|
Avatar (2009) - BZ wants your nub
Avatar (2009)
http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/3...rpostertp7.jpg This movie is finally coming December 18th after like 6 years in development, but no teaser or trailer as of yet. Estimated 300 million dollar budget. Not surprising since he broke budget records I think with The Abyss, Terminator 2, True Lies and Titanic I believe. Apparently its supposed to revolutionize the 3D movie experience with his own 3D stereoscopic camera. This shows the camera- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2squ9HDuBeI Basically no one has seen any film of yet, although one director has: Exclusive: Soderbergh Gives Avatar High Praise - ComingSoon.net Quote:
Quote:
There is even an Avatar MMORPG developed by Ubisoft that they say is coming in December, but we will see. I love sci-fi and his movies in particular. It is going to be good. The question is just how good. |
Quote:
|
Wow stalk me why don't you. I don't even know how that got in there. I will let you slide though since you like Breaking Bad.
|
Official Avatar Movie site | In Cinemas December 18th Worldwide
Damn this movie is slow on the news front. Apparently Aug 21st is the first screening in selected theatres. 15 minutes of footage for free. Comic-Con: James Cameron's Avatar High-Res Na'vi and Trailer Date | TheHDRoom Nice looking Na'vi there. |
I wonder how much of the movie rides on the 3D thing. 3D is not that big a deal here in Denmark. Actually, I only know of a single place that do it. I don't know how it is for the rest of the world, but I'd be pretty damn sad if it looks like shit or just plain boring in a regular cinema...
|
It's a shame 3D cinemas might speed up pushing out traditional film projectors since film prints are still higher definition (they just require more training of projectionists which wont happen...:()
But hopefully this is the film that moves 3D from a gimmick to something that actually uses the 3D to tell the story as opposed to it just being, but until it does that, it's just another gimmick. For instance, for those who saw Up in 3D did it make a difference in how you perceived the story versus watching the 2D film print? I'm guessing not, but I haven't seen it, so I could be wrong. But I suppose moving pictures were also a gimmick back in the day, so I'm on the fence. |
Oh great, this is in 3D too? What's with this sudden resurgence in popularity for the use of 3D? Out of nowhere every other movie seems to be using it now. Sure it can look pretty nice, but it's a pain in the ass trying to balance two pairs of glasses on my face.
Quote:
|
Well, it's pretty much impractical to pirate 3D movies, and I seriously doubt most people have 3D televisions or monitors capable of viewing it properly.
So, I'd wager you'll be seeing more, and not less, of 3D movies... |
From what I heard, Avatar will most likely get a three month IMAX run.
And the teaser trailer is finally here. Apple - Trailers - James Cameron's Avatar Is anyone seeing the 15 minute screening today in IMAX? Apparently, people who have on imdb say the 2d trailer fucks up the movie and doesn't do it justice? However, they are probably just on an emotional high and many people on the site are just fucked up to begin with. |
I saw the trailer a while ago and I'm honestly not impressed with what I saw.
I still want to see it, and I want to see it on the big screen. I don't feel that the new teaser trailer did the film any sort of justice. The story does seem a tad bit cliche; someone compared it to Dances with Wolves, but with mecha and aliens on a jungle planet. Whatever. I'm reserving judgment until the movie's released, although I'm far more interested in Cameron's suspected Battle Angel Alita live-action adaptation he's supposed to be working on after Avatar. |
The Search for the "Avatar" Hype
The first big mainstream push is tomorrow on the Biggest hd screen in the world at the Cowboys-Seahawks game. Apparently, 3.5 minute trailer. The only trailer released prior was the 60 second teaser. I guess you can see it before on the internet, but I'll catch it tomorrow. |
I just checked out the trailer and I can't say I'm terribly excited for this movie to come out. I've never been much into kid's movies, myself.
|
Sir, sarcasm is not very detectable with text. Throw a smiley in there or something.
|
Obviously nothing too interesting to offer as far as the plot goes but the special effects are looking pretty spectacular. Is it coming out in 3D, because that would definitely seal the deal for me.
|
You've not looked very far into this have you, Kyndig?
|
I've watched the trailer, which pretty much divulges the plot in it's entirety. Though perhaps you refer to me not knowing whether or not it's in 3D. I have vague recollection of someone saying something about that being the whole bloody point, but I could be wrong.
|
|
This will be a pretty rad digital vacation but it's not the hard sci-fi I was expecting when I first heard that Cameron was creating a new language for an alien race. I was expecting the aliens to be more alien and not just cat people.
