| Author |
Topic |
Megan Aven
Amarr |
Posted - 2009.12.26 16:45:00 - [ 61]
Went to see it yesterday - definitely of the best movies in recent years. |
Malaclypse Muscaria |
Posted - 2009.12.26 17:10:00 - [ 62]
 Originally by: Herzog Wolfhammer
We joked about people like you and are looking forward to making 2010 even harder on you and your kind.
Resistance IS victory.
Oh, do go on, I'd love to hear how is it exactly you and your motley crew of internet warriors are intending to "make 2010 even harder" on me.  Though as much as it may contribute to my amusement, and as much as you may see it as "victory", your continued "resistance" to pulling your head out of your ass along with your staunch determination on breathing your own rectal fumes instead of fresh air, will cause irreparable damage on whatever parts of your brain are still functional. Originally by: Dray
As for the story, give me a break, contrived, clichéd, trite, and predictable, cant wait for family guy or south park to send it up, cartman would love the tree huggers.
South Park already did rip on the Avatar storyline on "Dances with Smurfs", albeit a month before release and the main focus of the episode being ripping on Glenn Beck. |
MAXSuicide
Core Impulse
|
Posted - 2009.12.26 17:52:00 - [ 63]
Originally by: Malaclypse Muscaria
South Park already did rip on the Avatar storyline on "Dances with Smurfs", albeit a month before release and the main focus of the episode being ripping on Glenn Beck.
and it was funny. i saw avatar in 3d the other day and thought it was a great movie. who gives a **** if some of its predictable (isnt it like that in pretty much all movies except for certain crime thrillers?) |
Thuranni
Eldjotnar
|
Posted - 2009.12.26 21:08:00 - [ 64]
Edited by: Thuranni on 26/12/2009 21:09:28 Originally by: Herzog Wolfhammer
Well-crafted propaganda.
Of course, the sheep will oooh and aaaah at the special effects not knowing they are being programmed. '
At they, and the outcome of that programming, is certainly predictable.
Are you unable to turn off your paranoia for two hours to enjoy a piece of beautiful entertainment? You are going to think that I'm just another well-programmed sheep following the orders of the invisible elite, whilst you are a brave, free thinking man in a sea of drones, but honestly, I pity you. You are unable to enjoy the simple, nice things in life without seeing what you believe are parts of some global over-arching conspiracy to indoctrinate you into some culture of submission. If this was a piece of propaganda designed to "program" us "sheep", why was the overall message of the movie a anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist one? Or is this one part of a different conspiracy, not the consumerist, globalization one? My poor sheep mind can't keep up with all these conspiracies.  |
Toshiro GreyHawk |
Posted - 2009.12.26 22:17:00 - [ 65]
Ah ... it's to bad. I'd probably love the special effects in this thing but .... damn ... I am so sick to death of liberal ass hollywood horse manure I ... I have no frakking desire to ever see another bit of simplistic crap like Dances With Wolves again.
One of the real ironies about movies on the American Indian Wars - is that the OLD ones - got it right. If you want to read a series of really informative, entertaining, well researched Historical Novels - check out Terry C. Johnson's Planesman Series. He's sympathetic to the Indian position but ... shows them as they were. A Warrior Culture - that revolved around raiding their neighbors, raping their women, killing their men and stealing their children and live stock. You can't be a Warrior if you don't have someone to fight.
All I've seen is the trailer for Avatar - but - if the movie portrays these guys as sweet, innocent little lambs - then suddenly has them very succesful at weapons usage that's a problem. The American Indians were very good at using their weapons - because they used them all the time on each other - and anyone else who happened along.
Look at the film "Little Big Man" where the Lakota refer to themselves as The Human Beings - and then think about that. If THEY were the human beings - what was everyone else? I can tell you. Everyone else was NOT a human being. Just someone to be robbed and murdered or kidnapped and/or ****d.
Yes - the settelers weren't all innocent either - but - they suffered twice the deaths of the Indians.
If you look at some of the old John Ford Cavalry movies - they treat the Indians with respect - but show them as the brutal killers they were.
