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

Rottenwatch: AVATAR (82%)

Status
Not open for further replies.
The film is so close and we are now down to the most nit picky of nitpicking now. Their's only so much people can nitpick before they can't pick no more. :lol

And that scene was awesome in 3D at Avatar day especially the part that comes after it.
 
Still trying to stay as dark as I possibly can with this movie.

...so close...
 
joey_z said:
Yeah but what do you get out of Avatar hitting 90% on Rotten Tomatoes?
Edit: I think this question should be posed to almost everyone in this thread actually.
Click to expand...
SlowClap.gif
 
Dabanton said:
The film is so close and we are now down to the most nit picky of nitpicking now. Their's only so much people can nitpick before they can't pick no more. :lol

And that scene was awesome in 3D at Avatar day especially the part that comes after it.
Click to expand...
That doesn't seem like nitpicking to me. I guess some criticism is disruptive to the masturbatory ambiance you guys have got going on here, but deal with it.
 
Armond White is nothing compared to that one guy who accused Cameron and the rest of racial insensitivity towards blacks because the Na'vi have dreadlocks.
 
Zeliard said:
There isn't much of a split. The movie has gotten overwhelmingly positive reviews. The ones who can't get over the plot number a very distinct minority. Every review that I've read, positive or negative, mentions the lack of originality in the plot, but most also say that's irrelevant given the quality of the execution. Some even say the simplicity and predictabilty of the plot are in this case a positive, as too much complexity could have muddled things, especially given how much is already going on purely in terms of visuals. If it's trying to tell a story of huge scope and universal appeal, then simplicity is key.

I'm not sure how you think the % will actually get that low, if you've read the reviews. Star Trek, it should be pointed out, sits at 95%.
Click to expand...


I think I´ll see it this weekend (and again in 3d if it´s good), but that part really bothers me. True, every plot can sound sound uninspired in condensed form, but visual effects shouldn´t be so important that the story has to take a back seat if I´m to spend more than two hours of time and quite a bit of money.

And I might be in the minority here and yes, context, but what the fuck at "bonding" another living being by rubbing your love tentacles on it. Is this symbiosis, did the Na´vi evolve as parasites to this beasts or am I supposed that everything on this planet has an organic USB port? I really hope that the movie does a decent job at presenting this, because on its own it´s pretty, uh, strange.
 
LOL, just saw that scene.. I mean what the hell? I don't have to jack into a horse when I ride it. This movie makes no sense! Why are there blue people anyway?
 
Byakuya769 said:
LOL, just saw that scene.. I mean what the hell? I don't have to jack into a horse when I ride it. This movie makes no sense! Why are there blue people anyway?
Click to expand...
Whoa, wait a second. I thought this was a PG-13 movie.
 
Battersea Power Station said:
:/

Movie quality discussion aside (people are never going to agree on their impressions, before OR after having seen it), I really don't like the in-your-face dragon wings and stuff that are probably supposed to look cool in 3D. I wish filmmakers would stop doing that.
Click to expand...
the dragon wings don't pop out of the screen in 3D if I remember correctly
 
Of course it's strange, it's an alien planet after all. ;) I can't believe people feel offended by it. I remember when after the first teaser many critics wanted the aliens to be ugly as hell, insect/tentacle monsters and whatnot ("not alien enough) and now there's an uproar over such a scene?
This movie makes no sense! Why are there blue people anyway?
Click to expand...
Why does it make no sense? :-D
 
Meus Renaissance said:
Considering the budget, I'll be shocked if this thing breaks even. Unless there is a massive ship with Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio involved I doubt we'll be seeing a profit either
Click to expand...


How much do you think the budget is for this movie?
 
Battersea Power Station said:
:/

Movie quality discussion aside (people are never going to agree on their impressions, before OR after having seen it), I really don't like the in-your-face dragon wings and stuff that are probably supposed to look cool in 3D. I wish filmmakers would stop doing that.
Click to expand...
Having seen this specific scene in 3D, I can tell you that you are wrong. It's funny how one can assume that without actually seeing it.
 
Binabik15 said:
I think I´ll see it this weekend (and again in 3d if it´s good), but that part really bothers me. True, every plot can sound sound uninspired in condensed form, but visual effects shouldn´t be so important that the story has to take a back seat if I´m to spend more than two hours of time and quite a bit of money.
Click to expand...

