Will it be in Universal or Disney??
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Avatar the ride!!!!
- Thread starter ILLmaticS0ldier
- Start date
- Status
Cmdr_Crimson
Well-Known Member
That Movie with the plots of Pocahontas and Atlantis with blue puma people...Ew..Sorry I hate the film..So um let's see......NO!!!!
slappy magoo
Well-Known Member
I don't think Cameron would sign off on "just" an attraction. He'd want an entirely themed chunk of a park, and complete creative control like Rowling had with Potter. Disney would never go for that, unless they feel like they learned a lesson losing Potter.
However, here's why it's probably a moot point, Cameron would insist on complete creative control, but his dance card is so full right now, even if he were purely working as a creative consultant with veto control, letting his talented minions do 99.999% of the work, that means the people he trusts the most to do THAT work won't be working on his other film projects, including Avatar sequels. So unless Cameron were to decide this project took precedence over everything else on his plate, he won't invest the time. Which means, it won't happen.
However, here's why it's probably a moot point, Cameron would insist on complete creative control, but his dance card is so full right now, even if he were purely working as a creative consultant with veto control, letting his talented minions do 99.999% of the work, that means the people he trusts the most to do THAT work won't be working on his other film projects, including Avatar sequels. So unless Cameron were to decide this project took precedence over everything else on his plate, he won't invest the time. Which means, it won't happen.
Fable McCloud
Well-Known Member
So glad to see someone else agreeing with my thought that the movie was merely Pocahontas + Atlantis + Fern Gully. I thought it was pretty, but certainly NOT original and not worth all the hype, or the Oscars.:shrug:
Also, the protagonist's name is Sully...and he's a blue kitty-like creature. My BF yells at the screen: "Kitty!" and I start laughing and mutter "Mike Wasowski!". Disney references are fun.:lol:
inluvwithbeast
New Member
So glad to see someone else agreeing with my thought that the movie was merely Pocahontas + Atlantis + Fern Gully. I thought it was pretty, but certainly NOT original and not worth all the hype, or the Oscars.:shrug:
Also, the protagonist's name is Sully...and he's a blue kitty-like creature. My BF yells at the screen: "Kitty!" and I start laughing and mutter "Mike Wasowski!". Disney references are fun.:lol:
Or Dances with Wolves. It's a pretty archetypal storyline.
Kinda like "someone's lost and we have to find them" at WDW.
WDWFigment
Well-Known Member
So glad to see someone else agreeing with my thought that the movie was merely Pocahontas + Atlantis + Fern Gully. I thought it was pretty, but certainly NOT original and not worth all the hype, or the Oscars.:shrug:
Also, the protagonist's name is Sully...and he's a blue kitty-like creature. My BF yells at the screen: "Kitty!" and I start laughing and mutter "Mike Wasowski!". Disney references are fun.:lol:
James Cameron is highly overrated in general, in my opinion. I would put him in the same tier as Michael Bay, and that is not a compliment. (Okay, maybe he's not as terrible as Bay.) The Academy seems to have some sort of fetish for him, though (money talks).
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
I completely disagree. James Cameron is not overrated at all...James Cameron changed film...Michael Bay just blows crap up.
Sure, Cameron has had his bombs...or "not so good" movies...but you can't discredit his masterpieces because he had a flop or two.
The original Terminator...great flick...and then he did the sequel. Terminator 2 did stuff with special effects that had never been done before and taken them to a whole new level. (Also, Terminator:3D is the reason I think Avatar would go to Uni)
Aliens...IMO...was better than the original (but Ridley Scott came up with the original, so props for idea goes to him)
(Even The Abyss is a decent flick).
Titanic...while you may not like it...the guy held the number one moneymaker spot for a long time with this one...so he did something right. (Again, the special effects were incredible and nobody had seen anything like it before.)
Then we get to Avatar. Love it, hate it, like it, dislike it...it changed Hollywood. 3D films were around before Avatar...but it wasn't until Avatar showed us the possibilities of 3D, that it became sought-after. If you don't think so...look at the movies that got converted to 3D in post production due to the success of Avatar. Remember, Avatar wasn't a power-house right out of the gate...word of mouth is what brought those numbers in. Was it a simple story? Yes...Was it a story that has been done before? Yes. Was it implemented the best? Possibly. Was it presented in the best package? Yes.
And...finally Titanic loses it's number one moneymaker spot... to another James Cameron film.
People think he's overrated (and I'm not singling you out) because his movies bring in a lot of movies (much like a Michael Bay) but just because they are somewhat "popcorny" doesn't mean they are not enjoyable and well done.
Terminator, Aliens, and Terminator 2 are some of the highest respected Sci-Fi films ever made.
Bad Boys 2 and Transformers 2...notso much
WDWmazprty
Well-Known Member
I completely disagree. James Cameron is not overrated at all...James Cameron changed film...Michael Bay just blows crap up.
Sure, Cameron has had his bombs...or "not so good" movies...but you can't discredit his masterpieces because he had a flop or two.
