Avatar - The Movie

[ammitz]

Gor tickets to see it on thursday the 17th. I'm very exicited, and can hardly wait.

It's going to be so cool

[protokatie]

It's going to be so cool

Well, thanx for Jinxing it. Now it is going to suck. I'll prolly watch it on the 16th, and complain about it now.

[ammitz]

You'll just do that 

In the mean time i'm just waiting and 

[Ginsu Victim]

Well, thanx for Jinxing it. Now it is going to suck.

I thought the trailers did a good enough job of making me think it will suck. Hopefully I'm wrong (Cameron hasn't let me down yet, other than Titanic, which was still a visual effects achievement).

[AtomSmasher]

I thought the trailers did a good enough job of making me think it will suck. Hopefully I'm wrong (Cameron hasn't let me down yet, other than Titanic, which was still a visual effects achievement).

Thats what a lot of the reviews said, they expected it to suck because of the trailers, but it was actually a good movie.

[shmokes]

So far I can say that the trailers have me expecting it to suck.  Bad.  It could hardly be worse than his last effort, though. 

[shardian]

I have no desire to see it. Having said that, I have a birthday gift card for the local digital cinema. We'll probably go see it...

I'm curious to see if his "revolutionary camera's" fix the fatal flaw of shooting live action in 3D. Journey to the Center of the Earth 3D failed horribly. Any 3D previews for live action since have cause instant eye strain. If it sucks and/or it hurts my eyes, I would make sure to have a print out of all starting times at the theater and go see something else.

[drventure]

Yeah, My biggest concern is that it looks an awful like like a "Big budget video game movie", which is never a good thing.

But, if the CGI is decent, it might work. Here's hoping the 3d isn't a ridiculous gimmick.

I liked Cameron's quote in the latest Wired.

<paraphrased> "Then I realized "I'm making a vastly expensive chick flick where everyone knows what happens in the end and everybody dies" and I thought "What the f*&^ am I doing"

But I guess it worked out for him

[shmokes]

Well . . . it's James Cameron.  He made Terminator 2, The Abyss and the abysmal Titanic.  I think you can rest rather assured that the CGI will be "decent.   

[Dartful Dodger]

I thought it was a M. Night Shyamalan movie.

[shmokes]

Oh . . . I don't have high expectations, but my expectations aren't THAT low!

[HaRuMaN]

I thought it was a M. Night Shyamalan movie.

You're thinking of The Last Airbender

[ammitz]

Well I'll be in the movies in 2 hours an 45 min watching the movie.

Judging from the local reviews I'm not expecting a lot from the story, should be "Dancing with wolfes" on another planet .

But I'm looking forward to all the 3D effects and computer animations.

[shardian]

You're thinking of The Last Airbender

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I thought the trailer made that look pretty darn cool.

[RayB]

Judging from the local reviews I'm not expecting a lot from the story, should be "Dancing with wolfes" on another planet .

Really? I thought it looks like Smurfs + Pocahontas.

[shmokes]

You're thinking of The Last Airbender

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I thought the trailer made that look pretty darn cool.

Trailers for M. Knight Shamayalan's movies always make them look cool because he's really good with creating atmospheric films.  Unfortunately (with the exception of his first two movies) he gets every other aspect of his movies horribly horribly wrong.

[HaRuMaN]

Trailers for M. Knight Shamayalan's movies always make them look cool because he's really good with creating atmospheric films.  Unfortunately (with the exception of his first two movies) he gets every other aspect of his movies horribly horribly wrong.

I've never seen Praying with Anger and Wide Awake... are they good?   

[Ginsu Victim]

I'm in the minority, I guess, because I really liked Lady in the Water. I also thought The Village was decent. Signs was good for one viewing, and I haven't watched The Happening (haven't been in a hurry to, either).

Sixth Sense was great and Unbreakable is my favorite of his. Stuart Little is pretty good, too.

[drventure]

I think you can rest rather assured that the CGI will be "decent.

Well, by decent, I mean "won't look like a dang video game."

For instance, there was plenty of CGI in 300, but given the way the film was done, to me anyway, it didn't come off as obviously CGI.

I'm planning on a fri afternoon excursion to see it, so I guess I'll have to wait to see.

According to Sigourney Weaver on The Daily Show a few days back, it redefines the genre 

[Ginsu Victim]

Anyone seen Rec?

Blew my mind to find out the thing at the end wasn't CGI.

[shmokes]

I think you can rest rather assured that the CGI will be "decent.

Well, by decent, I mean "won't look like a dang video game."

