'Avatar' Theme Land Headed to Disney Parks

by Alex Ben Block

from http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/

Courtesy of Twentieth Century-Fox

The first themed "land" will be built at Disney World in Orlando, Florida, with construction expected to start by 2013.

The blue people are coming to Disney.

Walt Disney Parks and Resorts Worldwide has sealed a deal with filmmaker James Cameron and producer Jon Landau, Fox and Cameron’s Lightstorm Entertainment to create themed attractions at Disney parks based on the 2009 movie.

The first themed "land" will be built at Disney World in Orlando, Florida, with construction expected to start by 2013.

The first Avatar attraction will be inside the Animal Kingdom park. Disney said this was chosen because "with its emphasis on living in harmony with nature, Animal Kingdom is a natural fit for the Avatar stories, which share the same philosophy."

Cameron and Landau, through Lightstorm, will be creative consultants and partner with Walt Disney Imagineering in the design and development of the Avatar attractions, which eventually will be at other Disney parks worldwide as well.

The deal is exclusive to Disney, which plans to roll out other Avatar attractions over time. Some of that will depend on discussions with joint venture partners on parks outside the U.S.

The parks will not only play off the huge hit movie which dominated the box office for months in 2010, but also benefit from the release to two more movies now in pre-production. Cameron has announced plans to release those movies at Christmas 2014 followed by the second at Christmas 2015.

Avatar was a movie that broke new ground in terms of presentation and technology, especially in the use of 3D. It is expected that the theme park attractions will also use that technology and new innovations to engage park visitors.

“James Cameron is a groundbreaking filmmaker and gifted storyteller who shares our passion for creativity, technological innovation and delivering the best experience possible,” said Robert A. Iger, President and CEO of The Walt Disney Company. “With this agreement, we have the extraordinary opportunity to combine James’ talent and vision with the imagination and expertise of Disney.”

“Avatar created a world which audiences can discover again and again and now, through this incredible partnership with Disney, we'll be able to bring Pandora to life like never before. With two new Avatar films currently in development, we'll have even more locations, characters and stories to explore,” said James Cameron. “I'm chomping at the bit to start work with Disney's legendary Imagineers to bring our Avatar universe to life. Our goal is to go beyond current boundaries of technical innovation and experiential storytelling, and give park goers the chance to see, hear, and touch the world of Avatar with an unprecedented sense of reality."

"This exciting new venture combines the world of Avatar with the enormous reach of Disney and the incomparable talent of Jim Cameron,” said Fox Filmed Entertainment chairmen Jim Gianopulos and Tom Rothman. “While Jim is bringing audiences further into Pandora with the next two chapters in the Avatar motion picture saga, the theme park attraction will likewise bring a new dimension to the amazing universe he created."

"Avatar is a uniquely powerful franchise that has global appeal with audiences of all ages. Its spectacular settings, intriguing characters, imaginative creatures, and strong themes of family and loyalty make it a perfect fit for Disney,” said Thomas O. Staggs, Chairman, Walt Disney Parks and Resorts. “We can’t wait to give our guests the ability to journey to Pandora and explore the incredible immersive world of Avatar in person.”

James Cameron: 'Avatar' sequels coming Christmas 2014 and 2015

by Darren Franich

from http://insidemovies.ew.com/

 
Image Credit: WETA

James Cameron has spoken frequently about his intention to turn his mega-hit Avatar into a trilogy. Now, according to the director himself speaking at the PGA Awards on Saturday, those two sequels have release dates. Cameron tells EW, “I am in the process of writing the next two Avatar films now. We are planning to shoot them together and post them together, and we will probably release them not quite back to back, but about a year apart. Christmas ’14 and ’15 is the current plan.” Of course, it’s probably best to take those release dates with a grain of salt, since the first Avatar had several release dates before its December 2009 release. Still, now fans know that they’ll have to wait at least three more years for a return to Pandora.

Cameron also notes that we’ll see some familiar faces return. “Basically, if you survived the first film, you get to be in the second film, at least in some form,” say the director. One thing’s for sure: some percentage of the presumably-massive Avatar sequel gross will go to charity. “Fox has partnered with me to donate a chunk of the profits to environmental causes that are at the heart of the Avatar world,” says the director. “I didn’t want to make more Avatar movies without a grander plan in place.”

(Reporting by Carrie Bell)

Sundance: Gaspar Noe On Enter the Void, Avatar, and Magic Mushrooms

From: http://nymag.com/ 00Comment 00Comments

Avatar: James Cameron straight tripping?Photo: 20th Century Fox

Even here in Park City, it’s hard to escape Avatar’s long shadow. And it’s not just because everybody’s talking about the sci-fi epic’s record-breaking box office. Comparisons to James Cameron’s film came swiftly among both critics and moviegoers after the premiere of French director Gaspar Noe’s stunning Enter the Void, a borderline experimental techno epic about a junkie whose spirit floats above the streets of nighttime Tokyo after he’s killed during a drug bust. Sort of an art-film counterpart to Cameron’s film, Void is a fever dream that blends elements of 2001, The Tibetan Book of the Dead, and dozens of other films, books, and videogames to craft a journey into an alternate reality, one that seems to have emerged from the deepest recesses of one passionately twisted auteur’s mind. (Though, unlike Avatar, it’s also got acres and acres of explicit sex and nudity.) And for all his arthouse cred, Noe doesn’t seem bothered by the comparisons: He freely cops to loving Avatar, and the fact that he and Cameron share a Stanley Kubrick obsession.

He’s also convinced they have something else in common: “I’m sure Cameron did some mushrooms,” Noe told us during a chat here. “Those scenes in the forest with the glowing plants — if you’ve ever done mushrooms any time in your life, you know those are exactly the kind of visions you have. I’m sure he must have done some ‘mental research’ before he made that movie.” Cameron, of course, has denied ever having done drugs (except inadvertently, when someone infamously spiked the catering for Titanic). Noe shrugs: “Michel Gondry also does very trippy images, and I know for a fact that he’s clean as water. So maybe it’s true.”