The original Terminator...great flick...and then he did the sequel. Terminator 2 did stuff with special effects that had never been done before and taken them to a whole new level. (Also, Terminator:3D is the reason I think Avatar would go to Uni)
Aliens...IMO...was better than the original (but Ridley Scott came up with the original, so props for idea goes to him)
(Even The Abyss is a decent flick).
Titanic...while you may not like it...the guy held the number one moneymaker spot for a long time with this one...so he did something right. (Again, the special effects were incredible and nobody had seen anything like it before.)
Then we get to Avatar. Love it, hate it, like it, dislike it...it changed Hollywood. 3D films were around before Avatar...but it wasn't until Avatar showed us the possibilities of 3D, that it became sought-after. If you don't think so...look at the movies that got converted to 3D in post production due to the success of Avatar. Remember, Avatar wasn't a power-house right out of the gate...word of mouth is what brought those numbers in. Was it a simple story? Yes...Was it a story that has been done before? Yes. Was it implemented the best? Possibly. Was it presented in the best package? Yes.
And...finally Titanic loses it's number one moneymaker spot... to another James Cameron film.
People think he's overrated (and I'm not singling you out) because his movies bring in a lot of movies (much like a Michael Bay) but just because they are somewhat "popcorny" doesn't mean they are not enjoyable and well done.
Terminator, Aliens, and Terminator 2 are some of the highest respected Sci-Fi films ever made.
Bad Boys 2 and Transformers 2...notso much
I agree. Aliens is a classic. Titanic, although I'm not into the love story so much, it was a good movie as it showed the the actual disaster as it most likely happened using great effects. Avatar was a great movie; not so much because of the plot because as everyone has said, we've seen it over and over again. But, again, Cameron gets you with the cutting edge effects and technolgy he uses. And those effects obviously have something to do with how the movie is seen.
And yes. Michael Bay's movies maybe aren't oscar worthy, but heck, when I wanna have some fun and watch crap blow up, Michael Bay is the leading authority!-Transformers, Bad Boys, The Rock, Armageddon, Peral Harbor, The Island.
PirateFrank
Well-Known Member
Interesting.... I was convinced that I was watching Dances With Wolves in space...even their dialect was very 'native american' sounding....
I actually found the movie visually rewarding and plot/politically reprehensible. I'm so sick of big bad evil American corporations being depicted in reality and even now, fantasy....as the root of all evil. So not true!
The fact that Cameron even combined our so called big bad American military in with the evil corporate giant made it more reprehensible. Anyone serving in uniform shouldve been thoroughly disgusted after watching avatar.
I seriously hope neither Disney or uni touch this pile of dung of a movie with a 199 foot pole.....
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
Also...
People that say the story has been done before always bring up Dances with Wolves, Atlantis, and Pocahontas.
Why didn't anybody say "The story's been done before" when the SECOND released of those films came out?
Remember, most movies that are out have been rehashed ideas from other sources.
People that say the story has been done before always bring up Dances with Wolves, Atlantis, and Pocahontas.
Why didn't anybody say "The story's been done before" when the SECOND released of those films came out?
Remember, most movies that are out have been rehashed ideas from other sources.
WDWFigment
Well-Known Member
I completely disagree. James Cameron is not overrated at all...James Cameron changed film...Michael Bay just blows crap up.
Sure, Cameron has had his bombs...or "not so good" movies...but you can't discredit his masterpieces because he had a flop or two.
The original Terminator...great flick...and then he did the sequel. Terminator 2 did stuff with special effects that had never been done before and taken them to a whole new level. (Also, Terminator:3D is the reason I think Avatar would go to Uni)
Aliens...IMO...was better than the original (but Ridley Scott came up with the original, so props for idea goes to him)
(Even The Abyss is a decent flick).
Titanic...while you may not like it...the guy held the number one moneymaker spot for a long time with this one...so he did something right. (Again, the special effects were incredible and nobody had seen anything like it before.)
Then we get to Avatar. Love it, hate it, like it, dislike it...it changed Hollywood. 3D films were around before Avatar...but it wasn't until Avatar showed us the possibilities of 3D, that it became sought-after. If you don't think so...look at the movies that got converted to 3D in post production due to the success of Avatar. Remember, Avatar wasn't a power-house right out of the gate...word of mouth is what brought those numbers in. Was it a simple story? Yes...Was it a story that has been done before? Yes. Was it implemented the best? Possibly. Was it presented in the best package? Yes.
And...finally Titanic loses it's number one moneymaker spot... to another James Cameron film.
People think he's overrated (and I'm not singling you out) because his movies bring in a lot of movies (much like a Michael Bay) but just because they are somewhat "popcorny" doesn't mean they are not enjoyable and well done.
Terminator, Aliens, and Terminator 2 are some of the highest respected Sci-Fi films ever made.
Bad Boys 2 and Transformers 2...notso much
Okay, perhaps the Michael Bay comparison was a little harsh (okay...a lot harsh), but I still think he's overrated.
