LATEST NEWS
Cameron Confirms 'Avatar' Sequel is Not Ready Until at Least 2015
by Ethan Anderton
July 30, 2012
Source: New York Times
Though we know James Cameron has immersed himself in work on the follow-up to Avatar in 2009, the sequels (there might even be three of them when all is said and done) aren't so easy to get off the ground, despite the knowledge gained from making the first one. Producer Jon Landau was very aware of this fact back in April when he said it would be difficult to meet Fox's projected 2014 release date for the first sequel, and now James Cameron has finally spoken out on that very fact confirming to the New York Times that Avatar 2 will not be ready until 2015 at the earliest, and that's not even a guaranteed promise now.
The most recent buzz on the film came from Sigourney Weaver saying that he might shoot all three of the sequels (a third one hasn't been ruled out by Cameron in this recent interview) back to back. However, he's not sticking around Hollywood this time. Taking a page out of Peter Jackson's book, Cameron is relocating to New Zealand where he's just bought a huge chunk of land near Lake Pounui, and he's already anxious to strap on some scuba gear and head underwater for some inspiration on the sequel which has been said to focus on the sea life of Pandora, though no details have been revealed just yet.
In addition, Cameron will be utilizing New Zealand's Kiwi locals for his crew and is said to almost certainly be shooting the sequels in Jackson's Wellington production studio with Weta Digital doing visual effects on the film. Cameron says there's something special about how the people of New Zealand hunger to work on more films, "They aren’t the sort of third-generation people you find working on soundstages in a very jaded Los Angeles." But don't worry, Tinseltown, because Cameron is still shooting motion-capture footage on a soundstage in California. Three years is a long time to wait for fans who have already waited that long for a sequel, but we're hoping it's worth it, and allows for a more original, less derivative story.
27 Comments
1
I'm a huge Cameron fanboy so I'm undoubtedly excited for the sequels to Avatar, but I find myself less than enthralled with the idea of watching Sam Worthington play Jake Sully again. Maybe it will be better now that his body is gone and he's a Navi, but I just don't care for him as an actor and his roles since Avatar have proven my point. He's definitely no Arnold or Weaver, and I just hope him and his fellow actor (who also fell into obscurity following Avatar), Zoe Saldana, can elevate their performances a bit and show us why they're worthy to carry a Cameron franchise.
Matt Peloquin on Jul 30, 2012
2
As much as i would like to see a part 2 or 3, no one really cares at the moment. Make BATTLE ANGEL DAMMIT!!!!!!!!!
REAL6 on Jul 30, 2012
3
I could give a damn about ANOTHER sci-fi/action movie with a female lead....the sort of 'ass kicking chicks' sub-genre has been done to death...Cameron is one of my favorite filmmakers, and I don't want to see him dabble in that genre.
Chris Groves on Jul 30, 2012
4
You make it sound like the notion of the female action heroine is just a novelty or fad that has now been "done", and should therefore go away. Sorry, but it isn't, shouldn't and won't. Look at how many action films are released per year and then look at the tiny fraction of those that have LEAD characters that are women. It should not be the case that men are always the default, when it comes to action films. But until women are given more equal representation, too many people (like you) will continue to believe that they are.
crystaltowers on Jul 30, 2012
5
I just think it's rare that it is done well. There are plenty of action movies with crappy male leads too...More often then not, when it's a female lead it just isn't done right. Cameron I'm sure would be more than capable of doing it right, he did in in Aliens just fine...but it often comes off as hoaky. I'm not going to lie and act like crappy action movies with female leads are better just for having female leads. When it's done well it's done well, and when it isn't, it isn't...most of the time it isn't.
Chris Groves on Jul 30, 2012
6
I actually completely agree with you there. But that's why I think we need far more female action heroines on screen, in films. The more we have - both good and bad - the more chance there is that a few will be truly memorable. That's the luxury that male action stars have. Release 100 films featuring male action heroes in the lead role, and there's a good chance 2 or 3 will be classics that everyone remembers (while the rest are forgotten). But release just 10 films featuring female action heroines in the lead role, and there's a very good chance none of them will be classics (and so, the whole concept looks bad). Like you, I really hope we get another Ripley someday, and Cameron is one of the few directors that has truly treated female action characters in the right way.
crystaltowers on Jul 30, 2012
7
Very excellent points. I'm sur if Cameron did ever get to Battle Angel, it would be just a good as his other films...just as far as personal preference goes, I'm not interested in that adaptation.
Chris Groves on Aug 1, 2012
8
Shocker!
