Emyr Thy King
Posts: 2153
Joined: 13/4/2006
From: The Grid
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Kazuya
Predictably this thread is already filled with comments from people who want nothing more than the chance to say how shit they think this film look, which is pretty funny when you think about it, since most of those people will probably end up downloading some pirate version, watching it on their computer, complimenting themselves that they sure had pegged Avatar for what it was, a director returning with a new film, a super-hyped film, but a shit film. I don't really give a fuck, I just think it's funny. Obviously I'm not saying that everyone who posts derogatory comments about the trailer is one of the above mentioned douchebags, the film is definitely not going to be for everyone. The lame Star Wars prequels comparisons are so obvious it makes my skin crawl, the moaning internet fucknut so predictable it hurts. As for me, well I liked the trailer very much, as such I don't think any trailer could give the true idea of what the experience is gonna be like, but it was a good indication of what to hope for. I liked that there was no score blaring over the glimpses, the world looks lush and appealing and I gotta say I loved the look of the Navi themselves. Still looking forward to this one immensely.
Oh, and props to Cameron for putting Stephen Lang in this film.
No need to be precious, son. If you don't care about the aggrevating masses then don't dedicate so much verbiage towards them. Frankly, your post in question was a touch strong given that posters here are merely commenting on a trailer for a film. Why does it matter if a number of posters make facile comparisons with the Star Wars prequels or any other feature film which includes computer generated imagery?
I felt underwhelmed when I watched the trailer, some of the scenes were interesting but it almost seem lifeless without any orchestral music or dialogue. I have a strong instinct that James Cameron set out purely to try and 'revolutionise' cinema and create some thing new rather than concentrating more on an erudite piece of cinema. To which one in all likelihood would expect from him. I also feel he's picked out Sam Worthington to be his new 'Arnold Schwarzenegger', an action 'star' for a new generation and perhaps is trying to recapture the success he enjoyed with The Terminator, Terminator 2 and Aliens. I'm surprised that Bill Paxton isn't featured in the film so I don't get a sense of nepotism involved (Tim Burton being a guilty one) although Sigourney Weaver is in the cast. Still, Giovanni Ribisi is part of the cast and I haven't seen any thing from him in a while. I've enjoyed some of James Cameron's work of course, who hasn't? I simply feel his hiatus has left him too eager and perhaps desperate for another 'Titanic' success. I will go see the film and judge it on its own merit but I am simply less enticed by the trailer.
As for the role of three-dimensional technology in future films. I certainly feel this is the next logical step from a one-dimensional screen. Of course '3D' has been in development for a long while but I do not see the pinnacle of such technology being merely enjoyed through cheap plastic spectacles. I think Back to the Future Part II (despite being tongue-in-cheek) provided an interesting snippet of future technology with a three-dimensional shark hologram. Therefore, I do see 'true' '3D' technology on film being enabled through the use of holograms rather than jagged and blurred shapes on the screen.
< Message edited by Emyr Thy King -- 28/8/2009 7:11:49 PM >
_____________________________
"This whole imbroglio is epiphenomenal"...."demigogic faux egalitarianism" - Will Self
|
Printable Version
Avatar - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread