Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: Avatar

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Avatar Page: <<   < prev  28 29 [30] 31 32   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Avatar - 24/1/2010 2:24:38 PM   
Wilbert


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Dublin: Ireland

quote:

ORIGINAL: KaeruJim

Ryan good Optimus mate.

Do you guys think you're maybe over-analysing this one? It was made to look gorgeous, sound gorgeous, appeal to families and have one or two "serious" messages in it. Avatar delivers in spades on the first three; if you want really intellectually stimulating fare you're watching the wrong film.





Nobody is expecting the story to change the world but it could have been a lot better. Or at the very least it could have had some ambition. All of the visuals were pretty amazing but the story never got above adequate.

There's nothing wrong with wanting amazing visuals and an amazing story. I just think it's weird that people can give the film 5 stars and say that the script is unoriginal. Surely the script is the MOST important thing? If that's not in place, then we may as well just be watching a WETA effects reel.

_____________________________

You're killing Independent George!!!!

(in reply to KaeruJim)
Post #: 871
RE: Avatar - 24/1/2010 3:38:10 PM   
genejoke


Posts: 1783
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: bournemouth
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wilbert


quote:

ORIGINAL: KaeruJim

Ryan good Optimus mate.

Do you guys think you're maybe over-analysing this one? It was made to look gorgeous, sound gorgeous, appeal to families and have one or two "serious" messages in it. Avatar delivers in spades on the first three; if you want really intellectually stimulating fare you're watching the wrong film.





Nobody is expecting the story to change the world but it could have been a lot better. Or at the very least it could have had some ambition. All of the visuals were pretty amazing but the story never got above adequate.

There's nothing wrong with wanting amazing visuals and an amazing story. I just think it's weird that people can give the film 5 stars and say that the script is unoriginal. Surely the script is the MOST important thing? If that's not in place, then we may as well just be watching a WETA effects reel.


You are mostly right, personally i loved avatar and yeah i would give it 5 stars.  Okay so the script isn't that original and the main criticism from me is that it is very predictable.  That said those short comings do not break the film, it is still very enjoyable.
Now if you treat it like the beginning of a trilogy, it is a good set up, it introduces everything much like a superhero origin tale only it is introducing us to pandora not a person.

(in reply to Wilbert)
Post #: 872
RE: Avatar - 24/1/2010 4:03:29 PM   
lauriedunsire


Posts: 59
Joined: 5/11/2008
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Very good point Wilbert, and one I've been trying to make to a few Avatar fanatics recently.   As per my review I DID really enjoy Avatar, and gave it 4 stars as it was visually stunning and overall quite enjoyable as a film.   I don't like people who will completely slate a movie simply because it follows quite a predictable and cliched path, as some movies that fall into this category can be highly enjoyable if you just accept them for what they are.   But as you say a good script and characters are vital to any film, and whilst I think Avatar is good it could of been far better.   I never really related to any characters a great deal, which I think takes something away from the whole experience, and I thought the script itself wasn't structured as well as it could of been - and there was maybe a temptation to prolong scenes just to milk the aesthetics of Pandora and its inhabitants. 

Of course there are some fantastic movies out there which are nowhere near as stunning visually as Avatar, but a lot of these films have no requirement for CGI at all - and if they take a 'gritty realism' sort of stance then it isn't really applicable to even consider this aspect in the same way.   Whereas for Avatar the script, plot and character development are still integral parts of the film overall - and can't be overlooked simply because it is nice on the eye.

I've had some people telling me they think Avatar is the best film of the decade (2000-2009) which is ridiculous to me to be honest.  When I think back to some of my favourite films over the past 10 years - Donnie Darko, Memento, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Garden State, There Will Be Blood - then personally I think they were far more powerful for me when I saw them.  But there is not really any grounds to criticise any of them for the CGI or effects as, on the whole, they were not required for the type of movie.   Of course there have been other movies in my favourites list that have had a lot more special effects and CGI in them, movies such as The Dark Knight and District 9.

I'm quite opposed to 5 star rating systems anyway, as I don't think it allows us enough room to give a fair opinion of a movie.  5 stars is basically saying a film is pretty much perfect, which means I usually avoid giving any films that rating.  However some films I enjoy a lot for what they are even if they weren't ground breaking or THAT amazing.  So I end up with a wide array of movies in the 4 star category.

_____________________________

"I know it hurts. That's life. If nothing else, It's life. Itís real, and sometimes it fuckiní hurts, but it's sort of all we have."