DAVIDPD on Jul 30, 2012
9
Time has not been kind to Avatar. Does anyone even want a sequel anymore?
germss on Jul 30, 2012
10
Care to explain? Avatar is still probably the best live action 3D movie ever made so I'm guessing you just don't like the movie. It will stand the test of time just fine. The blu-ray is exquisite and will be a reference disc for picture quality for years and years to come. As for the sequels, count on them going right by TDKR and The Avengers at the box office and challenging if not exceeding the original at the box office. So, ya, almost EVERYONE cares.
racquetman on Jul 30, 2012
11
I liked the movie alright. It was one of the best examples of what 3D can do for a movie. I just don't see many people chomping at the bit for another Avatar movie. Once you get past the visuals, story wise it just doesn't have the foundation that could make it a classic. I still watch the first two Terminators. I think they're fantastic and if James Cameron came out and said he's making another Terminator I'd (and a lot of other people) would be super excited. Avatar just doesn't have that level of fandom. I'm sure people will go see it, but Cameron could sell a 3D movie about a dog eating his own shit and it would break B.O. records. I don't want to make it sound like if you enjoy Avatar you're an idiot, because I like the movie; but I like it less and less each year.
germss on Jul 30, 2012
12
I'm not sure why people don't get Avatar. It is simply Cameron's dialog on the environmental indifference of governments and corporations. He's trying to make you care about (or at least get you to think about) native cultures and mother nature. It is not supposed to be some classic never before told story. It was a non-subtle slap in the face about how humans destroy everything for the sake of profit. He could have just as easily made a documentary, but this was much smarter. He created a fictional world with gorgeous visuals to draw people in. Maybe a few million would have watched a documentary. We all know how many people saw Avatar. Avatar was much more than just some mindless blockbuster telling some ridiculous story to entertain the masses. Those movies are everywhere. Avatar has plenty of fandom. It just isn't that loud, childish, ignorant fandom that accompanies movies like The Avengers or the Batman trilogy. Fans of Avatar are older, level headed people who aren't going to go onto forums and make a ton of noise. They'll simply show up at the theater when the sequels arrive.
racquetman on Jul 30, 2012
13
I'm a big fan of yours as of right now 😉 and that isn't sarcasm.
rocky728 on Jul 31, 2012
14
It's just a pretty technical demo (as you stated). However the story is thin and trite and the dialogue poor. I weep for the future if Avatar is considered the height of cinematic excellence.
rennmaxbeta on Jul 31, 2012
15
Read my comment below. There is nothing "thin" about the story. The masses wouldn't have gotten the point if he made it complex and subtle. He is simply asking people to take a look at the world around them and how it is treated by governments and corporations (profit over all else). He doesn't have to do this again with the sequels - he already made his point in that regard. Look for something totally different from the sequels. Why are some of you so threatened by Avatar? You seem to think that ticket sales equate to movie excellence. No one with any intelligence is going to mistake The Avengers or Transformers or Avatar as TDKR as some of the greatest movies in history just because they made billions of dollars. Avatar is, however, absolutely the height of cinematic excellence in every regard EXCEPT for the story. Whether you like the story or not is completely subjective.
racquetman on Jul 31, 2012
16
no one like that anymore my friend!
jim on Jul 31, 2012
17
Let's wait till 2015 to say anymore about Avatar.
mooreworthy on Jul 30, 2012
18
Anyone who doesn't recognize the first film as a milestone of cinema is naive...I'm sorry, but they are. The effects are above and beyond movies that even came out THIS summer, the score is a perfect fit, the cinematography and visuals are great, and Cameron directs action better than Bay or even Nolan. I love The Avengers and the Dark Knight trilogy...but Avatar was a rare blockbuster with a heart and soul and something to say about the world we live in. The amount of people who went to see it over and over and the awards it won are a testament of it's quality.
Chris Groves on Jul 30, 2012
19
+1 for this. Well said.
crystaltowers on Jul 30, 2012
21
So it looks great and sounds great... I don't hear a lot of praise for the dull story and characters. It was an over-hyped amusement park ride.
rennmaxbeta on Jul 31, 2012
22
I can't think of a film in recent history that's had quite as much pointless, parroted criticism as Avatar. I just don't get it. The film has very solid characters, an exciting story, and excellent pacing. But "career haters" claim it has nothing going for it besides the visuals. Avatar is, quite simply, a victim of its own success. If it had been a barely-known sci-fi also-ran like "Serenity" and directed by Whedon, it would have almost no hate base at all.
crystaltowers on Jul 31, 2012
24
+2
rocky728 on Jul 31, 2012
25
Back in '09 I was never interested to see this movie. It wasn't until around April of 2010 that my class showed it and I was surprised by it. Not by the graphics, but by the story. It was good, solid plot wit a heart warming story. As much as I was mesmerized by the graphics, I didn't jeezed my pants over them like everyone at the Academy. Yes they were good, and very well detailed and looked very astonishing and real, but what people don't get is that it seemed real because most of it was computer generated instead of adding the CGI to a real set or world like the Transformers trilogy or The Avengers. That's why some parts really looked real, perhaps even better than some of The Avengers' which was done a2 years later.
Faceman on Jul 30, 2012
26
Who cares about that?
Jim on Jul 31, 2012
27
any more interest about life of ugly blue creatures?
Jim on Jul 31, 2012
New comments are no longer allowed on this post.
FEATURED POSTS
FOLLOW FS HERE
Follow Alex's main account on Twitter:
Add our posts to your Feedly › click here
Get all the news sent on Telegram 
LATEST TO WATCH