Avatar: what do you think of it?
- Thread starter redisforever
- Start date
I liked it, but it was praised way too much. It was nowhere near as good as people made it out to be. Hell when I went to see it a father sat his two kids down a seat away from me and a friend and said to the letter. "You two deserve to see this movie before you die, this is a masterpiece of a film that outshines all that has come before." Not sure where he went after that because he didn't stay to watch.
Ha! That's fantastic!Fiad said:
Seeing as that was how it was hyped, when it was merely good, was pretty annoying. It became, however, the highest grossing movie, ever.
And it's still going. I made this thread 30 minutes in, and the final battle is just about to start. EDIT: And restarted my laptop during that time too.
Hated it. But just to be fair...
Pros: amazing special effects, action-packed, entertaining
Cons: by-the-numbers idiotic story, cliched one-dimensional characters, downright silly acting from almost every cast member, clearly engineered to make money and not for any artistic merit, geared toward kids/no real sense of any danger in the action
I was entertained, but I came away from the movie objectively aware that it was a bad movie and that I wouldn't waste any time on a second viewing. I had to see it because of all the hype, so did... and it was just a collection of amazing special effects. When Cameron did Terminator 2, he had amazing effects AND an intriguing original story AND character development AND dangerous action with real consequences. Which is why that movie is an enduring classic, and why Avatar will ultimately (just my opinion) be confined to the same dustbin as much of the "Michael Bay Era" of action movies.
Pros: amazing special effects, action-packed, entertaining
Cons: by-the-numbers idiotic story, cliched one-dimensional characters, downright silly acting from almost every cast member, clearly engineered to make money and not for any artistic merit, geared toward kids/no real sense of any danger in the action
I was entertained, but I came away from the movie objectively aware that it was a bad movie and that I wouldn't waste any time on a second viewing. I had to see it because of all the hype, so did... and it was just a collection of amazing special effects. When Cameron did Terminator 2, he had amazing effects AND an intriguing original story AND character development AND dangerous action with real consequences. Which is why that movie is an enduring classic, and why Avatar will ultimately (just my opinion) be confined to the same dustbin as much of the "Michael Bay Era" of action movies.
It's alright i guess. Really great use of CG and the world looks damned good. That said, i think they could have done more with it but overall thought it was good, i mean it certainly wasn't bad.
That said though...i don't really know how one can really make a proper sequel out of it though. Cameron confirmed sequels, two in-fact, which makes me wander what the hell can they really do with the story seeing as it wrapped itself up before.
That said though...i don't really know how one can really make a proper sequel out of it though. Cameron confirmed sequels, two in-fact, which makes me wander what the hell can they really do with the story seeing as it wrapped itself up before.
It's alright.
While it's not Cameron's best work (Aliens, Terminator 1+2), it's a solid movie.
I thought the message was a little heavy-handed, and the characters were flat, it certainly wasn't bad.
It's like Call of Duty to me- fun, entertaining, and worth the time, but without any lasting impact on my life.
It's not a movie I'd watch again.
While it's not Cameron's best work (Aliens, Terminator 1+2), it's a solid movie.
I thought the message was a little heavy-handed, and the characters were flat, it certainly wasn't bad.
It's like Call of Duty to me- fun, entertaining, and worth the time, but without any lasting impact on my life.
It's not a movie I'd watch again.
I thought it was pretty good.
Admittedly I had a bit of a special effects high, but aside from that I thought the story and chracters were decent enough to not be a deal-breaker (and it was cool seeing Sigourney Weaver in another James Cameron sci-fi action vehicle). Sure it's a story that's been told before, but hey, there are some great movies out there that have taken pages from other films (i.e Indiana Jones and old B-movies like Secret of the Incas).
Admittedly I had a bit of a special effects high, but aside from that I thought the story and chracters were decent enough to not be a deal-breaker (and it was cool seeing Sigourney Weaver in another James Cameron sci-fi action vehicle). Sure it's a story that's been told before, but hey, there are some great movies out there that have taken pages from other films (i.e Indiana Jones and old B-movies like Secret of the Incas).
I really enjoyed it. All that it needed to do to be good for what it is, was to tell the story well. And it certainly did that. It didn't need to be original, which is where it seems to get a lot of flak. It built a huge, epic, immersive world, and told a cliche yet involving story within it. I don't know what more you could ask for.
I thought it was painfully boring, almost as bad as Barry Lyndon (or any other Stanley Kubrick movie really). I practically fell asleep about half an hour in, then decided to turn it off.
I totally agree with this guy. I just watched this generic money sucking blob just to have my pre-notions confirmed. This movie proved that the general American consensus will almost always be crap.Varanfan9 said:
It's a pretty good movie that was completely overhyped by the industry. It was advertized as the second coming of Jesus Christ, but it was just a good action flick.
You know what's weird about Avatar? I thought it was an interesting enough setting, but the characters and plot were a bunch of tired cliches. That said, I love The Dark Crystal, which can be easily accused of the same shortcomings. However, to me, the difference is that the people who made Dark Crystal actually constructed elaborate sets/puppets in the real world instead of in a computer environment. I understand that digital art is difficult and time consuming, but actual physical construction feels like it takes far more work effort and dedication to achieve an equal result. It's why I prefer practical effects.
lol Disney bought it an theyre making a theme park of it... once it reaches that stage, its overrated imoredisforever said:
