James Cameron's Avatar to get four sequels - The message will still be the same

Maybe imprinting the cloned memories in an alien brain creates an unstable psychosis mind or something. Good for evil dehumanized villain, bad for the viewpoint hero that the audience is supposed to empathize with.
So Zombie Evil Colonel comes back to life as the N'avi terminator? I mean, people like the villain Terminator more than Kyle Reese and it would subvert the first movie's expectations just like T2 did.
 
Judging by the Quaritch reveal, does that means he’s now TransNavi like Jake is?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: TVB
I read somewhere that the plot contrivance to bring back the Colonel is that they scanned and backed up a copy of his brain prior to death and then imprinted it into an avatar body. So get ready to see Stephen Lang in blueface.
Which is utterly idiotic as it makes his death in 1 meaningless and leads to questions like this which completely invalidate the whole reason behind the first story;
So how come they didn’t do that with original protagonist’s brother? The guy that died and they had to bring in his wheelchair brother to replace him or whatever
 
Somehow the new film is even more bland and inconsequential than the first one.

Avatar Boring shit of the water review.png
 
Really, this is definitely a movie to see on the big screen, but after it leaves, not so much.

Even so, I'll probably still go see it. Hey, if it is at least a fun popcorn flick like the first, then that'll do.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Johan Schmidt
Really, this is definitely a movie to see on the big screen, but after it leaves, not so much.

Even so, I'll probably still go see it. Hey, if it is at least a fun popcorn flick like the first, then that'll do.
Yeah, it'll be forgettable trash. But watching vaguely near future military stuff pound aliens into goo like it's space vietnam was a pretty good time in the first film.
 
On the note that the plot is worse, that's actually only a few peoples opinions. Other pre-reviews I've seen claim that it is much better written than the first, even by people who didn't care much for the first, with some even saying that the visuals are more in service of the characters this time around.
Sean O'Connell on Twitter   Never bet against @JimCameron. His #AvatarTheWayOfWater surpasses ...png
Ross Bonaime on Twitter   This really feels like James Cameron took all the criticisms of the ...png
Perri Nemiroff on Twitter   #AvatarTheWayOfWater is pretty incredible. I had faith James Camer...png
Guess I'll just have to see for myself.
 
Welp, like I said, we'll just have to wait see what the end result is, if it ends up being surprisingly good, or an absolute trainwreck.

All I can hope for is that, at the very least, it is an entertaining popcorn flick.
 
So it looks like exactly the same film as the first, but wetter. Mankind bad, environment good, can see why it took so long to come up with such a brave and original message. Still, it looks pretty so the critics will love it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Puff
So it looks like exactly the same film as the first, but wetter. Mankind bad, environment good, can see why it took so long to come up with such a brave and original message. Still, it looks pretty so the critics will love it.
Pretty much my entire life it's been "Reviewers know film is bad due to deep reasons while general audience only cares for explosion and tits", but it's clear nowadays that reviewers only care for eye candy and political messaging
 
Yeah, I wasn't going to a theater to see this unless it was 90%+. You know this is a terrible movie if it's getting under that.
Pretty much my entire life it's been "Reviewers know film is bad due to deep reasons while general audience only cares for explosion and tits", but it's clear nowadays that reviewers only care for eye candy and political messaging
I don't quite know how a film getting a favorable score in the 80% range means it'll be terrible, nor did I find the politics in the first film to be all that distracting (though they definitely got a bit too preachy), but again, that's just me.
 
I don't quite know how a film getting a favorable score in the 80% range means it'll be terrible, nor did I find the politics in the first film to be all that distracting (though they definitely got a bit too preachy), but again, that's just me.
Cause for leftwing cuck critics to give an environmental blowjob a review of under 99% means it's shit. C'mon man.
 
Back