View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
lakersken80 Retired Number
Joined: 12 Aug 2009 Posts: 38774
|
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A lot of people watched it for the immersive experience...they could've cared less about the storyline. I don't think there are any 3d movies that have come close, and this is a testament to James Cameron and his team. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52651 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lakersken80 wrote: | A lot of people watched it for the immersive experience...they could've cared less about the storyline. I don't think there are any 3d movies that have come close, and this is a testament to James Cameron and his team. |
Sure, it was a spectacle, and I'm fine with people calling it an amusement ride as long we refrain from calling it a good movie. _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Jason Isbell
Man, do those lyrics resonate right now |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rwongega Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Jul 2005 Posts: 20510 Location: UCLA -> NY
|
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DaMuleRules wrote: | lakersken80 wrote: | A lot of people watched it for the immersive experience...they could've cared less about the storyline. I don't think there are any 3d movies that have come close, and this is a testament to James Cameron and his team. |
Sure, it was a spectacle, and I'm fine with people calling it an amusement ride as long we refrain from calling it a good movie. |
Pretty sure no one here is. Or at least I hope not. It's sets the benchmark as a reference for visual quality. That's it. _________________ http://media.giphy.com/media/zNyBPu5hEFpu/giphy.gif
http://bartsblackboard.com/files/2009/11/The-Simpsons-05x18-Burns-Heir.jpg
RIP Jonathan Tang
RIP Alex Gruenberg
Free KBCB |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52651 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
rwongega wrote: | DaMuleRules wrote: | lakersken80 wrote: | A lot of people watched it for the immersive experience...they could've cared less about the storyline. I don't think there are any 3d movies that have come close, and this is a testament to James Cameron and his team. |
Sure, it was a spectacle, and I'm fine with people calling it an amusement ride as long we refrain from calling it a good movie. |
Pretty sure no one here is. Or at least I hope not. It's sets the benchmark as a reference for visual quality. That's it. |
Not to call him out all, but ocho has.
That aside, it set a benchmark for the spectacle of it all. But there are countless films that blow Avatar away when it comes to "visual quality" and didn't need state of the art CGI and 3D to do so.
I'll take the abilities of cinematographers like John Alcott, Conrad Hall and Roger Deakins to gorgeously capture real life within the camera over the convenience of being able to do all your work digitally with dozens of artists, technicians and a render farm. Avatar is not even remotely a benchmark of visual quality outside of being the first film to fake reality via high-end CGI and technical achievement on a huge budget.
Avatar was a cheesy spectacle and nothing more. It was brilliant in the advancement of the technical aspects and completely devoid of any substance. _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Jason Isbell
Man, do those lyrics resonate right now |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ocho Retired Number
Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 53788
|
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | I'll take the abilities of cinematographers like John Alcott, Conrad Hall and Roger Deakins to gorgeously capture real life within the camera |
You called Avatar pretentious on the previous page. _________________ 14-5-3-12 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ocho Retired Number
Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 53788
|
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 11:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
rwongega wrote: | DaMuleRules wrote: | lakersken80 wrote: | A lot of people watched it for the immersive experience...they could've cared less about the storyline. I don't think there are any 3d movies that have come close, and this is a testament to James Cameron and his team. |
Sure, it was a spectacle, and I'm fine with people calling it an amusement ride as long we refrain from calling it a good movie. |
Pretty sure no one here is. Or at least I hope not. It's sets the benchmark as a reference for visual quality. That's it. |
I thought it was a really fun action movie that gave the viewer a really unique theater experience. If it didn't work for certain people that's cool, I just think it's silly for the same people to single it out for not having an original story and then post about how awesome the new Star Wars movie is. That Avatar's story is familiar and covers ground that other movies have already covered is not a unique phenomena. It just happens to be the only action blockbuster that gets called on the carpet for it. _________________ 14-5-3-12 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tox Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015 Posts: 17876
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter wrote: | tox wrote: | The worst thing about these movies is that when I refer to the infinitely superior TV show Avatar (the Last Airbender), people will think I'm talking about the blue people movies. |
Yeah, it was pretty amazing for a kid's show. It dealt with some fairly complex themes, given the age of its intended audience. |
I was actually in the intended demographic for the show when it released (I was 11 when the first episode released). But it's amazing being able to revisit a beloved childhood show and finding out it's actually phenomenal. Basically everything else from that era of my life that I enjoyed is terrible. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tox Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015 Posts: 17876
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 1:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter wrote: | Gimme_the_rock wrote: | I have actually never watched the james cameron Avatar. It always just looked like Dances With Wolves in space to me. |
You made a mistake by focusing on the plot. I know a couple other people who did the same thing. It was all about the visual effects. It was the first great 3-D blockbuster. The plot wasn't quite irrelevant, but that's not what made it so spectacular. There were countless stories of people turning around in the parking lot and going back to watch it again. It wasn't for the plot. It was because the movie was like being in some sort of virtual reality ride.
