Avatar

Talk about films etc. 1 film per thread. Lets keep it tidy.
User avatar
sparksy
Posts: 3813
Joined: Mon 20 Nov 2006 10:41 pm
Location: uk

Re: Avatar

Post by sparksy »

sry rev couldnt resist :mrgreen:
proper geezer AVE IT init
User avatar
sparksy
Posts: 3813
Joined: Mon 20 Nov 2006 10:41 pm
Location: uk

Re: Avatar

Post by sparksy »

watched last night on a TS.. 1st... id say wait for a blu-ray to come out or see it at the pictures.. if you want to watch it... the cgi in it is pretty outstanding.. BUT

what a shit story.... very cheesey..very predictable... same plot has been used in zillions of films..... all got a bit icky-yacky-rain forresty for me...

nearly as cheesey as 2012..... ok to watch out your face....no real complicated plot to follow... id give it 3/10... and thats only because of the cgi in it..
proper geezer AVE IT init
skeletor
Posts: 9129
Joined: Sun 19 Nov 2006 3:57 pm
Location: Crawley, West Sussex
Contact:

Re: Avatar

Post by skeletor »

Just watched it. Story was very predicatble and nothing different to what has been done time and time again.

But the CGI looked very good (DVDScreener).
User avatar
sparksy
Posts: 3813
Joined: Mon 20 Nov 2006 10:41 pm
Location: uk

Re: Avatar

Post by sparksy »

i imagine in 3D it would pretty awsome on a big screen.... shame the plot was a bit wank......
proper geezer AVE IT init
User avatar
Forest
Posts: 1197
Joined: Mon 16 Jul 2007 6:11 am
Xfire Username: aopforest
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Avatar

Post by Forest »

THAT FILM IS FUCKING AMAZING IN 3D
Image
Image

"So why do they call me rohypnol??"... "doink"
User avatar
Forest
Posts: 1197
Joined: Mon 16 Jul 2007 6:11 am
Xfire Username: aopforest
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Avatar

Post by Forest »

SORRY FOR CAPS!!!!!!!!! JUST GETTING A POINT ACROSS....
Image
Image

"So why do they call me rohypnol??"... "doink"
User avatar
METRIC
Posts: 902
Joined: Wed 16 May 2007 5:26 pm
Xfire Username: aopmetric

Re: Avatar

Post by METRIC »

Yea seriously all yous have ruined the film by not watchin it how its meant to be watched, tbh all you can coment on is the story, which when you ermearsed in a 3d world is a lot eaiser to enjoy
skeletor
Posts: 9129
Joined: Sun 19 Nov 2006 3:57 pm
Location: Crawley, West Sussex
Contact:

Re: Avatar

Post by skeletor »

Sorry but that is bullshit. If the story isn't strong enough it isn't a good enough film, end of. You can't just throw millions in to a film for CGI with a shit story line and expect it to be good, however emmersed you are in it.

Knock the CGI down or out completely, if you still have a film you would like to watch, then you have a good film.
User avatar
Revolver
Posts: 2935
Joined: Sun 19 Nov 2006 8:42 pm
Xfire Username: aoprevolver
Location: Leicester
Contact:

Re: Avatar

Post by Revolver »

I don't know, a lot of the time films are about atmosphere and getting your attention. It's the experience as much as anything. An awe-inspiring 3D version is going to be a hell of a lot more enjoyable than a plain old 2D version. There are plenty of films that do the same things as others but do it better. Two plots the same but one will be a good film one will be not so good.

A big budget doesn't buy a good film though, we saw that with Star Wars. The original lower budger trilogy (ep iv-vi)was and is much better than the newer higher budget trilogy (ep i-iii).
"USP'd in the face from miles away Peter. You should be embarrassed." - Floodie 13/03/2012
skeletor
Posts: 9129
Joined: Sun 19 Nov 2006 3:57 pm
Location: Crawley, West Sussex
Contact:

Re: Avatar

Post by skeletor »

Exactly and a lot of the greatest films didn't have huge budgets with massive amounts of CGI (Shawshank, Green Mile, Gran Torino, Harry Brown etc).

Same with games. Doom and Final Fantasy 6 are 2 of the greatest games ever made, but people don't rate them anymore because they are 2D.
Post Reply