Avatar wows critics at its London opening today.

[K1052]

i really fail to see how CGI that looks laughtable in a 480p trailer on my computer monitor is going to look good on a 100ft screen.

No trailer does the film visual justice. It was specifically conceived and produced to be viewed in 3D.

 

[bdude]

Yeah I said it months ago. This is Pocahontas 2.0

every story worth telling has been told

 

[Glitchny]

Given its budget, I'll be stunned if this thing makes money.

If it does, I'll bow (briefly.) My fear then would be Cameron wanting a $1b budget for his next film.

Right cause the budget is so huge

http://www.thewrap.com/article/true-cost-and-consequences-avatar-11206?page=1

it's going to make money, that's already going to happen so you might as well start acting stunned.

I'm actually surprised at the amount of people in this thread not hating/bashing yet. Considering how everyone here is so opinionated about anything remotely popular it's amazing this thread hasn't degenerated into flames yet.

 

[Glitchny]

every story worth telling has been told

Yep people need to realize that pretty much every story is a copy/retelling of one that has been told before.

 

[darkxshade]

Yep people need to realize that pretty much every story is a copy/retelling of one that has been told before.

This is unfortunately so true, can't imagine the movie industry in 100 years...

SAW 105, HALLOWEEN 2109!

 

[zinfamous]

looks like it will be a great Blu-ray rental.

ATI will present their new 3D tech at CES this year...but even if that is successful, it will be 1-2 years, maybe, before Avatar at home can simulate to any approximation the experience in the theater.

 

[zinfamous]

It does look very cheesy but it's James Cameron. Almost all his movies have been very good. I won't see this on opening week but a week or two after. Oh and I hate 3-D movies. Just another gimmick just like motion controls. Every pair of the recent 3-D glasses I have worn have been uncomfortable as hell and really adds nothing to the movies.

this is completely new technology, so you really haven't seen this 3D before. the glasses are new, I've heard the characters are walking out next to you, in front of the subtitles.

I haven't seen any 3D in a theater, I think, because like you I don't give 2 shits about "gimicky" tech....But I find myself more and more excited about this as it really is a ground-up reinvention of the technology. Completely new cameras, better projectors, more streamlined production tech. at the very least, I've become impressed by this entire project.

 

[zinfamous]

Sadly this would actually legitimately explain the popularity of abominations such as Transformers 1 and 2.

show me a positive critical review of Transformers, or any Michael bay film. The smattering reviews for Avatar have been from critics, not fans. All positive so far, and related to the movie more than the effects.

Of course fans and general audience will like Transformers, b/c the type that go to see that tripe don't really see anything else when they go to the theaters. Critics have a much wider array of film experience, so they're opinions will be different--and are nearly 98% anti-transformers.

 

[AbAbber2k]

we still haven't fixed healthcare by then, huh?

Damn, beat me to it.

Yeah I said it months ago. This is Pocahontas 2.0

I was going with FernGully2k.

RottenTomatoes isn't giving me much hope. 94% rating, but most reviews are 4stars or less. There's even quotes on the front page from 3.5star "good" reviews that talk up the visuals but slam the plot. Substance has taken a backseat to special effects.

 

[SAWYER]

"Substance has taken a backseat to special effects"

That is what I am inclined to believe

 

[zinfamous]

Pixar.

correct me if I'm wrong, but Pixar has yet to shoot a live-action film using newly-engineered stereoscopic HD cameras.

 

[lokiju]

No, there's a plot. It's just the exact same plot we've seen in countless other films from Pocahontas to Dances with Wolves to The Last Samurai.

Here's a fun question though...if we are so technologically advanced that we can travel to distance worlds and create hybrid human/Na'vi being that we can transfer our consciousness too....why is Sam Worthington's character still paraplegic?

Even the preview addresses that.

 

[zinfamous]

Oh I don't necessarily disagree. Will I go see it? Yeah, probably. I'd love to see how great it ends up looking in IMAX 3D. Do I think it is going to be the best movie ever? Oh hell no. I just find it funny more per how this forum just reacts to anything that is "popular", it is just oh so cool to smash stuff that is popular. That is all my point really is. It applies to alot of things that get brought up on this forum and I just find it hilarious how much of a clique of anti anything popular that it actually is almost a majority.

I think you and many others assume that people bash something simply b/c it's popular, or b/c they think it's cool to do so. This is completely wrong.

