Commenting Rules: Keep the conversation civil and on topic. If your comment does not add to the conversation, it will be removed. Debate intelligently. Insulting the author, /Film, or other commenters will result in comment removal and possible ban. If you want to point out a typo, correction, suggestion or criticism for /Film, please email us instead. Please use your name or nickname and not your business name (ie Discount Car Parts) as we might confuse and mark it as spam. If you would like to have your own Avatar show up with your comment, sign-up for a free Disqus account. Any Links will go into moderation before being approved. Anything we deem as spam will not be approved.

Six New Images From James Cameron’s Avatar

Posted on Wednesday, August 19th, 2009 by Russ Fischer

avatar_pre_trailer_1

Avatar Day isn’t enough. Fox is trying to make this Avatar Week. First there was word that the trailer for James Cameron’s upcoming Avatar would arrive tomorrow morning, in advance of the theatrical footage premiere on Friday. Now we’ve got six new images from the film. They show Sam Worthington, Sigourney Weaver, Giovanni Ribisi, Stephen Lang and Michelle Rodriguez in character, and the one above, a still from the trailer, shows off some of the war tech we’ve already seen in toy form. Check ‘em all out after the jump.

In the Comic Con footage, some of which will be seen in theatres on Friday and which we expect to see briefly mirrored in the trailer, we already saw some of these characters, but this is the first time most of you get a look at Weaver, Ribisi, Lang and Rodriguez as they appear in the film. (Expect to see Weaver’s Na’avi avatar in footage soon.) I don’t even remember seeing Ribisi in the Comic Con footage, but it’s possible that he was seen and I just glossed over his appearance.

To put these images into some slightly speculative context (spoilers here, I guess) what you’re seeing is likely Worthington’s character Jake prior to arrival on Pandora, then Weaver, who plays one of the scientific leaders of the avatar program, and an administrator played by Ribisi, in the Avatar lab. The grizzled Lang is standing next to the creche that Jake (or any avatar participant) has to get into — basically a device that looks like a high-tech tanning bed — in order to transfer consciousness into a Na’vi avatar like the one seen in the first released production still.

We’ll have more on the film first thing tomorrow, as the trailer should be online around 10am EST / 7am PST.

avatar_pre_trailer_6

avatar_pre_trailer_3

avatar_pre_trailer_2

avatar_pre_trailer_4

avatar_pre_trailer_5

Comments 

Related Posts

Tags

20th Century Fox, 3D, Action/Adventure, Images, Sci-Fi, , , , , , ,

  • Longenous
    Looks like a video game.

    LMAO

    Enjoy your 400 million dollar video game.
  • Roland21
    First: It's not 400 million but around 240 million budget.

    Second: It's just a still, wait the trailer.

    Third: STFU
  • Lux
    it does look like a video game.. enjoy your 240 million videogame
  • Gelman
    HD TRAILER IS HERE: avatar.substance001.info
  • Gelman
    You may have to go through the news article's link to get it to work. It should start automatically:

    thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/film/2598393/Be-the-first-to-see-the-trailer-for-new-James-Cameron-film-Avatar.html
  • whsmith
    Somehow these pics inspire visions of the film Uwe Boll would make if he was given $300 million...
  • tinaturnerstampons
    Hah I totally agree

    WTF is up with those lame scars on Stephen Lang's head... I bet a Na’vi gave him it and he will share a riveting version of the story for the benefit of the audience

    gay

    I`m not even going to comment on the cg

    but i will say these pics of the actors are completely lacking in style

    and look like a kick ass direct to video movie
  • tinaturnerstampons
    Hah I totally agree

    WTF is up with those lame scars on Stephen Lang's head... I bet a Na’vi gave him it and he will share a riveting version of the story for the benefit of the audience

    gay

    I`m not even going to comment on the cg

    but i will say these pics of the actors are completely lacking in style

    and look like a kick ass direct to video movie
  • Martin
    ATTENTION ALL IDIOTS!

