Do we really need a movie that has to earn $2 billion to break even?
This could be the “Chinese Democracy” for James Cameron.
Do we really need a movie that has to earn $2 billion to break even?
This could be the “Chinese Democracy” for James Cameron.
destroyerofharmony 
“Need”? No. “Want”? HELL YES! Can’t wait to see the next chapter of Pandora, and James Cameron’s technological innovations.
I’ll watch it to see what the underwater sequences look like as they had to create new tech for that.
I would need to revisit the first one again (as I brush of the dust on the DVD) to re-familiarize myself with the story.
Im still not sure why so much money would be thrown at just one movie. I get it that the returns could be massive but ….
I think it’s largely the tech that they had to develop, plus filming underwater automatically multiplies the costs involved. You know Cameron and his water! He loves that stuff. Lol
I recently rewatched the original and remembered what I liked best about it: the 3D! Lol. No movie since has had the same impact and that is what I’m looking forward to most.
I only want to see if for the technology.
I think that’s most people.
The first one about put me to sleep, I’ll most likely skip this one.
That’s the thing about this movie. A lot of people that I know checked it out to see what the fuss was about especially around 3D.
But they didn’t like it enough to watch a sequel. But the movie studios see the sales and believe that every single one of those movie goers is a fan.