Sigourney Weaver is still a fine lookin lady tho |
Quote:
|
Those exosuits are pretty clearly appropriated from the mobile armors in Matrix: Revolutions. For spending so much time creating a gorgeous alien world they didn't put any thought into making Human technology feel fresh or interesting.
It's Starship Troopers invades Battlefield Earth. |
Ferngully 2 was awful. :(
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I ordered 3 tickets for December 17. |
Quote:
(I look forward to playing you in it. The L4D2 demo was both harder than expected and more rewarding at the same time.) |
Early Buzz: James Cameron's 'Avatar' - Cinematical
Quote:
|
How about we don't post a giant block of Twitter posts about the movie because Twitter fucking sucks. Thanks.
|
How about you shut you mouth nub.
|
How about you act like you're older than 13 by not calling me a nub.
|
How about you direct your attention to your prior post, nub.
|
You have found a way of being mean to Mo0 that GFF disapproves of.
That's hard to do. |
I sense a flamewar going on around here....
|
Quote:
|
The fact that the early press/fan screenings of Avatar are producing a resounding: "OMG AMAZINGS!" isn't really all that shocking, is it? That's what you get for picking and choosing your audience. I don't care how amazing the CG/3D looks, if the story isn't good then it's still going to be a crap film.
That said, I'm still probably going to see it to see what all the buzz is about...*sigh* I'm such a fool. |
Quote:
At another place I post at, there's been mixed reactions regarding James Horner's score - half the people there are saying it's great, the other half, not so much. The interesting thing is that Cameron specifically requested that Horner focus his time only towards Avatar and nothing else during production, so essentially he spent an entire year on the set and coming up with/writing/recording the score. Basil Poledouris was under similar conditions for Conan the Barbarian, and while I don't expect Horner's music to be anywhere near close to the same caliber as Conan, I'm hoping that Horner's music will at the least be enjoyable. Not to mention the CD is supposed to be out in stores as of today; I'm refraining from picking it up for now in the hopes of receiving it as a Christmas gift. The first two Terminator movies were excellent. True Lies is a lot of fun, both comedy and action wise, albeit a number of plot inconsistencies and nonsense (but that's typical of a Schwarzenegger film). I feel that Titanic could have been shortened a bit further down to, say, two hours as opposed to three, but it's a bit on the average side. I hope Cameron had enough of a break to make something worthwhile out of Avatar. |
Well Horner seems to be get a lot of flak from what I hear, due to alleged reuse of earlier classical themes and his own stuff. I can't back that up since I don't go through his repertoire or anything, nor listen to enough classical. Off the top of my head, all I remember listening to is Titanic, Braveheart, A Beautiful Mind and Apocalypto. All of which were extremely memorable besides Apocalypto (however Apoc worked great during the film).
|
"A good composer does not imitate; he steals." - Igor Stravinsky
Those allegations are correct, and while I'm not much into super old classical myself, the evidence of plagiarism of Prokofiev's Peter and the Wolf is clearly evident in Horner's The Land Before Time. If I remember right, he was influenced by classical music. Apocalypto is a terrible score (haven't seen the film), and Titanic is so-so. You ought to check out his 1980s material, when he was at his prime. More recently, Intrada Records started releasing a bunch of his older scores as limited editions, such as Something Wicked This Way Comes, The Journey of Natty Gann, Honey, I Shrunk the Kids and House of Cards. It's all great stuff. |
I saw it, it's pretty good. 3D wasn't great because I was sitting at the front of the thatre though, guess it isn't as effective when viewed at such an angle.
|
Yeah, it was largely and overwhelmingly okay and little more. Just like I expected.
|
Just got back from it. Felt like Ferngully, with 1.21 Jiggawatts being pumped through it. Story is incredibly plain, about what I expected -- really blatant, too. Like Titanic, it does what it needs to scrape by.
