Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The real Avatar
http://www.reuters.com/article/filmNews/idUSTRE56P0NH20090726

From a slide presentation on Avatar

some sort of walker
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm236685312/tt0499549

I am interested in this movie but I think it will be a let down for me visually. I can't really see 3D all that well... as in not really. I have VERY unequal vision between my two eyes. I can for the most part see normally-ish out of my left eye, but my right eye is pretty much just peripheral vision quality. Imagine looking at something out of the extreme corner of your eye while starring straight forward... that's what I get when I look at something straight on with my right eye. Needless to say... 3D glasses are a wasted effort for me considering the trick behind 3D requires both eyes to be working together.

I really hate normal sighted people at times... and watching movies like this is one of them.

I'm sure there will be normal theaters showing it as well. Thats the majority of theaters at the moment. Have faith in THE CAMERON.

I think Cameron hit a peak in the 80's with Aliens and the first 2 Terminators. It seems like with that success he lost his focus and put his fingers in too many pies.

I'd be delighted to see Avatar turn that around, Id really like to see a movie that actually 'wows' me, its been a while.

Mistress of minis wrote:I think Cameron hit a peak in the 80's with Aliens and the first 2 Terminators. It seems like with that success he lost his focus and put his fingers in too many pies.

I'd be delighted to see Avatar turn that around, Id really like to see a movie that actually 'wows' me, its been a while.

QFT I was hoping for that with Transformers, but even though the bots and transformations were cool it just looked like any other CG film.

Still i'm going with Frazz on this one and keeping faith in Cameron making something awesome.

99MDeery wrote:

Mistress of minis wrote:I think Cameron hit a peak in the 80's with Aliens and the first 2 Terminators. It seems like with that success he lost his focus and put his fingers in too many pies.

I'd be delighted to see Avatar turn that around, Id really like to see a movie that actually 'wows' me, its been a while.

QFT I was hoping for that with Transformers, but even though the bots and transformations were cool it just looked like any other CG film.

Still i'm going with Frazz on this one and keeping faith in Cameron making something awesome.

I'm not all that optimistic. The last major film he directed was a piece of junk of which only the special effects were that good and now here it is 12 years later and the only thing I keep hearing about is special effects. This makes me worry because FX and tech don't make good movies alone. It has been so long and the last movie was outside his norm, which wouldn't really be a bad thing except that Titanic really hasn't held up well, that I can't get that excited about it just because it is a James Cameron movie. In 1994 it meant something, but in 2009, not as much.

Wait are you saying that about Titanic? Titanic held the record for years in highest grossing sales land. I'm not sure what has surpassed it, and would be interesting to see in inflation adjusted dollars or pure ticket numbers. That movie made my Sr. citizen cry.

I'd like to see an actual trailer of this movie.

Update Titanic is still top grosser per this at a measily $1.8 BILLION (dude I'll take one percent-thats all I need, really)

http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/alltimegross?region=world-wide

Wow it says it won 11 oscars. Thats serious.

Titanic wasn't that bad a movie as far as Oscar pics go. True, it was chick flick/love story but it was also a disaster pic as well. It wasn't as bad as There Will Be Blood. Christ, you couldn't pay me to try to sit through that gak again.

Would I rather watch Aliens or Terminator? Hell yes, but I dare to name another chick flick with as high a body count as Titanic...

Titanic wasnt a bad movie, I just didnt like it.

I think it was more of a mainstream cash cow Cameron happily milked.

Just because a movie makes alot of money doesnt mean its special. It jsut means its popular. American Idol is popular too, but its still crap that I refuse to watch despite its mainstream success and occasional merit.

I'd rather watch guys in rubber suits and masterful camera angles with amazing lighting make a scifi classic by using pure human ingenuity. Star Wars (the real trilogy), Bladerunner, Aliens- all examples of that.

Using computers as tool in the movie makin process can be great (like the Matrix). But over use of CG can really kill a movie(like the newer star wars rubbish, King Kong etc etc).

I think the problem is in the mindset of the directors. In all of the classic SciFi that most of us consider a classic or as 'awesome' the directors all had alot to prove. Lucas, Cameron, Jackson, the Wachowskis, all had alot to prove when they made their first (big)movies. They all had alot of success- and since that happened they all seemed to have relaxed- and that really seems to show in thier work after they set their benchmarks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Edit- And Fraz, Oscars dont always mean much.

The Fellowship of the Ring, which almost everyone considers better than Return of the King, only won 4. RoTK won 11.

Frazzled wrote:Wait are you saying that about Titanic? Titanic held the record for years in highest grossing sales land. I'm not sure what has surpassed it, and would be interesting to see in inflation adjusted dollars or pure ticket numbers. That movie made my Sr. citizen cry.

Adjusted for inflation it is around the number 6 spot with Gone With the Wind #1 and Star Wars #2.

The problem with Titanic isn't that it is a bad movie like Warrior of the Lost World, is that it is incredibly mediocre, except for the Ship sinking FX. The story was blah and the characters were two dimensional.

Well any adjustment showing Star Wars as high up I'm on side with.

I'm sorry you can't call a film with 11 Oscars and gazillions of $ as mediocre. Thats the same as Ben Hur. Now I agree on ROTK but it was widely viewed that the awards were in recognition of the entire LOTR trilogy, not just the film.


Three with 11 Oscars:

Ben-Hur (1959)

Titanic (1997)

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)

Only one with 10 Oscars:

West Side Story (1961)

Three with 9 Oscars (the first two winning 9 out of 9 nominations):

Gigi (1958)

The Last Emperor (1987)

The English Patient (1996)

And seven with 8 Oscars:

Gone with the Wind (1939)

On the Waterfront (1954)

My Fair Lady (1964)

Cabaret (1972) *did not win Best Picture

Gandhi (1982)

Amadeus (1984)

Slumdog Millionaire (2008)

C'mon Frazz, you can come clean and admit you only watch Titanic once a month, and it involves a 3 day binge on Midol and a bottle of red wine to go with the box of Kleenex ^_^

The secret is out!

Frazzled wrote:I'm sorry you can't call a film with 11 Oscars and gazillions of $ as mediocre. Thats the same as Ben Hur. Now I agree on ROTK but it was widely viewed that the awards were in recognition of the entire LOTR trilogy, not just the film.

Wait a film with 11 Oscars can't be mediocre and in the same sentence you say it can? Why can Titanic not have mitigating circumstance that propel a mediocre film to awards but LotR can?

The list of Oscar winners that in retrospect shouldn't have won is fairly long and inglorious. Citizen Kane lost the Oscar to which movie? Do you know without having to look it up? Now Citizen Kane is the watchword for brilliance in a given field, "It is the Citizen Kane of [fill in the blank]".

I did not say LOTR or ROTK was mediocre but that it was widely viewed as representing all three of the movies (as it was the Oscras last shot and fat geeks everywhere would have stormed quiche fast food joints in outrage).

If Titanic is "mediocre" in your eyes what the hell is excellent?

Frazzled wrote:If Titanic is "mediocre" in your eyes what the hell is excellent?

Terminator
Aliens
Terminator II
The Abyss

Ahtman wrote:

Frazzled wrote:If Titanic is "mediocre" in your eyes what the hell is excellent?

Terminator
Aliens
Terminator II
The Abyss

Gak just when I'm getting revv'd up you pull that list out. Well played Ahtman. Well played.

Ahtman wrote:

Frazzled wrote:If Titanic is "mediocre" in your eyes what the hell is excellent?

Terminator
Aliens
Terminator II
The Abyss

Thats what I think of when James Cameron is mentioned.