Avatar 2 Delayed Yet Again, Will Not Meet 2017 Release Date

JaredJones

New member
Jun 8, 2015
452
0
0
Avatar 2 Delayed Yet Again, Will Not Meet 2017 Release Date

//cdn.themis-media.com/media/global/images/library/deriv/1260/1260190.png

Has Star Wars: Episode VIII scared the box office king out of town?

For the past four years, James Cameron has been promising us that an Avatar sequel would be on the way, only to pull the rug out from us time and time again. And look, we get it; a sequel to the most successful movie of all time doesn't exactly come overnight, but to loosely quote Abraham Lincoln, "If you're going to promise us pancakes, then there better be some damn pancakes!"

(Confession: I have no idea whether Lincoln ever said that and am on my fifth scotch of the day)

Most recently, rumors began to circulate (via Cameron himself) that Avatar 2 would be hitting theaters in Christmas 2017 to meet Episode XIII in an all-out battle for cinematic superiority. We were essentially going to be treated to the box office equivalent of Rocky vs. Ivan Drago, but now, it appears that the hyperbolic scenario depicted above will sadly not be happening.

According to Slash Film [http://www.slashfilm.com/avatar-2-delayed-again-wont-meet-christmas-2017-window/], not only will Avatar 2 *not* be meeting its projected release date in December of 2017, but has in fact been delayed indefinitely.

There was already speculation that Avatar 2 wasn't going to meet the estimated release when Star Wars: Episode VIII moved to December 15th, 2017, a full seven months after the previously planned May 2017 release date. Disney clearly knew they weren't going to have any major competition at the box office and also wanted that Christmas money for their merchandise release. Plus, there's no way Disney would willingly take on Avatar 2 with the chance of having a smaller IMAX screen count, especially when there's an installment planned for their theme parks [http://www.slashfilm.com/avatar-land-d23-expo-2015/].

Once again, it all comes down to toys.

The question now becomes: Has it already been too long for the general public to get excited about an Avatar sequel? The first movie became the success it was thanks in a big way to its innovative special effects, which back in 2009, more or less defined the "IMAX experience" (it sure as hell wasn't the knock-off Fern Gully storyline, in any case). The technology has caught up in the time since, for the most part, and with Marvel, DC, and Star Wars features set to dominate cinemas for the foreseeable future, you have to wonder whether or not Avatar 2 missed its window to be anything close to the success of its predecessor.

Time will tell, and if there's one thing that Avatar 2 has got going for it, it's time.

Source: Slash Film [http://www.slashfilm.com/avatar-2-delayed-again-wont-meet-christmas-2017-window/]

Permalink
 

MiskWisk

New member
Mar 17, 2012
857
0
0
Oh right, this is a thing isn't it?

Well, as someone who didn't like the first one, here's hoping this is delayed forevermore. I got sick of the first one when my geography teacher started waxing lyrical about its magnificence and caved to watch the bloody thing and fell asleep. Maybe I slept through the good bits, I'll never know.
 

Ukomba

New member
Oct 14, 2010
1,528
0
0
The problem is, Avatar completely failed to capitalize on it's popularity. Sure they allowed some terrible movie tie in games to be released, but that's it. No books, no comics, no games set outside the movie, no Expanded Universe. That's where they failed to learn from Star Wars. Star Wars came out 1977, Splinter of the Mind's Eye came out 1978.
 

Imperioratorex Caprae

Henchgoat Emperor
May 15, 2010
5,499
0
0
I see Avatar as the film analog of the AAA Gaming Industry: All flair and sparkles and no substance of worth. Cameron's playing it smart though, knowing he will lose the box office battle to Star Wars.
Essentially Dances with Wolves in space, it was a mediocre film at best. Visuals do not trump substantive story.
 

Adam Jensen_v1legacy

I never asked for this
Sep 8, 2011
6,651
0
0
Imperioratorex Caprae said:
I see Avatar as the film analog of the AAA Gaming Industry: All flair and sparkles and no substance of worth. Cameron's playing it smart though, knowing he will lose the box office battle to Star Wars.
He will lose it to everything. It worked once, and only once because of the marketing put behind it. But nobody cares about Avatar. It's not a memorable movie at all. Aside from being the highest grossing movie its got nothing going for it. It doesn't have a fanbase. And its special effects aren't so special anymore.
 