You won't see that today in Hollywood. Just more horse manure like "Dances With Wolves".
And don't get me wrong about that movie - I really enjoyed it ... right up until ... the end. The end was just stupid. It was like ... "American Beauty" ... a really good movie - right up until the director had to put in his political message.
So ... sadly ... I'll not be going to see this any time soon ... I've put up with this crap for decades and I've had all I want to see of it. It's kind of like "Alexander". I'm a history buff and ... I was really looking forward to seeing that ... until I started hearing more about ... no thanks ... the last 4 seasons of Buffy burned me out on more politics insinuated into entertainment.
*shrug*
Oh ... and anyone who doesn't think that these Liberal Hollywood directors don't use their movies to push their own political points of view - is incredibly naive.
And ... lest any one misunderstand ... I don't care for Conservative Horse Manure either ... you just get a lot less of that coming out of Hollywood.
Sorry for the rant but ... this is just another film I might really have liked to see ... if it wasn't ruined by some politically correct crap ...
*shrug*
Oh well ... more time to play EVE ... |
Bibbleibble |
Posted - 2009.12.26 22:37:00 - [ 66]
Originally by: Toshiro GreyHawk
Ah ... it's to bad. I'd probably love the special effects in this thing but .... damn ... I am so sick to death of liberal ass hollywood horse manure I ... I have no frakking desire to ever see another bit of simplistic crap like Dances With Wolves again.
One of the real ironies about movies on the American Indian Wars - is that the OLD ones - got it right. If you want to read a series of really informative, entertaining, well researched Historical Novels - check out Terry C. Johnson's Planesman Series. He's sympathetic to the Indian position but ... shows them as they were. A Warrior Culture - that revolved around raiding their neighbors, raping their women, killing their men and stealing their children and live stock. You can't be a Warrior if you don't have someone to fight.
All I've seen is the trailer for Avatar - but - if the movie portrays these guys as sweet, innocent little lambs - then suddenly has them very succesful at weapons usage that's a problem. The American Indians were very good at using their weapons - because they used them all the time on each other - and anyone else who happened along.
Look at the film "Little Big Man" where the Lakota refer to themselves as The Human Beings - and then think about that. If THEY were the human beings - what was everyone else? I can tell you. Everyone else was NOT a human being. Just someone to be robbed and murdered or kidnapped and/or ****d.
Yes - the settelers weren't all innocent either - but - they suffered twice the deaths of the Indians.
If you look at some of the old John Ford Cavalry movies - they treat the Indians with respect - but show them as the brutal killers they were.
You won't see that today in Hollywood. Just more horse manure like "Dances With Wolves".
And don't get me wrong about that movie - I really enjoyed it ... right up until ... the end. The end was just stupid. It was like ... "American Beauty" ... a really good movie - right up until the director had to put in his political message.
So ... sadly ... I'll not be going to see this any time soon ... I've put up with this crap for decades and I've had all I want to see of it. It's kind of like "Alexander". I'm a history buff and ... I was really looking forward to seeing that ... until I started hearing more about ... no thanks ... the last 4 seasons of Buffy burned me out on more politics insinuated into entertainment.
*shrug*
Oh ... and anyone who doesn't think that these Liberal Hollywood directors don't use their movies to push their own political points of view - is incredibly naive.
And ... lest any one misunderstand ... I don't care for Conservative Horse Manure either ... you just get a lot less of that coming out of Hollywood.
Sorry for the rant but ... this is just another film I might really have liked to see ... if it wasn't ruined by some politically correct crap ...
*shrug*
Oh well ... more time to play EVE ...
Seriously this thread is like a really badly made fruit and nut cake... It starts off nice and tasty, but as you get deeper into it, the nuts start to clog it up and take away any semblance of decent flavour. |
AtheistOfDoom
Amarr
Invicta.
|
Posted - 2009.12.27 00:15:00 - [ 67]
Originally by: GM Horse
I was a bit skeptical, but I honestly haven't enjoyed a movie this much in years. Also, you simply must see this movie in a cinema.
