Author Topic: Avatar (Read 175674 times)

Some of the things he said in this interview was absolutely fucking retarded. Comparing how we implemented color TV to become standard to how he wants 3D to become standard is absolutely stupid. Color makes sense, because there are things you just can't get at all from a movie being in black and white. But for 3D? You just get that extra dimension for pure immersion, which honestly is not necessary for any movie that isn't a roller-coaster ride through mediocre action sequences and stunning visual effects.

(No seriously, would YOU REALLY want to see Requiem for a Dream in 3D?)

PetFish · « **Reply #1163 on:** October 26, 2011, 07:11:44 PM »

^^

So turn off the 3D and watch it in 2D. So what if they make stuff in 3D? Nobody is forcing you to watch it in 3D. So what's so bad about giving people viewing options?

Chino · « **Reply #1164 on:** October 26, 2011, 09:17:46 PM »

As long as its done properly, I prefer 3D in regards to everything.

Zook · « **Reply #1165 on:** October 26, 2011, 09:35:23 PM »

Now I still haven't seen this movie and I bet I never wiiiill.

Chino · « **Reply #1166 on:** November 12, 2011, 08:06:52 AM »

Came across this on iTunes this morning, I almost bought it.

Jamesman42 · « **Reply #1167 on:** November 12, 2011, 08:17:17 AM »

lol

his face is not proportional to the avatar face, is that why you didn't buy it?

Chino · « **Reply #1168 on:** February 07, 2012, 08:33:39 AM »

NOOOOOOOO! NO NO NO NO NOOOOOO!!

https://www.nme.com/filmandtv/news/avatar-2-release-delayed-until-2016-says-produce/257476

My whole fucking next four years are ruined!

lateralus88 · « **Reply #1169 on:** February 07, 2012, 09:20:08 AM »

I am okay with this.

theseoafs · « **Reply #1170 on:** February 07, 2012, 09:26:06 AM »

Avatar is one of the worst films.

Zantera · « **Reply #1171 on:** February 07, 2012, 09:29:46 AM »

Which movies will Avatar 2 ripoff? Peter Pan? Aladdin?

BlobVanDam · « **Reply #1172 on:** February 07, 2012, 09:30:23 AM »

Quote from: Zantera on February 07, 2012, 09:29:46 AM

Which movies will Avatar 2 ripoff? Peter Pan? Aladdin?

Weekend at Bernies......

2.

Chino · « **Reply #1173 on:** February 07, 2012, 10:17:28 AM »

I can't wait to see what everyone says when the final two movies do just as well as the first, with no similarities to other films.

Quote from: theseoafs on February 07, 2012, 09:26:06 AM

Avatar is one of the worst films.

Your one of the worst humans.

Zantera · « **Reply #1174 on:** February 07, 2012, 10:46:30 AM »

Yeah, but why exactly did Avatar do so well?
The visual part. It was something new, "never seen before", the big project by James Cameron, who is after all one of the most popular directors out there. The fact that it was one of the most expensive movies to make, the whole "fuzz" that started before the movie had even come out, but the visual part was obviously the big interesting thing about the movie.
The fact that it had a script that a 10 year old could have written, or the fact that 90% of it was stolen from Pocahontas, that wasn't really a problem, cause hey "the movie has visual effects!".

I think that most people will agree with me when I say that it's quite obvious that the second movie will do well on cinemas. No matter how shit or good it will be, the amount of people that saw the first movie, it's quite obviously that a new movie will attract people. The third is hard to say now already, because if the second movie turns out a big flop, many people might ignore it for those reasons.

I think Avatar is a mediocre movie at best. Visually it's a cool movie, but some of the things in the script just made me go facepalm about it, and that might be because I'm not an American, but some of it was just too American for my taste. All the patriot-bullshit here and there, some of the lines were just cheesy. I might watch the second movie on cinema when it comes, it's too early to say, but it wouldn't be one of those movies I see because I think they will be awesome. Cool visually (and probably worth the cinema-fee just for that), but Cameron better come up with a better script.