It's a James Cameron movie, which means the special effects absolutely won't take precedent over the story. One of the things Cameron always does, and what sets him apart from trash like Michael Bay, is that he only uses new technology as a way to tell the story he's trying to tell. That's one of the hallmarks of his film-making. Every single time he has advanced new tech, he's done it in the service of his story.

The criticisms aren't really that the plot in Avatar takes a backseat to the special effects in terms of importance or anything like that, but rather than it's just not necessarily a story we haven't seen before. From what I've read, Cameron puts more emphasis on the romantic aspect of the movie than even Titanic, and also does it a lot more successfully (according to the reviews).
 
To all those saying that we need to see this in 3D, I don't really buy into that. The vast majority of the public won't be seeing this in 3D so to say that this movie needs to be seen in 3D in order to be good doesn't give me the biggest confidence in the movie. If I were to actually go to a theater for that length of time it won't be in 3D.
 
A. White said:
“There’s a network of energy that flows through all living things.” Alien-girl Neytiri (Zoe Saldana) teaches Sully how to bond with a tie-dyed, eagle-like creature by docking his wriggly tail into it. “Feel her!” Neytiri urges, and Cameron emulates the boy-plus-car symbiosis of Transformers—but with pulsing loins, veins and orifices.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... From the clip it looks like it was his braid, not his tail. Did this guy even watch the movie, or just sit in the theater daydreaming about how to pan the movie?
 
Binabik15 said:
I think I´ll see it this weekend (and again in 3d if it´s good), but that part really bothers me. True, every plot can sound sound uninspired in condensed form, but visual effects shouldn´t be so important that the story has to take a back seat if I´m to spend more than two hours of time and quite a bit of money.

And I might be in the minority here and yes, context, but what the fuck at "bonding" another living being by rubbing your love tentacles on it. Is this symbiosis, did the Na´vi evolve as parasites to this beasts or am I supposed that everything on this planet has an organic USB port? I really hope that the movie does a decent job at presenting this, because on its own it´s pretty, uh, strange.
Click to expand...

The tentacles are the way to
connect to the animal. The whole planet is one big network, the God of the Na'vi, and you tap into it. So when you're connected you move the animal with your thoughts. There are some creatures with this usb-port. In the movie we see the flying thing, a horse-like creature and a tree they can connect to. The spirits are stored in that tree or something, it wasn't that clear to me.

I found the plot very moving. It is not original, but it is executed so well. You really start to care about the characters and their fate in the world.
 
Big-E said:
To all those saying that we need to see this in 3D, I don't really buy into that. The vast majority of the public won't be seeing this in 3D so to say that this movie needs to be seen in 3D in order to be good doesn't give me the biggest confidence in the movie. If I were to actually go to a theater for that length of time it won't be in 3D.
Click to expand...
Would Wall-E be good in black and white? Sure. Would it be as good? No.
 
I'm gonna see it in 3D but I never have seen a 3D movie before, so I don't really have a position on that beyond some neutral "well shit, I can't wait to see what 3D is all about, especially with this movie."

However, I have seen quite a few who were previously saying they weren't fond of 3D at all, or the 3D in this film (such as after the Comic-Con footage), but came out of the full version of Avatar saying that everyone HAS to go see it in 3D. Not just Ebert, too.
 
Big-E said:
To all those saying that we need to see this in 3D, I don't really buy into that. The vast majority of the public won't be seeing this in 3D so to say that this movie needs to be seen in 3D in order to be good doesn't give me the biggest confidence in the movie. If I were to actually go to a theater for that length of time it won't be in 3D.
Click to expand...
Sure the movie could still be great in 2D, but it is fucking amazing in 3D. That's the difference. I've seen the same trailers and scenes in 2D and I've seen the 3D preview as well and imo it is soooooo fucking worth it to catch it in 3D.

After all, they did shoot the shit with 3D cameras and all. So why not actually go and watch the movie the way it was intended to be watched?
 
Still trying to convince my wife to see this flick with me in the theater. I'm like, "There's a love story!" - but she's not really buying it after seeing the trailers.
 
Big-E said:
To all those saying that we need to see this in 3D, I don't really buy into that. The vast majority of the public won't be seeing this in 3D so to say that this movie needs to be seen in 3D in order to be good doesn't give me the biggest confidence in the movie. If I were to actually go to a theater for that length of time it won't be in 3D.
Click to expand...

was anyone saying that it NEEDS to be seen in 3D to be good? Although a lot of audiences will see this in 2D, the film was made specifically for 3D, so those audiences are selling themsevles short of the total experience. Sucks for them.

It's people that have the ability to see this in 3D that don't want to that is curious to me.

