EPTJames Cameron's AVATAR series - Page 89
| Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
|
SCkad
Scotland97 Posts
| ||
|
darklordjac
Canada2231 Posts
| ||
|
radscorpion9
Canada2252 Posts
| ||
|
SergioCQH
United States143 Posts
The people who didn't see the hype probably didn't see the movie in IMAX 3D on a giant screen. | ||
|
nohbrows
United States653 Posts
And man, Crash's win at the Oscars might have been politically charged, but you can't say the film was garbage (even though I did have problems with its racism). Avatar is nowhere near that level. It's eye-candy. Nothing else. | ||
|
Shiori
3815 Posts
On August 03 2013 09:53 SergioCQH wrote: Hell, if garbage like Crash can WIN the Best Picture, Avatar definitely deserves at least a nomination. The people who didn't see the hype probably didn't see the movie in IMAX 3D on a giant screen. At least Crash had a modicum of depth (pretentious/contrived or not). Avatar had absolutely none and was written like a nursery rhyme. I'm actually amazed that people were so impressed by it. Am I the only person in the world who isn't impressed by CGI anymore? I mean, yes, it was "breathtaking," or whatever, but at the end of the day it's just visual art, which is pretty boring when it's as vacuous as Avatar. | ||
|
Nub4ever
Canada1981 Posts
| ||
|
GwSC
United States1997 Posts
On August 03 2013 10:04 Nub4ever wrote: I don't know, I actualyl really enjoyed the first movie... I'm one of those people. In any case I can only hope the pull it off well. I've fortunately or unfortuantely not relaly experienced the kind of "first one's good, rest kills it" kind of thing with series. So idk, I shall suspend my disbelief even if they're as meh as other people seem to think the first was and hoepfully enjoy em anyways :D One of "those people"  It's actually a pretty small minority that didn't enjoy it, but like most small minorities when it comes to popular films, they are very vocal. On every site with user or critic reviews, those that liked it greatly outnumber those that didn't. | ||
|
dotHead
United States233 Posts
On August 03 2013 10:00 nohbrows wrote: Crash's win at the Oscars might have been politically charged, but you can't say the film was garbage (even though I did have problems with its racism). Avatar is nowhere near that level. It's eye-candy. Nothing else. I had problems with all the racism in Avatar, the whole movie the guy was pretty much in blue face. | ||
|
furymonkey
New Zealand1587 Posts
| ||
|
Archvil3
Denmark989 Posts
Sequals could be good too, my only problem being that when you plan several sequals at once and possibly shoot them together, more often then not they become mass production with not enough love for the indivual movies. | ||
|
GGTeMpLaR
United States7226 Posts
On August 03 2013 07:19 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Well guess what: http://variety.com/2013/film/news/avatar-to-get-three-sequels-foxcameron-hire-screenwriters-1200570515/ It's getting THREE sequels. As long as they're as visually stunning as the original, I approve. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On August 03 2013 09:53 SergioCQH wrote: Hell, if garbage like Crash can WIN the Best Picture, Avatar definitely deserves at least a nomination. The people who didn't see the hype probably didn't see the movie in IMAX 3D on a giant screen. Problem is that Avatar didn't have anything going for it other than the visuals...and there's a perfectly good "Visual Effects" category for that. The story is generic, the sci-fi is really weak, the characters are cliches done straight. Even the acting was mediocre...I mean, the first time the protagonist speaks I think "Hey, an Australian military lead character, that's uncommon", and then later realize he's supposed to be an 100% American lead...and even later realize he really is an Australian actor, he just couldn't hide his accent very well. | ||
|
Shinta)
United States1716 Posts
On August 03 2013 10:03 Shiori wrote: At least Crash had a modicum of depth (pretentious/contrived or not). Avatar had absolutely none and was written like a nursery rhyme. I'm actually amazed that people were so impressed by it. Am I the only person in the world who isn't impressed by CGI anymore? I mean, yes, it was "breathtaking," or whatever, but at the end of the day it's just visual art, which is pretty boring when it's as vacuous as Avatar. Using bigger words makes things more entertaining for you? That's cool, but that's something that's more of a unique trait than a common one. "It's just visual art" Well..... It's a motion picture. Visual art is pretty much the highlight of motion pictures, as they are pictures that are in motion. Every picture needs to speak volumes, but even the most basic words can teach the wisest of lessons and provide the best entertainment. | ||
|
Junichi
Germany1056 Posts
| ||
|
corumjhaelen
France6884 Posts
| ||
|
i_bE_free
United States73 Posts
| ||
|
revel8
United Kingdom3022 Posts
| ||
|
Junichi
Germany1056 Posts
On August 03 2013 17:44 corumjhaelen wrote: Well, cool, while the first Avatar wasn't a great movie, it certainly was at least decent, and the people who say that it's just Pocahontas in space or whatever are just repeating the same idiocy they read without thiking anyway. You make it sound like Pocahontas was a bad movie. Which it wasn't. The story of Avatar was just boring. The visual creation still made the movie enjoyable though. As you say, not great, but decent. | ||
|
ItsFunToLose
United States776 Posts
| ||
| ||