Rina · « **Reply #1175 on:** February 07, 2012, 10:56:52 AM »

Quote from: Chino on February 07, 2012, 10:17:28 AM

I can't wait to see what everyone says when the final two movies do just as well as the first, with no similarities to other films.

Quote from: theseoafs on February 07, 2012, 09:26:06 AM
Avatar is one of the worst films.

Your one of the worst humans.

HE DIDN'T MEAN IT CHINO

HE DIDN'T MEAN IT

Implode · « **Reply #1176 on:** February 07, 2012, 11:08:10 AM »

Saying it's the worst movie makes about as much sense as saying it's the best movie.

theseoafs · « **Reply #1177 on:** February 07, 2012, 12:20:27 PM »

Quote from: Chino on February 07, 2012, 10:17:28 AM

Quote from: theseoafs on February 07, 2012, 09:26:06 AM
Avatar is one of the worst films.

Your one of the worst humans.

My one of the worst humans? Okay.

Avatar is a bad film. It tells an incredibly generic story that seems interesting because of the visuals. It invokes countless cliches and tropes, only to be lauded as revolutionary because of the CGI. I'm not saying the CGI wasn't impressive; it was. But if you peel away the visuals, you're left with a cliche story with a face-palmingly prominent moral and a romantic subplot that somehow finds a way to be unsettling in spite of its predictability.

Titanic affirmed Cameron's suspicion that a visual spectacle would make audiences forget that they weren't watching anything of substance, and Avatar was, for my money, Titanic Part II.

Fluffy Lothario · « **Reply #1178 on:** February 07, 2012, 02:51:49 PM »

I'd go see Avatar 2. I didn't think that highly of the first one, but it was good, and fun, at least.

I'm about one of the most furrow-browed movie watchers out there. Generally speaking, I won't watch a movie unless I genuinely think it has a chance of becoming one of my favourite movies.

Avatar didn't deliver, but it was enjoyable enough and distinct enough an experience that I would want to see the second, which is an exception to my normal watching habits.

Chino · « **Reply #1179 on:** February 07, 2012, 04:05:53 PM »

Quote from: theseoafs on February 07, 2012, 12:20:27 PM

Quote from: Chino on February 07, 2012, 10:17:28 AM
Quote from: theseoafs on February 07, 2012, 09:26:06 AM
Avatar is one of the worst films.

Your one of the worst humans.
My one of the worst humans? Okay.

Avatar is a bad film. It tells an incredibly generic story that seems interesting because of the visuals. It invokes countless cliches and tropes, only to be lauded as revolutionary because of the CGI. I'm not saying the CGI wasn't impressive; it was. But if you peel away the visuals, you're left with a cliche story with a face-palmingly prominent moral and a romantic subplot that somehow finds a way to be unsettling in spite of its predictability.

Titanic affirmed Cameron's suspicion that a visual spectacle would make audiences forget that they weren't watching anything of substance, and Avatar was, for my money, Titanic Part II.

Here's my thing. If you want strictly an awesome story, go read an awesome book. The entire point of a movie is to visually entertain the viewer. If that were not the case, we wouldn't need movies. Just for laughs, lets take the movies Short Circuit and Short Circuit 2. I am sure many people here, including myself, really enjoy those movies. Now, let us pretend Jonny V's character was played by a guy in a carboard suite. The movie would not have been anywhere near as good, even with the same exact story. Visuals are more than a gimmick that movies use entertain the viewer, it allows the people watching to connect and feel as though they are part of the movie. Avatar didn't just have awesome visuals. Avatar had awesome visuals that brought James Cameron's vision of this unknown world into reality. Pandora isn't just a bunch of pretty shit that is nice to look at. It's a world that goes beyond the imagination of anything we had seen to this day. Really break the world down, and you will see that everything in the world exists for a reason, and thousands of hours went into the creation of something that you forget is fake by the end of the movie. The creatures, the machines, the scenary, the language, the emotions, and the sheer fun factor, are all elements that make Avatar one of the greatest movies of all time. A new language full of rules was created from scratch. An entire food chain and ecosystem, along with evidence of it's own evolutionary routes, was created in unbelievable detail. The thousands upon thousands of minute details that went into Avatar's creation is was makes me extremely appreciative of what it is. I'm not saying, nor did I ever say, that the story of Avatar was the greatest thing ever. My point is that a movie is not suppose to be critiqued based on the story line alone, that's why it is a movie and not a book.