Right . . . but my point is . . . well . . . did you see any of those movies I mentioned?  Did you see the sinking of the Titanic???  Did you see liquid metal in Terminator 2?  Did you see the water effects in The Abyss?  It just seems that there is very little reason to be concerned with how the effects will turn out.  They will be unparalleled.  Of course they will.  Worrying about the quality of the special effects in an upcoming James Cameron movie is like anticipated a Michael Bay movie and wondering if there will be enough explosions in it.   

[Loafmeister]

I thought Titanic did not suck but I was more engrossed in the recreation of all facets of the ship itself, than of Jack and Rose (which IMHO wasn't that bad, it's a romance, what does anyone expect?!?). It's not to everyone's taste but I can see why it broke all records, it's not meant for "hardcore elite film experts" like you guys

Avatar:  Seeing it in IMAX (fakeMAX) 3d tomorrow night, looking forward to checking it out, see if it can now meet my expectations, which with all the reviewers crowning the visual look of the movie and 3d as "amazing", are pretty inflated.

[shmokes]

Oh . . . and The Village was ---smurfing--- horrible.  Just totally unwatchable.  Signs approached it with the ham-fisted god is great message being shoved down the audience's throat, but that movie at least had some fun moments.  Overall, it was retarded, though.  "Swing away!"    So stupid.  By the way, if you're ever unfortunate enough to see Signs again, pay attention to the news reporters talking on the TV in the background while characters are having conversations.  It's hilarious.  It's the most polite broadcast ever.  The reporters on TV wait to deliver their stories for breaks in the conversations between Joaquin and Mel.  It's kind of difficult to describe, but more or less the news anchors apparently don't want to be rude and talk over the people in the house, so they politely wait their turn in the conversation before delivering each snippet of news.

I haven't seen Lady in the Water, but if reviews are any indication it is among the worst movies ever made and substantially (and somewhat unbelievably) worse than The Village.  I haven't The Happening either, but it also garnered almost exclusively awful reviews.  

[shardian]

6th Sense = excellent
Unbreakable = boring
The Village = good for a part, but ended up sucking.
Signs = A great movie on first watch. 'Swing away' was still retarded though.
Lady in the Water = HORRIBLE!!!!!!!
The Happening = entertaining movie

[shmokes]

it's a romance, what does anyone expect?!?

I never understand when people excuse bad films by pretending it's impossible to make a good film in that genre.  MANY of the greatest films of all time are romances.  

Edward Scissorhands
Pride and Prejudice (the new one starring Kiera Knightly is great, btw)
Harold and Maud
The Princess Bride
As Good as it Gets
Dangerous Liaisons
The Piano
500 Days of Summer
Romeo+Juliet
Amelie
Dr. Zhivago
Forest Gump
Beauty and the Beast
The English Patient
Shakespeare in Love
Cyrano de Bergerac (and Roxanne for a modern take)
Before Sunrise
Before Sunset
Secretary
Gone with the Wind
An Officer and a Gentleman
When Harry Met Sally
Like Water for Chocolate
Notting Hill
Cassablanca

I could go on . . . .  

[Loafmeister]

Where the heck do I say it's impossible to make a good film in "that" genre?!?  Why do you have to assume someone backing up a movie you don't like are "excusing" the film?  Anyway, we defer on the genre; for me, Titanic was not a romance with the setting being on the Titanic, it was a story of the Titanic with a fictional romantic subplot.  IE: for me, the ship Titanic was the star of the movie, not Leo or Kate.

In no way am I saying success = a great movie but I'm willing to admit although I might think a movie is crap, it doesn't make it a bad movie and when I see a movie makes 1.8 billion, I'll concede my taste isn't above others, it's obviously entertaining in some ways to many, so I'll give it its due, just not my "type".

I like most movies, I appreciate popcorn movies, classics, adventure, sci-fi, whatever.  Sometimes I like movies that entertain my senses, not just my brain; and sometimes I like my mind entertained, not my eyes/ears.  Titanic fit 2/3'rds senses and 1/3's brain entertainment for me (the recreation of the era/ship triggers some brain action ).  Not all movies are created with the same end result in mind.

That's a fine list of movies you have there shmokes, though I wouldn't classify Forest Gump as a romance. On second thought, it IS kind of hard to classify that one.

[dafelandry]

Anyone else think the "avatar" race or whatvever they are look like zoras from OOT?

[Ginsu Victim]

I guess what I liked about Lady in the Water was that it stayed at the apartment location for pretty much the whole movie. I have a thing for movies that stay in one location for the entire duration, like Rear Window and Death and the Maiden.

