Expendable.
Member
silverbullet1080 said:
Don't worry then,
the mechs don't even come into play until very late in the film
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Rottenwatch: AVATAR (82%)
- Thread starter SCULLIBUNDO
- Start date
- Status
Don't worry then,
DieNgamers
Member
I think the the opposite way: I have the feeling that Avatar is something that has to be experienced in the theatre and I'd regret not seeing it that way. My hype is rising, only 4 days now. :O It will be my first 3D movie ever, yay!silverbullet1080 said:
Father_Brain
Banned
Ebert also gave overwhelmingly positive reviews to Titan A.E., Knowing, and Watchmen; his review for the first of those compared it to Star Wars as well. He has a demonstrated tendency to give gushing praise every few years to some visually impressive genre film that doesn't actually deserve it - c'mon, Dark City was good, but was it really the best film of 1998?
I won't be able to say whether Ebert overrated Avatar until I see it. But as great a critic as he is, his judgment is by no means unimpeachable - especially when it comes to this kind of film.
I won't be able to say whether Ebert overrated Avatar until I see it. But as great a critic as he is, his judgment is by no means unimpeachable - especially when it comes to this kind of film.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Oh great, I missed out on the A.I lovefest on the last page.
Anyway, reading Moriarities review and again we have another comparing it to Miyazaki's work.
Anyway, reading Moriarities review and again we have another comparing it to Miyazaki's work.
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
Father_Brain said:
Well, Ebert has given very, very positive reviews to past James Cameron movies, so he is clearly a fan of James Cameron's style of filmmaking.
PrivateWHudson
Member
Branduil said:
Yep, I can't belive how lifeless those aliens were. And christ, the fucking terminator was so bland you'd think he was a robot or something.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
Except True Lies. Also, I really like his Aliens review, where he says it left him feeling horrible and exhausted and panicked exiting the cinema, yet couldn't deny the quality of the film to be able to do that.
Neither the aliens nor the terminator are even really characters... they're more like forces of nature. But that's not that point, I was referring to human characters. Though even the animal gods in Princess Mononoke have more depth than the human villains in Aliens or Titanic.PrivateWHudson said:
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
Scullibundo said:
Well, he gave True Lies 3 stars (which is a thumbs up on his scale), so it's not as though he hated it.
Father_Brain said:
this is so obvious..OF COURSE you dont know if you will like a film until you see it. Why do people confuse pre-release hype and actual personal consensus? Its not like Ebert is the only critic giving the film a good review...some of you are really grasping at straws here.
The reviews are good, something I personally I didnt expect, so what is wrong with getting excited based on reading opinions of people that have seen it? I mean..itsnt that the ENTIRE POINT of reviews in the first place?
If not one "critic" saw this..and all I read was gaffers impressions..would it be wrong to get excited based on your opinions?
I don't understand why people maintain such a pessimistic attitude about everything...a lot of people REALLY liked this movie..so far only a few thought it was just OK, and I havent read any review that completely trashed it. This is a much better reception then I was expecting.
Yet..the same people come in (even louder once the reviews are positive) to express their opinion, to some how justify that they have been and will be right no matter what. All the while when they are basing ALL this negativity on a 2 minute trailer, or a 15 minute preview.
That's cool if this movie doesn't cater towards your (Star Wars hating. Really?) interests, but if that is the case.....
Why post in here in the first place? To show everyone you have SUCH a good reason to HATE something based on very little knowledge of the film, because the way the "alien design" is? If that isn't a totally uninformed and useless opinion to keep spouting page after page, I dont know what is.
and people are defending this?
I know some people have more power on the internets then others, but it doesnt make their opinions any greater then the average board members.
Give me a break kids.
but like I said..this stuff is void for me..anyone that doesn't enjoy films like the original Star Wars Trilogy has no reason to be in a Sci-Fi Movie Blockbuster discussion in the first place.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Branduil said:
Paul Reiser says lets not arbitrarily make any rash decisions here.
Very underrated villain. Cowardly, veiled villain that is as slimy and fucking evil as the worst of them. Very atypical bad guy.
Shrennin
Didn't get the memo regarding the 14th Amendment
GhaleonEB said:
I actually even kind of liked him when he was first introduced (and then I gradually began to dislike him more and more when it was revealed what he did and what he was trying to do). For that to happen, the character had to have been amazing.
Gary Whitta
Member
It was a bad call, Ripley. It was a bad call...
rhino4evr said:
:lol
It's so amusing that people come around saying that I have to make my opinion louder or I think my opinion is fact, and yet here is someone who legitimately thinks that if someone didn't enjoy Star Wars that somehow they shouldn't be allowed to post about any sci fi movies
This is someone being serious too, not sarcastic or anything.
I've seen a trillion sci fi movies many of which I liked - including James Cameron's own Aliens - and yet, because I didn't like this sacred cow Star Wars, I shouldn't be allowed to comment on any sci fi movie ever.
