Avatar wows critics at its London opening today.

[jonks]

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

Maybe so, but those vanilla fake Imax (not 3d) are just a waste of money and not worth the extra $5 or so that they charge. I saw Watchmen in a fake Imax and was not impressed.

 

[techs]

Avatar:
PG-13 for intense epic battle sequences and warfare, sensuality, language and some smoking.

I'm digging the new ratings system.

 

[Arkaign]

Avatar:
PG-13 for intense epic battle sequences and warfare, sensuality, language and some smoking.

I'm digging the new ratings system.

Heh. There is one thing I think is silly though. Smoking = higher rating. Ghostbusters, for example, would be at minimum a PG-13 with today's rating system. Freaking Ghostbusters! Hah.

Of course, there were some oddities to old ratings systems as well, such as Nuns on the Run, which although it had a PG-13 had a scene of sustained full nudity (!!). I wonder if sometimes the ratings people don't even watch the film in question

 

[Locut0s]

Heh. There is one thing I think is silly though. Smoking = higher rating. Ghostbusters, for example, would be at minimum a PG-13 with today's rating system. Freaking Ghostbusters! Hah.

Of course, there were some oddities to old ratings systems as well, such as Nuns on the Run, which although it had a PG-13 had a scene of sustained full nudity (!!). I wonder if sometimes the ratings people don't even watch the film in question

I love how movie rental places often list the objectionable material on the back of the rental box like accidental death and dismemberment insurance. 2 scenes of bare breasts, 1 joint smoked, 33 occurrences of swearing, etc etc... As if you could tell anything from that.

 

[jonks]

My friend just got back from the screening. His text:

"It is FANTASTIC. Get ready to have the hots for an 8 foot tall blue chick."

 

[JEDI]

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BA06820091211?type=reviewsNews

"Avatar" wows early movie reviewers

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Director James Cameron's long-awaited "Avatar" wowed critics at its London premiere on Thursday, with some early reviewers calling it "jaw-dropping," "mind-blowing" and a game-changer in Hollywood for its digital effects.

Britain's biggest-selling tabloid, The Sun, called it "the most dazzling film of the decade. ... The final battle scene is 20 minutes long and absolutely mind-blowing."

Empire magazine gave the movie five stars out of five, calling it a "hugely rewarding experience" whose new technology "will give directors ... one heck of a sandbox to play in."

The London Guardian's Mark Brown wrote on Thursday that "Avatar" was "really much, much better than expected, (it) looked amazing and the story was gripping -- if cheesy in many places."

"The terrible film that some had been anticipating had not materialized. It was good," Brown wrote.

Cameron may really be the king of the world.

wasnt star trek: nemesis also have a 20min combat scene. and the movie still SUCKED!

i predict this $500M :q movie will suck. but i also predict it will do well at the box office.

But will it make $500M in the US?!

.

 

[MercenaryYoureFired]

Maybe it's not his fault that the advertising blitz has overhyped it. RT premier reviewers are meaningless as they are all review whores (or many). If the reviews stay positive in a week or two--and probably they will be still overwhelmingly positive--then I may in fact put in the effort to see this in theater

RT reviewers are meaningless? Dude, your POSTS are meaningless. They couldn't be filled up with more hyperbole if you tried. Saying Avatar looks like community college CGI when most of the movie industry recognizes it's the best CGI ever done makes it really hard to take ANY of your posts seriously. You do this quite often so at this point taking anything you say and thinking the exact opposite would be a good way to see where things really are.

 

[Arkaign]

Gah, I just read about a dozen reviews on RT that are supposedly 'fresh', this is the summary of all of them :

Great, amazing CGI!

Slow and/or pointless story that is eventually abandoned just for the sake of a big shootemup ending.

Talk about damning with praise, I haven't read a single review that says it's a legitimately good film on real terms, just that the effects and surrounding world are superbly done.

 

[dennilfloss]

The computer-generated actress I saw yesterday in the trailer currently on television looked very convincing, a definite step up from Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. Looked a lot like Sigourney Weaver. Maybe they used her face as template.

Edit: nevermind. Just checked a still picture and they used real actors.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/her...of-scifi-outer-space-has-been-good-to-me.html

 

[totalnoob]

Frankly I don't care if the story sucks (though it doesn't sound bad at all)..

To see the best of the best that human technology is able to create in late 2009 is worth the price of a movie ticket IMO. There's nothing wrong with dropping your intellect and enjoying a beautiful site (being "wowed") occasionally.