Also like how the film stuck with just the residents of the apartments as the cast, overall. It doesn't hurt that I'm a fan of several of the cast members.

Like I said, I know I'm in the minority, but my wife and I really dug it when we saw it, and could see why a lot of people wouldn't like it.

Back on the subject of Avatar, definitely want to see it once the crowds die down.

[ammitz]

Hi again

I'm back from the cinema, with my very subjective and super short review.

Storyline (=It was dancing with wolfes on another planet) = 1 out of 6 stars
3D effects = 6 out of 6 stars
Special effects and computer animations = 6 out of 6 stars

In total I would give it 4 stars of 6, but only because the filming and the pictures are very beautiful, and he has created a planet "Pandora" with plants and animals that are somewhat believing.

I would definately recommend people seeing it if they went to a 3D theater, if it was in 2D I would say maybe.

[shmokes]

Where the heck do I say it's impossible to make a good film in "that" genre?!?

Maybe I misinterpreted when you asked asked rhetorically what one could expect from a romance.  At any rate, I don't really consider myself a movie snob.  Notting Hill is on my list and that's just a shallow Hugh Grant/Julia Roberts vehicle.  But it's cute and has clever, genuinely funny dialogue.  It's just a fun movie.  And it's not too unbelievable, and where it is unbelievable it is in forgivable ways because it's just having a bit of fun.  

Same goes for action movies.  I loved X-men.  I loved X-men 2.  I have no problem with absurdity, as long as it's well done.  Thus, X-men 3 made me want to throw up in tin foil and eat it.  It's not the concept of a goofy comic book movie that gets my goat.  It's lame, insipid, formulaic, lazy film making that bothers me.  It's two-dimensional characters that bother me.  I'm perfectly capable of suspension of disbelief, but the characters still have to behave and speak in believable ways under the circumstances.

And so on.  When I watch Transformers and am not entertained at all and then I have someone excuse it as a popcorn movie I just think that person has brain damage.  Iron Man is not literature.  Iron Man is a popcorn movie.  Transformers is a movie that you should not eat popcorn at because you should not be watching it.  It is the difference between good and bad filmmaking and non-stop explosions simply does not put Transformers into the same category as Iron Man.

Oh yeah . . . and Titanic sucks.   

[SNAAKE]

The Happening = entertaining movie

is it now I heard nothing happens..ever..

[Loafmeister]

Shmokes: I liked Transformers. The movie was based on a toy line so maybe I had lowered expectations but imho it's probably Bay's best work. If anything, he was able to keep the camera steady for a few shots and man, that was quite an accomplishment!

Bah, from your list we agree on about 90% of the movies out there, so I forgive you for your lack of taste for a couple of movies

[shardian]

The Happening = entertaining movie

is it now I heard nothing happens..ever..

Maybe you should just see it for yourself. Me and my wife both really enjoyed it. People are killing themselves left and right in the movie.

[HaRuMaN]

The Happening = entertaining movie

is it now I heard nothing happens..ever..

Maybe you should just see it for yourself. Me and my wife both really enjoyed it. People are killing themselves left and right in the movie.

My wife and I really liked it, too.  Good flick.

[Ginsu Victim]

Me and my wife both really enjoyed it.

My wife and I really liked it, too.  Good flick.

Subtle grammar correction.

[HaRuMaN]

Me and my wife both really enjoyed it.

My wife and I really liked it, too.  Good flick.

Subtle grammar correction.

Unintentional... but funny.      My wife is an English teacher, btw, so I hear it if I have screwed up grammar. 

[Ginsu Victim]

Boy, you done got your grammar corrected by a high dollar country bumpkin from Oklahoma.


 

[HaRuMaN]

Boy, you done got your grammar corrected by a high dollar country bumpkin from Oklahoma.


 

[Ginsu Victim]

Haruman did the grammar correction, and I'm no country bumpkin, so I don't know what he's on about...

[shardian]

Haruman did the grammar correction, and I'm no country bumpkin, so I don't know what he's on about...

Yes for the record everyone, it was subtle because Haruman merely echoed my sentiments...but in a grammatically correct way. I have a few grammar and spelling quirks, but for the most part I pride myself on my spelling and grammar.

My highlights I am always aware of:
-Overuse of commas
- Always spell tomorrow with 2 m's (thanks spell check!)
-Always put myself first (like in the case of this thread). I can't help it, I'm apparently subconsciously a selffish ---tallywhacker---.