My big gripe with Avatar is that there were 40+ minutes of deleted scenes. A lot of these scenes contained a great deal of back story and insite, that I believe not only enhanced the story, but also would have made it not as similar (as a whole) to prior movies. There were plenty of things brought to light that would have connected the viewers to the characters even more than they did originally.

Quote

Titanic affirmed Cameron's suspicion that a visual spectacle would make audiences forget that they weren't watching anything of substance, and Avatar was, for my money, Titanic Part II.

That's a bullshit argument. If you have the capability, why would you not make Titanic look as jaw dropping as possible. Go watch the black and white Titanic movie from the 1950's and tell me it was anywhere near what James Cameron did. How did Titanic have no substance? Even without the love story, it still showed many aspects of it's short voyage. We got to see all the classes, Titanic leaving the dock, the discrimination, the panic, the inequality, etc.... It was still a very informative movie that was extremely well done. It allowed people to see and feel something that they otherwise never would have been able to.

Dark Castle · « **Reply #1180 on:** February 07, 2012, 04:13:24 PM »

On the same note, without a good story, visuals don't mean much. I saw Avatar, and while it wasn't terrible, I wouldn't go out of my way to see it again whether it be buying it or renting it. The visuals are important yes, but not enough to sell the whole ticket.

Super Dude · « **Reply #1181 on:** February 07, 2012, 05:05:21 PM »

^ That. A truly great filmmaker recognizes that while film is a visual art, it cannot stand on that basis alone. That is why George Lucas will never be a great filmmaker.

Pols Voice · « **Reply #1182 on:** February 07, 2012, 05:12:43 PM »

Quote from: Zantera on February 07, 2012, 09:29:46 AM

Which movies will Avatar 2 ripoff? Peter Pan? Aladdin?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocahontas_2

Rina · « **Reply #1183 on:** February 07, 2012, 05:22:12 PM »

Quote from: Pols Voice on February 07, 2012, 05:12:43 PM

Quote from: Zantera on February 07, 2012, 09:29:46 AM
Which movies will Avatar 2 ripoff? Peter Pan? Aladdin?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocahontas_2

theseoafs · « **Reply #1184 on:** February 07, 2012, 05:31:18 PM »

Quote from: Super Dude on February 07, 2012, 05:05:21 PM

^ That. A truly great filmmaker recognizes that while film is a visual art, it cannot stand on that basis alone. That is why George Lucas will never be a great filmmaker.

Even if visual spectacle and imaginative environments are the most important things in movies, as Chino suggests (pro-tip: they are not), Star Wars is far more creative and revolutionary. The Pandora universe is stifled and derivative; every single one of these new animals are amalgamations of animals we see on Earth every day.

If I'm going to turn off my brain and gawk at colors for three hours, I'd rather be watching Lucas.

Implode · « **Reply #1185 on:** February 07, 2012, 05:35:57 PM »

All anyone ever says about Avatar is that it's unoriginal. Is that really enough to say it's a god awful movie? What if we compare it to real shit like The Phantom Menace and The Last Airbender? It can't be nearly as bad. I don't remember it failing at the movie basics.

Fiery Winds · « **Reply #1186 on:** February 07, 2012, 06:02:23 PM »

Quote from: Chino on February 07, 2012, 04:05:53 PM

Here's my thing. If you want strictly an awesome story, go read an awesome book. The entire point of a movie is to visually entertain the viewer. If that were not the case, we wouldn't need movies.

