• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Rottenwatch: AVATAR (82%)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Scullibundo said:
Once again Nappa, you have no idea what you're talking about. 3D has never been adopted by the industry the way it has been now. Once you've started integrating the practice into home viewing, its all over.

Cameron started the 3D New Wave.
Click to expand...

Sorry I completely forgot I posted in this thread.

Really, I just feel like, regardless of the quality of the 3D (which to me is still hasn't ever "worked") the 3D just doesn't add much to the movie. But it does get people to pay 5 bucks more for the same ticket which is why studios are adopting it and why I feel like it is a gimmick 90% of the time.

if you'll note, i don't say all the time for a reason. Select few films have used 3D "right"- Hugo and Jackass3D being the two I can think of off hand.
 
The underwater stuff is going to be off the fucking chain.

BotoxAgent said:
I wonder how rough Cameron is going to make it for his actors to get the most authentic feel as possible.

I predict Worthington is gonna punch Cameron's lights out one of those days
Click to expand...

Compared to his 80's/90's self, Cameron is a big ol' softie nowadays. I think actors actually like working with him now :lol
 
StudioTan said:
According to this list there were 46 3D movies released in 2011 and there are 50 released scheduled for 2012.

Also according to this article Hugo had a 75% 3D split showing that people will go see the 3D version if it's deemed worth the extra cost.

3D television adoption is growing.

http://www.3d-display-info.com/displaysearch-66-million-3d-tvs-sold-q3-2011-27-growth-penetration-reached-12



Lack of content is always a problem with new technology and as a constant early adopter myself I've experienced that many times. I own so many crappy movies on HD DVD and Blu-ray simply because there was so little selection.

"Nearly 40 per cent of homes in Western Europe will own a 3D TV by 2015."

It's not going anywhere.
Click to expand...

That doesn't really mean people are going to actually make use of it. A better gauge would probably be sales of second/third/fourth glasses since a lot of TVs only come with one pair if any at all (I just looked at a $6500 3d tv on futureshop's website and it doesn't include any). Or even actual 3d movies, since I don't think even most high end bluray releases include 3d on the disc.

The industry really really really wants us to want 3d. That much is clear. And a lot of people at least think they want it. I just wonder how many people really follow through on wanting it after they get it.

Also, just because past innovations have succeeded (widescreen, colour, talkies) doesn't mean that every new innovation gets a pass and is assumed to have the same shot at being successful in the long run.
 
omnomis said:
That must explain why it was the fastest selling 2D DVD and Blu-Ray of all time.
Click to expand...

Using sales figures to prove a film is of high quality is just ridiculous.

How about the MASSIVE marketing and merchandise campaign, the fact it was all over the news because of 3D and one of the most high profile directors in Hollywood behind it? Nothing to do with how good the film was.

It was hugely derivative, painfully cliched and overly long. It's a dumb, shitty movie that felt like one huge advert for a technology the director backed. The only thing going for it is the pretty lights.
 
DeathCubeK said:
Using sales figures to prove a film is of high quality is just ridiculous.

How about the MASSIVE marketing and merchandise campaign, the fact it was all over the news because of 3D and one of the most high profile directors in Hollywood behind it? Nothing to do with how good the film was.

It was hugely derivative, painfully cliched and overly long. It's a dumb, shitty movie that felt like one huge advert for a technology the director backed. The only thing going for it is the pretty lights.
Click to expand...

People don't pay money to see stuff (numerous times, no less) and buy stuff unless THEY LIKE IT. Simple as that.

You say that sales figures being an indication of quality is just ridiculous. Okay, fair enough. But then you follow that up with an equally ridiculous statement. Saying that a big marketing campaign ensures financial success is just as ridiculous.

Also, you're flat out wrong. For all that hype the film allegedly had, it only opened to a bomba $77M. Word of mouth and repeat viewings, surefire signs that *gasp* people enjoyed the movie, are the reasons the movie became the biggest ever. Not marketing, not hype, not Cameron's name, not tech gimmicks.
 