You should also see it in 3D. It's not the crappy kind :D Though IMO it was really predicable but very enjoyable. |
Brechan Skene |
Posted - 2009.12.27 00:59:00 - [ 68]
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Gallente
Sigma Special Tactics Group
|
Posted - 2009.12.27 01:24:00 - [ 69]
Originally by: Thuranni
Edited by: Thuranni on 26/12/2009 21:09:28
Originally by: Herzog Wolfhammer
Well-crafted propaganda.
Of course, the sheep will oooh and aaaah at the special effects not knowing they are being programmed. '
At they, and the outcome of that programming, is certainly predictable.
Are you unable to turn off your paranoia for two hours to enjoy a piece of beautiful entertainment?
You are going to think that I'm just another well-programmed sheep following the orders of the invisible elite, whilst you are a brave, free thinking man in a sea of drones, but honestly, I pity you. You are unable to enjoy the simple, nice things in life without seeing what you believe are parts of some global over-arching conspiracy to indoctrinate you into some culture of submission.
If this was a piece of propaganda designed to "program" us "sheep", why was the overall message of the movie a anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist one? Or is this one part of a different conspiracy, not the consumerist, globalization one? My poor sheep mind can't keep up with all these conspiracies.
The overall message is "anti-capitalist".... but have you grazed on over into any information that could show you how we have not had real capitalism since 1913? "Anti-imperialist".... Gee, thanks James Cameron. I suppose that if he supports the ideals of non-intervention foreign policy he can use the bully pulpit to perhaps break BOTH democrat and republican parties from being war parties. Yes a new dawn is.... oh oh could he be justifying that war that started after the US security assets dropped the ball and there just happens to be oil pipelines going through now and troops defending opium production... Oh say it ain't so. Starting at 13 minutes of the NPR interview Cameron makes the same points about imperialism and then goes on to say that the Afghan war is a "just" war. AND THAT illustrates my point about sheeple. You see, in 2154, we will not have an earth where we just sit here and say "we need energy! Send troops and kill them for it!!!!". No instead there will be lies and propaganda to keep the sheep (like you) justifying it. Perhaps let a few men from caves (oh wait, Saudi Arabia and Germany) lob some planes into a skysc****r or two for effect. So we send troops to "hunt terrorists" or "fight for your freedom" (while passing the PATRIOT ACT, illegal warrantless spying on citizens, no-knock searches, wiretaps, rolling surveillance without probable cause, all are spreading here). So are you starting to get the idea of what I mean by sheeple and propaganda? And the "right" are just as sheepled out as "the left". The hippies who used to protest "Bush's war" every Sunday on a local corner are gone now. But it's the same kind of president, same kind of policies, same kind of war party. The people who were against it before November 2008 are not for it, as are the same people for increased spending now were against the bankster bailout (but those who were for it are now against it). You seeing a pattern here or should I just mouth-breath my way to the theater and think that watching a movie that is "anti imperialistic" will change anything even if the producer is just as stupid as anyone else? Now we get to watch capitalism get the blame and the sheeple want socialism, and we don't even get real socialism. Merely a fraction of the money sent to banks this year could have paid off everybody's bills. Do you want to know where the money went or should I drool down my chin watching some 3D? |
Intense Thinker
Minmatar |
Posted - 2009.12.27 01:30:00 - [ 70]
Edited by: Intense Thinker on 27/12/2009 01:30:27Hooray! I just saw it!!! Had to get away from the drudgery of family for almost 3 hours  Interspecies sex ftw!!!  Edit: Herzog... as said in the AK thread, don't ever change |
WheatGrass
Silent but Friendly |
Posted - 2009.12.27 05:53:00 - [ 71]
I SEE you CCP!  But really... "impossimonium"?!? CCP should have been consulted for a better name. Veldspar would have been sufficient. I wanted to sit through the credits but three hours and six cups of coffee don't go well together. Speaking of coffee... who ever would have known that it was such a manly drink. I'm going to start holding my coffee in a more manly fashion. Heck! I might even start chewing it as well. The movie was really enjoyable and well worth the $10 and the two hour drive. |
Intense Thinker
Minmatar |
Posted - 2009.12.27 06:37:00 - [ 72]
|
Culmen
Caldari
Culmenation
|
Posted - 2009.12.27 07:34:00 - [ 73]
The plot was cliched and hackneyed.