Jesus, the CGI, though... I caught myself open-mouthed more than once. It was my first modern 3D film which might have something to do with it, but boy is this an incredible film to *look* at. |
Yeah I saw it in 3d, not imax just regular 3d, but I've never seen anything like it before. Fantastic all around even if the story is nothing new. It doesn't really have to be with everything going on around it, and the fact that retelling of stories is bound to happen more and more as we move forward.
Horners score was pretty good, but I am not sure it topped his oscar titanic win or Braveheart. However, I haven't listened to the soundtrack yet, so that may change. Frankly, it just boggles my mind when I think about what they had to do to get this 160 minute movie out. Oh and how about that next in line chief kicking fucking ass in the ship where the explosives were :rock: |
BZ swears by this film. That tells you all you need to know right there. I also don't get where this mindblowing aspect is coming from. I was more blown away by Jurassic Park than I was by this. The IMAX 3D is impressive, sure, but nothing really beyond this. Hype machine breeds fans, though, I guess.
:shrug: |
My down and dirty comments:
The animation and amount of detail was astounding. The story was good even though the allegations of Dances With Wolves + aliens hits pretty close to home. The movie, for all the hype, was quite traditional as movie-making goes (see above), which seems to be everybody's beef with it, I guess? What some people seem to be avoiding is the fact that the movie continually juggles the love story, the marine's renewal, the Na'vi culture, and the wider conservationism vs. rapid expansion plotline without hitting a false note. The animation and amount of detail was astounding. Although we haven't reached the point of being able to do full CG humans yet without looking odd, the Na'vi blow clear past the uncanny valley without slowing down. It is a landmark by any standard, even if all the talk about Cameron "creating a new genre" is just pap. |
|
No doubt. But I have to admit, this particular bullshit is why I hated Last Samurai as much as I did, and why I just can't stomach Dances With Wolves. Just that whole white guy walks into an ethnic place and shows them how shit gets -done- story is hard to swallow.
Except I love Dune, so what the fuck do I know outside hypocrisy? Still didn't much love Avatar, though. |
The main difference is that Dune's super whitey isn't TOM CRUISE or Kevin Costner (who is completely useless sans gills anyway).
I should get a chance to see this by the end of the week, but I'm certainly not expecting much. WE SHALL SEE. |
Quote:
Still though, it's an unavoidable part of making a movie about (and therefore placing focus on) any particular white person. Some story specific spoilers and :words: Spoiler:
|
Quote:
Avatar is the exact same thing, except with mechs. It was a fun time, shit blew up and the 3D effects were great. Is it the movie to end all movies? Nah. I would say this is basically just another Abyss for Cameron, where its just something thats *good* instead of the rungs of the ladder it tries to grab and misses. Then again, I'd say the same about Titanic. |
Overall, Avatar was a good popcorn movie, albeit I felt it was a bit long. The story, as is often stated, is nowhere near original. I also found
I'm curious about one thing though. He didn't seem to be Judging by all the universal praise Avatar's getting for visuals and world-building, I guess I should have watched it in 3D. A pity. |
I loved it. Beautiful to look at and I'm a sucker for epic conflict. Does anyone know if Cameron or the writer ever intended for there to be a sequel?
The story seems like it's set up for one. I was going to talk about it, but then I realized that I was basically describing Xenosaga, and figured it'd be wiser to stop. =( |
I believe he mentioned he always wanted to do a second one if it was successful. I can't recall the exact quote though.
|
A trilogy is most likely to happen. This movie is doing really really well and he already has stories ready to work on for sequels. Another factor is that since he already has all the CG assets and equipment needed to make the next film it won't take anywhere near as long to make it.