    These pics, except maybe the first one, are not stills from the movie but shot with a canon EOS 1D Mark III camera probably from a behind the scenes photograper.

    The movie is probably gonna look very different from these pics. Chill out, take some vitamin D and be patient!
  • tinaturnerstampons
    Does it make you feel like a big man to call everyone idiots

    Does it help you forget being raped as a child

    We are just assuming these are pics from the movie

    Like the article claims and we are talking about them as such

    Since the set of photos starts with a shot that is clearly not taken by a canon EOS 1D Mark III, why would we assume the rest aren`t stills

    If you actually have proof that they aren`t then don`t be such an uncreative douchebag about it

    Share and enlighten my friend
  • djoser
    OMG - I just realized that the heli ships have a really big Heli-carrier in the background -- that is COMPLETELY IN FOCUS, save some heat distortions from its "thrusters" (wherever they are).

    Looks like these CGI artists still need to take photography 101.

    No wide angle lens camera would be able to make a ship as "big" as that things supposed to be in exactly the same focus as the little buggy ships its releasing into the foreground.

    ELEMENTARY, MY DEAR CAMERON!~

    Even District 9 got the basics of atmospheric perspective down. THAT ship looked like it was a mile away, in every shot. I BELIEVED it was there.

    This one? Video Game. From 1990. Maybe '92.

    I don't care how many hairs I can see on the N'avi nostrils & eyelids.
    I want to see some basic photography that doesn't LOOK like CGI, dude~!

    Say what you will, but miniatures - despite their cost & craftsmanship time - NEVER had this problem.
  • I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that they know what they're doing, and you don't. Please, if you want to give your opinion on someone else's profession, have the same if not better credentials in "said" profession. The picture from first glance looks like some tilt shift is going on.
  • djoser
    And a mighty fine limb it is. I am simply a person with trained eyes.

    I don't doubt that they're professionals. I'm just saying that no matter how much professional work they've put into that 'screen grab' - it doesn't look pleasing to the eye.

    I'll give them this - it doesn't look "Polar Express" bad. Yet.

    But another group of professionals using the same "emo-cap" technology Cameron has innovated made another not so convincing EFX job:

    the latest Incredible Hulk.

    Look it up. They got that wonderfully convincing tech from Cameron's people. And we all know how that went.

    They're professionals too.

    For those who liked District 9's EFX, they were a combo of prosthetics & CGI, for close-up shots. CG articulated the Prawns eyes & tendrils, & full body shots. All others were photos of actual sculpts "amended" by CGI.

    I'm going to go out on a limb and say the laws of the Uncanny Valley that District 9 crossed on the cheap, by combining live footage w/ CGI produce to a wider audience more empathic, believable characters - at least in closeup shots. (Did you SEE the Avatar blue-face poster? Not convincing)

    We saw the test of "Emo-Cap". It was called the Incredible Hulk.

    Did you believe the Hulk was real?
  • Obviously you've never used a DSLR, for example, and opened the apature all the way.

    You're an idiot.
  • Craigasorusrex
    I'm sorry but those crafts aren't looking to good. I know its just a picture but the CGI for these ships aren't to impressive.

    Guess we know where all the money went (Na'vi and Environment). Don't want to sound to critical but I expected better lighting and blending for these heli/planes.

    Just basing this off the pictures. Maybe it'll look better in motion , guess we'll know when the trailer comes out.
  • Scruffmcgruff
    seriously? looks pretty photoreal as far as i can tell.

    also, im glad to see that harley davidson still exists in the distant future!
  • adrian_s
    Maybe it's just the design of them. They look atrocious to me as well, but then again, I think your attention is primarily directed to the fact they're queer as hell-looking.
  • freemachine
    You based your opinion of the CGI on a 72dpi JPEG? Wow.
  • Craigasorusrex
    Not quite, I said "Just basing this off the pictures. Maybe it'll look better in motion , guess we'll know when the trailer comes out" in my post.