Jtwo said:
Hmm. I'm kind of worried about the underwater sequences from a design standpoint. I just can't imagine it being as spectacular as the jungles and floating islands. Water is all dark and murky.
Click to expand...
On Earth. I'm sure it'll be fabulous and glowy on Pandora.
 
I think some people just can't detach their personal feelings when trying to assess how other people viewed the film. I'm not a big fan of avatar but i'm not silly enough to delude myself into thinking that this means everyone else feels the same way. The movie sold off of word of mouth and lots of people seeing the movie multiple times. The strong DVD sales also tell me that people enjoyed the movie.

Personally even though i think the first one wasn't that great, i think it could have been so much more. I'm very interested in what the second one will be like. Especially since Cameron has now turned this into a multi billion dollar franchise. Surely that pretty much leaves him to do whatever he wants with the film (if he didn't have that anyway lol).
 
Jtwo said:
Hmm. I'm kind of worried about the underwater sequences from a design standpoint. I just can't imagine it being as spectacular as the jungles and floating islands. Water is all dark and murky.
Click to expand...

Maybe at the bottom of the ocean, but close to the surface the ocean is often spectacular.
 
Motherfuckers in my city. Sinking my bridge.

171984-james-cameron.jpg
 
Scullibundo said:
Ed Harris was (rightly) under the impression he was about to die when his safety diver fucked up twice in trying to give him oxygen after a no-tank swim.
Click to expand...

Wow. The good thing is, if he would have died, they could have just towed him back to the ship and revived him with a defibrillator.

:p
 
Scullibundo said:
Ed Harris was (rightly) under the impression he was about to die when his safety diver fucked up twice in trying to give him oxygen after a no-tank swim.
Click to expand...
Aye. I recall reading about him having multiple breakdowns during filming, which may have stemmed from it. He'd just break down sobbing from the stress and terror of it all. I remember an interview when someone asked him about The Abyss, and his response was, "I'm not talking about The Abyss, and I never will." :lol

Poor guy was traumatized by it.

TheJollyCorner said:
fixed/adjusted.
Click to expand...

I find your fixes entirely acceptable.
 
Maybe when Jake and Neytiri go exploring under the sea, they'll find Coffee down there.

Edit - Ghaleon, he talks about it in detail on the making of The Abyss, which is one of the best behind the scenes stories ever.
 
DeathCubeK said:
It was hugely derivative, painfully cliched and overly long. It's a dumb, shitty movie that felt like one huge advert for a technology the director backed. The only thing going for it is the pretty lights.
Click to expand...
I love how you think your experience of the movie must be the same as everyone else's.
 
Scullibundo said:
Answered in other thread. Short version: Yes.
Click to expand...

Hah, I read through the thread and somehow missed your reply. My bad.

I should probaby migrate this to that thread, but since we're here and all...I'm confused by the different versions. You mention the quadrilogy, I've seen the anthology on blu-ray, and the stand-alone films advocated as well.

If I want the first two movies and their related documentaries on blu-ray, can I get them stand-alone? Where did you see the entire quadrilogy for $20? The cheapest I can find is $60.
 
GhaleonEB said:
Hah, I read through the thread and somehow missed your reply. My bad.

I should probaby migrate this to that thread, but since we're here and all...I'm confused by the different versions. You mention the quadrilogy, I've seen the anthology on blu-ray, and the stand-alone films advocated as well.

If I want the first two movies and their related documentaries on blu-ray, can I get them stand-alone? Where did you see the entire quadrilogy for $20? The cheapest I can find is $60.
Click to expand...

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B003AQBYUG/

Its region free. And pretty much all the documentaries are on the supplemental discs (Discs 5&6).
 
DeathCubeK said:
Using sales figures to prove a film is of high quality is just ridiculous.

