| Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject:  Posted: January 19th, 2010, 12:45 pm |
|
Joined: 10 July 2005
Posts: 23149
Location: Where there are handsome heroes and sexy villains.. all that need some lovin' ;)
Country: 
Gender: Female
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
|
Post subject: Posted: January 19th, 2010, 1:19 pm |
|
|
Eä |
| Moderator |
 |
 |
Joined: 04 June 2005
Posts: 12592
Gender: Female
|
Gimli:: I can't tell you whether the 3D would live up to your expectations and I never took off my 3D glasses during the movie but there's a flying scene that is pretty intense and I'm sure the 3D effects add to it.
Also the lushness and mystery of the planet of Pandora looks nicely bright and alive through the glasses.  _________________ >>Be the change you wish to see in the world<<
Banner credit: Shadowcat & Nurrantiel Mashiara
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: January 19th, 2010, 6:55 pm |
|
Joined: 11 August 2005
Posts: 18717
Country: 
Gender: Female
|
Johnny's Fan wrote: Excuse me while I fall off my swivel chair.
*BONK*
Teh Phoenix no wanty to see this?  That's like... whoa dude.
But I honestly don't blame you. It looks like a film that is powered by the gimmicks of 3-D, not because of the content. And I hate films that rely on something to "make them great" rather than the whole film being equally well made.
Sherlock Holmes looks much better. 
Seriously. I just think it looks dumb and as for this whole resurgance of 3D.
It was crap back then, it's still crap now. I don't want to put on stupid glasses and have stuff fly out at me on the screen so I'm dodging imaginary stuff instead of concentrating on the actual movie. Eff that.
I love CGI, I do. I'm not one of those people that get all CG squeamish. But dammit give me plot first, then wow me with your effects and technology. _________________ 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: January 19th, 2010, 8:50 pm |
|
Joined: 03 June 2005
Posts: 4079
Location: In my dreams
Country: 
Gender: Female
|
On 3-D: That's a little difficult for me to answer, because (as I discovered) the 3-D technology in my small town theater is not very good. However, I could tell it was directed with 3-D in mind, and not just as an excuse to charge extra for the ticket. There were times when it paid off, and you could see all the different layers of a shot. The quality of the special effects would probably be just as good in 2-D, though.
Raivynn Phoenix wrote: I love CGI, I do. I'm not one of those people that get all CG squeamish. But dammit give me plot first, then wow me with your effects and technology.
Hear, hear! _________________ 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: January 20th, 2010, 12:03 am |
|
Joined: 10 July 2005
Posts: 23149
Location: Where there are handsome heroes and sexy villains.. all that need some lovin' ;)
Country:
Gender: Female
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: January 26th, 2010, 6:12 pm |
|
Joined: 12 July 2005
Posts: 8885
|
|
Personally, from what I've heard and looked, it's essentially Ferngully/Pochantoas recycled in space. The only possible reasons why I would watch it is a. the visual effects as a lot of people said and b. the fetish fuel. Yes I can be shallow. If you want to see a good alien movie, I recommend District 9. It pulls off similar visual effects with a budget one eighth of Avatar and they look like freakin' aliens, not nudists dipped in blue ink. Plus the white protagonist is a little stupid cowardly office jerk, not the shiny Greek hero with chiseled muscles.
_________________ 
I was cured all right.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: January 26th, 2010, 7:42 pm |
|
Joined: 11 August 2005
Posts: 18717
Country:
Gender: Female
|
|
^
District 9 >>>>>>>> Just about every movie released in '09. Truly outstanding and like you say on a very very small budget comparitively.
_________________
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: January 26th, 2010, 9:24 pm |
|
Joined: 03 July 2005
Posts: 9846
Location: city that never sleeps
|
Johnny's Fan wrote: @ Pheonix - I completely agree with you about CGI. I like it when it compliments a good film and enhances it. Not when the film revolves around the CGI.
There's good CGI and bad CGI. Good CGI can be an art form. Avatar has some of the most imaginative CGI I've seen in a long time. To appreciate it you have to watch it in 3D, as that's what the film was intended for. I saw it in IMAX and it blew me away.
You can't judge a film that you haven't even seen. _________________ 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: January 26th, 2010, 10:28 pm |
|
Joined: 10 July 2005
Posts: 23149
Location: Where there are handsome heroes and sexy villains.. all that need some lovin' ;)
Country:
Gender: Female
|
|
If it looks fantastic in 3D then that's great! It's wonderful that people who don't suffer from headaches or any other conditions that might be aggravated by such visuals, or people who don't find it very painful wearing glasses over glasses, can enjoy this film.