    Of course I'm saving my final judgement over the visuals when I get to see it on IMAX 3D this Friday.

    The entire movie should be judged in December of course. Doesn't mean we can't express are thoughts on the pictures.

    Try not to cherry pick parts of my post so you can get a response in.
  • freemachine
    It's hardly cherry-picking if I responded to what was basically the summary of your thoughts. Nothing you wrote was taken out of context. I was clarifying that it's absurd to even attempt to make such a judgment from an extremely low-res image. If it were higher resolution, I might think that it was a rational conclusion.

    And BTW, did you accuse me of cherry-picking, which is off topic, just so you can get in your response to my response?

    Eagerly awaiting your response to my response to your response to my original comment. You know you want to.
  • Craigasorusrex
    "You know you want to."

    Caught me red handed. ;)

    But I was just making an observation on the CGI (obviously not the best source as its not high quality) but I point out the fact.

    Just not a great way to make a first impression if Fox intended to do so.

    Anyway, I'm still looking forward to this movie. The trailer and 15 minutes of footage will gives us a better idea of the machinery/aircrafts CGI than this low res pic.

    Also those writing "Wow looks great" should be held to the same response you gave me.

    Seems a bit of a double standard if those writing good things about a low res pic can form an opinion yet those who point out something negative get called out.
  • freemachine
    I'm just razzing you. And as far as not a great way to make a first impression, it is Fox after all.

    If the WETA's FX don't completely blow me away, given the money invested specifically to perfect the CG, I will scratch my head and wonder how they (WETA) were able to pull of one hell of a good job on District 9 with basically a shoe-string budget.

    Going to bed. Last word ;p

    EDIT: As far as not holding people who thought it look awesome up the same standard, all I can say is that I would, but there were only one or two positive comments to the overwhelmingly negative or doubtful comments. I just happened to pick you, for no personal reason.
  • Craigasorusrex
    No problem. I didn't take any offense.

    I'm in total agreement with your expectancy of the CGI. The vfx in District 9 were great but thats partly thanks to Neill who has an extensive history working with special effects since he was 14.

    Anyway you summed it up pretty well. WETA almost always delivers and Cameron's history of sfx is extensive as well so I'm expecting for him to deliver.

    But all the points you make are fair. A valid opinion should be formed when actually seeing the CGI in its intended resolution.
  • mbellerbrock
    Weta only did the ship and dropship, the worst of the movie and easiest to do IMO. I love Weta but their part of the movie was underwhelming. Two different companies did the prawns and mech: http://vfxworld.com/?atype=articles&id=4032
  • You're making a huge judgement off one still that's looking into a sun reflection, which would distort everything in real life too.

    I gaurentee all you little kids that just learned how to use mommy's computer and are bitching about everything, will be the first ones to cry when you don't get to see it, but all your little friends do.
  • Roland21
    Fraking Amazing!
  • Wiimo
    The ships remind me of something from Halo. And Michelle Rodriguez in uniform makes me happy. :D
  • Gelman
    M.Rodriguez is a drunk-driving little skank. Sorry, just not interested in seeing her on the big screen.
  • elharris84
    hear hear!
  • derekallan
    if Giovanni Ribisi isn't playing 'The Worn Out President', he better quit it with that pose!
  • djoser
    Maybe he just found out that he's Sigourney Weaver's illegitimate son...

    I'm just sayin' is all ... ;)

    They got like the same eyes & sh*t!
  • okayflint
    michelle rodriguez...whhyyyy do people cast her
  • mbellerbrock
    Exactly my thoughts, she's so typecast it's not even funny anymore, and she's not even good at what she's typecast as! Seeing her makes me worried... I wasn't aware she was in Avatar, obviously going to be some pseudo-badass marine chick who the audience can't wait to watch die. Also, I might receive flak for this but I've never been a fan of Weaver, maybe it's just that damn hair.
  • djoser
    Um, speaking of hair, that's a nice WEAVER they gave San Worthington in that first shot.

