That better not just be hyperbole. It's using its own propriety 3D tech right? Will we get it in 3D here?



Holy!

Please, True Lies was awesome.

Piranha 2 anyone?

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Jun 28 2009, 11:50 PM

The trailer didnt wow me. I was actually expecting the visuals to be better.

Hells yeah this looks much better than the first trailer. This actually makes me want to watch the movie again. Btw, did they refine the CGI since the first trailer? Coz this looks incredible, something I couldnt say for the first trailer.

---

Added on October 30, 2009, 11:05 amOh yeah HD links:

480p
720p
1080p

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Oct 30 2009, 11:05 AM

I believe the first reactions to Transformers were similar, so there you go. Although it has to be said, Cameron's left nipple itself has more talent than the whole of Bay when it comes to action movies. I'm feeling optimistic, all I want is a slam-bang smashing action extravaganza. As long as the storyline and writing is above average, I'm okay with it.

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Dec 12 2009, 08:20 AM

I cant see Bernardinelli's review. But the current crop of reviews at RT is getting to me.

Blend of live-action and CGI, mostly CGI I think. When I first saw Sigourney and Michelles Rodriguez I didn't know the movie was part live-action. I thought photorealism had been achieved then.

Btw, where is the best place to catch this in 3D? Is the IMAX screen in BTS showing it in 3D? (I know it's not under IMAX anymore)
I think Pavilion has the best GSC screens. Might watch it there.

I want to know as well if the IMAX screen in BTS is showing this in 3D. From the GSC website, it looks like Pavilion's screen is smaller than the 1U screen. BTS GSC 3D is puny.

Anyone here who has watched 3D in both Pavilion and 1U? Mov freak?

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Dec 13 2009, 10:25 AM

lol, that's what I did. And the 1U screen is the biggest. Each GSC branch has how many halls with 3D digital projection?

The only choice we have here is the IMAX-sized screen at BTS, which I'm not sure has 3D, or the usual 3D digital projections in the usual GSC/Cineleisure halls. Assuming the IMAX screen is hopeless, which is the best altrenative?

Just came back from this. Jim Cameron is back, and it's like he never left. Yes the story is conventional. Yes the characters are very black and white. And despite all that the result is a terrifically entertaining movie of the highest order. Its conventionalisms aside it's very, very well written with characters that still manage to easily gain and hold our attention. And once again Cameron proves that shooting action scenes is his forte. The visuals and 3D effects are impressive, but I'm still not totally convinced it's the medium of the future. Cameron knows how to use it, but others might not, and not every movie will have a $300 million budget greenlit. Plus I don't think he really went for photo-realism. It isn't photo-realistic, it's more fantasy-realistic if you get what I mean. A lot of it has to do with the colour pallete, but in any case I must say the foliage and water and fire look breathtaking.

Horror-action, sci-fi action, comedy-action, and romance-action... and now fantasy-action, Cameron has done them all. So yeah... this is one epic, entertaining movie. Everyone, just go watch it. In 3D.

P/S: I think the world of Pandora is actually pretty original. It's very mythic, and normally I dont like mythic, but this time it really worked for me. And all the little details, like the floating jellyfish-like tree seed and the way the Na'vi and the creatures bond, all add to the richness of Pandora.

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Dec 18 2009, 04:02 PM

PP/S: Stephen Lang is f***ing badass. How come I never heard of him before?

He musnt have been badass in Public Enemies then.

Anyway, how is the forecast for its opening weekend gross?

I woke up today with Avatar still in my mind. I'm not sure if this is a masterpiece just yet, but Cameron surely has done something quite spectacular with this. And I'm not just talking about the technical aspects of the film. The storytelling and pacing here are unmatched by any other movie I've seen this year.

Nope, I didn't let the hype get to me. In fact I'm still not buying that 3D is the future of movies. What this movie managed was take a step forward, but it's hard to see when the next step will occur, or what 10 steps ahead will look like.

What I truly like about the movie, is what made people like Star Wars in the first place. A simple story told extraordinarily. A world that sweeps you away and sucks you in. Movies about good vs evil like this need not be in any way complicated, it just needs to be told correctly, it just needs to nudge you into unequivocally picking the good side, it just needs you to fully get behind the main character, it just needs to make you feel like punching the air when Jake shouts "This is our land!", it just needs to make you want the main character to live and not die. And in my opinion Cameron delivers. And maybe 'just' is the wrong word I'm using, because I can't remember the last time an epic movie like this managed all that. The more I think of it the more I love it.

A second viewing will be in order. Let me see how this holds up.

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Dec 20 2009, 10:08 AM

True, the dialogue isn't up to his previous movies' standards, but I dont find it bad. Just... not that good. True also, "This is our land!" was cringeworthy, in the trailer. But watching the movie and all that went on before the line was delivered, I cant help but say "f*** it, I dont care if the line is bad, this is indeed OUR LAND!".

I hope you didn't mean it the way Jake meant it before he kissed her.

Btw I have no problem with the cast. Worthington isn't very impressive but he takes nothing away from the movie. His biggest weakness is his accent. As for Stephen Lang's colonel Miles, I have nothing bad to say about him. Larger than life and super badass. Someone I looooove to hate.

Sorry but no dice. That movie wasted a good premise on wanton action scenes, albeit some really good action scenes. That movie was even less original than Avatar.

I'll have to disagree there. He was as much a slimy doofus as the Paul Reiser character from Aliens, which you can pretty much bet Cameron modeled after. My only regret is that he didnt get his proper comeuppance like what Reiser got in Aliens.

---

Added on December 20, 2009, 5:26 pmThe world of Pandora itself, together with its myriad of finer details, is without a doubt more original than the whole of District 9, of which the only original thing was the premise.

defaultname will have a hard time with this, being a pretty hardcore lover of both movies.

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Dec 20 2009, 05:27 PM

I dont simply lump the magical details like the small jellyfish-like floating stuff, the way a Na'vi physically bonds with the wildlife, the plant that rapidly retracts its leaves and petals when touched etc together with the visuals. Someone had to think of them first. All those details add a incalculable amount of wonderment to the story.

Also, I found Wikus to be very annoying second time around. Guy just doesnt know how to shut the f*** up.

Damn, what's that term Hitchcock used. I got a memory block right now.

EDIT: McGuffin!

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Dec 20 2009, 08:12 PM