But if all that can be said about Avatar is the special effects and the 3D factor, then there are going to be a lot of disappointed people when they come to re-watch it on a bog standard TV.
LOTR had some pretty stonking good visuals as well. I still think Jurassic Park has some of the best special effects of the last 30 years. Neither of these films rely on the CGI to carry the film, hence the reason they have survived and will survive even longer.
My main bug bear with this film, is I just know that the hype surrounding the effects is the reason it is making so much money. If this was just any other film, I wouldn't want to watch it full stop. But the fact it's being continually shoved in my face because of the special effects, just convinces me any awards it is winning is not for anything other than the fact it's a) bringing money back to Hollywood and b) people are convinced it's like colour films all over again.
The fact that pretty much no reviewer has given the story more than 2 lines, reaffirms my opinion that this is CGI motivated film - effects great, story bad - and no film should sacrafice story for visuals because it just will not hold up after you've seen it in the cinema.
_________________ 
^ By me and my SS *squiggle hugs*
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: January 27th, 2010, 12:26 am |
|
Joined: 03 July 2005
Posts: 9846
Location: city that never sleeps
|
|
Granted, the plot is nothing original. The worldbuilding sucks. However, the most immediate, thrilling aspect of a movie is its visual appeal, an art form all by itself. The purpose of a movie is to entertain, and Avatar more than entertains. It sets a new standard for visual effects. Whether or not it'll survive time no one can say, but the movie will at least be remembered as the first international 3D hit.
People are telling other people to see the film while it's still in theaters, hence the hype. No doubt it'll die down once it's out on DVD. For now, the film looks pretty darn awesome on the big screen. That's skill, not sheer luck.
I still say see the film first before judging it. You won't necessarily like it, but it'll at least validate your arguments. Judging Avatar's artistic merit without first seeing it is like writing a book review without reading the book.
_________________
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Re: Avatar (2009) Posted: January 31st, 2010, 5:23 pm |
|
Joined: 07 October 2006
Posts: 2474
Location: From the north I have come, need has driven me and I have passed the doors to the path of the M6
|
Lor En Estel wrote: I was just curious to see if anyone else was really looking forward to this movie coming out?! I'm soo excited for it. I'm going opening day to see it with my best friend, and I can't wait. It should be a blast!
I saw it tonight. put it this way, I think I died and went to heacven whilst watching it. I ended up with my mouth being wide open for the last half hour.
Its beyonid outstanding. I'd recommend it in a heartbeat to anyone I know. It is truly epic. Put it this way, if I had to watch 3 films before I died, it would be FOTR, ROTK and Avatar. With no contest.
_________________
"This is the hour of the Shire-folk, when they arise from their quiet fields to shake the towers and counsels of the Great. Who of all the Wise could have foreseen it? Or, if they are wise, why should they expect to know it, until the hour has struck? "
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: February 2nd, 2010, 6:55 pm |
|
Joined: 28 June 2005
Posts: 2310
Location: USA
|
|
I must admit that I too have participated in the Avatar hate, but that's not because it was a horrible movie. (I was kind of bitter that Avatar did better than The Dark Knight rawr.) In fact, I gave it a four out of five stars on Netflix. I gave the Resident Evil movies (notoriously bad) five out of five stars. They're guilty pleasures. In the theatre, I was entertained for the whole 2+ hours I was there and I can definitely say that I got my money's worth. I always notice the cinematography, graphics, and general artsiness of a film, and with Avatar I was completley blown away. It took me to another world.
But wow, the predictability and cheesiness didn't really bug me until after the movie. I had seen the story many times before. I talked to a couple of people who did actually enjoy Avatar for its story, and I disagreed profusely. They shoved the same messages into our faces over and over, and they were messages that were in no way original or profound. The people I mentioned argued that a movie doesn't have to be original to be good, and I guess there is some merit to that.
The reason Avatar has been doing so well financially is because of the expensive imax and 3D tickets. Also, it's a must-see in theatres if only to witness this amazing development in the CGI world. It won't stand the test of time, but it is still worth the money. Plus, what is so significant about the highest grossing movies list? People said The Dark Knight might surpass Titanic, but those movies were released in totally different times, circumstances, systems, and economies. Same with Avatar and Titanic. It doesn't matter how much money a movie makes -- we watch what we want to watch and that's that.