The acting was poor.
The script as a whole was laughable.
This is the kind of movie that depends on its CGI to carry it.
The fact that I thought it was a good movies is thus a testament to how out of this ****ing world the CGI was.
Seriously the prettiest movie I have ever seen.
Despite that fact that every single sci-fi vehicle has been done to death in a dozen other movies
none of them actually looked half as real.
The creatures looked grown rather then rendered
The blue guys have easily the most expressive faces ever to come out of a computer
Id recommend the movie highly
|
Intense Thinker
Minmatar |
Posted - 2009.12.27 07:48:00 - [ 74]
Originally by: Culmen
The plot was cliched and hackneyed.
The acting was poor.
The script as a whole was laughable.
This is the kind of movie that depends on its CGI to carry it.
The fact that I thought it was a good movies is thus a testament to how out of this ****ing world the CGI was.
Seriously the prettiest movie I have ever seen.
Despite that fact that every single sci-fi vehicle has been done to death in a dozen other movies
none of them actually looked half as real.
The creatures looked grown rather then rendered
The blue guys have easily the most expressive faces ever to come out of a computer
Id recommend the movie highly
the 3D HD kicked major ass too  |
Culmen
Caldari
Culmenation
|
Posted - 2009.12.27 08:01:00 - [ 75]
Originally by: Intense Thinker
the 3D HD kicked major ass too
actually I think the 3D detracted alot from the movie I had to guess where the director wanted my eyes, making alot of the movie blurry i also heard that color is more vivid in 2D But judging by what i saw in focus, and even without focus, GOD DAMMMIT ITS PRETTY |
Intense Thinker
Minmatar |
Posted - 2009.12.27 08:13:00 - [ 76]
|
Thuranni
Eldjotnar
|
Posted - 2009.12.27 13:22:00 - [ 77]
Originally by: Herzog Wolfhammer
Words
It must be so hard being you. |
MAXSuicide
Core Impulse
|
Posted - 2009.12.27 14:42:00 - [ 78]
Originally by: Intense Thinker
Interspecies sex ftw!!!
made me lol when that came out inside of their big tree. was just like "ahhhaha rumbled mate...ur in for it now" |
Reiisha
Veto Corp |
Posted - 2009.12.29 16:12:00 - [ 79]
Could people please stop this crap about "messages" and "morals"? I'm pretty sure the movie wasn't intended like that, and even if it were, i don't give a rats ass about it. I enjoyed the movie for what it was, not for what people think it was supposed to be. |
Imperator Jora'h |
Posted - 2009.12.29 17:45:00 - [ 80]
Originally by: Culmen
The blue guys have easily the most expressive faces ever to come out of a computer
Probably because Cameron pioneered new forms of motion capture that upped the bar for the whole industry. The CGI characters were actually inhabited and acted by the human actors. As such their performances, every little nuance of arched eyebrow or quirk of the mouth, was directly translated to the CGI characters. Apparently it took Cameron a few years and many millions of dollars to get the tech right. You saw the results. |
M00dy
Minmatar
Killed In Action
|
Posted - 2009.12.29 19:19:00 - [ 81]
Down with Capitalism!
|
Scythian Howe
Amarr |
Posted - 2009.12.29 21:43:00 - [ 82]
Originally by: Toshiro GreyHawk
Ah ... it's to bad. I'd probably love the special effects in this thing but .... damn ... I am so sick to death of liberal ass hollywood horse manure I ... I have no frakking desire to ever see another bit of simplistic crap like Dances With Wolves again.
One of the real ironies about movies on the American Indian Wars - is that the OLD ones - got it right. If you want to read a series of really informative, entertaining, well researched Historical Novels - check out Terry C. Johnson's Planesman Series. He's sympathetic to the Indian position but ... shows them as they were. A Warrior Culture - that revolved around raiding their neighbors, raping their women, killing their men and stealing their children and live stock. You can't be a Warrior if you don't have someone to fight.
