Avatar: Fire and Ash (aka Avatar 3)

[Brian in Mesa]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[Brian in Mesa]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[Brian in Mesa]

Scheduled for release on December 19, 2025.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[oaken1]

Man...had they filmed the entire series in unison, similar to LotR, and released one film every 18 months...this thing could have been a legendary cinematic event.

But with the long wait the wonder and awe in the visuals and overall scope has worn off. Become old hat.
At this point it's just typical Hollywood over budgeted under performing sequel money grabs.
Such a disappointment.

 

[Cheesebeef]

None of these movies’ trailers have done anything for me, including this one and yet, I assume, just like the first two, this will be an amazing, immersive theater experience.

 

[Stout]

None of these movies’ trailers have done anything for me, including this one and yet, I assume, just like the first two, this will be an amazing, immersive theater experience.

An immersive experience, but will it actually be a good movie? The story, or lack of compelling story, kept me from watching anything. That and a really meh set of trailers for all of them.

 

[Cheesebeef]

An immersive experience, but will it actually be a good movie? The story, or lack of compelling story, kept me from watching anything. That and a really meh set of trailers for all of them.

So… you know there’s no story, yet you haven’t watched anything? Lol… classic Stout.

 

[Stout]

So… you know there’s no story, yet you haven’t watched anything? Lol… classic Stout.

In the modern era, where you can find whole scripts online and spoilers for anything, you have to actually watch the movie to know the story? LOL Classic Cheese. Get outta here with that weak nonsense.

 

[oaken1]

An immersive experience, but will it actually be a good movie? The story, or lack of compelling story, kept me from watching anything. That and a really meh set of trailers for all of them.

the story in the original was pretty good..on its base as well as in subtext.
The way of water was a disappointment IMO
But Avatar still holds the distinction of being both the first IMAX 3D I ever saw as well as the most amazing viewing experience I have ever had...maybe that added wonder bumped it up for me and made it impossible for the sequels to follow.
Considering seeing this one in IMAX 3D to see if that makes it suddenly so much better than Way of Water...or comparable to Avatar

 

[Cheesebeef]

In the modern era, where you can find whole scripts online and spoilers for anything, you have to actually watch the movie to know the story? LOL Classic Cheese. Get outta here with that weak nonsense.

So… have you’ve read both of the first two whole scripts online? (This is a rhetorical question because you and I both know you didn’t… which makes it silly that you even brought up).

So basically, you’re saying you know the stories (for 2 of the 3 TOP GROSSING MOVIES OF ALL TIME) are bad because you’ve seen a couple 3 minute trailers… out of 300 minutes of actual movies? Oh… and… some stuff other people… on the internet… said?

Also, even if you have read the scripts online, I’d think you’d know that even a mediocre script in the hands of an incredible director can make a massive difference for the end product, right?

I just find it really lame that a fellow writer just blindly and repeatedly follows a particular flock of sheep on the internet to make the kind of declarations about other stories without ever seeing them, rather than forming your own opinion.

And again, if you wanted to say the movies LOOKED/LOOK bad, no issue. To say they ARE bad without seeing them for yourself is just ignorant, by definition.

From one writer to another, there is no weaker sauce than that.

 

[Covert Rain]

Trailer was meh.

 

[Stout]

So… have you’ve read both of the first two whole scripts online? (This is a rhetorical question because you and I both know you didn’t… which makes it silly that you even brought up).

So basically, you’re saying you know the stories (for 2 of the 3 TOP GROSSING MOVIES OF ALL TIME) are bad because you’ve seen a couple 3 minute trailers… out of 300 minutes of actual movies? Oh… and… some stuff other people… on the internet… said?

Also, even if you have read the scripts online, I’d think you’d know that even a mediocre script in the hands of an incredible director can make a massive difference for the end product, right?

I just find it really lame that a fellow writer just blindly and repeatedly follows a particular flock of sheep on the internet to make the kind of declarations about other stories without ever seeing them, rather than forming your own opinion.

And again, if you wanted to say the movies LOOKED/LOOK bad, no issue. To say they ARE bad without seeing them for yourself is just ignorant, by definition.

From one writer to another, there is no weaker sauce than that.

You really want to double down on the stupid, don't you? I guess no one should complain about the Cardinals playing like crap if they didn't actually see the game. Good lord, you come off as sanctimonious sometimes, do you know? What a joke. I discussed the movie in detail with someone who I know and trust who had just seen it back in the day. Told me everything I needed to know about it. Same with the second. Who said anything about following flocks of sheep on the internet? But no, it's not possible for me to find the story lacking after having done my homework, right? Are we back to the dumb argument that you have to waste your time and money watching something or you can't comment on it?

