's a much higher score than Shrek 4 got (57%)

[Ramsay Snow]

I saw the film yesterday. In comparison to the first film, it's more of the same. Weak/cliche writing with nice visuals. It just feels like a big-budget video game simulation. The first one was a literal Pocahontas rip-off, this one had some Free Willy thrown in.

I would mostly be interested in hearing from folks who found the 1st film underwhelming - if they view this as a big improvement, then I might be tempted to go see it.

If the characters are likeable that alone would be a big change from the 1st film for me - i can barely remember the characters at all. And imo the mcu shows that likeable characters can go a long way towards making up for a mediocre or unoriginal plot/story

It's not a big improvement. The only thing that was particularly impressive was the underwater cgi. It's the best underwater cgi to date, but with the amount of money put into this film, it would've been sad if it wasn't. That said, I didn't come out of the film wowed by the experience like I was with the first one. I'm not sure if it's because cgi, in general, has improved since the first film, so it's not as groundbreaking, or what......And I have absolutely no intention of seeing any of the upcoming sequels.

As for the characters being likable, some are alright. I found the kids kind of annoying, though.

[Ramsay Snow]

I have family that can't see 3-d with their eyes. Not everyone can. Some just hate 3-d or get dizzy or have glasses and don't like wearing 2 glasses at once. Some just don't want to spend an extra $3. Thats why they have 2-d showings.

3D usually bothers me, as well (mild dizziness, picture doesn't look right), but the Avatar films are the only ones I've been able to watch in 3D where I didn't experience any negative effects.....Avatar aside, I'm glad the 3D hype has pretty much died down.

[Immortal Weapon]

Isn't weird that the movies he singles out had women in the director's chairs?

Coincidental. Cameron has been shitting on superhero movies as a means of promoting his movie for weeks now. He added wonder woman and cap marvel to his line of fire .

[WebLurker]

I think that's more because women are more likely to be hired to direct films with female leads, especially in the context of shared universes.

Still, why the insecurity on his part (esp. given that his movies seem to be better-liked, in general)?

Coincidental. Cameron has been shitting on superhero movies as a means of promoting his movie for weeks now. He added wonder woman and cap marvel to his line of fire .

Wonder what the deal is for him. (Still, arguing that you did something better -- esp. when your most notable example of feminism in storytelling is that the woman's only importance is that she's an incubator for the real hero vs. movies where the woman really does get to be the heroine of her own story -- is a bad look. Not saying he's a Whedon-level hypocrite, but how much of his own KoolAid has he been drinking?)

[inisideguy]

Still, why the insecurity on his part (esp. given that his movies seem to be better-liked, in general)?



Wonder what the deal is for him. (Still, arguing that you did something better -- esp. when your most notable example of feminism in storytelling is that the woman's only importance is that she's an incubator for the real hero vs. movies where the woman really does get to be the heroine of her own story -- is a bad look. Not saying he's a Whedon-level hypocrite, but how much of his own KoolAid has he been drinking?)

I have no idea WTF it is with these directors and going after superhero movies. Just make your freaking movie.

[godisawesome]

I have no idea WTF it is with these directors and going after superhero movies. Just make your freaking movie.

If I recall correctly, the most substantial complaint is that superhero movies are taking “spots” away from director-derived projects in production schedules.

And I *do* think there’s a major difference in where the storytelling genesis and priorities are for the MCU - the narrative and character arcs are given more focus as a matter of course, and writers and producers have almost equal influence to the directors themselves, and visuals have a standard, but not a very realist type of one.

It’s pretty much the exact opposite of the “auteur theory” of how films should be made - where the director is the greatest and at times singular progenitor of everything in the film. I’m okay with that, since I think the auteur theory is a load of nonsense.

But with Cameron in particular, there’s likely a simpler, specific reason - he’s a man who defines his creations by visuals, to the extent he would take a decade to fine tune visuals to his preference, and the MCU is the opposite of that.

[inisideguy]

If I recall correctly, the most substantial complaint is that superhero movies are taking “spots” away from director-derived projects in production schedules.

And I *do* think there’s a major difference in where the storytelling genesis and priorities are for the MCU - the narrative and character arcs are given more focus as a matter of course, and writers and producers have almost equal influence to the directors themselves, and visuals have a standard, but not a very realist type of one.

It’s pretty much the exact opposite of the “auteur theory” of how films should be made - where the director is the greatest and at times singular progenitor of everything in the film. I’m okay with that, since I think the auteur theory is a load of nonsense.

But with Cameron in particular, there’s likely a simpler, specific reason - he’s a man who defines his creations by visuals, to the extent he would take a decade to fine tune visuals to his preference, and the MCU is the opposite of that.

I guess. What is weird is Cameron makes many movies that could be considered super-hero movies. They just dont have a dude with a cape. And not just him, but other directors as well. I mean people can extrapolate a heroic character and make him a super-hero. From Clint Eastwood in a western, to Uma Thurman in Kill Bill, to Arnold in just about every movie he has been in. These directors seem to want to determine what is a super-hero and what is not. Luke Skywalker or Indiana Jones or James Bond might want to have a word about that.