For his part, Noe has been fairly open about how drug use played a part in the conception of Enter the Void, which the director has been working on for over a decade. (Along the way, to test out some of his techniques, he made the super-controversial Irreversible, which told a rape-revenge story in reverse, opening with a man being bludgeoned to death on-camera and then progressing backwards to the 10-minute Monica Bellucci rape scene which triggered the act.) “One day, in my 20s, I was with friends, and had done too many mushrooms,” he recalls. “I turned on the TV as I was coming down, and it was showing Lady in the Lake, the Robert Montgomery film noir that’s filmed entirely through the character’s eyes. I wasn’t so much hallucinating at that point, but I thought it would be great to make a movie like this and add all the experiences I had today on mushrooms — telepathic perception, strange colors around people, the sense of floating.”

So, will Enter the Void, which has been picked up by IFC Films and is set to be released later this year, now generate armies of imitators, as Avatar surely will? Noe isn’t so sure. “This is mainly a big budget underground movie, and it could only have been made in Europe. If it wasn’t me, then maybe it would be Lars von Trier or somebody making it. But I don’t know how many people will try to do what we did. It was pretty exhausting.”

James Cameron Announces New Technology for 'Avatar' Sequels

From: http://fora.tv/


fora.tv — "We are going to be seeing the oceans of Pandora, and the ecosystems there. The only sweeping change between now, and when we release the second Avatar film. I want to author the film at a higher framerate... Movies are way behind, they are a century out of date!"

A Gallery of Good and Bad Avatar Na’vi Costumes

Published by Paul Tassi

From: http://unrealitymag.com/

Halloween is fast approaching, and there are going to be two pop culture costumes of choice this year for the trend followers. A) Snooki and B) Na’vi.

If you thought I was going to make a gallery of potential Snooki costumes for you to look at, think again.

So yes, what you see below are either prime examples, or cautionary tales of how you should or shouldn’t design your own Na’vi costume. And trust me, a store bought Avatar-getup is the worst thing you could do.

Check them all out below:

In case you want to rob a bank on the way to your party

You got a little troll in my Na’vi

A worthy adversary always helps

Your paint is cracking, but good effort

For those who just can’t choose between vampire and Na’vi

“Yo dude, let’s ride some dragons!”

This tribe is clearly starving

Trannytar

Derpatar

Massive amounts of photoshop works too

…because sometimes actual makeup looks creepy

Nice flip flops

Underwear? CHEATING! And that dude has some wicked varicose veins

Minimal effort award

Very nice!

“Yeah I got some candy for you little boy.”

I hear jumping around in trees is a good workout.

We have a winner…

The 10 Best 3-D Movies And What Hollywood Can Learn From Them

By Josh, Katey, and Eric

From: http://www.cinemablend.com/


In the wake of Avatar 3-D is the next big leap and Hollywood hasn't been shy about putting everything they have into the format. Summer's over but the next few months will see even more movies released in 3-D. You'd probably better get used to wearing those glasses. Next week Piranha 3D shows up with a campy approach to the format and a few weeks later in September Resident Evil: Afterlife will take a much more technologically serious approach as it becomes one of the few movies since Avatar to use James Cameron's 3D Fusion Camera system. After riding the wave of a summer box office loaded with 3-D conversions we've talked a lot about all the ways that 3-D's been going wrong, but maybe there's something to be learned by looking back at all the times 3-D went right.

Freed from the shackles of the mostly unsuccessful blue and red glasses 3-D which spared people to death, used properly and on the right movies, 3-D can and has added something to your viewing experience. Listen up Hollywood. Here's what it looks like when 3-D is done right.


Captain EO (1986)
When it debuted at Disney parks in the 80s Captain EO was regarded as the first 4-D film because it incorporated in-theater effects like laser lights along with the 3-D elements on screen. But really, it was just 3-D with lasers. Directed by Francis Ford Coppola, the short film starred Michael Jackson as the captain of a ragtag starship crew on a mission across the stars. The story was pretty silly, and since it starred Michael Jackson, prone to a lot of singing, but the movie's special effects were stunning. Coppola's groundbreaking 3-D camera tricks were so good that those 3-D effects still hold up pretty well today. In part that's because Disney went all out when making it. Captain EO cost, on average, $1.76 million per minute to make. For that money Disney parks got the first ever 3-D movie that actually really worked in 3-D. It was so well done that more than twenty years later Captain EO continues to show at Disney's parks around the world.


Jim Henson's Muppet*Vision 3-D (1991)
Captain EO got all the attention but Michael Jackson's weird, space adventure wasn't the only 3-D movie showing at Disney's parks in the 90s. If you were lucky, maybe at some point during a trip to Disney you've stumbled into a showing of Jim Henson's Muppet*Vision 3-D. The attraction first opened at Walt Disney World and Disneyland in 1991 and it takes 3-D beyond the screen. The presentation uses actual animatronic Muppets and other real special effects to heighten the impact of the 3-D elements in the movie. At some point while you're watching it becomes nearly impossible to distinguish between what's really there in the room with you and what's being projected, and since it's the Muppets, it's a lot of fun. Muppet*Vision 3-D was the last thing ever directed by the late, great, Jim Henson. If he'd stuck around longer, it's hard not to wonder what he'd have thought of the format now… or for that matter what brilliant new ways he'd have come up with to use it.


Ghosts of the Abyss (2003)
Back in 2003 people still thought of 3-D as red and blue lenses Elmer's glued into paper frames. 3-D was still the awful, clunky, unwatchable stuff of Jaws 3-D and audiences wanted no part of that. But quietly, behind the scenes, James Cameron was working to change everything. Before he shot Avatar he started testing a new kind of 3-D on a series of underwater documentaries. This Cameron directed film was the first Disney movie produced in 3-D and, if you were one of the few who made it to an IMAX theater to see it, it blew your mind. Sure a lot of the 3-D effects were wasted on pie charts, but oh what pie charts. Graphs are a lot more interesting when they're hovering of the head of the guy in front of you. Images leaped out of the screen with stunning clarity. As Cameron's robotic cameras dove into the wreck of the Titanic, it was easy to let yourself go and feel as though you were really there. It would be more than half a decade before Cameron perfected his 3-D technique, but he laid the groundwork here, quietly, and while no one was really looking.