All I've seen is the trailer for Avatar - but - if the movie portrays these guys as sweet, innocent little lambs - then suddenly has them very succesful at weapons usage that's a problem. The American Indians were very good at using their weapons - because they used them all the time on each other - and anyone else who happened along.
Look at the film "Little Big Man" where the Lakota refer to themselves as The Human Beings - and then think about that. If THEY were the human beings - what was everyone else? I can tell you. Everyone else was NOT a human being. Just someone to be robbed and murdered or kidnapped and/or ****d.
Yes - the settelers weren't all innocent either - but - they suffered twice the deaths of the Indians.
If you look at some of the old John Ford Cavalry movies - they treat the Indians with respect - but show them as the brutal killers they were.
You won't see that today in Hollywood. Just more horse manure like "Dances With Wolves".
And don't get me wrong about that movie - I really enjoyed it ... right up until ... the end. The end was just stupid. It was like ... "American Beauty" ... a really good movie - right up until the director had to put in his political message.
So ... sadly ... I'll not be going to see this any time soon ... I've put up with this crap for decades and I've had all I want to see of it. It's kind of like "Alexander". I'm a history buff and ... I was really looking forward to seeing that ... until I started hearing more about ... no thanks ... the last 4 seasons of Buffy burned me out on more politics insinuated into entertainment.
*shrug*
Oh ... and anyone who doesn't think that these Liberal Hollywood directors don't use their movies to push their own political points of view - is incredibly naive.
And ... lest any one misunderstand ... I don't care for Conservative Horse Manure either ... you just get a lot less of that coming out of Hollywood.
Sorry for the rant but ... this is just another film I might really have liked to see ... if it wasn't ruined by some politically correct crap ...
*shrug*
Oh well ... more time to play EVE ...
To me, the movie was more about Gaia and the preservation of a world (our world) than the natives themselves who were mere extensions of the Gaia. Hence the creatures of the jungle joining in the fight later on. I think it spoke more of the victory of nature over man. Sort of a reverse man vs. nature theme. I very nearly wept openly in the theater when the planet (or their goddess/Gaia however you want to look at it) finally decided to fight the invaders at the end. |
brutoid
Caldari |
Posted - 2009.12.29 22:35:00 - [ 83]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Culmen
The blue guys have easily the most expressive faces ever to come out of a computer
Probably because Cameron pioneered new forms of motion capture that upped the bar for the whole industry. The CGI characters were actually inhabited and acted by the human actors. As such their performances, every little nuance of arched eyebrow or quirk of the mouth, was directly translated to the CGI characters.
Apparently it took Cameron a few years and many millions of dollars to get the tech right. You saw the results.
The CGI\Live action was done in New Zealand by WETA Digital, Peter Jacksons company responsible for bringing us Gollem. The techniques you've mentioned were all used back in 99\2000 when making the LOTR trilogy, check the dvd-extras on the Extended Edition boxsets, you'll see the results  . The techniques were again applied in King Kong, both roles played of course by Andy Serkis. I think Cameron has mentioned paying Jackson a visit after seeing The Two Towers, the first time Gollem was truly realised, and asking the master for his secrets. Apparently Spielbergs upcoming Tin Tin film is another that the 'old skool' have had to ask Jackson how to do 'properly'. What you're seeing in Avatar is the decade long polished technique by WETA being used by Camerons millions, Jackson must be loving it. Jackson managed to make a trilogy on less money and for me, Gollem looks better than these blue lanky junglebook dwellers. The 3D stuff is a bit more 'Cameron' but again, as far as i understand it, he approached an already established company doing things with new camera and lens designs and built on top of that. At the end of the day the real magic with this new 3D technique gets done inside the computer and i doubt Cameron knows much about that, i will however grant him the respect of getting the funds together to bring all these techniques to harmony in one film. However sh!t it is. Another 'tip of the hat' goes to his long term vision, i'm sure many here are aware that this new 3D malarky can be applied to films already made and i do believe that such films as The LOTR, Star Wars, Terminator 2, one of the Aliens etc are going to be treated to the 3D upgrade and rereleased for our viewing pleasure. Although i thought Avatar was a load of ****, i did however massively enjoy the whole visual experience and cant wait for someone to make something that will truly blow me away. If in the meantime while i wait for that day to come i get to watch the beginning of Star Wars with the whole letters scrolling and the ship flying overhead in 3D goodness, then i'm fine with that. |
Imperator Jora'h |
Posted - 2009.12.29 22:49:00 - [ 84]
Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 29/12/2009 23:03:51 Originally by: brutoid
The CGI\Live action was done in New Zealand by WETA Digital, Peter Jacksons company responsible for bringing us Gollem. The techniques you've mentioned were all used back in 99\2000 when making the LOTR trilogy, check the dvd-extras on the Extended Edition boxsets, you'll see the results .