If you didn't see it on the big screen in 3-D with the full theatrical sound system, I doubt that you could capture the experience by watching it on DVD, even with a 3-D player. If you watched it for the plot, you would never understand why it was such a massive blockbuster. |
Avatar actually is the reason I can't stand 3D to this day. I got nasty headaches watching it in 3D, though to be fair, I'm headache prone in general. Apparently I'm in the minority with that opinion. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52651 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
ocho wrote: | Quote: | I'll take the abilities of cinematographers like John Alcott, Conrad Hall and Roger Deakins to gorgeously capture real life within the camera |
You called Avatar pretentious on the previous page. |
If you are attempting to imply that recognizing the work of the greatest at their craft is somehow pretentious, you are WAAAY off base. _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Jason Isbell
Man, do those lyrics resonate right now |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52651 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 8:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
ocho wrote: | rwongega wrote: | DaMuleRules wrote: | lakersken80 wrote: | A lot of people watched it for the immersive experience...they could've cared less about the storyline. I don't think there are any 3d movies that have come close, and this is a testament to James Cameron and his team. |
Sure, it was a spectacle, and I'm fine with people calling it an amusement ride as long we refrain from calling it a good movie. |
Pretty sure no one here is. Or at least I hope not. It's sets the benchmark as a reference for visual quality. That's it. |
I thought it was a really fun action movie that gave the viewer a really unique theater experience. If it didn't work for certain people that's cool, I just think it's silly for the same people to single it out for not having an original story and then post about how awesome the new Star Wars movie is. That Avatar's story is familiar and covers ground that other movies have already covered is not a unique phenomena. It just happens to be the only action blockbuster that gets called on the carpet for it. |
The new Star Wars movie didn't pretend to be something it's not. _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Jason Isbell
Man, do those lyrics resonate right now |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ocho Retired Number
Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 53788
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
DaMuleRules wrote: | ocho wrote: | Quote: | I'll take the abilities of cinematographers like John Alcott, Conrad Hall and Roger Deakins to gorgeously capture real life within the camera |
You called Avatar pretentious on the previous page. |
If you are attempting to imply that recognizing the work of the greatest at their craft is somehow pretentious, you are WAAAY off base. |
That wasn't my point. Those guys are great. My point is if you're going to name drop your favorite cinematographers in an effort to thumb your nose at special effects in a discussion about a freaking Summer action movie you forfeit your right to call anything pretentious. _________________ 14-5-3-12 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ocho Retired Number
Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 53788
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
DaMuleRules wrote: | ocho wrote: | rwongega wrote: | DaMuleRules wrote: | lakersken80 wrote: | A lot of people watched it for the immersive experience...they could've cared less about the storyline. I don't think there are any 3d movies that have come close, and this is a testament to James Cameron and his team. |
Sure, it was a spectacle, and I'm fine with people calling it an amusement ride as long we refrain from calling it a good movie. |
Pretty sure no one here is. Or at least I hope not. It's sets the benchmark as a reference for visual quality. That's it. |
I thought it was a really fun action movie that gave the viewer a really unique theater experience. If it didn't work for certain people that's cool, I just think it's silly for the same people to single it out for not having an original story and then post about how awesome the new Star Wars movie is. That Avatar's story is familiar and covers ground that other movies have already covered is not a unique phenomena. It just happens to be the only action blockbuster that gets called on the carpet for it. |
The new Star Wars movie didn't pretend to be something it's not. |
Cameron's ego aside, I don't think he thought he was making Citizen Kane. And again, I'm cool with people not liking it, just find a better angle than the lazy "not an original story" argument. That's the only thing I objected to. The new Star Wars movie is almost a remake it's so close to the original, and after that the biggest difference it has with Avatar is the action sucks. _________________ 14-5-3-12 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52651 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
ocho wrote: | DaMuleRules wrote: | ocho wrote: | Quote: | I'll take the abilities of cinematographers like John Alcott, Conrad Hall and Roger Deakins to gorgeously capture real life within the camera |
You called Avatar pretentious on the previous page. |
If you are attempting to imply that recognizing the work of the greatest at their craft is somehow pretentious, you are WAAAY off base. |
That wasn't my point. Those guys are great. My point is if you're going to name drop your favorite cinematographers in an effort to thumb your nose at special effects in a discussion about a freaking Summer action movie you forfeit your right to call anything pretentious. |
My point was that there is a difference between using a team of artists, technicians and a render farm to create the beauty and capturing light and composition through a lens - a distinction I only make because of the comments of how gorgeous and visually stunning it was. And one I don't make in regards to things like "Dr. Strange" because it doesn't pat itself on the back for its imagery the way Cameron did with Avatar.