Superman Returns: An IMAX 3-D Experience (2006)
When it was released in 2006 an alternate version of Superman Returns called Superman Returns: An IMAX 3-D Experience was released simultaneously in IMAX theaters. It was the first live-action Hollywood movie to get a combined IMAX 3-D release, though now its commonplace. Only 20 minutes of the film were actually converted into 3-D which resulted in the admittedly annoying process of taking your 3-D glasses on and off throughout the film… but oh what a 20 minutes. Superman's bright, sharp colors and director Bryan Singer's talent for stunning visual clarity made those 20 minutes of 3-D worth the trouble. Used primarily on action sequences, 3-D made the movie's biggest moments even bigger and grander. Combined with IMAX's unmatched picture and sound quality Superman Returns delivered an, at the time, unmatched of theater experience.


Meet the Robinsons (2007)
Meet the Robinsons was a turning point for Disney. The studio's second attempt at computer animation was also their first good one. They'd been struggling, their animated movies were no longer working, and then out of nowhere suddenly Meet the Robinsons did. It helped that they had a strong story rooted in the importance of family, but visually, I'm not sure the movie would have worked without 3-D. On its own Robinsons' animation looked dated and overly simplistic but when 3-D was used to add depth, suddenly the film's unexpectedly simple landscape design became deeper and more interesting. In applying 3-D to such basic computer animation Robinsons discovered something interesting: 3-D works best when you keep it simple.


Journey to the Center of the Earth (2008)
While most movies use 3-D only to enhance what they're doing, Journey to the Center of the Earth existed solely in the service of 3-D. It was made, from the beginning, with 3-D in mind and the entire film was crafted from stem to stern with audiences wearing funny glasses as the plan. That paid off in a big way in sheer entertainment value. While the movie's story was, admittedly, a shallow, paint by numbers modern version of Jules Vernes' classic tale, the film's visual elements were such a blast that most went in and didn't care. The movie took full advantage of both the gimmicks and subtler nuances 3-D offers to delight and amaze. Journey to the Center of the Earth was the rare 3-D movie that there was literally no point in watching without 3-D. Without your glasses on, without 3-D effects, there was no movie. Maybe they didn't always get the story right but Journey knew how to get the most out of 3-D.


My Bloody Valentine (2009)
Before Hollywood started trying to promote 3D that was "subtle" and "enhanced the world of the film," My Bloody Valentine used the technology the way it was always intended-- to scare the hell of an audience by throwing things at them. I can't even tell you how many times a pickax swung perilously out over the crowd, or how many bulging eyeballs or body parts came up for our close inspection-- and that's mostly because I had to cover my eyes in terror every time it happened. I have no idea why a cheapie horror movie like My Bloody Valentine managed to do live-action 3D better than something massive like The Last Airbender, but I'd never been so happy to see real humans in the third dimension-- and then, of course, to see those real humans chopped to bits.


Coraline (2009)
As we've seen with many of the 3-D films released this year, it's often difficult to get the proper level of depth required for a positive 3-D experience with a live action movie. Henry Selick's Coraline, on the other hand, has depth to spare. Both filmed in 3-D and animated using 3-D figures, the movie actually establishes an immersive world for the audience, something that 90% of 3-D films lack. Be it expanding a tunnel into an alternate world filled with button-eyed doubles or fighting against the evil Beldam in a gigantic spider-web, Coraline was a movie experience made for 3-D. Watching it that way is like stepping inside the film's magical, stop-motion world. In Henry Selick's clay-molding hands, Coraline's 3-D experience was supremely effective.


Monsters vs. Aliens (2009)
Monsters vs. Aliens was an endearingly goofy and over-the-top spin on the classic monsters movie, and how better to honor the B-movie roots than by showing the whole thing in glorious 3D? It wasn't just that it was better to have the various laser beams and monsters flying out of the screen at you, but that even the 3D was getting in on the fun, amping up the bright colors and crazy action so that you didn't have a choice but to jump in. As one of the first DreamWorks movies conceived in 3D, MvA's action sequences took great advantage of the format, sending Ginormica skating down the streets of San Francisco with cars as roller skates, and showing off every bit of alien weaponry in sharp 3D detail. Monsters vs. Aliens was too early in the 3D trend to take advantage of enough high ticket prices to earn itself a sequel, but it still represents one of the earliest and best examples of how animation can really work with the added dimension.


Avatar (2009)
James Cameron began developing Avatar in 1994 and much of the time between then and its 2009 release was spent developing the movie's groundbreaking 3-D effects. Live action elements were shot entirely on the 3-D Fusion Camera System and that worked. But much of the reason the film's 3-D succeeds is that 60% of the movie's scenes contain no live action elements and were done using photorealistic computer generated images created using a new kind of virtual camera system for motion capture. Under Cameron's direction 3-D is used to give the Pandoran jungles depth or to make seed pods float out over the heads of the audience, and at times what's happening on screen feels utterly real. Since its release Avatar has become the gold-standard in 3-D filmmaking, and if you're serious about making a 3-D movie, then you'll do it the Avatar way.

James Cameron's Personal Pandora

From: http://www.radaronline.com/

Pacific Coast News

Hollywood director James Cameron is the most successful director of all time with Avatar grossing over $1.292 billion and Titanic pulling in $1.242 billion at the box office so it makes sense that his Malibu spread is equally epic.

PHOTOS: See James Cameron's House Here

Cameron bought the six bedroom, seven bathroom, 8,272 sq ft property back in 1989 for a modest $3.475 million.

Wedded Bliss: Hollywood’s Most Married Celebs

He currently shares the property with his fifth wife actress Suzy Amis and their three children. The home boasts a tennis court, swimming pool, gourmet kitchen, interior garden and courtyard, guest house and an indoor cinema.

In late 2003, Cameron’s Archer Trust paid an undisclosed amount to buy the late actor George C. Scott’s 6,672-square-foot house right next door that he now uses mostly as a production facility for his staff and crew.

But with his bank balance bulging following the success of Avatar, Cameron could now easily afford to buy the whole gated community where his two homes currently sit.

