I would title this Bloggery “Comic-Con 2009 Day 2,” but I’m going to reach back a little to the second half of Day 1 since yesterday’s post went up before the Avatar panel, plus people are still talking about that New Moon presentation more than 24 hours later. Unfortunately, there’s so much news and hype coming out of the Con today (Gary Oldman spills Batman 3 beans! Saw VII is greenlit!) that I may ignore some the stuff I care less about, like all the “awesome!!” responses to movies that will more than likely be commercial failures (like the ten listed here). Unless they’re really hilarious or profound.

Without further ado (I have little to say in this intro because I’m not at the Con), check out my favorite coverage from San Diego from the last 24 hours after the jump:

• Erik Davis and Todd Gilchrist at Cinematical infer some bad news from Gary Oldman’s reveal that Batman 3 begins shooting next year:
  

  we can’t imagine when Nolan would have the time to begin shooting in 2010, especially since he just started production on his sci-fi flick Inception…One imagines Nolan will be busy in post-production on that sucker through at least the beginning of 2010, followed by press junkets for Inception and all that jazz. So when, exactly, would he be shooting Batman 3?

  Unless he won’t be directing Batman 3?

• Quint at Aint It Cool News got a different story out of Oldman, though, about the movie’s production schedule:
  

  I just interviewed Oldman and he back-peddled a bit on it, going from sure to the movie filming next year on the panel to a more “well, I’m sure they want to do another one… it might 2 or 3 years…” I’ll have the exact quote for you in my interview, which I hope to have up tomorrow, but maybe them horses need holdin’. Or maybe he slipped and got an earful from Warners.

• Lane Brown at Vulture addresses an observation (initially made by Lou Lemenick at the New York Post) regarding the announcement that 15 minutes of Avatar will screen in movie theaters for free on August 21:
  

  But guess who maybe isn’t so excited! Poor Quentin Tarantino, whose Nazi-scalping Inglourious Basterds opens the very same day, will cost you the price of a ticket, and takes place exclusively on Earth and in two measly dimensions. Also probably upset: cash-strapped Harvey Weinstein, who desperately needs Basterds to be a hit. We suppose there’s always a chance that Avatar could draw more people to theaters who might stick around to see IB too, but, just to be safe, they might want to spend the next month having Brad Pitt’s character digitally painted blue.

• As for the Avatar footage shown at the Con, both Vulture and Cinematical have round ups of reactions from around the blogosphere, so I’ll just quote two very contrasting opinions. First, Alex Billington at First Showing thinks the film looks unbelievably life-like:
  

  Just finished watching a full 25 minutes and holy shit it was phenomenal, just amazing. It does indeed look like nothing you’ve ever seen, it is groundbreaking, it looks incredible. Every single second in this looked real. And most of it was a completely CGI created universe that does not at all look CGI. It is truly amazing!

• Drew McWeeney at HitFix disagrees with some of that major buzz being made:
  

  “Avatar” is really, really, really, really cool.  It is not photoreal.

  Your brain is never going to tell you “Hey, look, I think that’s an actual real ten foot tall blue cat person alien.”  You will always look at that and say, even if you don’t consciously say it, “Well, that can’t be real.”

• Steven Zeitchik at Risky Biz Blog talks to James Cameron about marketing Avatar, which is a rare thing in that it’s actually an original idea:
  

  Cameron did, however, draw on a space pic to say why this movie could work despite little brand awareness.

  “I remember when I saw the trailer for ‘Star Wars.’ I was there. People camped out around the block. I think people recognize when you show them something you’ve never shown them before, something that’s new and fresh. You don’t need a brand.”

• Tom O’Neil at Gold Derby wonders if Avatar will bring Cameron back to the Oscars:
  

  This year the best picture race at the Oscars is doubling to 10 nominees. So “Avatar” only needs to inspire passion among groups of voters in below-the-line jobs such as sound and visual effects to land a top bid.

• Patrick Goldstein at The Big Picture recognizes what this year’s Con is really about for Hollywood:
  

  the fest was really a thinly disguised effort by Hollywood  to flog its 3-D format, which allows exhibitors and studios to make an extra $2 or $3 on each theater ticket. Doing his best Jeffrey Katzenberg 3-D huckster impression, Zemeckis called 3-D “the future,” adding “It’s happening. We’re there.” As Variety somewhat more dryly observed, the real purpose of the noisy hype wasn’t just to energize the Comic-Con crowds, but also “to entice them to pony up the extra coin to see the pics in 3-D once they’re released in theaters.”