 

[cardncubfan]

I know I don't judge a movie until I actually see it. I've loved movies that had bad reviews & thought others suck that had rave reviews. You can't judge a movie based on others opinions that have watched it imo.

 

[Covert Rain]

I know I don't judge a movie until I actually see it. I've loved movies that had bad reviews & thought others suck that had rave reviews. You can't judge a movie based on others opinions that have watched it imo.

Agreed. Even people whose opinion's I trust have been wrong. I don't think you can judge something you have not seen either. I have taken the position something is likely going to suck will suck but I didn't actually know until I watch it. Even badly reviewed movies I have not seen I will eventually watch at home. When you talk about "leaked" scripts and crap like that? That has even less validity IMO.

 

[oaken1]

I know I don't judge a movie until I actually see it. I've loved movies that had bad reviews & thought others suck that had rave reviews. You can't judge a movie based on others opinions that have watched it imo.

for the longest time my standard M.O. was to check the critic scores...if they liked it I would wait for video..if they hated it I was off to the theater. History has shown me that critics do not watch a movie to be entertained, but to examine their expertise and technical quality...
I watch to be entertained,,,and I disagree with critic reviews not quite 100% of the time...but close.

 

[Stout]

I know I don't judge a movie until I actually see it. I've loved movies that had bad reviews & thought others suck that had rave reviews. You can't judge a movie based on others opinions that have watched it imo.

The problem there is the same as critiquing a Cards game: You are allowed no opinion at all, forever, until the end of time. Nah. You don't have to watch something to form an opinion that is not for you. Unless the board wants to fund Stout going to movies he doesn't want to see?

Or, heck, Card's games he hasn't bought. I'll take free Sunday Ticked

 

[Devilmaycare]

Just because they were high grossing doesn't mean they were good. Endgame is mostly forgettable now too. I wouldn't even have it in my top 5 of MCU movies.

The first Avatar's story wasn't anything to write home about either. It was a paint by numbers story that was essentially Dances with Wolves but with Smurfs. That movie was carried on visual.

 

[oaken1]

The problem there is the same as critiquing a Cards game: You are allowed no opinion at all, forever, until the end of time. Nah. You don't have to watch something to form an opinion that is not for you. Unless the board wants to fund Stout going to movies he doesn't want to see?

Or, heck, Card's games he hasn't bought. I'll take free Sunday Ticked

hell, sign me up to critique the Niners... hate those guys. But the stadium is close,...and I would certainly attend the home games to cheer on their opponents if it was free, lol.
asfn gets me season tickets with parking pass, and I will write an article after every game trashing the niners performance and smack talking their management

 

[cardncubfan]

The problem there is the same as critiquing a Cards game: You are allowed no opinion at all, forever, until the end of time. Nah. You don't have to watch something to form an opinion that is not for you. Unless the board wants to fund Stout going to movies he doesn't want to see?

Or, heck, Card's games he hasn't bought. I'll take free Sunday Ticked

Well one is a game & the other a movie so not exactly apples to apples there.

 

[Covert Rain]

Well one is a game & the other a movie so not exactly apples to apples there.

If your team gets waxed and takes a loss, you usually have a lopsided score to support that. Even then, at the end of the day you either won the game or lost it. Movies are much different. It's not a W/L sum. Movies have a much wider spectrum and you can enjoy them for a wide variety of reasons. Unless it's at the top or the bottom of critics scores that is much hard to ascertain and most critic scores are in the middle. That's even assuming you look at critics at all or even trust them. I don't see much of a correlation either.

 

[oaken1]

If your team gets waxed and takes a loss, you usually have a lopsided score to support that. Even then, at the end of the day you either won the game or lost it. Movies are much different. It's not a W/L sum. Movies have a much wider spectrum and you can enjoy them for a wide variety of reasons. Unless it's at the top or the bottom of critics scores that is much hard to ascertain and most critic scores are in the middle. That's even assuming you look at critics at all or even trust them. I don't see much of a correlation either.

I dunno man.
I used to watch the Detroit Lions lose by 35.
But Berry Sanders had 2 70 yard touchdowns that he ran for about 200 yards each on...
Even with the huge loss all the post-game talk was about Barry's runs and what an absolute monster he would be if...
1. He had an adequate offensive line
2. He could just hit the hole and go...save all that squirrelly crap for after he got past the line of scrimmage...
But then...Lions fans expected a big loss going in

 

[Brian in Mesa]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[UncleChris]

I'm probably in the minority, but this looks like it's going to be kick ass, possibly the best of the 3. Guess we'll see in about a month.

 

[Phrazbit]

I know some people love these movies, but I’m bummed out that one of my all-time favorite directors has wasted about 20 years making these plotless stupid movies that are only notable for looking pretty.

The original was OK, way of the water was freaking awful. I hated that movie.