The environmentalist has taken elaborate precautions to protect his properties from any Malibu brush fires this summer. He built his own pump house so that he can beat back any dangerous flames! He told New Yorker Magazine: “We have a big fire problem here- we take the pool water, mix it with Class A foam, and pump it out over the whole property. Everybody else just runs for the hills.”

And after previous wildfires got close to his homes in previous years Cameron admitted that he and his staff had run some emergency drills just in case.

He revealed: “We sit and wait. Put on our yellow coats and our breathing gear and wait. And, you know what? It’s impressive.

“When these hills light up with a hundred-foot-tall wall of flames coming over the top of the hill there, you feel like it’s Armageddon.”

The mega-wealthy director even has his own customized red Humvee platform fire truck parked in the driveway just in case!

Tiny Flying Lizard Discovered in Indonesia

A Reddit.com user by the name of Biophilia_curiosus posted a few photos that he took in Indonesia. They show an amazing species of gliding lizard which basically looks like a miniature dragon. Fans of the film Avatar will no doubt be reminded of the flying Toruks...

Photo: Biophilia_curiosus on Reddit

By Michael Graham Richard, Ottawa, Canada
on February 16, 2010

Biophilia_curiosus wrote: "The crazy part is that those lines you see running through the wings like veins are actually its ribs! Evolution did a number on these guys. They can expand and contract their chests at will to glide great distances. We were only able to catch females as they were laying their eggs. All we could do is watch as the males soared overhead."

Photo: Biophilia_curiosus on Reddit

By Michael Graham Richard

The photos were taken in Buton, Indonesia, in the Lambusango Forest reserve.

Photo: Biophilia_curiosus on Reddit

By Michael Graham Richard

As far as I can tell, nobody has identified the exact species of this lizard (yet). Biology geeks who recognize this specimen, please let us know what it is in the comments of this post.

Photo: Biophilia_curiosus on Reddit
By Michael Graham Richard

Original Post here: http://www.treehugger.com/

Avatar DVD Screener Leaks To BitTorrent

Written by Ernesto
From: http://torrentfreak.com/
 

A few hours after Avatar received nine nominations for the upcoming 2010 Oscars race, a DVD screener of the film leaked online. The leak, which presumably originates from a screener copy sent out to one of the Academy members, is expected to be downloaded by millions of people before the Oscars winners are announced.

Avatar has been an enormous success. The film has broken nearly all records at the box-office, and together with The Hurt Locker it was last night’s big winner raking in nine Academy Award nominations.

James Cameron and the rest of the Avatar crew probably cracked open a few bottles of Champagne to celebrate, but today they will wake up with a serious hangover.

Only a few days after the nominations were announced, a DVD screener of Avatar (2D) appeared online. Before today, only a lower quality Telesync copy of the film has been available on BitTorrent and other file-sharing networks.

Ironically, the DVD screener that is now widely available online most likely leaked through one of the Academy Awards voters.

There is no doubt that Avatar will also score big in the list of most downloaded movies this year. The Telesync copy of the film that has been available for over a month was already downloaded by more than two million people.

It is expected that the DVD leak will easily double or even triple these figures. Avatar has been among the most searched for keywords on nearly every torrent site for more than a month already.

Twentieth Century Fox has been extra careful with sending out the DVD-screener of Avatar, as more Academy members received it mid January, just a few days before they had to vote. Although this did delay the leak, it couldn’t be prevented.

How and if the DVD-screener will affect the box-office revenues is up for debate. The film has already grossed more than $2 billion worldwide, which is an absolute record despite the relatively high piracy rate. In fact, high piracy numbers are often an indicator of success at the box-office and vice versa.

Have you seen Avatar?

News Corp. in early talks for 'Avatar' sequel

Rupert Murdoch said company is 'pushing' for followup pic

By Georg Szalai

From: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com

"Avatar"

NEW YORK -- News Corp. is in very early talks with James Cameron about a possible "Avatar" sequel.

Asked about potential "Avatar" sequels, chairman and CEO Rupert Murdoch said on his quarterly earnings call Tuesday that the conglomerate is in "very early talks about it." Director James Cameron "has ideas" for a sequel, he said, adding: "We will be pushing for one."

But he cautioned analysts not to "hold your breath for an early one" in a possible reference to Cameron projects often taking a long time to come to fruition.

News Corp. deputy chairman, president and COO Chase Carey interjected that both sides want to make another movie. "We certainly both intend to have one," he said.

The executives said financing of a sequel like of any movies these days would be key as News Corp. likes to lay off risk, especially since Cameron films tend to go over budget. But given the success of "Avatar," financing details could come together.

Management also said 60% or more of the profit from "Avatar" will come in over the next two quarters, adding the firm will continue its theater run as the boxoffice goes well, with a DVD release also planned soon after the theatrical run. A DVD release date hasn't been announced so far.

Pushed further on details about the DVD plans for "Avatar," Murdoch said it will be released during his company's current fiscal year, which ends June 30. But he also highlighted that it won't be a 3D DVD release as that technology isn't developed enough yet. But Carey added there could be a 3D "Avatar" DVD release further "down the road" when the technology is ready.

[Editor's Note: An earlier version of this story incorrectly quoted Murdoch in the previous as saying to analysts not to "hold your breath for ANOTHER one." A review of his recorded comments reveal he said "early one."]

Top 4 'Avatar'-'Pocahontas' mash-up videos

Is "Avatar" just a thinly disguised remake of Disney's "Pocahontas"? Yes, say grassroots critics — and they've created videos to prove it

Film

"Avatar": A blue-tinted rehash of "Pocahontas"?
(20th Century Fox")

One of the many complaints about James Cameron's blockbuster film, "Avatar," is that its "derivative" plot ploddingly parallels that of 1995's Disney animated tale "Pocahontas." Though the similarities haven't dimmed "Avatar"'s box office — on track to beat Cameron's "Titanic," says BBC.com — they’ve provoked grassroots critics to "mash up" footage and audio from the two films to expose what they consider a shameless ripoff. Consider exhibits 1 through 4:

1. "Avatar" meets Disney: This spoof marries audio from 1995's "Pocahontas" with "Avatar" clips to make the case that the respective heros and heroines are interchangeable. By the time Vanessa Williams starts singing about blue moons and the irrelevancy of skin color (in "Colors of the Wind," the "Pocahontas" theme song) at 00:45, the two films seem to blur into one.



