Saw it today.
My useless opinion:
Amazing effects, pretty generic Native American rip off story but the movie was still good. Also the end scene was god damn badass. The 3D seemed pointless though but I guess it made it look better or something, I hate wearing those glasses though. All in all great movie and worth watching on the big screen.
I sincerely don't understand where all the tens come from. The story was OK at best, and honestly the story is what really makes the movie.
I was amazed by the CGI, and the plot was alright. It was one of the most awesome films in years, but what bothered me was how damn generic the human technology looked. The spaceships and other vehicles looked very nice, but the god damn mechs.. They looked SO unrealistic, I was really disappointed. I would've liked something closer to the mechs in Matrix, as robots wielding big knives and boring looking guns just doesn't make me tick.
Slightly boring design but other than that, a great movie.
[QUOTE=shanzo;19320386]I was amazed by the CGI, and the plot was alright. It was one of the most awesome films in years, but what bothered me was how damn generic the human technology looked. The spaceships and other vehicles looked very nice, but the god damn mechs.. They looked SO unrealistic, I was really disappointed. I would've liked something closer to the mechs in Matrix, as robots wielding big knives and boring looking guns just doesn't make me tick.
Slightly boring design but other than that, a great movie.[/QUOTE]
The only thing that bugged me about the AMP suits is that, it's 150+ years in the future and the best means we have for controlling something like that is a telemetric harness? Those things have been around FOREVER.
[QUOTE=Warren Holzem;19317382]I suppose a lot of it is just improbable coincidences.
Though the idea that a waify blue smurf-cat could do hand-to-hand battle with a gigantic, heavy metal mech suit is preposterous. An 8' tall, 250lb blue alien would not be able to deflect blows from that kind of armor.[/QUOTE]
You'd also have to remember that their bones are strengthend by a carbon fiber material.
Well I saw it last night and I must say I'm thoroughly impressed. The combination of 3D and what is probably the best CGI I've ever seen was probably worth the ticket alone, and the portrayal of the blue chick was quite convincing. I don't think the plot was that bad, I think it just goes to show that even 150 years from now the US just can't fight a guerrilla war.
The movie was okay but the ending was crap because the "bad guys" won.
Apparently the extended cut is going to have the extended version of the frankly awkward sex scene :saddowns:
[QUOTE=jcallan;19321368]Apparently the extended cut is going to have the extended version of the frankly awkward sex scene :saddowns:[/QUOTE]
>:/
I'm actually with you 100% that the sex scene was totally not really necessary.
It was just really weird and awkward when you're sitting beside a smelly hambeast and her 10 year old kids.
[QUOTE=jcallan;19321505]It was just really weird and awkward when you're sitting beside a smelly hambeast and her 10 year old kids.[/QUOTE]
Awkward 'cause you had a boner? :v:
Kidding aside, I was watching it with a friend who wanted me (WANTED me) to burn him a DVD of "AMV Hell", and it was STILL just a weird thing to have thrown in your face all of a sudden.
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;19321410]>:/
I'm actually with you 100% that the sex scene was totally not really necessary.[/QUOTE]
Ditto, I thought to myself "Cameron do we really need to go there?".
And as for the movie itself, while the overall arc of the story and it's progression was pretty derivative and mediocre at best and some points of the movie made me wonder if it was insulting my intelligence (especially when the story takes a semi-Disney tone in the final act and of coarse the ending). it is still a impressive technical achievement (12 foot-tall blue Cat things aside) and very watchable.
a solid 6 in my Book.
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;19321531]Awkward 'cause you had a boner? :v:
[/QUOTE]
:tinfoil:
It was a very good movie. I just didn't like how everything seemed to be a [url=http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Ptitlexn9xzsjd5fif?from=Main.ChekhovsGun]Chekhovs gun[/url].
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;19320766]The only thing that bugged me about the AMP suits is that, it's 150+ years in the future and the best means we have for controlling something like that is a telemetric harness? Those things have been around FOREVER.[/QUOTE]
In the fluff they say that most of the stuff used by the mining guys is pretty old, but proven and reliable tech, as you would expect.
