Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!
I wonder if he still calls 300 that. I enjoyed it buckets when I first saw it, but it doesn't fare rewatches well (it's great to revel in its violent, sadistic misanthropism one time around, but go for a second dip and you feel dirty).
Same here. Much like Snyder's Watchmen, 300 really seemed to work well surrounded by tons of hype and a primed audience... but later on, by itself, it's just a dull slog.
As for Avatar, it looks like all the fears about the fully-CG world being too cartoony or lifeless (ala' the final battle of Phantom Menace) were unfounded. Good to hear. As much faith as I had in Cameron's storytelling abilities, that was one thing I was definitely concerned about.
I feign pretentiousness fairly well (White Ribbon was awesome, really), but I'd love to see a brainless Michael Bay movie that was not a pile of crap.
Really, that's my only problem with a lot brainless action cinema - it's terrible. I'm willing to shut my brain off, but even then I have standards, like not being bored.
I would tend to agree. However, to give Devin credit, I believe he did rightfully bash Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, so I think he too enjoys good action films. I was just slightly annoyed at his summarization that films need to be more fantastical, and less serious & realistic. I enjoy a good character drama as much as I enjoy a good action, escapist entertainment type of film.
And interesting he brought up Up, before there was this other animated feature this year which is basically a critique of living in a fantasy world. Caroline!*
On topic: Avatar doesn't need to be smart for me to love it, but it damn well needs to be good. I want my eye candy and I want to be entertained for the almost three hour length.
*Coraline! Henry Selick's still got it, the rascal. But Pixar has the Oscar, naturally.
I think that's what it boils down to -- any film has merit, so long as it's good. There's nothing wrong with a heavily reliance on special effects, or explosions, so long as at the end of the day the film in question is simply good. That's how I'll judge Avatar -- on the basis of, "Did I think it was a good film, or not?", and everything else (i.e. special effects) is just trivial to me. Because no matter how many special effects you have in your film, it all boils down to the essentials, as it has for decades: good storytelling, good acting, etc etc.
Full speed ahead and damn the embargoes, full reviews are appearing: (It actually seems like FOX is about to lift the review embargo now that they see the great critic reactions)
...Cameron has never made a movie just to show off visual pyrotechnics: Every bit of technology in “Avatar” serves the greater purpose of a deeply felt love story. ...
In years of development and four years of production no detail in the pic is unimportant. Cameron’s collaborators excel beginning with the actors. Whether in human shape or as natives, they all bring terrific vitality to their roles. Mauro Fiore’s cinematography is dazzling as it melts all the visual elements into a science-fiction whole. You believe in Pandora. Rick Carter and Robert Stromberg’s design brings Cameron’s screenplay to life with disarming ease. ...
It’s been twelve years since Titanic, but the King of the World has returned with a flawed but fantastic tour de force that, taken on its merits as a film, especially in two dimensions, warrants four stars. However, if you can wrap a pair of 3D glasses round your peepers, this becomes a transcendent, full-on five-star experience that's the closest we'll ever come to setting foot on a strange new world. Just don’t leave it so long next time, eh, Jim?
Avatar is an overwhelming, immersive spectacle. The state-of-the-art 3D technology draws us in, but it is the vivid weirdness of Cameron’s luridly imagined tropical otherworld that keeps us fascinated.
Yeah, lifting the embargo because of positive talk is unsurprising. I wonder if any negative reviews will get through, though? Because in fairness, even if this film is great, somebody's going to pan it.
Also, I remember reading the Empire review of The Phantom Menace when it was released. Unless my memory has failed me, it was a 4 star review (and only their later home video review was 2 star.)
Further, the description of the aliens as being rather didactically portrayed as annoying hippies is disappointing if unsurprising, and the rave scene sounds especially worrisome (if there was one moment in retrospect which keyed Matrix Reloaded as garbage, that was it).
But no matter, I would have been content with a passable movie, and the reviews here are of the mind that Avatar is considerably more than passable. That is good. It's not 'Kegg, you know that film you dreamed about when you were ten? This is that film', but it's close enough.
as Jake finally faces off against the excellent Stephen Lang’s Quaritch, a scenery-chewing bad guy so badass that he can breathe the Pandoran air without a mask
How is that going to make sense, I wonder. Lang does have a nice presence about him in the trailers, though.
Also:
Mind you, despite all the advances and groundwork laid, we might be not quite ready to see two CG characters effectively dry-hump each other. That’s just wrong…
I haven't read that part of the review (trying not to excessively spoil myself), but according to one of the featurettes: "if you loose the mask, your are unconscious in 20 seconds, dead in 4 minutes". I suspect he simply gets the mask knocked off his face temporarily in a fight scene, but we should probably tread carefully with spoilery stuff.
Well, I've woken up to see Avatar has a bevvy of reviews, all positive. Is there an unwritten embargo on bad reviews or is it just really that good? It's not enough for RT to calculate a fresh rating yet, but anyway, promising. The RT Community had rated it at 75%, which is where I expected the tomato-meter to wind up if this film did good (may still yet, let's watch and see or not.)
If it does well – and there seems little doubt that it will – then can we expect more? "We'll see," said Cameron. "But yes, I have a story worked out for a second film and a third film."
Looks like he's got an eye on franchise potential. I'd heard rumours to that effect, and I'm sort of at a loss as to how this picture could produce more movies (humanity attacks again and again? Na'vi strike Earth? What?) but I suppose I'll be able to speculate on that better when I actually see the movie.
Avatar, in all conscience, looks fantastic – a near-seamless melding of fantasy extraterrestrial landscapes and cutting edge computer-generated imagery, all inserted beautifully into the high-testosterone camerawork which Cameron has made his specialty.
From what I've read, the consensus seems to be that the effects really are very good - while apparently in places the Na'vi aren't believable as real, they're always believable as people. And so on.
The review casts the film more as a misfire with some good points than as an outright disaster, and when that's the worst thing people are saying about your movie... well, that's good, isn't it?
Though the pacing problems the Guardian cites could be worrisome, and I've seen some pretty cagey reactions to the ending (not giving anything away, but feeling it could have been better).
Well I listened to James Horner's excellent score for Avatar and it's making me want to see the movie now...especially the track "War" which might be my favorite song. As Dan mentioned it's typical Horner with reused motifs and themes from his previous scores...and the battle theme for the USS Reliant during the battle against Enterprise is heard several times in the second half of the score which becomes really annoying and makes you want to watch Star Trek II or listen to the expanded soundtrack which was released in the summer time. Overall I was very impressed witih the score and the song "See You" is sung by Evenessence's Amy Lee and even that has familar overtones with "My Heart Will Go on" but I very much doubt it will become as big as that song did...still good though. I'm pumped to see the movie now.
For those who care, here is an interesting technical Cameron interview - about the Mocap breakthroughs that were made for the film, but also about CG lighting and 3D issues: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aao0YSITuxc
Salvor...you're right...quite a significant blunder on my part...for some reason I think she sounds like Amy Lee in the song. Thanks for correcting me lol.
Salvor...you're right...quite a significant blunder on my part...for some reason I think she sounds like Amy Lee in the song. Thanks for correcting me lol.