(in reply to Wilbert)
Post #: 873
RE: Avatar - 24/1/2010 4:14:25 PM   
genejoke


Posts: 1783
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: bournemouth
quote:

ORIGINAL: lauriedunsire

Very good point Wilbert, and one I've been trying to make to a few Avatar fanatics recently.   As per my review I DID really enjoy Avatar, and gave it 4 stars as it was visually stunning and overall quite enjoyable as a film.   I don't like people who will completely slate a movie simply because it follows quite a predictable and cliched path, as some movies that fall into this category can be highly enjoyable if you just accept them for what they are.   But as you say a good script and characters are vital to any film, and whilst I think Avatar is good it could of been far better.   I never really related to any characters a great deal, which I think takes something away from the whole experience, and I thought the script itself wasn't structured as well as it could of been - and there was maybe a temptation to prolong scenes just to milk the aesthetics of Pandora and its inhabitants. 

Of course there are some fantastic movies out there which are nowhere near as stunning visually as Avatar, but a lot of these films have no requirement for CGI at all - and if they take a 'gritty realism' sort of stance then it isn't really applicable to even consider this aspect in the same way.   Whereas for Avatar the script, plot and character development are still integral parts of the film overall - and can't be overlooked simply because it is nice on the eye.

I've had some people telling me they think Avatar is the best film of the decade (2000-2009) which is ridiculous to me to be honest.  When I think back to some of my favourite films over the past 10 years - Donnie Darko, Memento, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Garden State, There Will Be Blood - then personally I think they were far more powerful for me when I saw them.  But there is not really any grounds to criticise any of them for the CGI or effects as, on the whole, they were not required for the type of movie.   Of course there have been other movies in my favourites list that have had a lot more special effects and CGI in them, movies such as The Dark Knight and District 9.

I'm quite opposed to 5 star rating systems anyway, as I don't think it allows us enough room to give a fair opinion of a movie.  5 stars is basically saying a film is pretty much perfect, which means I usually avoid giving any films that rating.  However some films I enjoy a lot for what they are even if they weren't ground breaking or THAT amazing.  So I end up with a wide array of movies in the 4 star category.


It is tricky with a 5 star rating, I really enjoyed book of eli yet gave it 3 stars.  for as much as I did enjoy it it didn't wow me and there were a few other issues with it. If it was a rating out of ten I would give Avatar a 9/10 and book of eli 7/10, but working within a five star rating is limiting but thats the way it goes.

(in reply to lauriedunsire)
Post #: 874
RE: Avatar - 24/1/2010 4:21:12 PM   
lauriedunsire


Posts: 59
Joined: 5/11/2008
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
quote:

ORIGINAL: genejoke

It is tricky with a 5 star rating, I really enjoyed book of eli yet gave it 3 stars.  for as much as I did enjoy it it didn't wow me and there were a few other issues with it. If it was a rating out of ten I would give Avatar a 9/10 and book of eli 7/10, but working within a five star rating is limiting but thats the way it goes.



I know what you mean.   Even some of the best films I've seen recently I've only given 4 stars to, even some of my all time favourites I've only given 4 stars to, simply because I can still see as a film overall they have their flaws.   But I suppose there is a big difference between giving a film 10/10 and giving it 5 stars.   It's like with Avatar, I gave it 4 stars but there are other films that I've enjoyed and given 4 stars to that I'll say aren't anywhere near as good - but 3 stars just didn't seem to do them justice.

Still I know that isn't the reviewer's fault, I just feel that too many people are overlooking the basics of Avatar simply because of the ground breaking effects.   A very good film it is.   A perfect film it is not.

_____________________________

"I know it hurts. That's life. If nothing else, It's life. Itís real, and sometimes it fuckiní hurts, but it's sort of all we have."

(in reply to genejoke)
Post #: 875
RE: Avaturd - 24/1/2010 6:36:07 PM   
CrackDown

 

Posts: 26
Joined: 28/10/2009
NO MORE DRUGS... for that man.
Post #: 876
RE: Avaturd - 25/1/2010 10:40:41 AM   
CORLEONE

 

Posts: 4695
Joined: 2/11/2005
From: Nakatomi Plaza
quote:

ORIGINAL: SpiderBat

I can name at least 3 movies last year with better effects


Go on then.

_____________________________

Al Swearengen: "Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back".
Post #: 877
RE: Avaturd - 25/1/2010 7:04:01 PM   
SpiderBat

 

Posts: 120
Joined: 2/5/2009
quote:

ORIGINAL: CORLEONE

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpiderBat

I can name at least 3 movies last year with better effects


Go on then.


