Avatar is amaaaaaaaaaaazing!!!!
- Thread starter absurdistof
- Start date
- Aug 10, 2009
- 1,240
- 399
Provided they make enough money from this one, they will. I checked out their site while stalking them and I found an interview with James Cameron. He said that one of his(their) big pitches to Fox was that they could re-use the 3D models in a sequel. He said that if they make enough money from the first they most certainly will go ahead with the second.
They also sort of left the end open for a sequel... Kind of...
Dr. ROCKZO
L8: Fancy Shmancy Member
- Jul 25, 2009
- 580
- 159
Going to see it soon. Only a 84% on Rotten Tomatoes. Are they wrong?
- Aug 10, 2009
- 1,240
- 399
I'm not too surprised. I would assume that the score the movie should receive from an honest reviewer. The story aspect of the movie is a bit weak, as well as 1 or 2 characters and the acting of 1 character. Aside from that I think the movie is beautiful as well as the universe they paint around it.
Personally I'd give it a 96%
Personally I'd give it a 96%
- Sep 12, 2008
- 1,272
- 1,141
Bermuda Cake
L9: Fashionable Member
- Feb 20, 2009
- 679
- 480
I will see it in january, when the little town o' Woking, Blightey, will be getting its very own 3D projector!
- Dec 28, 2008
- 944
- 1,152
It looks "meh" and I don't wanna fork out the £6 or so to watch it here. I'll get it on Blu Ray and watch it then. It's one of those films that I really don't wanna sit in a room with other people to watch.
In saying that, I loved Wall-E when it came out in the cinema, and bought it on DVD as well...
In saying that, I loved Wall-E when it came out in the cinema, and bought it on DVD as well...
Mexican Apple Thief
L3: Junior Member<br>LEAD FARMER
- Aug 23, 2008
- 345
- 60
You realize that both those and the hornets are based on the same typical sci-fi design right? Not sure where it came from, but it's used a lot, and before Halo.
Last edited:
off-topic but its useless trying to agrue that stuff.
People think WoW and HALo are OMG SUPER INOVATIVE!
yet neither brought anything "new" to the genre.. just new people.
So because those are most peoples "first" games they feel there was nothing before it that existed.
/rant
Yup they are wrong.
Its billions of hours of pure epic cinema.
What's more its a new benchmark on what can be done with CGI
- Aug 10, 2009
- 1,240
- 399
- Nov 12, 2007
- 1,128
- 746
This is why I went and saw it. I'm greatly interested in technologies that help bring imagination to life, and this movie proved we're at a point where we can realistically and seamlessly integrate live action and CG.
However, I think the rotten tomatoes score is too high, not too low. I'd personally put it somewhere around 75%, because while the visual effects were a sure 100, the story was nothing higher than a 50. It was one of the most predictable, uninspired, safe plots I've encountered in quite a while.
It does not go on my list of favorite movies, and it gets slotted next to Final Fantasy: Spirits Within as a movie that gives great hope for a new era of filmmaking, but I would really rather not have to sit through again.
I've been told it was based on a book. In which case the "lacking" story cannot really be blamed on the cinema script. From what i can see, the "universe" created has a lot that can be expanded upon further, much in the same way Half-Life 1 was/had. In addition to the way it was technologically innovative, if content cliché. If we expect a sequal on the same scale as the Half-Life series i cannot seriously consider myself in a position to complain.
fixed. But seriously, i agree.
I was tempted too, but decided to be cheap about it since i forked out the extra for 3D glasses the first time around. 3D was purely novelty and ruined a lot of scenes, whilst enhancing others.