The next movies are most likely to take place off of Pandora perhaps on other planets/moons/systems and supposedly still feature the same cast as they are very pumped to get on board again. There's also rumors of an extended director's cut of Avatar which features Earth scenes that apparently WETA had completed but Cameron cut out of release in order to keep the movie under 3 hours. While all this excites me I am slightly disappointed because Cameron may or may not do the Battle Angel trilogy he put so much design work into. I'm hoping that filming the next two Avatar movies changes his mind and he figures out a good way to mix CG captured performance characters (ie Alita/Gally) into a mostly live action world. |
Given that Battlefield Earth did a better job of tying up loose ends, there really should be a sequel.
Spoiler:
|
We're going into sequel (and manual) territory here, so...
I'd link to the official Pandorapedia, but it seems their links are broken at the moment. |
Quote:
Spoiler:
|
Just came back after seeing it in IMAX 3D.. What can I say that already hasn't? I find it was worth the 17.50 for the ticket, and yeah... pretty fun experience
|
Yeah Cameron had plans for a trilogy if it did well and.. it's doing pretty damn insane at the box office and was well received with critics so expect it. I know he really wants to do Alita next and they even have a script and other pre-production work done already. However with the great response Avatar is getting he may change his mind and shift focus to the Avatar sequels.
|
Wow so Avatar has already crossed the billion mark worldwide and knocked down The Dark Knight as the 4th highest grossing film worldwide of all time in just 3 weeks. It looks like it REALLY might beat Titanic at this point. This movie is a beast and has some insanely strong legs. Made 68 million this weekend only dropping 7 million from last weekend. Sherlock is also doing well and we will most likely get a franchise out of it.
|
Hey, so. Unobtainium is the most retarded name for something ever.
|
Quote:
I mean, he could still have come up with something like "lenticulum" but it might not be as transparent to youngsters. |
Unobtainium is actually a term that's used jokingly in engineering to describe materials that are either rare and impossible to find, or flat-out non-existant. Cameron's cheeky use of it is pretty clever but it comes across poorly in the film. It's like they KNOW it's a ridiculous name so they play it off that way.
|
I know Unobtanium has been used in other movies as well. I think the machine they used in The Core was supposed to have been made out of it.
(I'm actually surprised Bender wasn't made out of Unobtainum at some point.) |
In the original script (I don't have the link on me) unobtanium had a legitimate name, but was coined unobtanium because it was a pain to get. The name stuck.
I agree though, in the movie it just came off as somewhat ridiculous. |
Script can be found here with Unobtainium intact, for anyone interested. This is the version being passed around for the Academy to read, so I'm sure it's the final draft:
http://www.foxscreenings.com/media/p...eronAVATAR.pdf |
Here's the original scriptment to which I was referring: Avatar Scriptment by James Cameron
Summary of changes here: PROJECT 880: THE AVATAR THAT ALMOST WAS |
I kinda thought unobtanium wasn't the real name in the movie, but just something all the workers called it for the heck of it.
|
Quote:
The spectacle wasn't taken out of the film...just the interesting parts. Like seeing Earth in the shitter, and implying that the Avatars they are piloting are actually conscious. More horrifying, but interesting. Doesn't have to be arty to be a bit less generic than the final script was. Oh welly. Plus: Quote:
|
Quote:
"Alright, like, so this stuff, it's like an element that's hard-to-get. Hard-to-get, hmm... almost like it's unobtaina- Hold on. I've got it." - James Cameron, 2009 |
I'm reasonably sure it's a knowing nod to the engineering term rather than a really unoriginal stab at a name of something.
|
Doesn't really change my opinion of the inanity of the movie.
|
Quote:
TV Tropes uses it along with the terms "Phlebotinum" and "Narrativium" to characterise the phoney science often used in film and television scripts. It's the fake science version of "A Wizard Did It" Unobtainium - Television Tropes & Idioms So I don't know what to make of the use of it in Avatar, since usually a scriptwriter is expected to come up with his own term for unobtanium (see: Naquadah, Dilithium...) rather than just use the generic name. |
Okay, so the scriptment says stuff about superconductivity at room temperature and whatever, but, I mean, it's not like the fantastic properties of unobtanium were used as a plot device, like in The Core. It could have been called Space Gold or Astro Oil or whatever and nothing would change; all that mattered was its monetary value.