2. "Pocahontas" meets James Cameron: This mashup uses the reverses strategy — ambitiously syncing the "Avatar" trailer's audio with "Pocahontas" footage. Savvy viewers may notice that, at 1:28, Pocahontas begins "spouting" Sigourney Weaver's cynical "Avatar" dialogue, giving the effect that the sensitive Indian Maiden considers her lover an empty-headed himbo.



3. The alternative "Colors of the Wind" music video: Here, Vanessa William's Disney theme song becomes a musical backdrop to an "Avatar" dream date. Two large-nosed blue beings flirt, swoon, and soar about on the backs of pterodactyl-like creatures until it becomes clear that, of all the windy colors with which one can paint, blue is the most romantic.

4. "Pocahontas" recut as an "Avatar" action film: Similar to number 2 (above) but with a faster-paced, "Terminator" edge. In this version, the relatively chipper Disney tale turns menacing with help from James Horner's pounding "Avatar" soundtrack and Sigourney Weaver's voice ("let your mind go blank...") emerges not from Pocahontas, but from a sinister, anthromophized tree.



...............................................

'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows' coming in 3D!

By Carl DiOrio

From: http://www.heatvisionblog.com/

Warner Bros. will release the next two "Harry Potter" films in 3D, a move underscoring the post-"Avatar" rush for extra-dimensional boxoffice.

Studios executives on lots around town have been scrutinizing film slates for opportunities to expand forays into 3D releasing. Warners has been testing footage from its upcoming "Clash of the Titans" -- converted into 3D by an outside vendor -- and the tests have gone so well that execs have decided to release not only "Titans" but also the two-part "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" in 3D.

Warners refused to confirm the decisions Tuesday, but an announcement on "Titans" -- a co-production with Legendary Pictures -- is expected by week's end. Official word on the "Potter" pics also is awaited.

Conversion expenses have been coming down, so each film will cost just $5 million to change into 3D. Warners also will absorb an additional $5 million expense per pic to pay for 3D glasses for exhibitors handling the movies.

In a related move, Warners will push back the release of "Titans" one week to April 2. "Deathly Hallows: Part I" is set to unspool Nov. 19, and "Part II" is slotted for July 15, 2011.

The only previous "Potter" pic to dabble in 3D was last year's "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince," which included brief footage viewable in 3D in Imax venues. It was unclear whether "Potter" author J.K. Rowling had to OK the move into the third dimension.

As for the impact on boxoffice prospects for the final two "Potter" sequels, consider the more imminent situation with "Titans."

A remake of a 1981 film starring Laurence Olivier, "Titans" previously might have been expected to fetch no more than $200 million domestically, and even that was an aggressive projection. Released in 3D, Warners figures to reap well north of $200 million, with 2007's $211 million domestic grosser "300" considered a beatable benchmark.

"Titans" in 3D also is considered a safe bet to best the $245 million in foreign coin that Warners fetched with "300."

The "Titans" move is not without risk. The installed base of 3D movie screens has been growing rapidly, but it's not sufficient to release the film entirely in 3D.

That should be less of a concern by the time the next "Potter" hits multiplexes. But execs also are quietly confident of getting enough 3D playdates for "Titans."

"I would not think it would be an issue to establish ourselves in the 3D marketplace with 'Titans,' " a studio insider said. "By sliding it back a week, we should at least have enough screens in the major markets."

Warners should secure upward of 1,000 playdates for "Titans," which will unspool a week after Paramount bows DreamWorks Animation's spring tentpole "How to Train Your Dragon."

The "Titans" move might spur further reshuffling in the spring release calendar, as its new date makes for a fifth wide opener set for Easter weekend, which historically is a solid boxoffice session but hardly one to support that many big pics.

Other wide openers set for April 2 include Fox's "Diary of a Wimpy Kid," a likely PG-rated film adapted from a book series popular with middle-schoolers; Disney's PG-rated Miley Cyrus starrer "The Last Song," adapted from a Nicholas Sparks novel; Universal's futuristic action thriller "Repo Men," starring Jude Law and Forest Whitaker; and Lionsgate's latest Tyler Perry pic, "Why Did I Get Married Too?"

Meantime, the move of "Potter" into the extra dimension could prompt other high-profile moves. Could a 3D James Bond loom?

Warners' decision with its "Potter" franchise is likely at least to prompt 3D discussions between MGM and 007 producers. But unlike Warners' incremental move with the "Potter" franchise -- going with full-on 3D only after an initial foray into partial Imax 3D -- Lion execs would be starting at square one in talks on Bond.

Still, there is the siren call of those extra-dimensional dollars -- and other 3D currencies. In addition to lusting after "Avatar"-like boxoffice, industry execs have taken note of how well 3D pics play overseas.

Warners 3D horror pic "The Final Destination" overperformed internationally this summer, and Sony's 2D "Zombieland" did less than one-fourth as well overseas as domestically a few months later.

Perhaps by no coincidence, Sony might send "Spider-Man" into the third dimension with the webslinger's next pic.

Cameron Answers Critics Re: Smoking in ‘Avatar’

By Edmund Mullins

From: http://www.blackbookmag.com/

Avatar is taking on very special distinction for me. Of all the films I’ve never seen, it has, in a very short time, become the one that I seem to know the most about. There’ve been so many blogs, so many conversations and so many appurtenant behind-the-scenes stories, exposés and think-pieces that I almost feel like an expert. Now, two-plus weeks after its release, Avatar is still punishingly ubiquitous and the news keeps coming. The latest item concerns cigarette smoking. It seems that Sigourney Weaver’s character, an environmental scientist, is seen during the pic taking some loving drags on a cancer stick. No big deal, right? Well, it is if you’re part of anti-smoking watchdog group. The New York Times reported today that Stanton A. Glantz of the Smoke Free Movies Initiative announced he’d soon be mounting an informational campaign to counter what he perceives as the film’s pro-smoking message. Still worse, Scenesmoking.org, another group that monitors cigarette use in films, awarded the film its “black lung” rating. What does James Cameron think of all this? He very nicely and patiently calls bullshit.