This is what I mean, though. People want their own opinions reinforced. They don't want to hear negativity about anything they like. To put it simply, because they're so feeble minded that they are unable to completely enjoy something that someone else may be negative about. EVERYONE has to like EVERYTHING about what they love, or else it's somehow raining on their parades. And this perception then turns into what they believe to be "trolling." "That person must be TROLLING it, after all, if he can't feel what I feel! How is it possible that something I love so much can have someone who doesn't? He MUST be trolling!"
I honestly don't care what you think, or anyone else thinks. That's what gives me the freedom to make my own informed opinions about everything. I only dislike ignorance. And when people were lashing out against Ebert because they thought he MIGHT not give the movie a good score - and then were made to look silly when he gave it a GREAT score - that's the type of shit I do care about.
Shrennin
Didn't get the memo regarding the 14th Amendment
GhaleonEB said:
Yea, that's pretty much it. It helps that I didn't know that Burke was the villain when I was watching Aliens (but I didn't know the villain in Titanic was a villain either, although when we are first introduced to him my villain radar went off unlike with Burke).
liquid_gears
Banned
£24 just for two Imax 3D tickets on Monday 21st. Jesus fuck.
Since when did a couple of drinks beforehand, two pepsi's and a large box of popcorn equal about £50?
On the bright side, there's no chance that I will ever bail on a date at the cinema ever again. Not with the price of the tickets. I want my money's worth.
I'm looking forward to it. Solo said it best earlier, I'm going in with no hype, just a clear mind with no wild expectations. I expect it to be a decent film though at least.
Since when did a couple of drinks beforehand, two pepsi's and a large box of popcorn equal about £50?
I sound more and more like my Dad every single day
On the bright side, there's no chance that I will ever bail on a date at the cinema ever again. Not with the price of the tickets. I want my money's worth.
I'm looking forward to it. Solo said it best earlier, I'm going in with no hype, just a clear mind with no wild expectations. I expect it to be a decent film though at least.
"caring" about reviews does not mean people can't make up their own mind about something. I respect Ebert (and a handful of other reviewers), and so when they review something positively, I take that as a recommendation. You make that sound like anyone who takes recommendations similarly are bound and sworn to love it. I really don't comprehend what you're trying to say. Most people base their opinion of stuff on their opinion; this does not make you special.
GhaleonEB said:
You don't comprehend because you're parsing a completely separate discussion from my comments. Each time you've responded to me in this thread it's as if you were replying to a different person, your failure to understand being fairly dramatic. This is also probably because you've being over sensitive as someone who is trying to defend AVATAR.
The debate is simple though, you just need to take a step back.
It started because Karma Kramer called Ebert a "hack" merely on the hunch that he was going to give AVATAR a negative review. I dismantled that viewpoint quickly, establishing Ebert's long and storied career and his demonstrated body of work which demands respect.
It continued when rhino, angered that anyone can find anything negative with AVATAR even after Ebert gave his 4/4 review, strongly implied that disliking AVATAR now that he has come back with this good review means people were hating just to "hate" and that since the reviews are back positive the haters should eat crow.
To which I replied that my opinion is not dictated by the whims of others. One does not eat crow merely because someone I respect has given it a positive review. No where in any of my arguments does it say you cannot use a positive review as a guidepost for your anticipation, or that you cannot believe it's a good recommendation.
Later rhino suggested that if you don't like Star Wars, you don't deserve to comment on sci fi. This is the type of comment you should actually be taking a stand against.
The only argument in THIS end of the spectrum was the argument that it is absurd the suggestion that I must somehow believe everything is good now because Ebert gave the movie 4/4 stars, and that if I don't I'm a "hater."
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
I find it funny that in the end Ghaleon and Amirox are arguing for the same thing, yet neither realises it.
D
Deleted member 22576
Unconfirmed Member
Welp, got my tickets booked for 2:30pm on Saturday!
In IMAX!
In IMAX!
Amir0x said:
The reason not liking Star Wars comes across as so weird in a discussion of sci-fi/fantasy (it's much more the latter) cinema is because it's the lynch pin of the whole genre.
Whatever you think of its quality it's as important as Birth of a Nation, Citizen Kane and Snow White & the Seven Dwarfs to cinema.
Your stance on the film seems so perverse to others because all the genre films (you could easily argue all blockbusters as a whole) that have come after it owe it so much, and creators such as James Cameron have been so heavily influenced by it.
How you can like the progency but not, on at least some level, the progenitor seems improbable at best and purposefully antagonistic at worst.
Dabookerman
Member
I love it when people have arguments about opinions. It's like trying to swim up a waterfall.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Dabookerman said:
Are you trying to suggest its impossible to swim up a waterfall? I submit that you are weak willed!
Furret said:
It is true there are plenty of movies that are, at the very least, influenced by what Star Wars did.
It is not true, however, that there have not been a billion movies that have come out that have been infinitely better than the "master", so-to-speak, and that one must like the source at least a "little" in order to like what came after.
I do not like Star Wars. Since the first time I saw it as a little kid, to the many times I've sat down to repeat view it up through adulthood, I've always felt the same. This is cheesy. This is boring. This is not even particularly directed well. The script is kinda awful. I am not the least bit interested in these characters or these worlds. The history is retarded.