I see that the scriptment's in-universe explanation of the term is that it started as a joke name and stuck, which is plausible, though not terribly clever. EDIT: whoops quazi already said that |
Well, floating mountains make more sense when you know that superconductors float in magnetic fields. So with a big magnetic field and lotsa unobtainium, the floating mountains aren't quite as absurd.
|
How about them waterfalls :33:
|
Quote:
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y16...s/emot-wth.gif |
Quote:
|
Don't forget all the banshee piss. Also, it's not like a mountain would stop having an aquifer just because it's floating. It's just that the scale is way off; the waterfalls would be too big for the "peaks" even if the mountain clumps were on the ground.
|
Quote:
|
I finally saw this last night to see what the fuss was about and I have to say, this movie was hyped for the right reasons.
The story was pretty predictable but the overall impression with the characters and visual effects is what made the movie as a whole. I didn't really like main villain because he was a generic Disney type of character but I guess for this type of movie, I would take any villain just to keep the movie going. I actually thought this kind of movie was going to be 60% real people with some boring talk about the planet but the majority of the movie was with the Navi people which was quite a surprise to me. I didn't have any idea of what i was walking into with this movie and I think because of that, I just freaking loved it. The movie replayed in my mind as I went to sleep @_@ I saw it in Digital 3d, nothing really impressive from what I saw, just a few flies or leaves popping up and the occasional holographic screens. Or maybe I just have an eye problem. |
The thing about the 3D was they deliberately did NOT go for shoving the 3D in your face. The 3D just became part of the movie, and about 20 minutes in you're easily able to just treat it as a part of the movie. It made it more like you were there without constantly having a "WOOOOOOOAH THEYRE SHOVING THE SPEAR IN MY FACE THIS IS SO COOL" moment every 5 minutes to remind you.
|
Floaty seed pods. 'S all I'm sayin.
|
The only thing that bothered me was when protruding foreground objects were out of focus, because my instinct is to try and focus on the floaty bits jutting out towards my face, and it feels weird to not be able to. That's the point, I guess--I'm not supposed to be looking there--and maybe the impulse will go away once I get used to seeing 3D movies.
But, if a film's going to be in 3D, wouldn't it make sense to have a really deep focus and let your eyes do the work naturally? I know playing with focus has been in a cinematographer's toolbox for forever, but it just doesn't make sense to me outside of a 2D projection. Maybe dudes smarter than me who know more about the technology and filmmaking could explain why this would be a bad idea. |
I had a headache during this and for about 3 hours afterwards.
Terrible script IMO. Spoiler:
|
I was surprised how little the 3d bothered me even though I've got cokebottle glasses. Generally 3d stuff gives me a pretty bad headache.
|
That's something that bugs me about 3D, there seems to be a "right way" to watch a 3D movie. Since when is there a "right way" to look at an image? My sister got headaches when she saw it because she's used to looking at the whole screen as opposed to one particular object, and I found that slightly annoying as well.
Some of the shots were really well done though, like the water droplet in the opening because it was just a way of deep focus (like Worm was saying) but more XTREME Will be interesting to see what someone else does with the technology, but Avatar didn't sell me on it. Fun movie though, pew pew, explosions :D |
Feel free to correct me here, but it seems to me like that comes from an issue with what people expect from 3D movies versus what actually physically can happen.
In the real world, you can focus on whatever you want to because everything exists in 3 actual dimensions. In a normal movie, cinematographers use changes in focus to draw your eye to what they want you to watch, and just like an eye, a camera can't focus on everything all at once (well, it CAN, a technique called deep focus, but it's not a popular method these days. Citizen Kane used it extensively.) This was one of the big advances that WALL-E nailed, actually, because they spent a lot of time focusing on depth of field and having focus on specific objects. The temptation when you CAN focus on everything is to do it, but most people expect the selective focus that other movies use. Anyway, a 3-D movie only APPEARS 3-D because of a combination of how it's being displayed on the screen and the glasses you're wearing. It tricks your eyes into seeing things as closer or farther away than they actually are. In the end, though, it is still a 2 dimensional image, and just as you can't willfully focus on the background in a 2-D movie if you don't want to see Harrison Ford staring wistfully in that new movie he's in that sucks, you can't willfully change the focus on this "3-dimensional" image because in the end the choice was made for you and it's on that flat screen in front of you. |
Thought this was funny. I still haven't seen it, unfortunately.