The techniques were again applied in King Kong, both roles played of course by Andy Serkis. I think Cameron has mentioned paying Jackson a visit after seeing The Two Towers, the first time Gollem was truly realised, and asking the master for his secrets. Apparently Spielbergs upcoming Tin Tin film is another that the 'old skool' have had to ask Jackson how to do 'properly'.
What you're seeing in Avatar is the decade long polished technique by WETA being used by Camerons millions, Jackson must be loving it. Jackson managed to make a trilogy on less money and for me, Gollem looks better than these blue lanky junglebook dwellers.
Actually no. Well, it was WETA that Cameron hired to do the work but no, WETA did not have the tech anywhere near this level. WETA did the work, Cameron provided the money and the insistence for something that had not been done before. Quote:
In fact, Cameron doesn’t even like the term “motion capture” for the process used on Avatar. He prefers to call it “performance capture.” This may seem like semantics, but to Cameron, the subtle facial expressions that define an actor’s performance had been lost for many of the digital characters that have come before. In those films, the process of motion capture served only as a starting point for animators, who would finish the job with digital brush strokes. “Gollum’s face was entirely animated by hand,” says Weta Digital effects master Joe Letteri. “King Kong was a third or so straight performance capture. It was never automatic.” This time, Cameron wanted to keep the embellishment by animators to a minimum and let the actors drive their own performances.
SOURCE: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/industry/4339455.html?page=3
ETA: If you read the whole article you'll see they had a couple of false starts that tunred out horribly (using WETA's existing tech) till they hit on the right approach. Then WETA spent a crapload of tedious work tweaking the parameters so the process produced what Cameron wanted. Apparently it was the work of a couple years to achieve. |
brutoid
Caldari |
Posted - 2009.12.29 22:57:00 - [ 85]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Actually no.
Well, it was WETA that Cameron hired to do the work but no, WETA did not have the tech anywhere near this level. WETA did the work, Cameron provided the money and the insistence for something that had not been done before.
Quote:
In fact, Cameron doesn’t even like the term “motion capture” for the process used on Avatar. He prefers to call it “performance capture.” This may seem like semantics, but to Cameron, the subtle facial expressions that define an actor’s performance had been lost for many of the digital characters that have come before. In those films, the process of motion capture served only as a starting point for animators, who would finish the job with digital brush strokes. “Gollum’s face was entirely animated by hand,” says Weta Digital effects master Joe Letteri. “King Kong was a third or so straight performance capture. It was never automatic.” This time, Cameron wanted to keep the embellishment by animators to a minimum and let the actors drive their own performances.
SOURCE: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/industry/4339455.html?page=3
Nice, cheers for the link. I stand corrected, Cameron payed WETA to expand on a technique they were already pretty efficient at. Evolution i guess, but in no way should be solely attributed to Cameron imo. |
Imperator Jora'h |
Posted - 2009.12.29 23:02:00 - [ 86]
Originally by: brutoid
Nice, cheers for the link. I stand corrected, Cameron payed WETA to expand on a technique they were already pretty efficient at. Evolution i guess, but in no way should be solely attributed to Cameron imo.
