I don't see anything here technology-wise that wasn't in the first film so why did this take 13 years to make?
shareThe movie was delayed several times, the pandemic added further delay too. According to Cameron they didn't have the tech to film the Avatar world underwater, so this was the main "selling" point. So maybe it has good CG water, and the design of the marine creatures is great. But the rest is really awful, taking into account it's a 2022 movie with a big budget, and has James Cameron behind it.
Some animations look off, also the boats look like toys when they crash. But mocap is by far the worst offender, clearly inferior to the first movie, even outside the water. You can even tell when you see humans interacting with the Navi, they appear to be moving at different framerates.
I remember when the first film came out, James Cameron said he wanted to make a film where you couldn't tell what was real and what isn't. I like the films, but I think he failed massively in that department.
shareI agree, and I also found both movies entertaining, although they do have some weak points in the plot. Still I don't get why so many people are praising the visuals of this one, when you can clearly see how bad is the CGI on several scenes. Cameron failed to deliver a movie "where you couldn't tell what's real and what isn't." And maybe it's understandable for a movie made in 2009, but not in 2022.
shareFinally saw it and was thinking the same. The effects don't look improved and in some parts look bad. Along with the hollow story, this was a slog to get through. I did like the music though.
shareI liked it but not as much as the first one. I agree the effects don't look improved. I would love to hear Cameron talk about why it took so long other than "the technology finally caught up with what we wanted."
share