|
|||||
Quote:
So yes, I appreciate the cinematographer is using the same kind of tricks to guide your eye, but I think the technique isn't mastered yet. The cinematographer even said something to the effect that he had a much harder time directing the audience's eye using the 3D stuff because of the depth of field. Since you seem to be a cinematography guy, you'd probably appreciate the article they did on it in American Cinematographer. Pretty interesting. I guess the problem was the cameras had a limited ability to put things into a shallow depth of field, so they compensated with the lighting and set dressing by taking things out of the background. In that sense, it'd be interesting to watch the film in 2D just to see what all of that looks like without the 3D effect guiding it along. |
Avatar has become the highest grossing film of all time.
Post your reasons on why this is a grave injustice to art and the world at large below this line: ____________________________________________ |
Why would art care?
|
http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i1...Picture1-2.png
You didn't really leave enough room to approach the topic with any seriousness but I think that sums it up alright. |
You know, I'm pretty sure that the Harry Potter books have made more money than War and Peace but you see surprisingly little internet nerd-rage about that.
Who actually gives a fuck if Avatar is popular? Big studios are in the business of making money and they're very good at it, that's why they make films they think will be popular and throw a lot of advertising at them. Soap operas are often the most watched programmes on tv for the same reason, if you want something to have wide appeal, you need to aim it at the lowest common denominator. Anyway, Sprout, didn't you say you liked Avatar in your journal? That you have an opinion at all suggests you paid to see it, in which case you have exactly zero grounds on which to complain about how much money it's made. |
Quote:
Furthermore: Quote:
|
Oh, sorry then, got the wrong end of the stick.
Carry on. |
Hey, come on, the movie ain't that bad. Then again, I have to admit that I also like Michael Bay flicks :/
Also, I wonder if Cameron played the game Albion Spoiler:
wtf? |
Quote:
It's kind of like complaining when a song has dumb lyrics. Yeah, sure, good lyrics can certainly help a song, and some great ones can be made just by being very poetic, but there's still a place for shit like Bang the Drum. |
I still haven't seen the movie, so can't really comment on how good or bad it is, but I wonder if the enormous financial success of his last two films (Avatar, Titantic, natch) will give Cameron enough leeway to make Battle Angel Alita without a lot of Executive Meddling ?
|
Quote:
And calling film a "visual medium" discounts all the writing, acting and sound work that go into making a good film whole. |
Well, it being visual is what sets it apart from radio.
Also, is anyone actually saying that Avatar is a pinnacle of film as art? I'll I've heard people say is it's a pretty good popcorn flick that's entertaining for your $10 (or $15 if you're doing the 3D thing). At least it does what it does well, as opposed to, say, 2012. Why is liking a movie for one reason better than another? |
Quote:
|
I'm curious if they include the sales/rentals of 3d goggles into the gross sales. Those tickets don't come cheap.