I heard a lot of good things about Coraline's 3D..but I never saw it in the theater..and was only able to watch the 2D version at home. I still LOVED the movie...
 
Kung Fu Jedi said:
Hitting 90% on RT is not an indicator of how much money the film will make, which is far more important. What's the budget on this thing? I know it's astronomical What kind of money does it need to make just to break even?



I thought it was well done for what it is, and seeing it out of context doesn't help it any. I'm sure it'll fit in fine in the film itself. I've seen far worse, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the confusion. I didn't mean do well in just the box office sense, but overall seeing that its accepted and not hated on. And yes, ultimately you can argue that if it receives a high score, positive word of mouth will spread and potentially lead to more tickets sold.
 
Mr. Sam said:
3D =/= colour.
Click to expand...
It's a greater richness, black and white to colour, 2k to 8k, 16mm to 70mm, mono to 7.1, whatever. The point is a more vivid experience is available, and most people, giving it a chance would think it was superior, I really believe that. I'd say 2D to 3D is a greater leap than any of those.
 
stuburns said:
It's a greater richness, black and white to colour, 2k to 8k, 16mm to 70mm, mono to 7.1, whatever. The point is a more vivid experience is available, and most people, giving it a chance would think it was superior, I really believe that. I'd say 2D to 3D is a great leap than any of those.
Click to expand...



do people who have trouble seeing the old style 3d (whether due to astigmatisms or other sight reasons) have trouble with the new one? That's my concern. There are dozens of us!
 
levious said:
do people who have trouble seeing the old style 3d (whether due to astigmatisms or other sight reasons) have trouble with the new one? That's my concern. There are dozens of us!
Click to expand...
Depends what the issue was I guess, if you're red green colour blind, the old system wouldn't work at all, and now it'd work perfectly.
 
oh, well that's cool, but my problem I think is with astigmatisms... image would go in and out of alignment throughout the movie.
 
Zeliard said:
It's a James Cameron movie, which means the special effects absolutely won't take precedent over the story. One of the things Cameron always does, and what sets him apart from trash like Michael Bay, is that he only uses new technology as a way to tell the story he's trying to tell. That's one of the hallmarks of his film-making. Every single time he has advanced new tech, he's done it in the service of his story.

The criticisms aren't really that the plot in Avatar takes a backseat to the special effects in terms of importance or anything like that, but rather than it's just not necessarily a story we haven't seen before. From what I've read, Cameron puts more emphasis on the romantic aspect of the movie than even Titanic, and also does it a lot more successfully (according to the reviews).
Click to expand...

I´ve seen Cameron´s movies and yes, they´re good. Well, the execution is. I don´t want to go off topic, let´s just say that I´m glad that the Alien universe already existed and blue cat people and pink horses are nowhere to be found in Aliens.

Let me just say this: If Avatar´s story turns out to have a
in yo face
message about not exploiting nature and leaving the noble savages alone AND tacks on a 08/15 movie love story about finding true love in the face of insurmountable obstacles and cultures that are at war with each other, I´ll be disappointed in the movie. No matter how good it might look and how entertaining it might be, because it´d be a wasted opportunity to set such a story in a unvierse that was so carefully crafted.

And I don´t like tha Na´vi design, sorry. Everything is all colourful and "alien" on their world, yet they look like humans with bodypaint and prosthetic make-up. Even their skeletal-muscle configuration seems to be (mostly?) identical to ours. I´m skeptical because I´m deeply interested in biology and love science fiction that explains its creatures in a believable way. So the Na´vi are build for endurance running like us humans looking at their calves (from the outside)? What is their tail for? Usually it functions as a counter-weight, but the Na´vi stand totally upright like they don´t even need it and their upper body looks extremly broad compared to their legs, but not enough that they´d need a tail.

I just want such things explained in a semi-realistic way to be satisfied, but I´m afraid that this isn´t what the audience will get.

And I´m not hating on the creature design because it´s so "outlandish" and "alien", look at our natural world and the marvels it produces and understand that no matter how crazy your design might be, earth probably one ups you :lol We have parasites that can mind-control crabs and turn them into something like mobile homes for themselves, fishes with eyes resting in a see-through head and other freaky stuff, but it all serves a purpose and didn´t just happen for the rule of cool.

But that USB ponytail is really something else :/ As I said, if they have an explanation that can pull me in I´m fine, but until I see it I´ll remain slightly baffled by this scene :D

Edit: I should type faster, then I would´ve seen ClosingADoor´s post. Uh, really? That sounds really cool and stuff, I guess. Like an Warhammer 40k Crawftworld. As long as the humans summon demons to battle the natives (and get smacked down by Grey Knights for their heresy) I´m fine with it.

Can you tell that this is excactly what I DIDN´T want the answer to be? Oh well, time to put on the wizzard robe and say goodbye to the science part in the fiction and welcome the high fantasy part.
 
polyh3dron said:
Color =\= Sound
Click to expand...

Correct. You're good at this.

In ten or however many years' time, if all films and television shows are being made in 3D, I'll acknowledge it was as great a leap as black and white to colour was and that movies like Avatar were the root of it.
 
Mr. Sam said:
Correct. You're good at this.

In ten or however many years' time, if all films and television shows are being made in 3D, I'll acknowledge it was as great a leap as black and white to colour was and that movies like Avatar were the root of it.
Click to expand...
That doesn't really make sense, as the leap in production from black and white to colour doesn't compare with 2D to 3D.
 
Mr. Sam said:
Correct. You're good at this.

In ten or however many years' time, if all films and television shows are being made in 3D, I'll acknowledge it was as great a leap as black and white to colour was and that movies like Avatar were the root of it.
Click to expand...

I dont think it will be on that level for sometime..but the number of 3D moives has increased every year since The Polar Express was released..so maybe THAT was the real turning point?
 
Mr. Sam said:
In ten or however many years' time, if all films and television shows are being made in 3D, I'll acknowledge it was as great a leap as black and white to colour was and that movies like Avatar were the root of it.
Click to expand...

Won't happen till they can do 3D that doesn't require the use of special glasses.
 
We're seeing The Road this weekend since it's finally opening. We'll probably see Avatar some time next week. We've already decided to see Up in the Air on Christmas Day. It sucks because I won the Fandango codes from McDonalds but I don't think we're receiving them till like January.
 
the RT excerpt for armond's review

The corniest movie ever made about the white man's need to lose his identity and assuage racial, political, sexual and historical guilt.
Click to expand...

how in the FUCK has this guy not been removed from the RT trusted critics list?:lol
 
Link Man said:
Why? I wear glasses, and the 3D doesn't really work for me. And that's not to mention that 3D movies are double the price of 2D.
Click to expand...


Yeah..I wear glasses too..not really an issue. Do you have contacts?

I undetstand the price thing kind of...usually its only an additional $2 or $3..id say its worth that price.
 
rhino4evr said:
Yeah..I wear glasses too..not really an issue. Do you have contacts?

I undetstand the price thing kind of...usually its only an additional $2 or $3..id say its worth that price.
Click to expand...
Nope, just glasses. And I'm not going to pay a premium for something that doesn't add anything to the experience for me.
 
rhino4evr said:
..smacks forehead.
Click to expand...

It´s his choice, isn´t it?

Maybe there´s a good reason.

Avatar would be my first 3d movie (and I think the only one I saw twice at the cinema) should the 2d showing make me like the movie. I´d like to be able to judge the movie and not my first time 3d experience. Plus my left cornea is inflammed and if it doesn´t get better until the weekend I´d have to see a 3d movie with one eye open :lol So I´ll just order tickets for a 2d show.
 
Binabik15 said:
Edit: I should type faster, then I would´ve seen ClosingADoor´s post. Uh, really? That sounds really cool and stuff, I guess. Like an Warhammer 40k Crawftworld. As long as the humans summon demons to battle the natives (and get smacked down by Grey Knights for their heresy) I´m fine with it.

Can you tell that this is excactly what I DIDN´T want the answer to be? Oh well, time to put on the wizzard robe and say goodbye to the science part in the fiction and welcome the high fantasy part.
Click to expand...

Don't think you'll like it then. You should see it anyway to experience for yourself, but it does have a bit of a anti-climate abuse / money isn't worth everything message.

I saw it more as a fantasy movie then real science fiction. The Na'vi are fighting with bows and arrows, so it isn't like Aliens or Halo or something anyway :P
Humans do walk in mechs though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Rottenwatch: The Bride!
37
525
CGNoire replied
RIP Cora (my avatar)
46
1K
gamingforum1 replied
Funk musician Sly Stone, 82, has passed away
11
610
GeekyDad replied
What's the deal with your avatar.
2 3
131
2K
Sand Dan Glokta replied
Brian Wilson Legendary founder of the Beach boys dies at 82
28
948
LiquidMetal14 replied
Top Bottom