Is James Cameron’s all-digital Avatar sequel really what audiences want?

Writer, reviewer, director location scout and script assessor, as well as editor of the NZ Screen Industry Guild’s magazine, NZTECHO.

Afew weeks before Christmas 2019, I got an unexpected present. An editor phoned to ask if my US visa was current (NB, it still is...) and whether I had a few days free in the coming week. As a feckless freelancer, you learn to say ‘‘yes’’ immediately, and worry about the details after.

Four days later, I was in Orlando, Florida, writing a few pieces about Disney World and the new Star Wars ride in particular. Yeah, I know, life is hell.

Rise of the Resistance was a blast. But what really blew me away in Orlando, apart from the – real – baby alligators on the path back to my hotel room, was the Avatar ride Flight of Passage.

The elements were simple enough – a hydraulic ‘‘saddle’’, a headset, a spray of scented water and a mind-blowing 3D visual presentation from Po¯ neke’s

own We¯ ta¯ FX – but combined, the effect was beautiful, thrilling and strangely moving. I didn’t quite shed a tear after the ride, but I saw plenty of adults who did.

Seriously, if you ever get the chance, Avatar: Flight of Passage is an unforgettable trip.

So, count me as a fan of Avatar. I liked the film when I saw it on opening night, in 3D at Wellington’s unlamented Reading Cinema. And I was definitely curious to see the preview for the long-awaited second film – The Way of Water – at a screening last week. And, now that I have, I have questions.

In the 13 years since Avatar, we have got used to ‘‘performance capture’’ – live actors, enhanced by animation – in films. The technology has played a part in movies that have become box-office behemoths. The Marvel and DC franchises are impossible to imagine without some performance capture-based characters. But hardly any films since 2009 have gone the full ’Tar, with performance capture used for almost all of the main speaking roles. Cats, anyone?

Audience’s evolve and we outgrow special effects. The stop-motion animation and optical effects of Willis O’Brien (King Kong) and Ray Harryhausen (Jason and the Argonauts) could make an audience scream from the 1930s to the 1970s, but they were absorbed and superseded by post-production and digital effects. For the past 20 years or so, digital has been all-conquering. But only a fool could miss that the pendulum has been swinging back.

Guillermo Del Toro (The Shape of Water), Denis Villeneuve (Dune, Blade Runner 2049) and a host of others have been leading a charge to a style in which everything that can be done physically or ‘‘incamera’’, is done that way. Digital effects are then only used for the shots and effects that can’t be achieved physically. The old-fashioned magic of miniatures, prosthetics and model makers is back with a vengeance.

The only thing I know for sure, is the only part of a film that doesn’t age, is a great script. If the writing is strong enough, you can make your film with puppets – and it will last a generation. But, if the script isn’t right, then all the technology in the world won’t save it.

I guess, come December, we’ll find out.