Watchmen, District 9, and Where The Wild Things are. With the last two I didn't even notice the effects they were so good. Of course each one was a better movie, so that probably influenced my opinion too. Nothing in Pandora looked remotely realistic. Check out the plastic looking dog things. Maybe if they had CGI smurfs running through a real rainforest with CGI add-ons it would have looked better. 3D was just a gimmick to disguise how lame the special effects were. Maybe I needed stronger drugs.

(in reply to CORLEONE)
Post #: 878
Avatard - 25/1/2010 7:59:56 PM   
rich


Posts: 4998
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Neo Kobe
quote:


Nobody is expecting the story to change the world


But that's what the hype told us to expect. Though good story telling and some real drama could have made be give all the cliches a break. I would have like more on Jake's psychological state, but it gets about one line.

On the subject of effects they were not that good, especially the creature designs - why create some great new aliens just to give every species the same blue plastic skin? What about armour plates, scales, rhino like hide or insect like carapace? If I was going through the art department's work I would not pick 5 different animal designs that look so similar, and would tell the artist he/she needs to get out of their comfort zone. I can see they are trying to get them to all look like they live together in the same environment, but that's very a silly choice -  if you look at a bird, a mammal, a reptile and a primate and they all live in one area of a the rainforest, they dont all look the same.


< Message edited by rich -- 25/1/2010 8:03:29 PM >


_____________________________

Meanwhile...

(in reply to SpiderBat)
Post #: 879
RE: Avaturd - 25/1/2010 8:03:00 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: CORLEONE

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpiderBat

I can name at least 3 movies last year with better effects


Go on then.


District 9, Where the Wild Things Are and Moon all had better effects.

Up was a better looking animated flick too....

(in reply to CORLEONE)
Post #: 880
RE: Avatard - 25/1/2010 8:07:50 PM   
Wilbert


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Dublin: Ireland

quote:

ORIGINAL: rich

On the subject of effects they were not that good, especially the creature designs



What are you talking about!?!?! They had a thing that was like a horse but it had 6 legs!!! and another thing that was like a rhino but it had, get this, 6 legs!!! And they had another thing that was like a giant tiger thing but it had 6 legs!!! and these other things that were like dogs but they had 6 legs!!!

What more do you want?!?!

People like you are worse than Hitler!!!



_____________________________

You're killing Independent George!!!!

(in reply to rich)
Post #: 881
RE: Avatard - 25/1/2010 8:17:50 PM   
rich


Posts: 4998
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Neo Kobe
Well if the Final Solution was to eradicate this type of filmaking then I might be on his side 

_____________________________

Meanwhile...

(in reply to Wilbert)
Post #: 882
RE: Avatard - 25/1/2010 10:52:47 PM   
CORLEONE

 

Posts: 4695
Joined: 2/11/2005
From: Nakatomi Plaza
Some of you haters are clearly psychos. Avatar has the best special effects ever. Why? Because the ENTIRE film is a special effect! Story crap blah blah, shit script blah blah I'll give you, but turning on the effects is really quite pathetic!

_____________________________

Al Swearengen: "Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back".

(in reply to rich)
Post #: 883
RE: Avatard - 25/1/2010 11:48:30 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: CORLEONE

Some of you haters are clearly psychos. Avatar has the best special effects ever. Why? Because the ENTIRE film is a special effect! Story crap blah blah, shit script blah blah I'll give you, but turning on the effects is really quite pathetic!


Plenty of films are entirely made up of special effects in that respect tho, if thats you're argument. What about any of the Pixar flicks? Surely the integration of effects into a real environment is far more impressive than simply showcasing expensive cgi?

(in reply to CORLEONE)
Post #: 884
RE: Avatard - 26/1/2010 10:11:49 AM   
Gretzky


Posts: 307
Joined: 20/12/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: CORLEONE

Some of you haters are clearly psychos. Avatar has the best special effects ever. Why? Because the ENTIRE film is a special effect! Story crap blah blah, shit script blah blah I'll give you, but turning on the effects is really quite pathetic!


I think some people are so jaded to CGI they're unable to see the intricacies of what makes Avatar even better... Gollum was amazing but the Na'vi are streets ahead in terms of detail. It's not about the design (I'm sure Cameron has never claimed he's going to design things YOU'VE NEVER SEEN BEFORE). As Corleone says, it's *how* they're made which is the special effect.