[editline]03:38PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Warren Holzem;19317175]90% or more of what he's talking about was not actually in the film.
I don't give a fuck what nonsense they talked about OUTSIDE of the film if it didn't make it through editing.
[/quote]
Then you're rather missing the point. I'd say this film is more like a book adaptation than a one off film, Cameron created a whole world for it to be set in. Much like how Tolkien created the Lord of the Rings universe with it's extensive back-story and history. Including all that in a film would be stupid, but it makes the plot deeper for those who wish to look into it.
[QUOTE=Warren Holzem;19317175]
It's one of those "ignore that" moments.
The film is riddled with them.[/QUOTE]
Uhh, rain? The mountains aren't above all the clouds.
[QUOTE=Hivemind;19324712]In the fluff they say that most of the stuff used by the mining guys is pretty old, but proven and reliable tech, as you would expect.
[/QUOTE]
I've thought about that too, but still, it's kinda sad that it's as far as they've gotten.
I gave it a 9, although not sure if I'd go for 10. Definitely a 9 or 10, really awesome film.
TLDR version of below: The science is very much there, indeed it is the scientific application of 'what if' that seems to be behind much of the interesting spectacles in this film.
[QUOTE=Warren Holzem;19311722]Then those kind of people must have loved Avatar, because it was almost entirely devoid of science.[/QUOTE]
How so? IMO it was much more like a 'proper' sci-fi because pretty much everything in the film was scientifically possible, yet so different to our world that we see it as impossible. Also you need some scientific know-how to get the gist of the ideas.
An example is the floating mountains. As someone interested in science you think they look stupid and impossible at first, until you have the science behind them explained to you.
One of the main points of the film is that pandora is full of 'unobtanium' - a ridiculously good superconductor (hence the comical sounding, but appropriate name, since it would literally be the holy grail of modern science) which also, very oddly, traps magnetic fields. This gives earth just cause to spend the trillions needed to send humans to another star etc etc.
However another consequence of this plot piece is that the pandora can be incredibly outlandish and alien, while still being in the realms of physics. It can have giant floating mountains because those mountains and the surrounding planet are made from superconducting ore, meaning they levitate, for example. It gives us the basic info and then allows us to infer the science from that.
I'd say Cameron has done a great service to sci-fi here, by taking the core idea of science fiction - i.e. it should be awe-some and unbelievable yet scientifically plausible - and applying it to a huge film like this. This makes it a proper sci-fi film, not just one set in the future or in space. There are no magical warp drives or antigrav fields, called 'scientific' because they use phrases like 'bending space time', the science in this film is there and clearly well thought out. I'm not sure how well it would hold out to detailed scrutiny, but you have to draw a line somewhere.
I actually think that's something really nice about this film, it has a solid and extremely interesting scientific background, but can be enjoyed just as much by regular people because the plot doesn't rely on it. It is fun for the rest of the world, and has some nice extras for the sciency people willing to think a little bit. The only people it misses out are those who think they know their science but don't, because it doesn't feed it to them on a silver platter.
[QUOTE=SM0K3 B4N4N4;19313713]eh the characters were decently believable but the story has been done 1000 times before, and at some points it got really preachy, like on the verge of Ferngully status of liberal environmental preachyness. The visuals saved the movie for me.[/QUOTE]
I love Ferngully.
:|
Anyone caught Apocalypse now reference?
I suppose I should actually say what I thought of it, personally I loved the film, spoilers possibly below.
Plotwise: Although the basic plot, (the classic evil threatens native population, evil goes too far, native population fight back) is not original, what sort of person finds the one sentence summary of a story the most important part?
The juicy details of the plot - the fact the story is set on another extremely odd planet, the idea of the 'avatars' and their relationship with the natives, and the idea of the whole world being one giant sentience - to name but a few, are by far the most impressive parts of this story, and they are certainly not unoriginal. This is very much a classically 'epic' plot. I did find the leader humans (ie the exec and the corporal) to be a little extreme and clichéd though.