Sorry...added to my post above. WETA expanded on their techniques but it was a lot more work than a few simple tweaks. As for giving Cameron credit...well, he is the Director and the driver for the artistic vision. Most directors would have settled for something less. A movie is hundreds or thousands of people working to produce the final product. Given that should you ignore the Director's part in it? Afterall he did not act or edit or build sets or design costumes or program computers. He did nothing I guess.  |
brutoid
Caldari |
Posted - 2009.12.29 23:36:00 - [ 87]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Sorry...added to my post above. WETA expanded on their techniques but it was a lot more work than a few simple tweaks.
Absolutely, please dont get me wrong but i believe i commended Cameron earlier for his long term vision but i'm just making the point that its easier to get stuff done if you're using another Directors company who have an exsisting film-worthy technique and pay them to expand on it (as you pointed out to me) rather than starting from scratch on your own. Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
As for giving Cameron credit...well, he is the Director and the driver for the artistic vision. Most directors would have settled for something less.
Tottally agree, though knocking Cameron for what he has achieved artistically is our right as a viewer and largely hinges on whether we liked the film or not. Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
A movie is hundreds or thousands of people working to produce the final product. Given that should you ignore the Director's part in it? Afterall he did not act or edit or build sets or design costumes or program computers. He did nothing I guess.
Actually Cameron did design some of the creatures himself due to not liking what his artists achieved, speaks volumes about the man whose body of work i largely like, i think I'm not ignoring Camerons input as a Director, besides, without discussing the merits of his DoP or what was most important in making this film be it Principal Photography or Post-Production etc, what would be the point? I'm certainly not knocking what Cameron has achieved technically either, but this whole 14 year vision, Camerons great technology etc marketing spin, is just that. This film cost so much that they are selling it with whatever wow-factor they can attatch. Credit were credit is due, is what i'm getting at and that extends (for me at least) to WETA as much as Cameron for bringing it all together. Plus we all know that he's never made a film as good as Aliens! |
Cyprus Black
Caldari
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.12.30 08:59:00 - [ 88]
Wow, everyone is getting all up in arms over this movie.
Best advice to anyone planning on seeing this movie who hasn't yet:
Don't go in looking for an underlying message, deep story, or political finger-wagging.
Just go in and enjoy it for what it is. |
Toshiro GreyHawk |
Posted - 2009.12.30 10:04:00 - [ 89]
Edited by: Toshiro GreyHawk on 30/12/2009 10:14:25 Originally by: Bibbleibble
Originally by: Toshiro GreyHawk
...
Stuff I said
...
Seriously this thread is like a really badly made fruit and nut cake...
It starts off nice and tasty, but as you get deeper into it, the nuts start to clog it up and take away any semblance of decent flavour.
Outstandingly crafted insult there Bib. Very well done. Not really being into insulting other people I'm afraid I just don't have anything better to respond with other than something crude so I'll just let it go. *shrug* You have a Happy New Year now. Originally by: Scythian Howe
Originally by: Toshiro GreyHawk
...
The same stuff I said before.
...
To me, the movie was more about Gaia and the preservation of a world (our world) than the natives themselves who were mere extensions of the Gaia. Hence the creatures of the jungle joining in the fight later on. I think it spoke more of the victory of nature over man. Sort of a reverse man vs. nature theme. I very nearly wept openly in the theater when the planet (or their goddess/Gaia however you want to look at it) finally decided to fight the invaders at the end.
That's cool. If you're into the whole Gaia thing. I'm just not. To me ... a planet is just a bunch of rocks and minerals ... that can't think. *shrug* So I have a hard time with the idea. Now ... if it's that all the living things on those rocks and minerals have some kind of shared consciousness ... I still wouldn't buy it ... but that would make more sense. Anyway - if people enjoy this movie - good for them. I'm just ****ed because I really like special effects and would love to go watch this movie soley for that purpose (like the reason I watched Titanic was to see the ship sink ...) but ... I'm just burned out on the High Tech is Evil - Low Tech is Good crap. *shrug* Maybe I'm just old and have seen to much of it already. . |
Glassback
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion |
Posted - 2009.12.30 15:57:00 - [ 90]
Epic film I thought.
I dont think the storyline detracted from the film at all. Withnail and I doesnt have anything resembling a storyline and thats one of the greatest films of all time. |
|
All Channels
Out of Pod Experience
