|FAQ||Members List||Calendar||Search||Today's Posts||Mark Forums Read|
|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|Jan 18th, 2010 10:21 PM|
|nirvana_infinity||My only issue was: In the big battle, why the F@CK did the mecha-robot pull out a freaking hunting knife??? Was he going to clean a fish? Skin a buck? Robots packing knives! What is the world coming to?|
|Jan 18th, 2010 09:06 PM|
Ah alright. Thanks for clearing that up, Proto. I figured that the glasses all came from the same place.
Anyway I read on Yahoo news that Avatar is damn close to taking Batman's spot as No. 3 highest grossing movie domestically. I thought Avatar was incredible but Dark Knight is a modern freaking classic, so I'm not sure how I feel about that.
|Jan 18th, 2010 03:46 AM|
|executioneer||i think moc320 is a spambot, guys|
|Jan 18th, 2010 03:43 AM|
Moc320: That was very nicely put.
Protoclown: They charge that much for 3D and won't let customers keep the glasses anymore? Christ, I hope they at least stay to cuddle afterwards.
|Jan 18th, 2010 01:07 AM|
|Jan 17th, 2010 11:50 PM|
Avatar is a phenomenon you can't ignore, monumentally imposing and done with extraordinary expertise ?but the same could be said of the Dubai skyline, and I'm not sure that represents any future worth investing in.
|Jan 17th, 2010 01:30 PM|
|caffman||I went to see it in 2D and it was great!|
|Jan 16th, 2010 01:00 PM|
|10,000 Volt Ghost||It seems like new movies in 3D just look like really good High Def instead of stuff jumping out anymore.|
|Jan 15th, 2010 09:26 PM|
|Coryjonc||Goblyn, I'm not disagreeing with you or anything but Avatar's 3D doesn't have a lot of the problems you listed. The glasses you get are new, and you just throw them out afterwords. They're also big enough to fit over your glasses (I have big, dorky glasses and the 3D ones fit comfortably over them). Also, the 3D effects never "Jump" out at you. Honestly I never really liked 3D movies, because I also have bad eyes and don't like it when things jump out at me, but the new 3D system they used in Avatar isn't like that. I was really skeptical going in, as a matter of fact. It just makes the movie look nicer.|
|Jan 15th, 2010 03:56 PM|
|goblyn||In general I don't like 3D; I don't like having to watch a movie through dark glasses as my eyes are already bad, I don't like the idea that someone with poor hygiene may have worn those glasses before me, I don't like having to remember to wear contacts on the day I'm going to the theater if I want to avoid the stupidity of having to wear 3d glasses over my regular glasses, and I don't like the eyestrain that 3d causes when things start getting too "exciting" for my eyes to handle. I know I sound like an old coot (I'm 30, which probably makes me ancient here), but its true, I know plenty of young people with the same problems. However, I do have to say that certain movies, like silly horror movies, work well with the 3D gimmick. I just think that if the future of film really is 3D, nobody is going to want to put up with all the drawbacks just to see some shitty rom-com or oscar worthy drama.|
|Jan 14th, 2010 07:45 PM|
|Y-Hat||I'm glad to hear that I wasn't the only one not really blown away by the 3D. I liked everything else about it, though. I just love the planet that he created, and the plot reminded me of a space Western. Other than the 3D, it was really good.|
|Jan 13th, 2010 02:25 PM|
|Jan 13th, 2010 04:15 AM|
|Coryjonc||I honestly loved this movie. I thought the story and characters were awesome. Not necessarily unique, mind you, but diffidently awesome. I even really liked the 3D. I'm sure the movie is still great in 2D, but I enjoyed seeing it in 3D and I wouldn't mind seeing other movies in that format. I actually saw it twice with two separate groups of friends (dragged the second group along in traditional "YOU HAVE GOT TO SEE THIS" style and they all loved it).|
|Jan 13th, 2010 03:17 AM|
|Ant10708||Next James Bond will be in 3D. Because you managed a movie theater does not mean you know about the health of the industry as a whole|
|Jan 12th, 2010 03:08 PM|
The problem with movies built on eye candy is that sooner or later I stop paying attention to it and start paying attention to the plot and characters, and it's clear James Cameron didn't give a shit about either when making Avatar.
What really needles me, though, is that some reviewers are trying to gloss over that by saying Cameron "made well-worn ideas fresh again." No, he fucking didn't; he took a very bland, trite and horribly cliched story full of uninteresting, one-dimensional characters and hung a lot of pretty window dressing on it. I've never before seen critics fawn over a movie built on nothing but special effects, and I'm afraid it sets a terrible precedent for films to come. At this rate, Transformers 3 will end up sweeping the Academy Awards, and I'll just have to make the permanent switch to books.
|Jan 11th, 2010 10:25 PM|
|Nick||It does look interesting, but I think I will wait for the Blu Ray release.|
|Jan 11th, 2010 10:18 PM|
|DrewP||I can't wait for the Piranha remake in 3D... Flying killer fish in 3D ... I am there|
|Jan 11th, 2010 09:08 PM|
|Purple Man||"Dances With Giant Smurfs", is what it is. They took the Pocahontas story, changed the names, and figured no-one would notice. So no, colour me purple unimpressed.|
|Jan 11th, 2010 07:24 PM|
|All Hail Duke||
I'm in the minority of people who didn't like this or think it was groundbreaking at all.
Just thought it was boring with bad sfx that reminded me of Beowulf.
|Jan 11th, 2010 07:08 PM|
|Protoclown||Ant10708, my friend who can't see 3D didn't see the movie in blurred vision. While wearing the glasses he saw everything normally, not in 3D. He said it was still a beautiful movie in regular 2D, as have other people who have seen it that way.|
|Jan 11th, 2010 05:39 PM|
Movie theaters are in no danger. I know cause I used to manage one and an article just came out showing that that had a slight 3 year slump that had more to do with the quality of movies than people paying to go to the theater.
3D will probably kill a theaters as all you will see is visual crap fests.
|Jan 11th, 2010 05:33 PM|
"it's what World of Warcraft players fantasize about when they masturbate"...LOL, i hate you
Anyways, i do plan on seeing this,but not sure if i want to see it in 3d or not..mostly becouse i would have to drive an hour outside of town..
|Jan 11th, 2010 02:44 PM|
|Ant10708||I also heard from people who seen demos of the 3d blu ray, claim its even better in 3d on your tv because your closer and thus more in the world|
|Jan 11th, 2010 02:43 PM|
|Ant10708||If you saw it in 3D how did your friend who is unable to see 3d images enjoy the movie in blurred vision? And protoclown you are so wrong about the future of 3D. 3D will keep movie theaters open and profitable for the foreseeable future. Unless you want to see movie theaters become non existent I suggest you embrace the 3D format because its def the future of movies and theres no turning back the clock now on this technology. my friggin grandma saw avatar in 3d. its offically been introduced to the general public with avatra.|
|Jan 11th, 2010 01:07 PM|
This film is good, but I don't think it's quite deserving of a lot of the praise it gets. Pretty much all the characters were bland and uninteresting (Stephen Lang's Colonel was awesome, however), and the plot really predictable (complete with some foreshadowing they all but beat you with). A lot of the Na'vi moments, especially the 'serious' things and situations, left me giggling more than anything else (especially the mating scene). I just couldn't take them seriously.
Still, the visuals are very awesome to look at. Especially the night sequences, with all the glowing plants, that was outrageously cool. And the final battle (narm-inducing lines omitted) was very fun to watch. Good movie, entertaining movie, but that's about it.
And I feel the exact same way about 3D. Making a movie 3D simply doesn't make it a better movie in the end.
|This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|