James Cameron's Avatar - General

[QUOTE=Warren Holzem;19293875]What synopsis am I supposed to give? We both saw the same things, only you for some reason seem to think he was cartoonish and unrealistic on purpose as opposed to just being shitty.[/quote] Because I described how he filled his role in the movie to the degree that was required. Now it's your turn to show me how he didn't. [quote]We see enough to get a sense of scale, and to see that it could not possibly function without there being some major unexplained and unseen magical phenomenon that was not covered in the film.[/quote] You mean like how they control the avatars with no real linkage? I'm surprised that neither you nor the guys who side with you are complaining about lack of explanation for THAT little tidbit, considering it's one of the crucial parts of the movie and not scenery. [QUOTE=SantanaDVX;19295178]I think I need to watch district 9 to take me down a notch after watching Avatar.[/QUOTE] You should, District 9 was a great movie.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;19295162]What's so wrong with comparing completely different things anyway? [editline]11:47PM[/editline] These two movies aren't really that different. Common ground exists[/QUOTE] Yeah, like racial themes. Just because one was talking about apartheid and the other was talking about the Native Americans, doesn't mean we can't debate which was more entertaining.

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;19295193] You mean like how they control the avatars with no real linkage? I'm surprised that neither you nor the guys who side with you are complaining about lack of explanation for THAT little tidbit, considering it's one of the crucial parts of the movie and not scenery.[/QUOTE] Similarly, they never explained precisely how wikus' arm turned all alien. Sure, he got sprayed with that liquid, but they never explained the technology behind it. Which seems to be what you are demanding of the Avatar movie. [editline]11:57PM[/editline] [QUOTE=SamPerson123;19295223]Yeah, like racial themes. Just because one was talking about apartheid and the other was talking about the Native Americans, doesn't mean we can't debate which was more entertaining.[/QUOTE] I'd say they're about equally so.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;19295269]Similarly, they never explained precisely how wikus' arm turned all alien. Sure, he got sprayed with that liquid, but they never explained the technology behind it. Which seems to be what you are demanding of the Avatar movie.[/quote] My point is some things, you just have to let go, especially in sci-fi movies.

Goddamnit I got to read the whole thread before I post, sorry. rate me dumb

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;19295342]My point is some things, you just have to let go, especially in sci-fi movies.[/QUOTE] Most interesting that not the face/stomach or wherever the liquid (should) have started work first he started getting one of them.

[QUOTE=SEKCobra;19295381]Most interesting that not the face/stomach or wherever the liquid (should) have started work first he started getting one of them.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but then you lose the shock from the cast removal scene, which is what I was talking about earlier as far as why directors often do things that don't make sense.

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;19295401]Yeah, but then you lose the shock from the cast removal scene, which is what I was talking about earlier as far as why directors often do things that don't make sense.[/QUOTE] Yeah. Thats also a good point in Avatar, its "realistic", theoretical possible.

Saw it in 3D (Unfortunately, there are no IMAX theatres near here (At all, really) so I saw it in normal 3D) Was good, but I did notice (Quite easily) the large number of re-curring plot devices, slightly made it worse but it was still good. 10.

Pandora was supposed to be a deadly world, but I was disappointed when the flowers didn't shoot poison darts or try to kill anyone. [editline]10:16AM[/editline] 8 [editline]10:16AM[/editline] 3D really helped it [editline]10:17AM[/editline] The glasses were so fucking uncomfortable though

[QUOTE=Zezibesh;19295478] The glasses were so fucking uncomfortable though[/QUOTE] Did you have to wear yours over your normal glasses, too? It's annoying as hell, ain't it? :v:

I had to wear it over my normal glasses and it wasn't uncomfortable at all.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;19294910]I just saw it tonight. Great movie. Way better than Inglorious Basterds anyway.[/QUOTE] Are you serious?

[QUOTE=tankkiller;19295858]Are you serious?[/QUOTE] Inglorious Basterds was wierd. And it had Till Schweiger. So yeah, Avatar is better.

I wanted to see the movie in 3D but the nearest cinema that plays it in 3D is about 5 hours away...

Avatar i the best movie I ever and is better to see it in 3D.I watched it two times in 3D and i liked it!:).So who didnt saw the movie yet i hope you will see it and like it.:P:D

[QUOTE=KillerTele;19295934]I wanted to see the movie in 3D but the nearest cinema that plays it in 3D is about 5 hours away...[/QUOTE] Playing it in 3D isnt hard, they just need the glasses (Which cost them 0,57 € a piece) and 1 lcd thing to put in front of the projectors lens. Since they get 1 € for 1 glasses and do not handle them out, they would make profit from this...

[QUOTE=SEKCobra;19295907]Inglorious Basterds was wierd. And it had Till Schweiger. So yeah, Avatar is better.[/QUOTE] Quinton Tarantino movies tend to be a little off the chain, but that's what makes them Quinton Tarantino movies. :v:

[QUOTE=tankkiller;19295858]Are you serious?[/QUOTE] Yeah.

[QUOTE=stefan248218;19295949][b]I think[/b] Avatar i the best movie I ever and is better to see it in 3D.I watched it two times in 3D and i liked it!:).So who didnt saw the movie yet i hope you will see it and like it.:P:D[/QUOTE] That's better. Everyone should stop formatting opinions like facts. It's just annoying.

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;19295972]Quinton Tarantino movies tend to be a little off the chain, but that's what makes them Quinton Tarantino movies. :v:[/QUOTE] Yep, and they are good. But Avatar is better in my eyes.

[QUOTE=SEKCobra;19296011]Yep, and they are good. But Avatar is better in my eyes.[/QUOTE] Only because of the CGI.

[QUOTE=SamPerson123;19296000]That's better. Everyone should stop formatting opinions like facts. It's just annoying.[/QUOTE] That post was a bit of a clusterfuck regardless.

[QUOTE=SEKCobra;19296011]Yep, and they are good. But Avatar is better in my eyes.[/QUOTE] Sadly I haven't gotten to see Inglorious Basterds yet, as when I was going to watch it at a friend's house I was hit with a sudden case of "Can't fucking stay awake" (long night the night before) and had to head home before I was too tired to drive. :/

[QUOTE=tankkiller;19296016]Only because of the CGI.[/QUOTE] No, because the Na'vi. They are the most awesome part of the movie.

[QUOTE=tankkiller;19296016]Only because of the CGI.[/QUOTE] Inglorious Basterds doesn't really have many redeeming features for me.

Fucking incredible experience in 3D.

Seeing it today, can't wait.

[QUOTE=FreDre;19289704]Yeah, I agree on that. I hope that the extended cut (if there will be one) shows more complexity in the story and more development on the characters.[/QUOTE] Read that the extened cut will have more of Jake becoming a part of that Na'vi clan, aswell as an attack on the RDA base.

[QUOTE=Carne;19298329]Read that the extened cut will have more of Jake becoming a part of that Na'vi clan, aswell as an attack on the RDA base.[/QUOTE] Also it will hopefully have some Earth scenes, since the part where Jake said, "My brother was killed for the paper in his wallet" was supposedly a voice-over.