So, you can say that I do not like the genre as it originally was. I like the genre as it became. I like many films in the genre now that have done things so, so much better. Everything from the special effects from the writing itself has been in a litany of films which are, in my opinion, far superior.
That is not "antagonistic." One does not need to like Star Wars to like what came after and did things better.
For the record, my favorite sci-fi movies are Gattaca, followed by Blade Runner, 2001: Space Odyssey, Aliens, Back to the Future, etc etc
Dabookerman
Member
Scullibundo said:
£1 TRILLION to anyone who can swim up that. (no guarantees)
Amir0x said:
I didn't say you needed to like Star Wars to like what came after, I merely said it was highly improbable that you wouldn't.
I'm curious to know what other genre films you would claim to be a "million times better" than Star Wars though, in terms of the internal consistency of the universe, the charm of its characters and the quality of its storytelling (read Ebert or any other high brow review of the original before you splutter at this last point).
The fact that the only example you've given is Gattaca, with which it has not one single thing in common, seem highly peculiar.
(Obviously I'm talking about the original trilogy here - specifically the first two films).
Furret said:
"For the record, my favorite sci-fi movies are Gattaca, followed by Blade Runner, 2001: Space Odyssey, Aliens, Back to the Future, etc etc"
I put a list of my favorites in the original post.
And yes, I know you're talking about the original film. Again, your problem is that because you like it, you fail to be able to comprehend that this isn't interesting to someone else. It is suddenly "improbable" or even "impossible" that someone can't see this about films you like, especially if they like what came after! I don't believe the characters were charming or well written. I always found the universe absurd and frankly a little retarded. C3PO and R2D2 always had me laughing, talking garbage cans with bad designs.
As with any good sci-fi movie, you have to at first be interested in the world it is building. I was never for a moment interested in the creatures and characters the world presented, and so the cheesy writing and the the entire plot premise fell short to me. I don't think this is a bizarre opinion, a lot of people I know feel the same thing. It's simply that because I'm a forum where a lot of geeks reside, it's like taking a shot at a golden idol.
It's not like I'm inventing this opinion for this thread to be "antagonistic". Here are a list of posts from a while ago where I discuss my consistent opinion of not liking Star Wars: 1, 2, 3 etc.
I never got that spark when watching Star Wars. I always bored me to tears. The special effects never did it for me. The writing never did it for me, nor the characters or the universe. The directing never did it for me.
So, how can I like it?
On the other hand, I love the universe created by Firefly. I loved the universe created by Doctor Who. Or Aliens. Or 2001. Or Gattaca. But on top of liking the world's built, I ALSO liked the writing, or the visuals, or the wide list of other aspects that appeal to me about cinema. These movies appeal to me, and I like them because they are good. I don't think this about Star Wars.
And it's not about me hating something that is popular. I love the Lord of the Rings trilogy, for example. I love Batman: Dark Knight. I love most Pixar movies. I loved Princess and the Frog, most recently.
:lolAmir0x said:
Must be mutual failure, since you're not doing that, I don't think you are, and haven't said you are. Not sure where you think I'm defending the movie, since the conversation had strayed away from the movie itself.
I've been lukewarm on Avatar for months.
I don't think you're making a lot of sense, but I did dive into a conversation when I shouldn't have, so I'll back out now.
Edit: and holy shit you type fast. 0_o
Amir0x said:
So basically you like every single piece of genre fiction except Star Wars - and you're surprised people find this odd?
It seems more likely to me your dislike is born of some personal trauma than any intellecutal or cinematic distaste.
To say anything else would simply be to attack your personal taste though, which I'm not interested in doing.
For the record I like almost everything you've quoted (except ironically Firefly which steals the most outrageously from Star Wars). Although again most of them are fairly hard sci-fi and Star Wars most certainly is not - it's a fairy tale version of The Lord of the Rings and bears no comparison with 2001 or Blade Runner.
Perhaps you were always expecting it to be something it is not.
Other than that I can't even begin to understand how you've ended up with this point of view and it seems you're incapable of explaining it too.
No, I hate plenty of sci-fi. I hate Star Trek, for example.
And I've explained it fine. With a trillion words. I am not going to explain it another time, though, and derail this thread with Star Wars debate.
The ultimate point is it is perfectly easy to hate Star Wars and like other sci-fi movies. It's not only easy, but it can be explained logically. I am sorry you don't like to hear that but what can I say... you act as if this is the first time some bent out of shape Star Wars fan got annoyed at the implication that it isn't the holy grail of sci-fi.
And I've explained it fine. With a trillion words. I am not going to explain it another time, though, and derail this thread with Star Wars debate.
The ultimate point is it is perfectly easy to hate Star Wars and like other sci-fi movies. It's not only easy, but it can be explained logically. I am sorry you don't like to hear that but what can I say... you act as if this is the first time some bent out of shape Star Wars fan got annoyed at the implication that it isn't the holy grail of sci-fi.
- Status