Kenbo Slice

Respect your surroundings
Jun 7, 2010
2,699
0
0
James Cameron doesn't do what James Cameron does for James Cameron, James Cameron does what James Cameron does, because James Cameron is...James Cameron.
 

The Enquirer

New member
Apr 10, 2013
1,007
0
0
Imperioratorex Caprae said:
I see Avatar as the film analog of the AAA Gaming Industry: All flair and sparkles and no substance of worth. Cameron's playing it smart though, knowing he will lose the box office battle to Star Wars.
Essentially Dances with Wolves in space, it was a mediocre film at best. Visuals do not trump substantive story.
Ironically enough Star Wars Battlefront and Avatar suffer from the exact same issue you mention.
 

Morti

New member
Aug 19, 2008
187
0
0
I hope it gets released, if only to see how they try and justify any sort of plot when the only logical followup to Avatar is "Orbital Bombardment. Mine the resulting wasteland with drones."
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
7,330
807
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Ukomba said:
The problem is, Avatar completely failed to capitalize on it's popularity. Sure they allowed some terrible movie tie in games to be released, but that's it. No books, no comics, no games set outside the movie, no Expanded Universe. That's where they failed to learn from Star Wars. Star Wars came out 1977, Splinter of the Mind's Eye came out 1978.
Actually, there were multiple games released. I think only the mobile version was set during the movie itself. Every other game was a prequel. Plus there's already EU stuff in the form of the survival guide, a junior novelization, and an upcoming comic series.

Now, I'm someone who loved (and loves) Avatar, but I won't try to change anyone's mind. However, in this case, I can't help but blink at the irony here, that this is Star Wars Episode VIII that's delayed it. Yes, Star Wars. Sequel to Episode VII, a.k.a. A New Hope 2.0., which, while not escaping that criticism completely, was widely eaten up by the general public. Yet it's Avatar that's the one that gets flak for taking inspiration from older stories that at the least, didn't have "Avatar" in the title. Bearing in mind that this is also in the same breadth of the MCU which basically has the same formula repeated over and over. So if Avatar is "Ferngully in Space" (ergo bad), but Guardians is "Avengers in Space" (ergo good), well, go figure.

I'll admit that a difference exists between Avatar 2 and Episode VIII in that, IMO, Avatar didn't need a sequel, whereas TFA at least had the decency to say upfront that it was the first in trilogy. Yet we have at least five more Star Wars films, at least 11 more Marvel films, and at least 11 more DC films (assuming that they're all made), yet Avatar is the property that's being milked with 4 more films.

So, yeah. I don't think it was necessary for Avatar to have a sequel, but if it's a choice between Marvel film God knows what or The Empire Strikes Back 2.0, suddenly a return to Pandora feels more appealing.
 

Ukomba

New member
Oct 14, 2010
1,528
0
0
Hawki said:
Ukomba said:
The problem is, Avatar completely failed to capitalize on it's popularity. Sure they allowed some terrible movie tie in games to be released, but that's it. No books, no comics, no games set outside the movie, no Expanded Universe. That's where they failed to learn from Star Wars. Star Wars came out 1977, Splinter of the Mind's Eye came out 1978.
Actually, there were multiple games released. I think only the mobile version was set during the movie itself. Every other game was a prequel. Plus there's already EU stuff in the form of the survival guide, a junior novelization, and an upcoming comic series.
"James Cameron's Avatar: The Game" was a prequel? I thought it was just a 'what if' version of the movie. It seemed to follow all the plot points from the movie, what with the soldier forming a connection with the Navi, having to choose who to help, and ending with a big battle between the two sides. Did that really all happen twice? Which ending is the canon one?

Survival Guide is good and all but a bestiality isn't so much world building as an exposition dump, a movie novelization is nice but doesn't continue the story, and Comics will be good, depending on what they are, but it's been 6 years. By 1983 Star Wars had all 3 movies of it's original Trilogy out, 3 novelizations of movies, 7 EU Stories, 4 games, and multiple comics. It's true Star Wars then died out for a while until Zahn, but it's first 6 years were very busy.