How about the MASSIVE marketing and merchandise campaign, the fact it was all over the news because of 3D and one of the most high profile directors in Hollywood behind it? Nothing to do with how good the film was.

It was hugely derivative, painfully cliched and overly long. It's a dumb, shitty movie that felt like one huge advert for a technology the director backed. The only thing going for it is the pretty lights.
Click to expand...

No, it proves that people saw the film in theaters in 3D and liked it enough to go out and buy it again on 2D dvd or Bluray. Which directly goes against the poster that claimed everyone was duped into seeing it for the "3D experience" and once they got out of the theater would be done with the movie for good.
 
.GqueB. said:
Jackass 3. I didnt see in theaters and there were moments I know were amazing in 3D. Kinda regret skipping it.
Click to expand...

I saw Jackass 3d and I forgot it was a 3d movie half way in because there were so little 3d moments to be aware of. I felt a bit ripped off. Good thing the movie was awesome though.
 
Sorry, Scullibundo...

Speaking at a screening for the Titanic remake, Landau suggested that Avatar 2 is due to be released in 2016, seven years after the original.

In October 2010, Cameron revealed he had earmarked the eagerly anticipated sequel for cinemas in December 2014, and Avatar 3 in December 2015.

He said at the time: 'I am in the process of writing the next two Avatar films now. We are planning to shoot them together and post them together, and we will probably release them not quite back to back, but about a year apart. Christmas '14 and '15 is the current plan.'

Although no explanation has been given as to why fans will have to wait another two long years, it is thought Cameron may need more time to push the boundaries of 3D technology.

According to reports, he wants to make Avatar 2 more realistic by shooting it at 60 frames per second, as opposed to the industry standard of 24 frames per second.

In comparison, Peter Jackson is shooting The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey at 48 frames per second.


Read more: http://www.metro.co.uk/film/887164-...ilm-producer-jon-landau-reveals#ixzz1jFZGMOG9
Click to expand...
 
sad to hear it, but not phased in the slightest. 2014 did seem a little too ambitious. to be honest it will probably make more of an impact too. goddamn I'll be nearly 30 in 2016.
 
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/enterta...ce-of-3d-company/story-e6frf9h6-1226246452417

OSCAR-winning director James Cameron has opened the first international office of his 3D technology and production services company, Cameron Pace Group (CPG), in Melbourne today.

The office, which will give Aussie fillmmakers access to the same technology that made Cameron's epic Avatar possible, will be led by managing director Andrew Wight, who produced Cameron's $30m 3D cave-diving feature film Sanctum in Australia last year.

The Melbourne office marks the first step of a global expansion phase for CPG, which was co-founded by Cameron and Vince Page, to meet rising worldwide customer demand in 3D productions.
Click to expand...

No stopping Cameron's 3D train. The rich man gets richer.
 
2016? Damn it...I'll nearly be 38 by the time it comes out. It better be worth the wait. To me, Avatar 1 was not worth the 12 year wait. Still, I have faith in the sequel. And 7 years isn't as bad as 12 years, but still....damn...
 
The news is much more optimistic for another genre film franchise Weaver's involved in: "Avatar." The actress said that she's been in regular contact with director James Cameron about a return trip to Pandora, but doesn't expect it to happen in the immediate future.

"We've had a couple of talks, but he's busy," she said. "He has a very ambitious goal to be the person to take a submersible down to the lowest point in the Marianas Trench, which he wants to accomplish this year. 'Avatar' will happen after that."
Click to expand...
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1677685/ghostbusters-3-sigourney-weaver.jhtml

Hmm..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

RIP Cora (my avatar)
46
730
gamingforum1 replied
Funk musician Sly Stone, 82, has passed away
11
576
GeekyDad replied
What's the deal with your avatar.
2 3
131
1K
Sand Dan Glokta replied
Brian Wilson Legendary founder of the Beach boys dies at 82
28
890
LiquidMetal14 replied
Avatar Error?
7
489
Nocty replied
Top Bottom