[Brian B]

I guess. What is weird is Cameron makes many movies that could be considered super-hero movies. They just dont have a dude with a cape. And not just him, but other directors as well. I mean people can extrapolate a heroic character and make him a super-hero. From Clint Eastwood in a western, to Uma Thurman in Kill Bill, to Arnold in just about every movie he has been in. These directors seem to want to determine what is a super-hero and what is not. Luke Skywalker or Indiana Jones or James Bond might want to have a word about that.

Eastwood’s Westerns are not superhero movies.

However, your larger point and everyone calling out Cameron’s hypocrisy are spot on.

Cameron, except for one big budget epic disaster movie, makes fantasies. He makes scifi schlock.

I’m not saying Cameron is not among the all-time great directors. Certainly, for his pushing technological innovations alone, he is one of the great directors. But he’s no Scorsese or Coppola. Cameron’s not even as good as a Spielberg or even a Sidney Lumet. Hell, Cameron isn’t even as good as Ridley Scott

He’s also a hypocrite, taking that Disney cash and distribution for his movie, money which was earned in at least some small part by Feige’s MCU and invested in Cameron’s production.

When I hear Scorsese’s or Coppola’s complaints about superhero flicks, i listen. They’ve earned it.

Cameron? Come off it. Cameron is full of crap. Cameron’s the guy who helped make “Hasta la vista, baby” a catchphrase. Ingmar Bergman he is not.

[The Cool Thatguy]

I guess. What is weird is Cameron makes many movies that could be considered super-hero movies. They just dont have a dude with a cape. And not just him, but other directors as well. I mean people can extrapolate a heroic character and make him a super-hero. From Clint Eastwood in a western, to Uma Thurman in Kill Bill, to Arnold in just about every movie he has been in. These directors seem to want to determine what is a super-hero and what is not. Luke Skywalker or Indiana Jones or James Bond might want to have a word about that.

Honestly, as much as I like MCU movies, the only difference between them and your regular action movie is that the main character isn't cut from the same cloth as every other action movie. The protagonist is a new archtype, and well acted.

All Avatar is, is a pretty action movie. Without visuals, I doubt anyone would remember the first one. Cameron just wants to pretend to be better than it is.

[Rincewind]

I have no idea WTF it is with these directors and going after superhero movies. Just make your freaking movie.

I think it is more likely that every interview brings up MCU/Marvel/Superhero movies. And anything that can be spun as negative gets headlines.

[Brian B]

Honestly, as much as I like MCU movies, the only difference between them and your regular action movie is that the main character isn't cut from the same cloth as every other action movie. The protagonist is a new archtype, and well acted.

All Avatar is, is a pretty action movie. Without visuals, I doubt anyone would remember the first one. Cameron just wants to pretend to be better than it is.

I don’t think we should neglect to mention that Cameron ripped his visuals in Avatar off of artist Roger Dean, no matter what the courts ruled.

It’s screamingly obvious he stole the look of Avatar.

[regnak]

Isn't it ironic puss and boots 2 of all things has a better rt score than avatar 2! That is just so funny! Boots both critic and aud are high 90s while 82 to 84 for avatar 2!

But who cares about that as its time for james weekly "i hate marvel" rant! This time--Wonder woman and captain marvel are not real heroes as they never fought bad guys while pregnant!

Ironic thing about that is captain marvel / ms marvel DID fight bad guys while pregnant in avengers 200!

Oops.

https://comicbook.com/movies/news/ja...aptain-marvel/




I have family that can't see 3-d with their eyes. Not everyone can. Some just hate 3-d or get dizzy or have glasses and don't like wearing 2 glasses at once. Some just don't want to spend an extra $3. Thats why they have 2-d showings.

James Carmeron is a raving lunatic . Who ever claimed pregnant women fighting was important before him?

[inisideguy]

Honestly, as much as I like MCU movies, the only difference between them and your regular action movie is that the main character isn't cut from the same cloth as every other action movie. The protagonist is a new archtype, and well acted.

All Avatar is, is a pretty action movie. Without visuals, I doubt anyone would remember the first one. Cameron just wants to pretend to be better than it is.

Yea for me maybe its the media or whatever they are always trying to " classify" something as a particular genre. What Arnold does in Commando or Predator, or Bruce willis does in Die Hard, or Harry Potter or Gandalf or Luke Sky Walker or Ashoka or these blue people do in Avatar isn't much different than what Daredevil, or Doctor Strange, or Wolverine or Spider-man does. I dont spend my time ripping on Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter or Star Wars. I like them all to some extent. I dont have to say well yea sure Gandalf can destroy trolls with his magic spells but that doesn't make him a " super-hero" he's a wizard.

[Wildling]

Movie was dope. I'd watch at least another one.

I heard, after watching it, that Sigourney Weaver played both the old and young related roles in the movie. She's really so cool.