Since I am more of a Korra fan then I can wait it out especially if the Korrasami couple does hold out for the entirety of the film. Needless to say, I have always been a Makorra supporter:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/entertainment ... d1a2db1506

El Squibbonator wrote:So, Lightyear hasn't been doing too hot. It's brought in $85 million in its worldwide opening weekend, which compared with its $200 million budget isn't very much. One of the reasons I've seen suggested for this is that Pixar spent the last few years releasing its movie exclusively on Disney+, to the point that the demand for them in theaters became muted.

But what's the fallout from this for Pixar? Even in the best-case scenario-- that Lightyear does well overseas and barely manages to double its budget-- it'll still be considered disappointing. Will we then see Pixar movies relegated exclusively to Disney+? Or will they continue to be released to theaters, but with lower budgets than before? Pixar's next movie, Elemental, is tentatively scheduled for a theatrical release in June 2023, but that could easily change.

It's definitely a strange tactic. I certainly enjoyed Toy story movies in the cinema rather than streaming. I think they expected it to do well as it is part of the Toy Story franchise. However, if you take out Randy Newman, Woody and upgrade it with far-out animation, it will be a very different experience.

Gus Hanson wrote:Since I am more of a Korra fan then I can wait it out especially if the Korrasami couple does hold out for the entirety of the film. Needless to say, I have always been a Makorra supporter:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/entertainment ... d1a2db1506

I'm curious about those movies. If the content in them is similar to what was in Legend of Korra and the Rise of Kyoshi books, then we might well be looking at a PG-13 rating for them. But animated movies rated higher than PG don't exactly have a stellar track record at the American box-office, especially if they aren't comedies. Are there really enough Avatar fans out there to make such a movie successful?

I'm also curious about why they're happening now, instead of in, say, 2010.

Yes, I know there was the awful live-action movie, and Legend of Korra, but neither of those really felt like a long-term commitment to turning Avatar into a franchise along the lines of, say, Star Wars. Why didn't Nickelodeon strike when the iron was hot, and try to make Avatar into a large multi-media franchise right off the bat instead of sitting on the property for fifteen years?

If they'd done that, we could have gotten these movies a decade ago. I can't help but feel that Nickelodeon has been rather slow on the uptake regarding Avatar's potential as a franchise.

Don't know really. Maybe they felt since the James Cameron franchise of the same name was getting it's first sequel closer and closer to coming out this year and the new technology used for the underwater sequences *Kate Winslet who played Rose in Titanic broke Tom Cruise's record by scoring a record seven minutes* could definitely impact the other's future that they decided to immediately jump on the franchise bandwagon.

Sigourney Weaver will be back for Avatar The Way of Water but not as Grace Augustine, instead playing Jake and Neytiri's adopted daughter:
https://www.empireonline.com/movies/new ... exclusive/

First trailer for Clerks III:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8VmfYyJ_d4

*sighs* As mood lifting as this may be, what I really wanted Will to do in terms of sequels would be for him return to Independence Day. Fast and Furious movies have many characters who have faked their deaths so why not the Fresh Prince?
https://www.bing.com/search?q=will+smit ... 01&PC=U531

I think Independence Day was too much of its era for a sequel to work. It was just 1996 in movie form, you can't recapture that.

Agreed. I want to say Lindsey Ellis did a video essay on this, but I can't find it right now. The thing about Independence Day is that it's an alien invasion/disaster movie with no underlying political message, which is something you could only really get from a period of American history when we thought we'd "fixed everything" from a geopolitical perspective. The aliens don't stand in for any particular foreign menace, the way alien invaders in movies usually do-- they're just there. If it had come out in the 80s, they'd be the Soviet Union. And if it had come out in the 2000s, they'd be Middle Eastern terrorists. So the reason the sequel to Independence Day underperformed (though despite what a lot of sources say, it still broke even) is that the political climate just doesn't allow for movies like Independence Day anymore.