The message of the film may be a little overdone lately, but personally I love the way it is delivered.
The CGI: The graphics in this film are very, very impressive, especially considering it was filmed in IMAX 3D. This is possibly the first live action film where the CGI characters are actually more important than the live action characters, and which actually pulls this off beautifully. I actually wasn't thinking about how amazing the CGI was after the first scene, because it melded so well with everything else.
Who wouldn't like this film:
- People who really don't like 'treehugging rubbish' will most likely be too annoyed to enjoy it (p.s: blame hippies)
- People who don't mind 'treehugging/environmental rubbsh' too much but are tired and jaded by the constant stream of it we are bombarded with every day.
- People who get really annoyed at the whole 'megacorps are evil' thing will probably be put off, this did annoy me a little, but I got over it, besides, there is a good reason this message is thrown around so much.
- People who dislike CGI.
- People who dislike big blockbusters with simple overall plots but lots of plot detail.
[QUOTE=SBD;19320791]Well I saw it last night and I must say I'm thoroughly impressed. The combination of 3D and what is probably the best CGI I've ever seen was probably worth the ticket alone, and the portrayal of the blue chick was quite convincing. I don't think the plot was that bad, I think it just goes to show that even 150 years from now the US just can't fight a guerrilla war.[/QUOTE]
They're weren't U.S. Soldiers, they were mercenaries. Oh by the way, I think everyone in my theater hated me because I was laughing and going "FUCK YEAH" when the Mercs blew the shit outta their tree.
Anyone notice that Colonel Badass is far more interesting then the Merc Captain in District 9? I mean Merc Captain was extremmely cliche at times.
[editline]12:36PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=NuclearAnnhilation;19326919]They're weren't U.S. Soldiers, they were mercenaries. Oh by the way, I think everyone in my theater hated me because I was laughing and going "FUCK YEAH" when the Mercs blew the shit outta their tree.[/QUOTE]
You realize they are soldiers from RDA, which has military capabilities greater then the majority of Earth Governments.
[QUOTE=ManningQB18;19315045]I have one question, how did the water get up to the big floating rocks? I know that the roots of trees must have contributed some, but that amount is ridiculous.
Or is this one of those ignore that moments?[/QUOTE]
That's when James Cameron pulled out the good old NEVERMIND LOL.
Just like with the purpose of Unobtainium*.
[*It's explained in the wiki (It's a magnet for Antimatter reactors and for maglev trains), but not on the movie.]
[QUOTE=Eudoxia;19327195]That's when James Cameron pulled out the good old NEVERMIND LOL.
Just like with the purpose of Unobtainium*.
[*It's explained in the wiki (It's a magnet for Antimatter reactors and for maglev trains), but not on the movie.][/QUOTE]
They left a lot out of the movie.
We established that.
:|
Just saw this on IMAX 3D, just brilliant. The story wasn't amazing, pretty generic, but just for the amazing visuals it's well worth going to see it on an IMAX screen if you can.
Question to those who liked it a lot :
Did you think it was better than LOTR?
[QUOTE=jcallan;19328087]Question to those who liked it a lot :
Did you think it was better than LOTR?[/QUOTE]
Visually, by a teeny bit. Story-wise, hell no.
[QUOTE=jcallan;19328087]Question to those who liked it a lot :
Did you think it was better than LOTR?[/QUOTE]
Hell no, LOTR is the gold standard of movies.
It's by far the greatest book-movie adaptation I've ever seen, with the Harry Potter series coming a close second (closer to the material, but not as awesome.)
[editline]01:27PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Pascall;19328098]Visually, by a teeny bit. Story-wise, hell no.[/QUOTE]
The visuals of LoTR suited it perfectly, it didn't need Avatar graphics.
For me, LOTR was the best thing about the decade, I really don't think any film since has surpassed it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
