Avatar

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Thu Jan 14, 2010 7:16 pm

[quote="bumblemusprime]
Yeah, I'm going to third that. I'm reminded of something Harlan Ellison said about the Back to the Future trilogy, essentially that they were silly fluffy movies full of utter disrespect for science, but that they had an overarching theme about responsibility for our actions.

And that is a good thing for a movie everyone everywhere will see.[/quote]

WHen you think back about Back to the future im pretty certain most ppl dont remember the moral overones about ones responsibility, but more the fact it was just a good movie with a flux capacitor etc...

If you remove the gloss from Avatar, is it a decent movie?
No I think its pretty average, it will be superceded by other 3D movies within the next few years. And perhaps one with a better plot.

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Fri Jan 15, 2010 12:52 am

Impactor returns 2.0 wrote:
Yaya wrote: The milestone here is because of the 3D, not the CGI. It was very difficult in the past to meld a real actor with a CGI world and make it 3-D without it either a) looking artificial or b) making someone sick to their stomach watching it.
Having worked with this tech for the past 20 odd years, my point is:

Terminator 2 used animators.

Gollum was created by mo-capping Andy Sirkiss's face onto his CGI model, this is the same process as seen in Avatar, because its the same company producing the effect!

Its not a new technique, and has already been mastered,

Ah, I see. Interesting.

I was actually saying that 3D isnt a crappy effect anymore, its now a decent effect thanks to dual cameras and ultra-fast scan rates required for dual sync refresh...

My mistake, I misunderstood.

Well COnsidering every major TV manufactuere has just shown off a 3D TV at CES I think they dont agree.

I was lucky enough to watch Sky Sports in 3D recently, even on a 40" screen the depth perception of a football game greatly enhanced my experience.

Are you talking about a video game? Hadn't really considered the whole video game bit. That would be awesome in 3-D.

Back to Avatar, the story is pants, if this film wasnt in 3D super vision im pretty sure it wouldnt be talked about...

Probably would barely crack $100 million, I'd imagine.

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Fri Jan 15, 2010 12:57 am

Impactor returns 2.0 wrote:[quote="bumblemusprime]
Yeah, I'm going to third that. I'm reminded of something Harlan Ellison said about the Back to the Future trilogy, essentially that they were silly fluffy movies full of utter disrespect for science, but that they had an overarching theme about responsibility for our actions.

And that is a good thing for a movie everyone everywhere will see.

WHen you think back about Back to the future im pretty certain most ppl dont remember the moral overones about ones responsibility, but more the fact it was just a good movie with a flux capacitor etc...

If you remove the gloss from Avatar, is it a decent movie?
No I think its pretty average, it will be superceded by other 3D movies within the next few years. And perhaps one with a better plot.[/quote]

This.

Back to the Future didn't take itself seriously, so it's difficult to compare the two. Two different animals entirely. BTTF was just pure fun. Avatar entices you to look at it with a more critical eye due to the new tech and the hype surrounding it.

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:13 am

Jack,

As The Limits of Control is a foreign film, likely as good as such films as Hero and Cinema Paradiso, and because this is America where Hollywood cannot be challenged by such films of astounding integrity, I am having a hard time finding it. The video store I went to didn't have it.

Have to try Blockbuster.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Sat Jan 16, 2010 10:25 am

Yaya, Sky TV have been recording live footy matchs here in the UK, In 3D for the last year or so. A lucky area in London has been testing this tech on new 3D tv for the last year too.
If you pop to a Sony center here in the UK u can experience this for yourselves.
The 3D prog will air nationally on SKY in the next fee months, and the biggest sporting event in the world, the world cup, is to be broardcast in 3D this summer!

On the subject of 3D games, Avatar the game is in 3D. And Nvidia the GPU manufacture have these 3D glasses that have been around for a year or two, supposedly on a FPS type game it really helps you to take long shots! And looks cool...

Jack Cade · Post by **Jack Cade** » Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:30 pm

Yaya - pretty sure Limits is an American film, even though it's set in Spain. Jarmusch is certainly an American director, and most of the film is in English. Do you have anything like Lovefilm over there? We can pretty much rent anything that's out on DVD through the post.

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:11 pm

Impactor returns 2.0 wrote:Yaya, Sky TV have been recording live footy matchs here in the UK, In 3D for the last year or so. A lucky area in London has been testing this tech on new 3D tv for the last year too.
If you pop to a Sony center here in the UK u can experience this for yourselves.
The 3D prog will air nationally on SKY in the next fee months, and the biggest sporting event in the world, the world cup, is to be broardcast in 3D this summer!

