Jump to content

Home

Your opinion of the movie?  

46 members have voted

  1. 1. Your opinion of the movie?

    • Magnificent!
      20
    • Good
      9
    • OK
      6
    • Bad
      2
    • Disgusting.
      1
    • Y-O-D-A, Yoda
      8


Recommended Posts

...Why isn't there a thread about this?

 

avatar-movie-poster_353x529.jpg

 

I haven't seen it, but i'm seriously contemplating it. I have some friends that say that 3D is the only way to see it.

 

There is a cinema very near where i live that afaik doesn't have it in 3D. If i wanted to see the movie in 3D, i will have to travel 30-40 minutes and then pay $20 for the movie ticket. But seeing that my personal income is far from steady or substantial, $20 of my hard earned money to go watch a movie requires quite some persuasion. (I'm not counting it out completely).

 

I haven't heard one bad thing about this movie. None. at. all. All seats were prebooked for days, and all who see it go around raving about it. But if anyone here who has seen it could provide their input on 3D or no 3D, it would be appreciated.

 

Currently, i'm keeping away from all spoilers (not even reading the synopsis), so please use hidden tags, like always.

 

[edit]

 

Avatar was nominated for four Golden Globes: Best Film Score, and Best Film Song, winning Best Motion Picture – Drama and Best Director.

 

 

Based on the success of the movie, James Cameron has confirmed the possibility of sequels:

In 2006, Cameron stated that if Avatar was successful, he hoped to make two sequels to the film.[21] In response to the film's financial success, Cameron confirmed the possibility of making sequels.[20][21]

 

Meanwhile, despite being its most successful movie, Avatar has been mostly banned in China for fears that the movie may cause political unrest.

 

The China Film Group, which is run by the state, believes the plot of human colonists attempting to demolish an alien village for its resources steers too close to a very sensitive issue in China at the moment.

 

Millions of Chinese people have been evicted from their homes to make room for high rises and government infrastructure projects, reports The LA Times. Avatar's success has also angered some Chinese officials, who fear the film's popularity takes too much market share from their domestic films.

2D showings of Avatar will now be pulled from Chinese cinemas, but film fans can still see 3D showings of the sci-fi epic. However, there are so few 3D cinema screens in China, it's essentially a theatrical ban for the Golden Globe-winning movie.

 

So, instead of Avatar, Chinese film fans can look forward to the Chow-Yun Fat biopic of the ancient philosopher Confucius in its place.

 

An Asian media consultancy, Wolf Group Asia, however, insists that the decision to choose Confucius in favour of Avatar was all to do with the Chinese New Year holiday, which begins in the middle of February.

 

A spokesperson added, "There are certain windows in the year that are held for domestic films. We're coming up on Chinese New Year, so this can be expected."

 

Edited by JesusIsGonnaOwnSatan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I haven't seen it, but i'm seriously contemplating it. I have some friends that say that 3D is the only way to see it.

This isn't so much because the 3D is good, but because it's an awfully generic film in 2D. The story is old, the characters are clichéed, the events play out like an old Disney animated film and the acting is forgettable.

 

Despite the film's epic length of 2.75 hours, so much of it still feels cut out or left out. I say this from a sci-fi point of view - if all you're looking for in this film is a timeless tale told Disney-style, there's plenty of here. But District 9 was a far more enjoyable film in pretty much every aspect, and it got sci-fi done right too.

 

The special effects however, will probably get it an Oscar and are beautiful to look at. The film is only worth its price in 3D, and in I hear it's especially great in IMAX, so if you've got an IMAX theatre near you, that should be good spending. In standard 3D, maybe, but it isn't worth mugging an old lady about. In 2D, you'd might as well forget it and catch it on DVD later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree that the story isn't that original, I found the movie awesome regardless. All those clichée elements are neatly packaged to form a decent story, the acting is very good and the visual effects are breathtaking. Definitely worth a watch.

 

P.S. I watched it in 2D, like all movies should be watched. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm reluctant to see it... very reluctant, I mean, we've all seen perty visuals in other movies that are just as good if not better. The difference is that this movie is a "hey look at these perty visuals" movie while the others are "hey look it's a movie, but did you notice it had party visuals? no you didn't, did you... that's how good they are"... *looks around*

 

avatar_kitties.jpg

 

i has blu kittehs...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What difference does it make, Lynk? I recommend watching it in 3D, it might not be shown in theaters after the "hype-train" has died off >:|

I won't be able to see it in 3D unless I go out of my way to find a cinema that is showing it in 3D... which down here is most likely NO CINEMA except IMAX cause we're still using ye olden projectors from the silent era :dozey: ...plus I'm sure there'll be some special Blu-ray edition I can get that'll have it playing in 3D somehow with some universe hax or something. It'll probably end up being a better watch on my setup anyway than any of the cinemas around here. About the only reason I go nowadays is for the popcorn and coke and experience... which I only do with movies I REALLY want to see.

 

But like I said, I'll do what I did with 300 and watch it when everyone else has forgotten about it. Cause I know, if I saw 300 when it was out in cinemas and every other bastard was seeing it then I wouldn't have seemed as good with general public go "THIS IS SPARTA" every five seconds around me.

 

Also... I hear this movie is

 

2017397.jpg

 

+

 

ferngully_the_last_rainforest_ver2.jpg

 

 

XD is that true? Cause if it is... lulz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I lol'd when folks lied about GL wanting to Do More Star Wars Films if this took off... and after seeing the film I lol'd even Harder, Perfectly Fine big budget merchandise dreadnought, the type we see every few years, but it was kinda meh TBH. 350 mills worth of Special effects, but I wouldn't pay to watch it a second time. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also... I hear this movie is

 

2017397.jpg

 

+

 

ferngully_the_last_rainforest_ver2.jpg

 

 

XD is that true? Cause if it is... lulz.

I've heard that it was also like

 

l_99348_6c7f7048.jpg

 

+

 

A70-6652

 

which would be just as bad.

 

This just looks like typically stunning James Cameron visuals packaged with an equally typical (after Titanic, at least -God, I HATE that film) hackneyed, shallow and predictable James Cameron story. See it once, go "Ooh!" and "Ahh!", and then forget about it.

Edited by Q
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen it twice with two different groups of people in 2D (hate 3D).

 

My biggest complaint with the movie is it's 3 hour length. It's actually 2h 40m, but with about 20 minutes of previews, you're sitting there for 3 freakin' hours.

 

The story is nothing new or exciting. In my opinion, the movie is a 3 hour tech demo about evil white men taking the native savages' land for their valuable resources.

 

Bottom line: looks pretty, too long, and old story.

 

My favorite part of the movie is the when the shuttlecraft flies on screen. That's one cool looking ship.

 

Valkyrie.jpg

 

And that dragon hovercraft is pretty badass too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's most likely the first movie to do 3D right, and that's about the best praise that I can endow.

 

The rest of it is quite filler-worthy, and is essentially a copy-and-paste of Dances with Wolves, among things, in a sci-fi/action wrapper. And, naturally, the characters are as flat as crêpes. I can concur with others on the grounds that it's too long, but it's not the sheer length that is the culprit; most of it is filler-fodder, and when it's not an action scene, then it's some blasé dialogue. I felt that the story could have been executed in a greater fashion in much less time, to say the least.

 

I'll warrant a guess that someone will take the same technology and forge it with an actually praiseworthy story, then that will be something to truly gawk at, but Avatar isn't it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, Avatar had an OK story that, yes, i've seen done lots of times before. what made this such a good movie, though, is a combination of how well the story is told, the imaginative setting, and of course, the fantastic visuals.

 

as far as the story goes, it reminds me of several movies ranging from Fern Gully, Dances With Wolves, and about 50 other movies with space marines. what makes the difference with this story is two things: its very well written, and it doesn't insult your intelligence. the way the story is told allows the movie to tug at your heartstrings at times and then make you smile at other times.

 

of course, the visuals are the real draw of this movie. having seen this movie in both 2D and 3D, i can honestly say that Avatar is just as breathtaking visually in either format. couple that with the imaginative world that Avatar is based on, and you have a movie that will absolutely take your breath at times.

 

anyways, if you haven't seen it yet, then you really should consider it. its well worth the price of admission, and i can honestly say that this is one movie that i can't wait to add to my Blu-Ray collection. ;)

 

8/10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CGI and cinematography were fabulous, the music was absolutely fascinating. The attention to detail in the art from the broad vistas down to the tiniest bits of jewelry or foliage was amazing. The story was cliche, sure, but it was fun just the same, and the 3D tech was a vast improvement over any 3D movies I've ever seen (Jaws 3D being one of the worst). If you have a vision problem like a lazy eye or your eyes don't work together, don't spend the money for the 3D--it still won't work for you. However, if you don't have those kinds of visual problems, it's quite surprising how far the technology has come.

 

Sigourney Weaver did such a good job as Dr. Augustine that at first I didn't realize it was "Sigourney Weaver playing X character". Sam Worthington did a great job of portraying a paraplegic--it is extremely hard not to move a limb at all, and he managed it quite well. I suspect they did some special effects to make his legs look as wasted away as they did, too, which added to the effect.

 

Go see the movie. It's not going to win an Oscar for Best Picture. It's not Schindler's List or The Lion in Winter in terms of intellectual and thought-provoking insights on humanity. It is, however, an enjoyable, visually and musically stunning picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have a vision problem like a lazy eye or your eyes don't work together, don't spend the money for the 3D--it still won't work for you. However, if you don't have those kinds of visual problems, it's quite surprising how far the technology has come.

Can you elaborate on this? Because that's exactly what i have. My eyesight took a nosedive last year (randomly). Ive now got long sightedness on my left and short sightedness on my right. I have to wear glasses. :(

 

Interestingly enough, Nvidia's discover 3d stuff works for me and i can see these kind of 3d images fine:

 

crosseye.jpg

 

along with the Magic Eye stuff:

 

magiceye.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time for my two cents:

 

I saw the movie Sunday afternoon, and I thought that it was one of the better movies that I had seen in a long period of time. Though the plot was cliched and, more than once, predictable, I thought that the movie was put together with a high degree of skill. The beautiful cinematography only added to the movie.

 

Admittedly, the three hours of sitting in place was a bit much. Don't bring a drink if you intend to watch. >.>

 

The actors, I thought, played their respective rolls well, and the movie was just fun to watch. Overall, I'd watch the movie again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you elaborate on this? Because that's exactly what i have. My eyesight took a nosedive last year (randomly). Ive now got long sightedness on my left and short sightedness on my right. I have to wear glasses. :(

 

Interestingly enough, Nvidia's discover 3d stuff works for me and i can see these kind of 3d images fine:

 

I was speaking about vision problems even with your best correction (glasses or contacts) on.

 

If you can see these in 3D, you'll likely see the 3D aspect of the movie just fine. The prescription of your glasses doesn't make any difference, unless you don't happen to have them on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...