_____________________________

~ Formerly Ash_Boomstick
Female Film Fan




(in reply to CORLEONE)
Post #: 885
RE: Avatard - 26/1/2010 11:20:50 AM   
m_er


Posts: 3964
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Istanpool
forget the discussion above. lookie here.


All-Time Worldwide Box office

Rank Title Worldwide Box Office
1. Avatar (2009) $1,839,741,499
2. Titanic (1997) $1,835,300,000
3. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) $1,129,219,252

never thought that it'd take the lead in this short time.

_____________________________

WHOA. I don't believe what I'm hearing. Check out the BALLS on this kid. Hey Spider, this is for you.

My movies
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=4044070

(in reply to Gretzky)
Post #: 886
RE: Avatard - 26/1/2010 11:21:41 AM   
m_er


Posts: 3964
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Istanpool
forget the discussion above. lookie here.

All-Time Worldwide Box office

Rank Title Worldwide Box Office
1. Avatar (2009) $1,839,741,499
2. Titanic (1997) $1,835,300,000
3. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) $1,129,219,252

never thought that it'd take the lead in this short time.

_____________________________

WHOA. I don't believe what I'm hearing. Check out the BALLS on this kid. Hey Spider, this is for you.

My movies
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=4044070

(in reply to Gretzky)
Post #: 887
RE: Avatard - 26/1/2010 11:22:26 AM   
m_er


Posts: 3964
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Istanpool
forget the discussion above. lookie here.

All-Time Worldwide Box office

Rank Title Worldwide Box Office
1. Avatar (2009) $1,839,741,499
2. Titanic (1997) $1,835,300,000
3. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) $1,129,219,252

never thought that it'd take the lead in this short time.

_____________________________

WHOA. I don't believe what I'm hearing. Check out the BALLS on this kid. Hey Spider, this is for you.

My movies
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=4044070

(in reply to Gretzky)
Post #: 888
RE: - 26/1/2010 11:23:48 AM   
m_er


Posts: 3964
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Istanpool
forget the discussion above. lookie here.

All-Time Worldwide Box office

Rank Title Worldwide Box Office
1. Avatar (2009) $1,839,741,499
2. Titanic (1997) $1,835,300,000
3. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) $1,129,219,252

never thought that it'd take the lead in this short time.

EDIT: Sorry for the 4 times posts. didn't do on purpose. The message window kept showing 500 - Internal server error.
There is a problem with the resource you are looking for, and it cannot be displayed
., hence the same posts! Sorry

< Message edited by m_er -- 26/1/2010 11:36:29 AM >


_____________________________

WHOA. I don't believe what I'm hearing. Check out the BALLS on this kid. Hey Spider, this is for you.

My movies
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=4044070
Post #: 889
RE: RE: - 26/1/2010 12:35:12 PM   
rich


Posts: 4998
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Neo Kobe
When it says the internal server error message it HAS posted your comments just refresh the page

quote:


Some of you haters are clearly psychos. Avatar has the best special effects ever. Why? Because the ENTIRE film is a special effect! Story crap blah blah, shit script blah blah I'lgive you, but turning on the effects is really quite pathetic!


The only thing thats pathetic are the people gushing about how amazing and immersive it was and how magical and believable it was Because it's not and it wasn't. How good the effects are do not equal believable - Gollum doesnt look real, its the way they used the effects to create the performance. I enjoyed the film so dont use the word "hater" thank you, but its still a hugely average film.


< Message edited by rich -- 26/1/2010 12:39:57 PM >


_____________________________

Meanwhile...

(in reply to m_er)
Post #: 890
RE: RE: - 26/1/2010 3:28:02 PM   
CORLEONE

 

Posts: 4695
Joined: 2/11/2005
From: Nakatomi Plaza
quote:

ORIGINAL: rich

When it says the internal server error message it HAS posted your comments just refresh the page

quote:


Some of you haters are clearly psychos. Avatar has the best special effects ever. Why? Because the ENTIRE film is a special effect! Story crap blah blah, shit script blah blah I'lgive you, but turning on the effects is really quite pathetic!


The only thing thats pathetic are the people gushing about how amazing and immersive it was and how magical and believable it was Because it's not and it wasn't. How good the effects are do not equal believable - Gollum doesnt look real, its the way they used the effects to create the performance. I enjoyed the film so dont use the word "hater" thank you, but its still a hugely average film.



Well that's your opinion and I disagree with it. It wasn't a great film but for me in 3D IMAX it was a spectacular experience. Did I say how good the effects are = believable? Erm, no. My reply was straight after yours but it wasn't to you specifically. If I was replying to you specifically I'd quote you. Chill, Winston.