Hawki said:
Now, I'm someone who loved (and loves) Avatar, but I won't try to change anyone's mind. However, in this case, I can't help but blink at the irony here, that this is Star Wars Episode VIII that's delayed it. Yes, Star Wars. Sequel to Episode VII, a.k.a. A New Hope 2.0., which, while not escaping that criticism completely, was widely eaten up by the general public. Yet it's Avatar that's the one that gets flak for taking inspiration from older stories that at the least, didn't have "Avatar" in the title. Bearing in mind that this is also in the same breadth of the MCU which basically has the same formula repeated over and over. So if Avatar is "Ferngully in Space" (ergo bad), but Guardians is "Avengers in Space" (ergo good), well, go figure.

I'll admit that a difference exists between Avatar 2 and Episode VIII in that, IMO, Avatar didn't need a sequel, whereas TFA at least had the decency to say upfront that it was the first in trilogy. Yet we have at least five more Star Wars films, at least 11 more Marvel films, and at least 11 more DC films (assuming that they're all made), yet Avatar is the property that's being milked with 4 more films.

So, yeah. I don't think it was necessary for Avatar to have a sequel, but if it's a choice between Marvel film God knows what or The Empire Strikes Back 2.0, suddenly a return to Pandora feels more appealing.
I'm no fan of Episode VII or what Disney is doing to milk the property dry. I think their change of release date is a cynical grab for more money and I wish people would stop swallowing their S***. I was never a fan of Avatar, but it was a better movie than Episode VII, and I would rather see Avatar get 10 more films than suffer through 1 more year of Disney Marketing Blitz followed by another JJ, OT, EU hybrid abomination.
 

Ukomba

New member
Oct 14, 2010
1,528
0
0
I'm calling it now, James Cameron waiting to make Avatar 2 the first VR movie, what with the Oculus Rift and other VR head sets coming on the market. He'll be the big push for 360 degree immersive head set theaters.
 

P-89 Scorpion

New member
Sep 25, 2014
466
0
0
I doubt Star Wars has anything to do with the change of release date when James Cameron has stated multiple times that Avatar 2-4 will be released over 3 consecutive years.
 

FirstNameLastName

Premium Fraud
Nov 6, 2014
1,080
0
0
While I can't say Avatar was a great movie, it was at least decent enough, and despite the rather mediocre story I am genuinely curious to find out where they're going with all this.
 

FirstNameLastName

Premium Fraud
Nov 6, 2014
1,080
0
0
ravenshrike said:
...
Not to mention the fridge logic inherent in Avatar that the blue idiots are the remnants of a hyper-advanced race that genetically engineered a significant portion of the planet in question before erasing any technological advancement from racial memory.
Source? I haven't followed Avatar outside of the movie, so this is the first I've ever heard of such a thing.
 

DeepReaver

New member
Feb 25, 2009
80
0
0
Good? I am sorry but any future plot for that movie that is not 'earth's propaganda machine spinning the slaughter of miners leading to nuking a planet to glass' does not make any sense to me... Cause honestly sure the na'vi won a battle, but so did the native Americans when it came to fighting a technologically superior foe.
 

SonOfVoorhees

New member
Aug 3, 2011
3,509
0
0
Does anyone care? The first movie was a thing but now? I would say fad just because i cant think of a better word. But i doubt Avatar 2 would get anywhere near the amount of money the first movie did. But then who knows, i just cant see the amount of people being obsessed by it.
 

Hairless Mammoth

New member
Jan 23, 2013
1,595
0
0
Um, yeah, if I was in charge of Avatar 2's release date, I wouldn't put it up against Star Wars or any major Marvel movie.(Something like Ant Man or that cheesy GC Star Wars movie based on the show, maybe.) The first Avatar might have been the first big 3D live action movie to kick off this generation of 3D technology, but beyond the colorful (and 3D) visuals, it didn't set itself apart from neither other scifi action movies nor other stories with a hero that switches to the natives' side. I guess this gives Jim more time to develop the techniques and equipment to get the perfect underwater shots, though. I think the ocean fetishist himself did say oceans would play a major part.
Ukomba said:
I'm calling it now, James Cameron waiting to make Avatar 2 the first VR movie, what with the Oculus Rift and other VR head sets coming on the market. He'll be the big push for 360 degree immersive head set theaters.
That is possible. Either equipping enough theaters with headsets or waiting for the consumer VR install base to be large enough for digital distribution to be profitable will take a few more years. It sure would give him an excuse to keep up the approximate one feature film a decade pace he has been working at since 1997.