In a statement given to the Times, Cameron defends himself as follows:
“I wanted Grace to be a character who is initially off-putting and even unpleasant. She’s rude, she swears, she drinks, she smokes. She is not meant to be an aspirational role model to teenagers, in fact our young protagonist, Jake, through whom we experience this story, finds her to be obnoxious at first. Also, from a character perspective, we were showing that Grace doesn’t care about her human body, only her avatar body, which again is a negative comment about people in our real world living too much in their avatars, meaning on-line and in videogames. In addition, speaking as an artist, I don’t believe in the dogmatic idea that no one in a movie should smoke. Movies should reflect reality. If it’s okay for people to lie, cheat, steal and kill in PG 13 movies, why impose an inconsistent morality when it comes to smoking?

I do agree that young role-model characters should not smoke in movies, especially in a way which suggests that it makes them cooler or more accepted by their peers. In the same way that I would never show lying, cheating, stealing, or killing as cool, or aspirational, I would never portray smoking that way. We need to embrace a more complex set of criteria than simply the knee jerk reaction “smoking is bad, therefore cannot be shown.” It should be a matter of character, context, and the nature of the portrayal. I think the people who are earnestly trying to do some good in this area would be more supported by the artistic community if they were less black and white in their thinking. Smoking is a filthy habit which I don’t support, and neither, I believe, does Avatar.”

Cameron’s argument is perfectly reasonable and sound, but I’m certain it won’t deter any of the afore-mentioned anti-smoking campaigners. Mr. Glantz likened the smoking scenes in Avatar to someone putting “a bunch of plutonium in the water supply.” This is an aggressively ridiculous assertion which neatly underscores the extremity of his views.  I’m almost sorry that Cameron felt obliged to answer back at all, as it suggests a willingness to be part of this trivial and trivializing conversation. He doesn’t owe the art police a thing, but now they’ll know he’s listening. That’s usually their cue to get louder.

A New 'Star Wars' Trilogy Directed by Spielberg and Coppola?

From: http://www.scifisquad.com/2009/10/22/is-george-lucas-planning-a-new-star-wars-trilogy/

Um ... probably not. But the folks over at Market Saw seem to believe that they've uncovered secret galactic plans to create a brand new big-screen Star Wars trilogy in 3D. However, they claim these films wouldn't be directed by George Lucas -- instead, he'd pass them off to other directors like Steven Spielberg or Francis Ford Coppola (who Market Saw claims their source mentioned directly as a potential candidate). Yeah, definitely let me know when Coppola decides to direct a Star Wars film so I can look out my window and watch all the pigs flying.

Almost immediately after this rumor hit, folks began to read between the lines. Market Saw, who've been the unofficial Avatar fansite for awhile now, continually mention in their piece that Avatar has to do well in theaters in order for this new Star Wars trilogy to happen since Lucas wants the films in 3D and needs more theaters to come equipped with 3D technology. As AICN points out, it seems like someone at Fox is spinning a marketing web by putting the thought in folks' heads that if they go see Avatar, they'll be helping to bring new Star Wars movies to life.

From MS: "How seriously should you consider these rumors? Well it is coming from a source that SHOULD KNOW. This source is absolutely connected. So odds are it is seriously being talked about at Lucasfilm. Right now. Will it happen? AVATAR will have to hit and hit big and then all the stars have to align properly - all I can do is pass on the info."

AICN contacted Lucasfilm who of course denied that any new trilogy was being worked on. They also denied that the original Star Wars films were being converted to 3D, though we already know (and Lucas has said it himself) that he wants to transfer the original trilogy to 3D and re-launch those in theaters. Friends of mine have already seen test footage of the opening ofA New Hope in 3D and say it's amazing, so that I believe to be true.

And, yeah, I could see folks at Lucasfilm eying Avatar closely to see if it's worth investing all that time, money and energy into the conversion if there aren't enough theaters to house the films. So, a brand new trilogy? No, I don't think so. But I do agree that in a lot of ways Avatar holds the key to the future of 3D on the big screen. If it's a huge success, the theater industry will have to embrace the new technology, and you'll see folks like Lucas and Spielberg and Peter Jackson going back through their films and converting them to 3D.

What would you rather see: a new Star Wars trilogy or the original trilogy re-released in 3D?

A Different Side Of Avatar Captured In Amazing Photos

life.com — Before unveiling the 3-D sci-fi epic to an intensely curious audience at the December 10 world premiere, director James Cameron and actors Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana, and Sigourney Weaver zipped around Paris, Berlin, Moscow, and London on a dizzying promotional tour. LIFE.com photographer Jeff Vespa was along...

Box Office Report: 'Avatar' is No. 1 again, soars past $1 billion worldwide

by Adam B. Vary

from: http://hollywoodinsider.ew.com/

Thanks to astronomic word-of-mouth, inflated 3-D ticket prices, and consecutive holiday weekends that began on a Friday, Avatar continued its seemingly unstoppable climb to the Hallelujah Mountains of U.S. and global box office. According to estimates from Hollywood.com Box Office, James Cameron’s sci-fi opus grossed $68.3 million over New Years weekend, a tiny 10 percent drop from Christmas weekend for a $352.1 million domestic total — easily the biggest third weekend in the U.S. ever (2002’s Spider-Man had held the record with $45 million). Much more impressively, in just 17 days, Avatar has surpassed $1 billion in global box office. To put that in perspective, it took The Dark Knight pretty much its entire theatrical run just to make it to that milestone. (Another landmark: $66.4 million of Avatar’s worldwide total is from IMAX theaters, a record for the mega-screen format.)

Avatar wasn’t the only film to ring in the new year with serious box-office bounty, either. Sherlock Holmes sleuthed out an elementary $38.4 million for second place, a 41 percent drop for $140 million total. Hot on its heels, Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel chirped to $36.6 million, dropping just 25 percent for $157 million total and third place. (So what will the inevitable third film be called? The Second Squeakquel? The Threakquel?) It’s Complicated fell a bite-sized 15 percent, cooking up $18.7 million for fourth place and $59.1 million total. And in fifth place, The Blind Side actually improved upon its total last week, rising 8 percent for $12.7 million and $209.1 million total. (As EW noted yesterday, this means star Sandra Bullock is the only actress ever to have a film marketed on her star power alone pass $200 million in U.S. box office.)