Cool. Let me know how the World Cup is in 3-D. If it looks good, maybe tennis won't be far behind.

Yaya - pretty sure Limits is an American film, even though it's set in Spain. Jarmusch is certainly an American director, and most of the film is in English.

Should be at Blockbuster then.

Post by **Best First** » Sun Jan 17, 2010 10:09 am

Saw it at the Manchester Imax last night.

Really enjoyed it for what it was.

Not sure what the fuss is about the plot - anyone who has seen any other Cameron film ever shouldn't have been suprised.

Think all this 'game changing' chat is a bit silly - its just improved special effects at the end of the day - in fact if anything it feels more like a one off - because the next time you see this technology used it won't seem nearly as impressive, and the next time, and the next time etc and the need for the film to stand on its own merits, more than the wow factor, will come back to the fore.

Shanti418 · Post by **Shanti418** » Mon Jan 18, 2010 8:00 pm

Impactor returns 2.0 wrote:
Yaya wrote: The milestone here is because of the 3D, not the CGI. It was very difficult in the past to meld a real actor with a CGI world and make it 3-D without it either a) looking artificial or b) making someone sick to their stomach watching it.
Having worked with this tech for the past 20 odd years, my point is:

Terminator 2 used animators.

Gollum was created by mo-capping Andy Sirkiss's face onto his CGI model, this is the same process as seen in Avatar, because its the same company producing the effect!

Its not a new technique, and has already been mastered,

Impy, my impression was not that the actual process was revolutionary, ie the mo-capping a face onto a model, but that Cameron's cameras had the ability to see it in real time, so that he was actually looking at the mo-cap + CGI image and the background in his lens, and that THAT was something of a breakthrough, as least from a directorial standpoint.

Post by **spiderfrommars** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:40 pm

I find 3D kind of annoying, maybe I'm just getting old. But Pandora did look stunning and the characters were the most realistic CGI creations I've ever seen in a film. It's just a shame I could predict the whole plot after about 10 minutes.

But hey, Sigourney was awesome as usual. And that last battle was something else. I have a lot of respect for Cameron. The man knows how to deliver, and he could have made the whole thing a non-stop action fest but took a lot of time out to drop some important (though admittedly hamfisted) messages too.

I saw it last night, and saw District 9 for the first time today. I think D9 is better by a fair margin though ironically it owes a lot to some of Cameron's older flicks.

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Thu Jan 21, 2010 12:16 am

spiderfrommars wrote: I think D9 is better by a fair margin though ironically it owes a lot to some of Cameron's older flicks.

I was actually debating which film I preferred overall. I loved the premise of D-9. The acting and CGI were fantastic.

I think Avatar "wowed" me, but District 9 will likely stick with me for a long time.

Still, that whole sequence in the forest the first time Sully and the blue girl meet, the whole tree falling, the flyng on those pteradactly creatures, the ship fight at the end. Mmm. Might have to go with Avatar.

Planning on seeing Avatar in 3-D IMAX again. Likely missed a lot the first time. There's so much going on, you likely miss the finer touches.

Obfleur · Post by **Obfleur** » Fri Jan 22, 2010 12:03 am

Ob + Avatar = Tomorrow.

Yes, it's time.

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Fri Jan 22, 2010 12:43 am

It can't be stopped.

http://boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=2646&p=.htm

Obfleur · Post by **Obfleur** » Sat Jan 23, 2010 11:59 am

I was wowed. Cameron delivered a really cool action flick (after having spent twelve years with fish!).
Predictable plot though.

But I cant imagine watching it on a regular tv and still be "wowed".
I can watch Aliens a million times, 'cause it's cool and bad ass. But I don't think Avatar will have the same lasting appeal (though that might change when we all have 3D tv's).

Now lets bring Arnold out of retirement and pair him up with Cameron!
Terminator 5, here we go. Woop woop!

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Sat Jan 23, 2010 10:29 pm

Well, he (Arnie) is in T4, albiet in CGI form. But its one of the best, if not the best, CGI actor substitutes I have ever seen!

Obfleur · Post by **Obfleur** » Sat Jan 23, 2010 10:51 pm

He's also in The Expendables

A movie that will kick your balls.

IronHide · Post by **IronHide** » Sun Jan 24, 2010 6:10 pm

Is that out yet? I heard its supposed to be crazy doses of action and explosions.

Obfleur · Post by **Obfleur** » Sun Jan 24, 2010 7:21 pm

"Release date(s) United States: August 20, 2010" (Wikipedia)

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Sun Jan 24, 2010 10:28 pm

True fact: Stone Cold Steve Austin broke Sly's neck on set last week.

