James Cameron says it needs to make 2 billion worldwide to break even. That sounds unlikely to me. I don't even see a lot of ads for it and it's coming out in two weeks. Somehow the world has changed a lot since 2009 and smurfs in space seems less appealing. Plus the whole sequel thing. But Cameron also has a pretty solid track record and hopefully the movie will somehow be fresh and engaging! What do you think?

Here's the official trailer...

I would observe a few things. The success of the first movie depended on a two things that this one is lacking 1) a fresh, new sci-fi concept/world, 2) fresh new EFX and 3D. The new film will have neither of those (well, it's got HDR 4k filming, if you see it in the right theater).

Now looking at the trailer I can say I, for one, will be seeing this in the theater. Not opening week, but soon there after when crowds are smaller. and probably a matinee.

Problem is to do 2 billion gross ticket sales you've got to get people back over and over again. ( I think I saw the original twice in theaters. Only other film I can think of I've done that for in the last two decades was Infinity Wars). And ideally one of those viewings is a premium ticket price show like Imax/3d. Is this even coming in 3D? I don't see that being pushed. Well, I guess it is... https://www.forbes.com/sites/bennyhareven/2022/11/29/whats-the-best-cinema-format-to-see-avatar-the-way-of-water/?sh=438e13e56522

Personally I voted for Tepid. I think the film will do well, specially if the story is actually good and satisfying and the word of mouth grows. Cameron did take a long time working on the script and complaining it wasn't good enough. I don't think this is just going to be another Transformers movie. I hope. However, I would be very surprised if it can do 2 billion, or even beat Top Gun Maverick (this years best film at 1.4 billion.) But for the sake of cinema and sci-fi I really hope it surprises us all.

my man Kareem Abdul-Jabbar didn't think much of it...

"MY TAKE: Avatar: The Way of the Water is like looking at the most beautiful gowns ever made—but hanging lifelessly on a wire hanger in a .99 store. I wanted to like the movie—I really did—because I have to be committed in order to sit in those small movie seats with my legs crunched up for over three hours! Unfortunately, my knees did not forgive me.

When the first thing most people talk about is the special effects, then you know something went terribly wrong. We can praise the innovative techniques all we want, but that is no replacement for the barrenness of the story, the thinness of the characters, and the blandness of the dialogue.

Director and co-writer James Cameron’s sequel to Avatar (2009) was thirteen years in the making, but already feels dated. We can start with the most obvious: it’s an hour too long. I say this as a moviegoer who likes long films (sorry, knees), but only if the story justifies the length. This one does not. Most of the scenes showing the family assimilating to life with the water tribe are boring and unnecessary. They didn’t have to be, but they are because the film cares more about wowing us with visual effects then giving us characters that aren’t stereotypes.

I like stories that blend genres, but this doesn’t blend so much as jump around with no transitions. It’s an action film, then a teen dramedy, then Jaws, then a pseudo-spiritual/environmental lesson (spoiler: We’re all connected to Nature), then an homage to Titanic. Yes, all this could have been mixed together to create something wondrous, but sadly it just goes through the motions.

There’s a ‘50s vibe to the plot. Mostly, the men are strong, silent, and manly, the women emotional and spiritual. Dads bond with sons, mothers with daughters. Most of the conflicts result from the children disobeying the parents—again and again. The dialogue, the plot, and the characters are all woefully predictable. I had more of an emotional reaction to Thing being injured in Wednesday than to anyone in Avatar.

Be prepared for three hours of eye-rolling and head-shaking."

finally heading out to see it tonight... imax 3d... we will see if 13 years of improving technology can make a better three hour blue-side-boob show!

It was pretty much what I expected, and most of you have said; great effects, not much of a plot, mildly worse than the original. I'm glad I saw it IMAX laser 3D, but you'd have to pay me to sit through it again. But, I think we've all learned a lesson here; never bet against the Cameron. Good for him. My main take away was I liked the underwater alien stuff more than the endless action stuff. B+

But I do think it's weird that the male Navi clearly have nipples but mysteriously the woman do not.