Quote:
|
Quote:
"The film vibrates with the excitement of discovery and awe. Not just for the sight of six-legged rhinos and butterfly-hued dragons, but for the thousands of hours of work that unite here in a creative epiphany." - Colin Covert, Minneapolis Star Tribune "Mr. Cameron's singular vision has upped the ante for filmed entertainment, and given us a travelogue unlike any other. I wouldn't want to live on Pandora, mainly because of the bad air, but I'm glad to have paid it a visit. " - Joe Morgenstern, Wall Street Journal "An astonishing, breathtaking masterpiece. Cameron did it! It will easily surpass Titanic's box office. I think Cameron created a few new colors." - Victoria Alexander, FilmsInReview.com "With Avatar, Cameron has created the first great epic of the 21st century and a new benchmark in filmmaking. No wonder that this took 4 years to produce, it was worth every minute to get this right." - Diva Velez, TheDivaReview.com "This masterpiece is definitely one experience worth braving text a lot guy, talking teen girls and parents who can't be bothered to get a babysitter to see in the theater." - Jeffery Lyles, MD Gazette "The best picture of 2009, one of the best films of the decade and, really, one of the best movies I've ever seen." - Kevin N. Laforest, Montreal Film Journal "James Cameron invented a world comparable to George Lucas' galaxy of long ago, far, far away and as original as what Peter Jackson did with J.R.R. Tolkien's Middle-Earth." - Gary Wolcott, Tri-City Herald "Works as both a socially conscious Western update and as a true SF film, revealing the influences of such fine genre writers as Philip Jose Farmer, Larry Niven and especially Edgar Rice Burroughs (the 'John Carter of Mars' series)." - John Beifuss, Memphis Commercial Appeal "Un entretenimiento fascinante, con pasajes de inusual belleza, servido con mano maestra por James Cameron. Es también un alegato ecologista y pacifista, justo en tiempos de creciente militarismo y abuso de recursos naturales." - Enrique Buchichio, Paraguay Total Ole! |
You need someone else's words to feel better about Avatar?
|
Quote:
Quote:
Films as art resonate with more force and pathos than Avatar does. Honestly, aside from breakthroughs in CGI filmmaking, the word "art" doesn't even belong in a conversation about Avatar. All the non-visual elements are pretty ordinary, from the plot to the dialogue to the soundtrack. It's a fun movie but it has absolutely no impact. Compare this to far greater films such as Citizen Kane, Dr. Strangelove, Shawshank Redemption or Schindler's List. Those are works of art because they evoke something real. Avatar cannot accomplish this, and is barely "art" as far as the legitimate meaning goes. |
Quote:
There's no baseline for watching a movie and enjoying it (The same person could enjoy Last Year at Marienbad and Dumb & Dumber for different reasons), so I don't know why you guys are so keen on shoehorning one in here. |
Quote:
|
You guys are getting way too bogged down in this "art" talk.
This is from Roger Ebert's review of Raiders of the Lost Ark: Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I don't even think it is 20 bucks. IMAX 3d was 14 dollars for me anyway. And I seem to remember these ticket sales were like less than 10% of the overall gross. Or was that 3D in general?
|
I imagine IMAX 3D would be about 10%, though now I'm a bit annoyed I paid about that for 3D in a normal theater. :mad:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Even the original version was shown both in 2 and 3D. Is it a work of art? Is any Cameron movie one? Can popular action movies (or "CG-Pr0n" as the hater dub them) ever be considered that? And does that even matter? I mean, at the end of the day the characters are not too deep, the plot is not too original. But then the movie has 10 feet tall blue alien cat bushpeople that ride on flying dinosaurs fighting mechs and a bad guy boarding his power suit in while his ship's going down and he's on fire. Which is pretty awesome in my book, shallow characters or not. |
I friend of mine actually was interested in seeing and I went to watch it again last night. In IMAX this time. It was a dollar more than digital 3d but clearly IMAX was the better choice. As soon as the movie started You could see the difference in clarity and the 3D was actually was more obvious. Not saying that it played a big role in the overall enjoyment though.
I completely agree with points about the story too but I actually enjoyed watching it more the second time around. Probably because it was my first IMAX film, but visually, it was great eye candy and pretty much a good reason to watch a movie on the big screen. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
This review tidily lays out a lot of the issues I had with Avatar. It's a bit long, but then again you wasted three hours of your time and fifteen of your hard-earned dollars watching the movie, so this is really quite an efficient use of your time by comparison. Plus: the reviewer has more personality than any of the characters in Avatar, and he had the ability to make me laugh - and not just at him.
Enjoy!
|
||||||||
It's weird watching that after his Phantom Menace review, in which he talks about how you shouldn't stray from stock characters too much. For the first half, I thought he was only pretending to dislike Avatar. I mean, contrast with this bit:
(not embedded due to timecode) But I get his point that Cameron played it too safe. I think this was a fair review. He makes it pretty clear that your personal tolerance for eyeroll moments can make or break this one for you; for me, it helped that I expected all the noble savage white guilt preachy junk before I walked into the theater. |
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:32 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.