    Nice to know some special-people's club FX are still done by the Special People's Club themselves.

    For Men, of course.
  • I saw the 15 minutes of footage today, and you should prepare to have your mind blown.
    The General in those images (with the scars on his head) delivers a great monologue to open the footage, and it just gets cranked up from there.
    Seriously, the CGI in this thing blew me away.
  • mbellerbrock
    Where did you see it?
  • Gelman
    In his imagination.

    Or maybe he was watching Ghostbusters II; saw Sigourney and some CGI ghosts... thought it was Avatar.
  • LOL
    No I definitely saw it.
    I was a guest of Fox here in New Zealand, where all the effects are being done.
    You'll see when the 15 minutes of footage comes out.
    Just wait for the scene where the hero faces down a massive beast that's a cross between a rhino and a hammerhead shark, but with a plume of bright feathers on it's head.
    It's a trippy scene, and I reckon Cameron has done some drugs in his time :-)
  • mbellerbrock
    Haha, yeah, you definitely did see it early, that monologue the colonel delivers is pretty BA.
  • starscream9289
    I want to BELIEVE this movie is gonna be groundbreaking.

    That picture reminds me of the grasshoppers flying towards the anthill in A Bug's Life.
  • freemachine
    Holy shit! Is that a bit of lens-flare I detect? Please to tell me that J.J. Abrams hasn't begun a new trend in SFX.
  • dsahawker
    Actually it would be a re-trend....lense flares forever have been considered so cliche and downright wrong because they were so overused back in the day.....I work in CG and it's a long time running joke with us.....now it's coming back full force

    though some of the shots in Star Trek using excessive lenseflare were still soooooo frickin awesome....
  • camerapologist.
    In all fairness, the shot is facing the sun directly, so it'd be hard to eliminate all flare from a direct light source into the lens, no matter how kickass the lens coating. This is NOT J.J. Abrams-level flare :-).
  • freemachine
    "...the shot is facing the sun directly, so it'd be hard to eliminate all flare from a direct light source into the lens, no matter how kickass the lens coating."

    Are you actually talking about a CG sun that is pointed directly at a non-existent lens? Ok.
  • mbellerbrock
    Well do you want accurate looking CGI or not? One of the best ways to make bad CGI is to eff up the lighting. Camerapologist is right, it's virtually impossible to eliminate flare from a direct light source.
  • camerapologist.
    You can't have an image without a lens, either theoretical or actual, and if you want your world to be real, you're going to want to have your real rays of light flowing through real glass.
  • Lens flare exists in real life too, you know. It comes from this thing called "The Sun". Oh look, there's reflection of the sun in that cap. Wierd that there would be lens flare!

    /s

    Ass.
  • izzi
    what year does this story take place in?
    i thought it was suppose to be in the future.
    the way they are dressed it looks like 2009!!
  • djoser
    I'll give a couple theories:

    a) It's an Avatar "simulation", "simulating" the look & feel of 2009.

    b) It's so far in the future, that Sam Worthington's decided to go uber-retro.
    So his haircut & brand new looking shirt are as if someone today dressed like they were in the 1920's. It'd be 'uber-cool' in Avatar's timeline.

    c) They spent all their money on N'avi's skin textures and the plantlife on their homeworld, and skimped on wardrobe- just walking up the block & getting "civilian" clothes from Targe't. (pronounced "Tar-Je' ").

    d) This WOULD have been the distant future, when they started making the movie.

    So it IS the distant future. The year 2000~!
  • thegoblinking
    this thing is gonna have a one of a kind tone because it takes place in onther world another time, so called pandora. i can tell this is going to be a really incredible film, those stills show a very strong story and the stuff on the planet and the action... i just can't mother fucking wait.
blog comments powered by Disqus

gorilla nation

/Film

Copyright © 2010 /Film. Web design by Pro Blog Design. Logo Concept by: Illumination Ink

All names, trademarks and images are copyright their respective owners.