Before bashing Avatar, I would recommend watching it just for the experience. Why not? Otherwise, don't assume that you know the movie already. It really is a beautiful movie, and you have to respect the immense amount of time and effort that went into making this movie. I wish Cameron invested 10 years and $500 million in a better script and plot, but the monster designs and the locations were awesooome.
_________________ <center>
<a href="http://raindrops.lemon-drop.net/">Between the Rain Drops</a>
[ + @ # ? : ]
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: February 2nd, 2010, 7:43 pm |
|
Joined: 10 July 2005
Posts: 23149
Location: Where there are handsome heroes and sexy villains.. all that need some lovin' ;)
Country:
Gender: Female
|
|
You see here's the thing. I kinda think everyone has a right to opinion based on what they know. I haven't seen Avatar. But even without seeing it, I know one thing (and this has been confirmed by many people and also my brother whose taste mirrors my own and whose judgment I trust completely) - this film exists purely for the moment. This film is here now, when 3-D films are back in fashion and technology is getting better all the time.
I can't comment on the script, the acting, the dialogue, which is why I haven't because I haven't seen it and it would be stupid to mention those things.
But I can surely comment (correct me if I am wrong) on the fact that 99.9% of reviews and people say that Avatar is fantastic for the effects?
Now, I also can't comment on how good the effects are (although I have heard that they are obviously very good, and with all the time and effort spent on it I would be surprised if it wasn't).
But I believe that I can have an opinion over whether this film truly deserves to win so many awards and be nominated for so many categories, when all is said and done, technical things are all it has going for it?
You know, because at the end of the day should a film which has contributed so much to special effects, but in actuality contributes very little other than that, be awarded so many things, that many other well rounded films will never achieve?
That's my point about Avatar. The fact I don't want to see it, and am sick of hearing about it means nothing in this instance. I like debating about films, and why things deserve this or the other.
The first talking picture - and let's face it is that not a bigger revoultionary change than anything else in the last 50 years? - was merely awarded a special Oscar for its achievements. It wasn't a great film, but what it did for cinema is practically unrivalled.
And at least 83 years later, you can still marvel at how it must have felt to hear speech in film bak in 1927. Whether I will be able to have the same feeling of wonder if I see Avatar on DVD and appreciate the technology as much when I'm guessing it will look like any old film, only time will tell.
And as for the money factor.... back in 1939 when people had probably even more money worries than today and life was harder, there was a war looming in Europe.... Gone With the Wind put more backsides on seats worldwide than Avatar and Titanic have ever or will ever do.
_________________
^ By me and my SS *squiggle hugs*
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: February 3rd, 2010, 4:59 pm |
|
Joined: 11 August 2005
Posts: 18717
Country:
Gender: Female
|
|
Well, I think I made my feelings very clear on why I don't want to see it.
I'm not willing to spend money I barely have to go watch a movie...just cause everyone else is. Or because it's 'pretty'. If it doesn't interest me or do anything for me via pics/trailers. I won't go. It's that simple.
The 3D gimmick just pisses me off even more.
_________________
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: February 5th, 2010, 10:23 pm |
|
Joined: 03 July 2005
Posts: 9846
Location: city that never sleeps
|
|
No one's making you go. I do see your point, though, that Avatar doesn't deserve that many nominations. I also hope it doesn't win stuff like Best Motion Picture of the Year because it wasn't. Art Direction and Visual Effects, maybe, but definitely not Music either.
The thing with Avatar is that it's a completely submersive experience. You walk out of the theater dazed and seeing blue men everywhere you go, but an hour later you start asking yourself about plot and worldbuilding. Cameron has remarkable talent, but had he put more effort into storyline Avatar would have been leagues beyond amazing.
_________________
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: February 6th, 2010, 12:01 am |
|
Joined: 10 July 2005
Posts: 23149
Location: Where there are handsome heroes and sexy villains.. all that need some lovin' ;)
Country:
Gender: Female
|
|
^ And that, it would seem is the tragedy.
It's kinda like coming away from ROTK an emotional weeping wreck, and then you realise aside from the battles the characters were weak and the story was non-existant.
_________________
^ By me and my SS *squiggle hugs*
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Boyz theme by Zarron Media 2003
|
|