People have different expectations when approaching a piece of art--whether it be music, film, books, whatever. These expectations are based on experience, and oftentimes, you'll find crowds of people that have vastly different, often more diverse experiences in particular forms of art than you will have. To simply discount the criticism of someone who likely has a much wider experience to pull from as "bashing b/c it's cool" is cheap and ignorant.

The Economist had a decent short article on this phenomenon a few weeks ago, about a prediction that a staff reporter made ~2 years ago regarding the expected demise of "the Blockbuster" (the advent of cheap home digital technology, You Tube, downloaded content, etc...). Well, it didn't happen. People still go to see blockbusters, despite their lackluster quality and as some might argue, considerable depreciation in quality (ergo, Transformers). As it happens, those that want to see blockbusters in theaters will continue to see blockbusters--b/c for the vast majority of that crowd--this is the ONLY type of movie they ever see. You won't see them in an art house, they wouldn't even rent such a film. Their only understanding of "film" never expands beyond the action/sci-fi/adventure genre, and most of that is further limited into" pewpew-bang-pow" category of action, as previously mentioned. Simply put: this audience doesn't know any better.

There are several members here, actually, who have not only spent a significant amount of their lives engaged in film study--whether it be through watching much more diverse genres of world film, spanning the history of film, or those of us that have even studied film history and theory in an organized manner; so you should attempt to realize that some of us aren't expressing criticism, positive or negative simply b/c it's "cool," but because we have a diverse array of expectations to pull from, and a rather solid understanding of film as a medium to appreciate how something either fails, or succeeds, for what it is trying to accomplish.

To discount someone's interpretation of a film as based on a desire to be counter to prevailing opinion is not only simple-minded, but it adopts the anti-intellectual bias you often see with the layman's anti-science crowd--the "I fear and don't trust what I don't understand" mentality. It's Palin-style populism that erroneously defends itself with a baseless claim of anti-elitism.

 

[zinfamous]

Here's a fun question though...if we are so technologically advanced that we can travel to distance worlds and create hybrid human/Na'vi being that we can transfer our consciousness too....why is Sam Worthington's character still paraplegic?

there are no more original plots...this was true even in Shakespeare's time.

anyway, about this issue. Since we have to exist within the reality of the film, how about this assumption:

Based on the current debate over ethics in science, concerning cloning, cyborg technology, now stem cells as a potential remedy for paralysis, I think it's reasonable to argue that by the time period of this sci-Fi film, we can imagine that the technology required to cure someone of paraplegia is a less ethical application of medicine than traveling to distant worlds and creating a false Avatar as a housing for consciousness.

Sounds crazy, perhaps, but we don't exist within that ethical debate, so it's impossible for us to appreciate the prevailing issues that this society faces.

 

[zinfamous]

we still haven't fixed healthcare by then, huh?

 

[Albatross]

if this fails,prepare for Transformers 12

 

[Arkaign]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091211/ap_on_en_mo/us_film_review_avatar

2.5 Stars out of 4, AP.

 

[jonks]

Cameron fleshed out most of the ideas/themes for Avatar in his 1995 scriptment.

If anything the film is an indictment of colonialism/manifest destiny.

Funny how the guilty always think everything is about them. Very "Tell-Tale Heart".

 

[lifeobry]

This will be worth it at the theaters for the tech/action alone. If there's a coherent story inbetween, a nice plus

 

[JDub02]

i'm deciding between imax 3d and reald 3d. my local theater has both. anyone know which is better? i haven't seen a movie in either.

 

[Locut0s]

i'm deciding between imax 3d and reald 3d. my local theater has both. anyone know which is better? i haven't seen a movie in either.

I would wait for reviews comparing both. Usually IMAX movies (as opposed to documentaries and the like) are way over-hyped and overpriced. But there is the rare movie that is supposed to look really spectacular in IMAX.

 

[darkxshade]

I would wait for reviews comparing both. Usually IMAX movies (as opposed to documentaries and the like) are way over-hyped and overpriced. But there is the rare movie that is supposed to look really spectacular in IMAX.

Might be worth the premium just to see it on the giant screen at IMAX.

 

[Arkaign]

Might be worth the premium just to see it on the giant screen at IMAX.

Beware the quasi-Imax though. It used to be that all IMAX theatres were the big bold wraparounds, now there are bunch of sort of weak IMAX theatres out there.

 

[Aharami]

yep, IMAX sold out it's name to make more money

 

[K1052]

Beware the quasi-Imax though. It used to be that all IMAX theatres were the big bold wraparounds, now there are bunch of sort of weak IMAX theatres out there.

Even in the smaller retrofit rooms the IMAX 3D presentation will be superior to normal digital 3D.