In fact, with no major debuts to steal away fresh audiences, it was simply a fabulous weekend to be in movie theaters, period. Up in the Air pitched down an imperceptible 3 percent with $11.3 million and $45 million total. The Princess and the Frog hopped up 11 percent with $10 million and $86 million total. Even certified turkey Did You Hear About the Morgans? was up 4 percent, bringing in $5.2 million for a (still woeful) $25.6 million total.

Overall, the top ten box office was up 70 percent from last year, when Marley and Me was barking its way into filmgoers’ hearts.

Image credit: WETA

Is blue the new black? Why some people think Avatar is racist

By: Mark Mardell |

From: http://www.bbc.co.uk/

****Spoilers Alert****

 

I am back after the holidays. Christmas day was bracketed by breaking news on health care on Christmas Eve and the underpants bomber on Boxing Day, but for the last few days I have been enjoying some time with the family.

One of the best things we did was see Avatar. Stupendous. Exhilarating. Extraordinary. I never thought 3D could work. The technology is stunning. I admit I am something of a science fiction buff, but I think most people are going to be blown away by this film. Predictably, columnists who live to attack whatever is successful and put the counter-intuitive point of view are having a field day.

But the criticism that has intrigued me is the charge that the film is racist.

I have tried in writing this not to blow the plot, but inevitably there are some spoilers. For those who don't know already, the story centres on a conflict between greedy corporate human invaders and the planet's inhabitants, 10-foot tall, blue-skinned people with rather feline features and tails. One of many such blogs argues that "Avatar is a fantasy about ceasing to be white, giving up the old human meatsack to join the blue people, but never losing white privilege."

With a certain accuracy critics have pointed out that all the "human" characters are played by white actors and all the blue, cat-like Na'vi are played by non-whites. With a degree of American insularity they also say that because they use bows and arrows and wear feathers they are "really" native Americans. This ignores tribal indigenous people from New Guinea to Brazil, so deliberately misses a wider point.

The debate in the US is conditioned by the long-running argument among sci-fi writers and fans about the "magical negro". It is a term coined by black critics who noted white authors often featured non-white characters possessed of a certain sort of natural wisdom, mystic powers, who play sidekick to the white hero and often sacrifice themselves for the central character. They are a variant on the much-older ideal of the "noble savage".

If I have understood correctly, the critics say this is demeaning because the character, who need not actually be black, but native American or some other ethnic group, acts only to help the whites central to the story, and isn't part of a racial group, doesn't have a back story, or a fully developed character but is essentially a plot device. I'd note that American fiction has quite often featured a "magic janitor" and I think the key is what the author perceives on a very basic level as otherness as much as race.

The term surfaced in the political arena during the last presidential elections when in the LA times David Ehrenstein suggested Barack Obama was a magical negro: "Like a comic-book superhero, Obama is there to help, out of the sheer goodness of a heart we need not know or understand. For as with all Magic Negroes, the less real he seems, the more desirable he becomes."

It is a thoughtful article, disturbing for its unspoken assumption that Obama is a self-constructed stereotype, not a real person and that "authentic" black people behave in a certain way.

In any case the term was gleefully taken up by Obama's opponents and set to the tune of Puff the Magic Dragon. You might guess their purpose was not to advance post-structuralist criticism but to earn the licence to repeat the naughty word "negro" and make fun of the candidate.

Thank the powers, of whatever race, that no-one has suggested that any character in Avatar is "really" the president. Although I thought I spotted Donald Rumsfeld on the big screen. The criticism of Avatar is an extension of the "magical Negro" idea. Indeed at one level it is an inversion of it: "the magical Caucasian" who turns out to be an even nobler savage than the common and garden, bred-to-it variety. Tarzan, Lord of Greystokes, Lord of the Jungle has to be top of the tree in this game. The central complaint is that in Avatar it takes a white hero to lead the natives.

This seems to miss two points. The first is simply about the way narrative works. The critics' version of the film would be very dull. Bad people land on planet. Good people defeat them - virtuous but not much of a story arc. An emotional journey, learning and changing are better narrative. Raising age-old questions about whether it is better to be true to your values and your friends rather than your country (species) is more thought-provoking than most Hollywood blockbusters manage.

My second objection is more profound. I strongly believe the racial divide has been the driving force in American history, and continues to play a huge, and often under-discussed role in its politics. I am not one to underestimate its power.

But that doesn't mean everything is about that debate. One of the reasons I like sci-fi, apart from the escapism, is the way it explores political ideas, old and new. The film is actually a rather old-fashioned, liberal, morality tale. As in many futures imagined by authors over the last several decades the company has replaced the state as the agent of colonialism and greedy conquest. Then there is the mainstay of Hollywood morality, the underdog mounting a ferocious fight-back. Added to the mix is a healthy dose of new age Gaia-ism (Pandoraism?). The idea of weaker opponents fighting back against a military force with an apparently overwhelming technological superiority, aided by the enemy within, surely echoes not only Vietnam but conflicts much closer to us in time and space. Perhaps it is easier for American critics to think it is about race.

Oddly enough I read a rather subtler take on the idea of technology versus nature just a few days after seeing the film. My wife bought me Peter F Hamilton's Fallen Dragon for Christmas. It is much more compact and better written than his past sprawling space operas but equally packed with ideas. One chapter sees the company's military defeated in a way very familiar to viewers of Avatar. The twist is, the planetary defenders of Santa Chico are not aboriginal but come from elsewhere, post-humans genetically mutated into a state of harmony with the local flora and fauna, which are themselves itself genetically uplifted into a state of scientifically ennobled post savagery. The natives are originally from California. I always thought the West Coast was magic.

Five Reasons Avatar Still Won’t Win Best Picture

I hate to post this article, after seeing the movie last night in IMAX 3D. Which i have to say deserves best picture. I agree if Lane Brown.