For that reason alone this movie will rock!

Professor Smooth · Post by **Professor Smooth** » Mon Jan 25, 2010 12:26 pm

I remember, after Titanic took the record for highest grossing movie ever, people would ask, "what's going to beat Titanic?" Years went by. High movies came out and didn't come (realistically) close to beating the record. Three new Star Wars movies. The Lord of the Rings Trilogy. Harry Potter. The Dark Knight. Even with inflation, none of them could beat the record.

After awhile, my friends and I stopped wondering, "what will beat Titanic" and started thinking, "With home theater being what it is, could anything possibly beat Titanic? WILL anything ever beat it?"

Eventually, it become more of a hypothetical. "Could you imagine IF something beat it? IF something else took the record? The director would have bragging rights well into the future. "I'M the guy who directed the movie that unseated Titanic as the highest grossing film of all time! I'M the guy who finally beat James Cameron!"

Well, tomorrow, the worldwide box office record is finally going to be broken. The director who finally beat James Cameron? James Cameron. Wow.

I'm serious. Wow. I'm not sure who he could brag to. I mean, everybody already knows. But assuming he could find the one person who doesn't know (and would care.) Imagine the kind of thing he could tell some dude in a bar.

"Right, so I made this movie. It cost a bunch of money and everybody said it was probably gonna flop. But it became the highest grossing movie ever. And it stayed that way for like 12 years, untouchable, until somebody beat it. They beat it in only like 6 weeks."

"You must've been pissed," the guy at the bar would say.

"Not really," Cameron would say. "I directed that one too! Bartender! Another round for me and everyone in the bar!"

"Yay" they'd all say. "Yay for the guy who directed Titanic, and for the guy whose first movie after Titanic BEAT TITANIC!"

"Yay, indeed," Cameron would say.

Obfleur · Post by **Obfleur** » Mon Jan 25, 2010 4:41 pm

saysadie · Post by **saysadie** » Mon Jan 25, 2010 5:12 pm

What I can't figure out is why this didn't happen sooner. Why is it that this film became/is to become the highest grossing film?

I mean it was enjoyable enough, but it was enjoyable on the same level a visit to a big aquarium might be. "oh, that was pretty, let's go home now". There's no real substance there. Is that all it really takes? A combination of pretty and hype?

I don't know why but that's kind of disturbing on some level. Or maybe its just sad. But then I can't say anything really, I saw it.

Obfleur · Post by **Obfleur** » Mon Jan 25, 2010 7:21 pm

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." George Carlin

Stupid people and shiny things go good together.

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Wed Jan 27, 2010 12:42 am

It's official. Avatar is now the most money making movie of all time:

http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/

Professor Smooth · Post by **Professor Smooth** » Wed Jan 27, 2010 8:27 am

Yaya wrote:It's official. Avatar is now the most money making movie of all time:

http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/

I wish James Cameron were an asshole. Just imagine how much fun he could have. I mean, really think about it. He could call a press conference and be like, "Twelve years ago, when my movie won a record number of awards and became the highest grossing film of all time, I declared myself 'King of the World.' I waited twelve years for somebody to prove me wrong, to beat the record. Well, now the record's been broken. By me. The first time I made another movie. So, you know what? Eat it, world."

But, sadly, he's not. In fact, one of the only reasons he'd even care about the record is that he'll have 100% absolute freedom to do anything he wants to do next. If he goes to the studio and says he needs 750 million dollars to begin work on a movie about some cartoon than nobody outside of southeast Asia has ever heard of that won't even have a screenshot ready until 2024, he'll get it.

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Tue Feb 02, 2010 1:02 am

Run for your lives!

It can't be stopped!

IT CAN'T BE STOPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDD!

http://boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=2665&p=.htm

bumblemusprime · Post by **bumblemusprime** » Tue Feb 02, 2010 1:33 am

Well...

When you adjust for inflation, Gone With The Wind made five times as much as Avatar.

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Tue Feb 02, 2010 1:54 am

I don't really know how to respond to that. Except..

IT CAN'T BE STOPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPED!!!!

RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!

saysadie · Post by **saysadie** » Tue Feb 02, 2010 6:33 am

bumblemusprime wrote:Well...

When you adjust for inflation, Gone With The Wind made five times as much as Avatar.

One of my brothers and I were just having the general gist of this convo today. The "if you adjust for inflation..." bit, and minus Gone with the Wind.

bumblemusprime · Post by **bumblemusprime** » Tue Feb 02, 2010 1:41 pm

And I think one of the reasons Avatar shot to the top is that people are paying double for most showings to see it in 3-D and even more to see it in IMAX.