< Message edited by CORLEONE -- 26/1/2010 3:35:15 PM >


_____________________________

Al Swearengen: "Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back".

(in reply to rich)
Post #: 891
RE: RE: - 26/1/2010 3:33:16 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19049
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
I still can't put my finger on the effects thing. I think it has to do with how the camera moves in way we are not conditioned by - at some points it moves so smooth and becomes determental to the effects work. Other times it is spot on.

Still think the cat creature thingy doesn't look great.

And I still find Gollum to be pretty damn photo realisitc. There is a point to be made about it being the performance, but there are points where I am still stunned by how well they made that character.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to CORLEONE)
Post #: 892
RE: RE: - 26/1/2010 3:40:48 PM   
CORLEONE

 

Posts: 4695
Joined: 2/11/2005
From: Nakatomi Plaza
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

And I still find Gollum to be pretty damn photo realisitc. There is a point to be made about it being the performance, but there are points where I am still stunned by how well they made that character.


Watched the Rings trilogy a few months back and I thought the Gollum effects were starting to look a little dated. Having said that I've only seen Avatar once, and it was in 3D IMAX. I think they're both great. Is that allowed?

_____________________________

Al Swearengen: "Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back".

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 893
RE: RE: - 26/1/2010 3:49:13 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19049
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
quote:

ORIGINAL: CORLEONE

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

And I still find Gollum to be pretty damn photo realisitc. There is a point to be made about it being the performance, but there are points where I am still stunned by how well they made that character.


Watched the Rings trilogy a few months back and I thought the Gollum effects were starting to look a little dated. Having said that I've only seen Avatar once, and it was in 3D IMAX. I think they're both great. Is that allowed?


No. There are rules.

I think there is CGI work that will grow old gracefully - we already have the first generation of that with Jurassic Park and Starship Troopers. LOTR is the same. Yes - it is a dinosaur now in comparison to the new effects work, but it has a character to it. The way it moves and performs.

Avatar will be interesting to watch on a TV. Again, I don't think the effects are bad, but the way the digital camera moves can sometimes give the game away. Same complaint I had with the Prequels. Look at District 9, the camera moved how we expected it to move and bought into the CGI a lot more. Its why I think JP and ST have stood the test of time as well.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to CORLEONE)
Post #: 894
RE: RE: - 26/1/2010 3:58:08 PM   
CORLEONE

 

Posts: 4695
Joined: 2/11/2005
From: Nakatomi Plaza
If we're talking effects then the T1000 rising out of the checkered floor in Terminator 2 still blows my mind. Can't believe that's almost 20 years old.

_____________________________

Al Swearengen: "Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back".

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 895
RE: RE: - 26/1/2010 6:50:40 PM   
SpiderBat

 

Posts: 120
Joined: 2/5/2009
quote:

ORIGINAL: CORLEONE

If we're talking effects then the T1000 rising out of the checkered floor in Terminator 2 still blows my mind. Can't believe that's almost 20 years old.


Bruvsta, Total Recall. 1990. Big screen. One of the best soundtracks ever (RIP Jerry Goldsmith), more deaths per frame than any movie since, but balanced by more memorable lines per frame than any movie since. Tonnes of great special effects, but all done with ATITUDE. And if I had to choose living on a planet with tree hugging smurfs or chics with three breasts I know where I'm headed son. "Baby, you make me wish I had THREE hands!"

(in reply to CORLEONE)
Post #: 896
RE: RE: - 26/1/2010 8:20:57 PM   
hampstead bandit

 

Posts: 381
Joined: 18/9/2009
if we're talking effects then the T1000 rising out of the checkered floor in Terminator 2 still blows my mind. Can't believe that's almost 20 years old.

I'm a huge fan of everything Terminator related, but unfortunately feel that the effects you mention in T2 actually look very dated because they simply look "fake"

I'd go so far as to say that the water tentacle effect in The Abyss, which predates T2 (as you probably know, the software was originally developed for The Abyss), is superior to T2's morphing because in The Abyss its a simulation of water in a dirty, badly lit underwater environment

I was impressed when I first saw T2 in the cinema on the week of release, but that effect now bugs me as it ages the film somewhat...

(in reply to SpiderBat)
Post #: 897
RE: RE: - 26/1/2010 10:17:53 PM   
maffew


Posts: 2809
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: chester
Wow, its taken 40 odd pages of reviews and arguments for me to finally get round to watching this!

I thought it was great. As always, the hype around it made it slightly underwhelming - not helped by the fact i work in a cinema, and every show, every day was sold out. But I loved it - I've read a lot of reviews, some overly negative, some heaping on too much praise.

Firstly, I think if Empire hadn't mentioned that tree prayer bit, no one would have brought it up - I was expecting something totally embarrassing the way people were harping on about it, and it just seemed like a native ceremony - it didn't bother me in the slightest.

Secondly, I thought the dialogue was fine - typical action stuff, but fine. No worse than anything else of it's type, certainly better than the Star Wars prequels. The speech he gave at the end even gave me goosebumps. The plot was good too, it was written 15 years ago, right?.. a lot of films have come out since then, it's not really fair to cite films that it's ripped off when chances are the designs and script were created before they were even put into production.

Thirdly - 3D. It's odd that it should take Avatar, the ground breaking 3D extravaganza, the 'game changing' technological achievement of the year, to put me OFF 3D. And I'll tell you why - it was supposed to be a new level of immersion, a new way of watching, feeling like your there, this was supposed to be the one! And if it is, then I'm not really interested in 3D - if this is as good as it gets, then there's not much point. It's just super expensive - £11.75 it costs in my cinema. That's a helluva lot. It had its moments, and it did indeed add another layer to the experience, but at the end of the day, it's still cut off by the edges of the screen, there's only so much it can do - those blobby little floaty things looked lovely, and a few other things, but it wasn't that great, was it?

Finally, fourthly - The effects: Regardless of the slightly underwhelming 3D, the effects were truly phenomenal. While it made me realise I don't care much for 3D, it did show me just how far effects have come on. While it's not perfect, there were countless times I had no idea whether what I was seeing had been computer rendered or not - humans and Na'vi interact almost seamlessly, the textures on their faces are stunning - flawless, actually.. when Jake falls off that horse thing, and gets mud all over him it hurt my brain a bit - I genuinely didn't know what was happening.. CGI mud? The character was CG but was the ground? Was it a mud texture? This kept happening to me, and after a while I stopped trying to work it out, and settled on the fact that everything looks awesome. From the plant life to the Na'vi - who's faces especially are beautiful - the eyes and teeth are flawless, to the animals (which are all pretty fucking original looking if you ask me) to the stunning vistas - I don't think I've ever seen a world alien or otherwise so stunningly realised as here.

So, four stars. Yes.

****

< Message edited by maffew -- 26/1/2010 10:25:13 PM >


_____________________________

"Now i don't know much about security lighting, but i'm guessing they'll be using 180-degree dispersing halogens with motion sensors"

(in reply to hampstead bandit)
Post #: 898
RE: RE: - 26/1/2010 10:53:00 PM   
lbiu


Posts: 2779
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Just 3 doors away from Heaven
I just think the texture on the creatures was too smooth. It all felt very cold and sterile. But the Na'vi looked amazing...extremely photo realistic.
I still think this movie was a solid 3 stars. No amount of 3D technology can cover up the predictable storyline and one dimensional characters. 

_____________________________

My Homer is not a communist. He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a communist, but he is not a porn star.

(in reply to maffew)
Post #: 899
RE: RE: - 26/1/2010 11:02:35 PM   
maffew


Posts: 2809
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: chester
http://img.wallpaperstock.net:81/avatar-neytiri-wallpapers_16285_1440x900.jpg
http://www.hdwallpapers.in/walls/neytiri_beautiful_warrior_in_avatar-wide.jpg
http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/9600000/Jake-Sully-Avatar-avatar-2009-film-9668384-1600-1200.jpg

zoom in on those pictures. The creases in the lips, the slight imperfections and bumps on the skin... It's amazing! They have a tangible texture, you can imagine how they'd feel to the touch.. There were little things too - like tiny strands of hair in their ponytails illuminated by the light behind them... the level of detail was staggering!

edit: ah, you were referring to the creatures being too smooth, no the na'vi? That I kind of agree with...

< Message edited by maffew -- 26/1/2010 11:04:51 PM >


_____________________________

"Now i don't know much about security lighting, but i'm guessing they'll be using 180-degree dispersing halogens with motion sensors"

(in reply to lbiu)
Post #: 900
Page:   <<   < prev  28 29 [30] 31 32   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Avatar Page: <<   < prev  28 29 [30] 31 32   next >   >>
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Movie News††|††Empire Blog††|††Movie Reviews††|††Future Films††|††Features††|††Video Interviews††|††Image Gallery††|††Competitions††|††Forum††|††Magazine††|††Resources
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.250