I agree regarding Terminator. Same with Aliens. I guess where I see him as overrated is based upon the clout that followed him after Titanic, and into Avatar. The money, awards, and accolades these two movies have made/received is what I'm predicating my "overrated" stance upon. These films may be crowd-pleasers, but they are not nearly as good as the BO numbers bear out, nor are they as good as the awards they received. Cameron's reputation stems mainly from these two overrated films, and that's my basis for saying he's overrated.
That isn't to discredit his earlier stuff, which is great, but you can still be a good director and be an overrated director if you're labeled a "great" director. Heck, even a great director is overrated if he's labeled a legendary director.
captainkidd
Well-Known Member
Titanic, Aliens or Terminator 2 - Have you seen those?
Pumbas Nakasak
Heading for the great escape.
Id be underwhelmed.
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
Well, I can see what you mean...I don't think anybody gets "Legendary" status until they have retired or passed on. Kubrick was legendary. As long as Scorsese doesn't botch up the rest of his career...he'll be legendary.
You may say that those are two overrated films (and, in some aspects I agree with you), but at the same time, his reputation "GREW" from those...but wasn't created from those films.
Cameron's greatness comes from his vision...not necessarily his storytelling. Nobody can sit there and tell me that Avatar was not visually stunning and unlike anything they've ever seen before. Heck, I WANT TO GO TO PANDORA! He could've put this movie out...but he then sat on the idea and vision until the technology caught up to him. He has such an amazing vision for his films that puts him at "legendary" status (for that aspect alone). I truly believe that he is the greatest visual director of all time and the director that knows how to use technology to his advantage...and not a gimmick.
Watch Avatar in 3D in an IMAX and then watch it in 2D. There's a large dropoff because the immersiveness of Pandora (which is the main focus of the movie) doesn't surround you.
Now take a movie like Clash of the Titans. (Story aside) You can watch that in either format and you're not missing much if you watch it in 2D.
I'm not a huge fan of Titanic but I respect it. That ship felt real. The way it sank felt real. Sure, the story wasn't "great" but again, the environment he created carried the movie.
It's really no different than George Lucas with Star Wars. The actors were horrible...the dialogue was horrible (scruffy looking nerfherder?!?!?)...but he had a vision of what he wanted the planets, characters, etc. to look and sound like...and they became "legendary" films. (I'm, of course, only speaking of the original trilogy).
Good discussion :wave:
Oh, and to touch on Michael Bay... He knows what he is. He doesn't try to do "serious" films because he's created a Niche. He throws his name out there and it's synonymous with "explosions" and it puts people in the seats. He's not trying to be anything he's not. I know when Transformers 3 comes out...it'll just be a bunch of big robots with bad dialogue and huge explosions and close-ups. Will I see it on opening night? Yep. Why? It's fun...and not serious...and it's very mindless. I can go, sit there, eat popcorn, have my eyes explode out of my head...and then go home and not think about it again.
imagineer boy
Well-Known Member
Agreed. That was one thing that disapointed me, the Navi weren't very creative or alien at all. They were just blue CGI native americans.
Tha't what really turned me off about the movie. I mean, do were really need more of this schlock from hollywood? And I hated the balatant politics too... "He's fabricating an excuse to attack the Navi in some sort of shock and awe campaign." Gee, I wonder what that's a reference to.
:lol: I seriously hate it when politics intrude on a movie even if I were to agree with them. Takes all of the fun out.Having that said I do disagree with the Cameron is overrated comment. Sure I think Avatar is overrated but Aliens and the first two Terminator movies are sheer awesome masterpieces. True Lies is one of my favourite movies and Titanic (aside from the cheesy love plot) is pretty spectacular in its large scope and attention to historical detail.
WDWFigment
Well-Known Member
Can't say I disagree with any of this--except the statement that he's the best visual director of all time (I'll grant you that he's the best with visual technology, but to me, visually encompasses cinematography as a whole, and I think there are plenty of better directors in that regard). I think Cameron's reputation has GROWN pretty significantly based on Titanic and Avatar to an echelon where it doesn't quite belong. I realize he was putting out great stuff before then, but I think those two movies catapulted him, reputation-wise, to a tier where he doesn't belong. In my mind, he's not up there with Kubrick, Scorsese (even with a number of turds under his belt), Hitchcock, Kurosawa, or a number of other directors.
I agree that Michael Bay doesn't take himself too seriously, and his movies can be enjoyable if you go in with the right attitude. The key difference, I think, is that no one else takes Bay too seriously, either. He isn't winning Best Picture or other awards, just making some cool explosions.
JimboJones123
Well-Known Member
Tangled is basically a scene by scene remake of Beauty and the Beast.
Doesn't discredit it.
The reaction to hype is what fuels the dislike of Avatar. Same as Titanic. Do I like Titani?. No. Is it a better movie than almost every other disaster film ever made? Yes.
Doesn't discredit it.
The reaction to hype is what fuels the dislike of Avatar. Same as Titanic. Do I like Titani?. No. Is it a better movie than almost every other disaster film ever made? Yes.
- Status