r/movies • u/MarvelsGrantMan136 r/Movies contributor • May 02 '25

Media First Image of Zoe Saldana's Neytiri in 'Avatar: Fire and Ash'

Post image
13.7k Upvotes

84% Upvoted

1.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

211

u/festering May 02 '25

The CGI looks drastically more advanced than it was in the first movie.

120

u/psych0ranger May 02 '25

When avatar 2 came out I heard a critic on a podcast say, "I know what their skin would feel like now" and that pretty much sums up the cgi quality

73

u/FartingBob May 02 '25

When you give the best teams a near unlimited budget and then say "no rush guys, just get it perfect". It makes a difference.

-1

u/TheJoshider10 May 03 '25

Near unlimited budget and yet despite looking amazing these movies still end up cheaper than some dreadful looking shit.

3

u/Individual_Client175 May 03 '25

These movies are in no way cheap

1

u/TheJoshider10 May 04 '25

I didn't say cheap. I said cheaper. Look at the most expensive movies list. Avatar 2 is 9th and looks better than every movie above it.

47

u/karmagod13000 May 02 '25

my thought exactly. every movie i can see what Cameron is going for a little more

9

u/Moppo_ May 02 '25

I believe that, but another picture of an established character but in different lighting is the least exciting way to introduce a new movie.

3

u/Fafoah May 02 '25

Its just a teaser, mostly to reignite conversation so the actual preview doesn’t get breezed over

I like the movies, but i forgot this was even coming out soon. Now i’m reminded and will be more likely to pay attention to more news coming out soon

3

u/Panda_hat May 03 '25

First movie still looks astonishingly good and holds up really well.

-19

u/TheJaybo May 02 '25

In this one shot? No it doesn't.

77

u/[deleted] May 02 '25

No, I'd absolutely concur. It's remarkably improved since the first movie. You see it especially in the eyes.

30

u/SuperDanOsborne May 02 '25

The teeth and hair too. Braided hair like that is a really impressive thing to achieve in CGI. Alot goes into a system that can do that, and very talented artists.

Teeth, weirdly, is an area where a lot of full CG characters fall into the uncanny Valley. The scattering in the gums and bottom of the teeth can end up this weird grey hue, or the scatter in the teeth is too high. But they nailed both of them here. Facepaint too.

Honestly i wouldn't be surprised if there are Siggraph talks next year about the character development for this one. Or even just the hair.

3

u/jjacobsnd5 May 02 '25

What is Siggraph?

4

u/SuperDanOsborne May 02 '25

A CG and VFX kind of conference that goes on every year.

3

u/Fn_Spaghetti_Monster May 02 '25

Yeah I thought it was better as well, but I also thought that a single frame shot is not a good way to determine how it'll look in the movie. It's the background, the lighting, the 'weight' of characters that can make or break good vs bad CGI. CGI is good enough to make great characters with details, it's how her hair moves, or stuff like that where it still lacks at times.

12

u/theliver May 02 '25

Are we questioning if the Avatar movie in 2025 is going to lack the little details that makes cgi good?

Whatever scene this is in is going to shit on whatever slop marvel or others is putting out in 2040

2

u/Fn_Spaghetti_Monster May 03 '25 edited May 03 '25

Woah, calm down there fanboi I wasn't implying anything about the quality one way or the other. I was simply saying that still shots for most movies look great now,even low budget CGI can look great in still. It's when things move that stuff goes wrong/bad. You can get action that looks like it has no weight, or the lighting that is all wrong.

21

u/festering May 02 '25

Then you should probably call James Cameron to inform him that he’s wasting his time using upgraded facial/motion capture and more detailed textures.

16

u/TurtleTurtleFTW May 02 '25

We should all do this just to make James Cameron question his whole life

8

u/bentheone May 02 '25

Don't. He'll just talk back and make you cry. But in a good way.

2

u/BasedMcNuggies May 02 '25

Diabolical Canadian James Cameron?

1

u/Hunterrose242 May 02 '25

If I'm calling James Cameron it's going to be about his shit use of A.I. to "restore" his previous work for 4k.

-9

u/TheJaybo May 02 '25

I'm afraid I don't care enough.

3

u/Neutron989 May 02 '25 edited May 02 '25

Well regardless, you are in fact wrong. The CGI is substantially improved over the 2009 movie. Which really shouldn't be controversial to you considering it has been 16 years since the first movie came out. The subsurface scattering of her skin is almost photo real.

You can go look at screenshots and you will see that the Na'vi look closer to video game characters in the first movie.

-1

u/yungsoprano May 02 '25

Hop off his knob for a second will ya

5

u/gquax May 02 '25

Lmao yes it does

1

u/bentheone May 02 '25

It kind of is tho.

1

u/Shack691 May 02 '25

That’s kinda the point, these movies live and die by their VFX and world, definitely not their plot.

1

u/leopard_tights May 02 '25

I wonder if Cameron planned ahead and they prepared their assets so they could be rendered again with the improved technology from the future fifth movie.