I believe this is a flawed premise, which if true would certainly make Avatar a great movie. I loved the visuals, especially in 3D.

I think a more accurate description of what a movie is would be: "Entertains viewers through visuals and audio". The operative word being "entertain". People place different weight on the components of a movie which entertain them. You find entertainment in pretty visuals. Others may place quite a bit of weight on story, character development, thought-provoking ideas, sound, etc. If someone puts little weight on visuals and a large weight on original story, they probably wouldn't enjoy Avatar very much. Doesn't make either of you wrong, it simply means you have different tastes.

However, I am looking forward to the sequel though and hope it has a more original and less predictable story.

7thHanyou · « **Reply #1187 on:** February 07, 2012, 06:21:33 PM »

I really hated the story in Avatar, not because it was unoriginal (many of the best-told stories are entirely unoriginal), but partly because the "white guilt" template is not something I was ever fond of. If a movie is going to be preachy, it needs to earn it (The Empire Strikes Back is an example), and I never felt like Avatar really earned anything. Goddammit, I want to punch every single character in that movie in the face. I actually laughed during the whole burning of the hometree part, not because it was inherently funny--it shouldn't have been--but because belaboring the point for a five fucking minute sequence is just overdoing it, forced storytelling at its very worst. Show us the attack, show us the aftermath, but you don't have to dwell on every single aspect of the atrocity. It's like the filmmakers were shouting "CARE ABOUT THIS, PEOPLE!"

Ironically, District 9, which was arguably even more preachy and had a somewhat similar premise (mostly the "capitalism = evil" part), earned it. Seriously. My mind was blown by every minute of that film, until the ending, where it broke down a bit but was still strong enough not to affect the overall quality of the movie. It wasn't subtle either, and yeah, I hated the protagonist, but it pulled me in every direction it wanted to and for the most part did it skillfully and naturally. I forgot I was watching a movie. With Avatar, I was reminded every ten seconds.

But here's the worst part: everyone says it's a great-looking movie, and all I see is Lisa Frank CGI vomit. Like the Star Wars prequels, it has a repulsive visual style, so any technical wizardry falls flat. What are people seeing, exactly? The world just seems shallow, full of unrealistic and unbelievable colors. I guess to get sold on it, I'd have to believe it's natural, but I never do. The whole thing looks damn fake to me, and since it's going for realism (unlike, say, a Pixar film), that's a huge problem.

What is it about this visual style that people like?

If you want to LOOK at a movie, you're better off with, I don't know, a Stanley Kubrick film. Something remotely interesting. If you want to look at CGI, there are plenty of options for that too.

Super Dude · « **Reply #1188 on:** February 07, 2012, 06:30:41 PM »

Quote from: Implode on February 07, 2012, 05:35:57 PM

All anyone ever says about Avatar is that it's unoriginal. Is that really enough to say it's a god awful movie? What if we compare it to real shit like The Phantom Menace and The Last Airbender? It can't be nearly as bad. I don't remember it failing at the movie basics.

The word "unobtainium" makes me cringe almost as much as Hayden's acting.

Chino · « **Reply #1189 on:** February 07, 2012, 06:37:52 PM »

Quote from: 7thHanyou on February 07, 2012, 06:21:33 PM

But here's the worst part: everyone says it's a great-looking movie, and all I see is Lisa Frank CGI vomit. Like the Star Wars prequels, it has a repulsive visual style, so any technical wizardry falls flat. What are people seeing, exactly? The world just seems shallow, full of unrealistic and unbelievable colors. I guess to get sold on it, I'd have to believe it's natural, but I never do. The whole thing looks damn fake to me, and since it's going for realism (unlike, say, a Pixar film), that's a huge problem.

What exactly was not believable or unrealistic?

News: Dream Theater Forums: Biggest Dream Theater online community since 2007.

Author Topic: Avatar (Read 175674 times)