It's the same point behind the displeasure I and others expressed when "Life of Pi" won the Academy Award for Cinematography. It's not about pretentiousness at all. It's about recognizing what goes into the work. _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Jason Isbell
Man, do those lyrics resonate right now |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ocho Retired Number
Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 53788
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
DaMuleRules wrote: | ocho wrote: | DaMuleRules wrote: | ocho wrote: | Quote: | I'll take the abilities of cinematographers like John Alcott, Conrad Hall and Roger Deakins to gorgeously capture real life within the camera |
You called Avatar pretentious on the previous page. |
If you are attempting to imply that recognizing the work of the greatest at their craft is somehow pretentious, you are WAAAY off base. |
That wasn't my point. Those guys are great. My point is if you're going to name drop your favorite cinematographers in an effort to thumb your nose at special effects in a discussion about a freaking Summer action movie you forfeit your right to call anything pretentious. |
My point was that there is a difference between using a team of artists, technicians and a render farm to create the beauty and capturing light and composition through a lens - a distinction I only make because of the comments of how gorgeous and visually stunning it was. And one I don't make in regards to things like "Dr. Strange" because it doesn't pat itself on the back for its imagery the way Cameron did with Avatar.
It's the same point behind the displeasure I and others expressed when "Life of Pi" won the Academy Award for Cinematography. It's not about pretentiousness at all. It's about recognizing what goes into the work. |
I think if we were talking about a movie with lazy CG and cheap effects I would agree with you but that is certainly NOT what Avatar was. An inhuman amount of time and craft and consideration went into making that movie and creating that world. Its cool if it wasn't your taste, but knocking the craft of it is a tough sell. _________________ 14-5-3-12 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52651 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
ocho wrote: | DaMuleRules wrote: | ocho wrote: | DaMuleRules wrote: | ocho wrote: | Quote: | I'll take the abilities of cinematographers like John Alcott, Conrad Hall and Roger Deakins to gorgeously capture real life within the camera |
You called Avatar pretentious on the previous page. |
If you are attempting to imply that recognizing the work of the greatest at their craft is somehow pretentious, you are WAAAY off base. |
That wasn't my point. Those guys are great. My point is if you're going to name drop your favorite cinematographers in an effort to thumb your nose at special effects in a discussion about a freaking Summer action movie you forfeit your right to call anything pretentious. |
My point was that there is a difference between using a team of artists, technicians and a render farm to create the beauty and capturing light and composition through a lens - a distinction I only make because of the comments of how gorgeous and visually stunning it was. And one I don't make in regards to things like "Dr. Strange" because it doesn't pat itself on the back for its imagery the way Cameron did with Avatar.
It's the same point behind the displeasure I and others expressed when "Life of Pi" won the Academy Award for Cinematography. It's not about pretentiousness at all. It's about recognizing what goes into the work. |
I think if we were talking about a movie with lazy CG and cheap effects I would agree with you but that is certainly NOT what Avatar was. An inhuman amount of time and craft and consideration went into making that movie and creating that world. Its cool if it wasn't your taste, but knocking the craft of it is a tough sell. |
I'm not knocking the craft (which is why referred to the CGI team creating them as "artists" - and before you get knit-picky, I did use the term "technicians as well because of those that create the equations that are used are that). I have a great deal of respect for what visual effects artists do and have acknowledged their work and achievement in this very thread. I'm just making a distinction, and I think it is a fair one.
And since I brought up Life of Pi, I was amongst those who were in support of the criticism leveled against Ang Lee for not acknowledging his VFX team when he won his Oscar. So it's not the craft I knock, it's how Cameron patted his film on the back in regards to it. _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Jason Isbell
Man, do those lyrics resonate right now |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Chronicle Retired Number
Joined: 21 Jul 2012 Posts: 31935 Location: Manhattan
|
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 4:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm really looking forward to these movies. love sci fi _________________ Kobe |
|
Back to top |
|
|
numero-ocho Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2004 Posts: 18199 Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2017 10:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
This time I'll be rooting for the Marines. _________________ "Suck it up. Don't be a baby. Do your job." - Kobe Bryant |
|
Back to top |
|
|
governator Retired Number
Joined: 28 Jan 2006 Posts: 25075
|
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2017 10:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lots of hate for Avatar her., I enjoyed watching it when it came out. Nice, easy to follow story line, nice visuals... subjective I guess |
|
Back to top |
|
|
22 Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Apr 2013 Posts: 17063
|
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2017 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
numero-ocho wrote: | This time I'll be rooting for the Marines. |
I did the first go round! We needed that unobtainium!
Anytime I'm not enjoying a movie I'm watching but I can't leave or change the channel I begin to root for the villain. Keeps me entertained lol.
I def rooted for the monster in the first Cloverfield |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|