• Goldstein also quotes Stuart Heritage at Heckler Spray, who sounds like a Sundance complainer from a decade ago. Before arguing that New Moon doesn’t belong at the Con, he writes:
  

  The problem with Comic-Con - other than the fact that it probably smells quite strongly of Savlon - is that it’ll let anyone in now. It’s not just a comicbook convention any more - it’s where any old filmmaker can go with a couple of castmembers to show 30 seconds of footage of their upcoming movie to a roomful of social inadequates because a 14-year-old executive at their studio told them that it’d be good for the movie’s buzz.

• Dustin Rowles at Pajiba also recognizes that Comic-Con has changed thanks to New Moon:
  

  Sixteen-year-old girls wept, the floor was covered in a three-inch pool of tears and panty wetness, an half the audience walked out pregnant. Halfway through the panel, the original spirit of Comic-Con died.

• Apparently the New Moon frenzy is really affecting other Con attendees’ ability to function propertly. Lloyd Wilson at Pajiba shares a moment from the Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus panel:
  

  The audience questions yielded some gems from both Gilliam and the audience. One audience member blanked and forgot his question, so Gilliam gave him some good natured guff. The questioner retorted: “I’ve been battling fucking Twilight fans for two hours just to get in here, my brain’s fried”.

• Vince Mancini at FilmDrunk offers an analysis of the New Moon motorcycle clip everyone’s talking about:
  

  [Taylor Lautner] teaches Bella Swan to ride a motorcycle, which is like a metaphor for his greasy ethnic sex appeal.  But Bella crashes because she can’t handle it.  She needs the gentle, fake love of her sparkling-white vampire who can’t touch her, only listen to her stupid teenage emo whining and share meaningful looks.  Then Taylor Lautner takes off his shirt to wipe the blood off Bella’s head, which is a metaphor for all the girls in the audience who just menstruated for the first time.

• Kyle Buchanan at Movieline focuses mainly on that shirt removal and “the abs that shook Comic-Con” (see the photo above):
  

  Though posting the picture above may get me into hot water with Summit Entertainment and child protective services, I feel it is my duty to help all you non-Conners understand the moment where thousands of female audience members simultaneously orgasmed, menstruated, gave birth, and passed out.

• Michelle Collins at Best Week Ever concentrates on another New Moon star’s appearance at the Con:
  

  And judging by the photos… one of them is a liiiiiiiiiil bit hungover… but who? Could it be Looks Like a Brit It girl Kristen Stewart or Teen With a Thousand Abs Taylor Lautner?

  The answer? After the jum– oh f**k it, it’s Kristen Stewart:

• Kevin Kelly at Sci-Fi Squad points out in his District 9 review that a movie doesn’t need groundbreaking F/X to wow the Con:
  

  the CGI aliens are extremely well done. They even made some of us in the audience forget about James Cameron’s Avatar. When you can illicit an emotional response from a tentacled alien, that’s impressive.

• Katey Rich at Cinema Blend believes it’s Kick-Ass that is Avatar’s true competition for Con favorite:
  

  The standing ovation that greeted Vaughn after an early scene from Kick-Ass was, I’m not joking, even better than the one James Cameron got before Avatar…Kick-Ass didn’t just look and sound and feel amazing, it felt different. Avatar will probably turn out to be the great industry game changer, but Kick-Ass really did feel like a whole new direction for comic book movies.

• Lauren Davis at i09 thankfully puts the Kick-Ass buzz into perspective:
  

  If the standing ovation Millar’s fans gave is any indication, folks who liked Kick-Ass the book will probably enjoy the movie. But even if the Kick-Ass comic wasn’t your thing, the adaptation may still be worth a gander, provided you can accept the basic premise that a kid from our world wakes up one morning and decides to be a superhero.

• Vic Holtreman at ScreenRant gives me reason to no longer have any interest whatsoever in the Nightmare on Elm Street remake:
  

  In this film Freddy will not be joking and it will be more of a straight-up terrorizing angle on the character. They’re looking to reintroduce the character to a new generation.

  It does look like it’s going to be a fresh approach - not going for the black humor so much as an all-out horror movie.