• By: Lane Brown
• From: http://nymag.com/

Photo: Courtesy of Fox

We go on vacation for a few measly days, and look what happens: James Cameron's ecstatically reviewed, box-office-conquering Avatar is suddenly, improbably, the front-runner in this year's Best Picture race. Far be it from us to tell the HMFIC what he can and can't do, but we still don't see the King of the World reigning on another Oscar night. After the jump, we count down the five biggest reasons why Avatar can't win the Academy's top award (or at least the five reasons we'll be surprised when Cameron swaggers up to the Oscar podium, spikes his award, and tells his haters to suck it in Na'vi).

1. The Special Effects.
When it was released in 1997, Titanic, too, had CGI impressive enough to distract from Cameron's tin-eared dialogue — but the film's clear focus was its sweeping, tragic, human-based love story (not that this helped Cameron get a nomination for his screenplay, of course). Avatar's script is serviceable, we guess, but have you heard a single person raving about anything but the movie's special effects? We have not.

2. The Academy: still snobby.
While it may be true that only whiny snobs are still complaining about Avatar's extravisual shortcomings, it's worth noting that the Academy's current membership is comprised primarily of whiny snobs. Remember last year, when they snubbed The Dark Knight in favor of The Reader? Or the year before that, in which the cumulative gross of the five Best Picture nominees was approximately half of what it costs to see Avatar in IMAX? Not since 2003's The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King have popcorn-allergic Oscar voters rewarded anything crowd-pleasing and blockbusting in the top category.

3. Screeners.
Another thing Academy members are snobby about is sharing recirculated movie-theater air with mouth-breathing non-Oscar-voting plebeians. Studios interested in winning awards generally have to furnish agoraphobic, non-theater-visiting voters with DVD copies of their movies — standard-definition, 2-D DVDs obviously incapable of showcasing the three-dimensional, IMAX-def glory that is Avatar.

4. Oscar still hates science fiction.
Like comedy, animation, and movies featuring brown people, science fiction has historically been ignored by the Academy Awards. No space-based movie has ever won Best Picture, and none have been nominated since E.T. in 1982 (it lost to Gandhi, which featured not a single alien).

5. Actors.
One argument for Avatar's Best Picture chances is that 3-D movies (and higher ticket prices) are the film industry's current best hope for longevity, and that the Academy might cast a vote for its own survival. Fat chance, we say: The organization's biggest contingent, by far, is actors, the very same people replaced by blue pixels on James Cameron's computer-generated, thespian-free Pandora. Sure, one could correctly argue that Avatar features the motion-captured performances of real human beings, but just try explaining that to technophobic ballot-wielding elderlies like Mickey Rooney and Dame Judi Dench.

How 3-D Movie Projection Works

Wired Explains:

• By Brian X. Chen
• From http://www.wired.com/
  

Every few years you’ve probably watched a mainstream movie through a pair of glasses that make creatures, people and explosions pop out of the screen. And if you’ve bought into the massive hype, you were probably lining up this past weekend for James Cameron’s Avatar, which is screening in 3-D.

You might wonder, why can’t more movies be shown in 3-D? It would just take some post-production video rendering and a pair of stereoscopic glasses, right?

Actually, 3-D projection is a lot more complicated — and expensive — than one would think. In anticipation of Avatar, Wired.com paid a visit to Dolby Laboratories in San Francisco to learn about the history of 3-D movie technology leading up to its current state.

Remember those junky glasses, with a blue lens for one eye and a red one for the other? They were tied to a 3-D-imaging method called anaglyph that dates back to the 1950s. With this system, the images on the screen were projected with two color layers superimposed onto one another. When you put on the glasses, each eye sees a separate visual, the red-tinted image through one eye and the blue-tinted one through the other. Your visual cortex combines the views to create the representation of 3-D objects.

Though it may have been impressive at the time, early anaglyph imaging suffered from many issues. The color separation on film was very limited, and thus it was difficult to perceive details in 3-D scenes. Another frequent problem was ghosting, which happened when the image that should be appearing in your left eye would creep over to the right.

And then there’s the screen. Theaters projecting 3-D movies with the anaglyph method had to install silver screens for an ideal viewing experience. That’s because the more reflective screen helped keep the two different light signals separated.

3-D movie technology has come a long way. Anaglyph imaging has improved: Glasses now are typically red and cyan, which, when combined, can make use of all three primary colors, resulting in more realistic color perception.

RealD cinema, currently the most widely used 3-D movie system in theaters, uses circular polarization — produced by a filter in front of the projector — to beam the film onto a silver screen. The filter converts linearly polarized light into circularly polarized light by slowing down one component of the electric field. When the vertical and horizontal parts of the picture are projected onto the silver screen, the filter slows down the vertical component. This effectively makes the light appear to rotate, and it allows you to more naturally move your head without losing perception of the 3-D image. Circular polarization also eliminates the need for two projectors shooting out images in separate colors. The silver screen, in this case, helps preserve the polarization of the image.

Dolby’s 3-D system, used for some Avatar screenings, is a little different. It makes use of an exclusive filtration wheel (above) installed inside the projector in front of a 6.5-kilowatt bulb. The wheel is divided into two parts, each one filtering the projector light into different wavelengths for red, green and blue. The wheel spins rapidly — about three times per frame — so it doesn’t produce a seizure-inducing effect. The glasses that you wear contain passive lenses that only allow light waves aligned in a certain direction to pass through, separating the red, green and blue wavelengths for each eye.

The advantages of Dolby’s 3-D system? There’s no need for a silver screen, thanks to the built-in color-separation wheel and the powerful bulb right next to it, ensuring a bright picture necessary for 3-D viewing. Also, a mechanism can be adjusted inside the projector to change the projection method from reflection to refraction — meaning theaters can switch between projecting regular movies and 3-D movies.

The cons? The glasses are pricey: $27 apiece, so they’re designed to be washed and reused (as opposed to recycled). (Although, this would be considered a pro for the environment.) Altogether, a Dolby 3-D projection system costs theaters about $26,500, not including the eyewear.

Updated 9 a.m. PDT with more details explaining circular polarization.

See Also:

• April 8, 1953: Hollywood Finally Catches 3-D Fever

Photos: Jon Snyder/Wired.com, Brian X. Chen/Wired.com