TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Montreal
-- Avatar in 3D
Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »


Posted by Vermz on Dec-28-2009 19:37:

tellement niaiseux dans le car wash hahahaha wow !!


Posted by Dj Nacht on Dec-29-2009 18:25:

Even if Avatar is a trilogy it wont be as good as the Original three classic Star Wars. The 3 new Star wars are garbage and should have never been made. Avatar is funked right off the bat if they decide to make a sequel. Throughout the movie you never really learn who the characters are and to be honest you don't really care. For a sequel to work you need to really have great characters and Avatar doesn't have any. Great movie but making a sequel would be hard and thats putting it lightly..



SPOILER
Edit : FFS I felt more for the tree when it fell than I did for any of the other characters.
SPOILER


Posted by 84th Ave. on Dec-29-2009 18:31:

lol you guys are funny

people can never be satisfied...its a movie, its not supposed to change your life

this is like 300, its a movie you go see at the theaters because it gives you a different viewing experience (IMAX + 3D)

i agree with everyone the story was done before, and millions of times too, but have you ever seen a movie with those kinds of visuals?

for me that was $9 well spent, and i'll probably go see it again...

when they start making every movie in 3d and with those kinds of visuals, then i'll start be picky about the story line


Posted by WittyHandle on Dec-29-2009 19:32:

quote:
Originally posted by Dj Nacht
The 3 new Star wars are garbage and should have never been made.


Revenge of the Sith and Empire Strikes Back are tied for my two fav's personally.

The first two are terrible though, I agree.


Posted by OkiDokie on Dec-30-2009 03:59:

I just got back from the cinema, and it really is a great movie

The story is just the regular story you find in almost all the movies, but the visuals are goddamn good, at one point I felt like if I was inside the screen lool!

It has also a clear message, which personally I liked.

Overall, I would give this movie a 9/10


Posted by sonic monkey on Dec-30-2009 04:26:

I just came back from the movies and I got to say that the film is
amazing. Totally worth the money but here's my quick non-spoiler review:

+Mind Blowing Visuals
+Predictable but EPIC movie
+Sigourney Weaver!!!

-No memorable dialogues
-No memorable action sequences
-Weak Character development

All in all, I really enjoyed this movie but it was missing some elements that made previous James Cameron movies a classic imo. Remember the unforgetable (stylish) moments or the iconic characters we had with Terminator, Aliens, etc... ? Maybe my expectations were a bit high for a James Cameron movie but it was still a great experience.


Posted by Schadenfreude on Dec-30-2009 15:43:

quote:
Originally posted by 84th Ave.
lol you guys are funny

people can never be satisfied...its a movie, its not supposed to change your life

this is like 300, its a movie you go see at the theaters because it gives you a different viewing experience (IMAX + 3D)

i agree with everyone the story was done before, and millions of times too, but have you ever seen a movie with those kinds of visuals?

for me that was $9 well spent, and i'll probably go see it again...

when they start making every movie in 3d and with those kinds of visuals, then i'll start be picky about the story line


maybe it is just me, but i don't go to see a movie for cheesy in your face non stop visuals.

do you like pro wrestling too?

I want to get involved in a plot. I want to be kept thinking. I used to like stupid movies once in awhile as a guilty pleasure, because there were less of them back in the day. For the last 5 years at least, it is almost nothing but stupidity coming out of Hollywood. All you have to do is look at how they are raping everything from the 80's/early 90's at the moment to show you that there are no new ideas.

Hollywood has become trance.

300 was brutal. The last 2 films i actually enjoyed on Imax were The Dark Knight and Disney's Earth. They were both visually stunning and had some substance to them. Had they had none, the visuals would not be enough.

Avatar is the Ed Hardy of movies. Just a shitload of crap thrown onto something that ends up being hideous, yet the people who don't like to think the most gravitate to it


Posted by Ravemontreal on Dec-30-2009 15:50:

Even if I like VFX, I never go see a movie based only on it. I knew the minute I saw the 15 min of Avatar last summer that I wouldn't like it.

That's why I stay away from movies like 2012 even if I could see something inspiring, I just get bored as fuck.

This is the kind of movie that gets me a little more excited.


Posted by Schadenfreude on Dec-30-2009 16:07:

I am really looking forward to Tim Burton's adaptation of Alice In Wonderland. Burton's style is perfect to do the book, and it should be stylishly done. Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter seems to me to be lazy casting (obvious choice), but he should pull it off.

Another one that I am really looking forward to is The Rum Diary. (Johnny Depp again lol) Depp will retake his role as Hunter S Thompson, a character he did amazingly in Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas. To me his performance in the first movie was the best of his career, so this one i can't wait for. I am trying not to hype myself up to much to avoid disappointment, but this novel is one of Thompson's best works, so a big screen adaptation is very interesting.

Inception does look good Martin


Posted by Ravemontreal on Dec-30-2009 16:19:

Funny, I never enjoyed a Tim Burton movie, except a NIghtmare Before Christmas and maybe mildley enjoyed Edward Scissorhands.

It always look good, but I never enjoy them. Don't know why.

And he should really get over his man crush for Johnny Depp, it:s ridiculous to cast teh same guy over and over again.


Posted by WittyHandle on Dec-30-2009 16:21:

I'm so psyched for Inception. Christopher Nolan is a personal fav, and can do no wrong in my book. He just puts so much quality throughout his work that makes it interesting at first, but nearly always pays off after repeated viewings as well.

From what I hear, he wrote, produced, and directed this one, plus he's got enough cred to get a significant budget nowadays to play with. I'm really trying not to get too pumped up for this for fear of ruining it for myself, but it's hard not to.

I was looking forward to Alice in Wonderland when I first heard about it, but after seeing the stills and then the trailer, my hopes have faded a bit. I used to love Tim Burton, but I feel like he's gotten a little lax, especially in his visual design. Depp is still great though.

I've got this dream that after the inevitable success of the Hobbit movies, Guillermo del Torro redoes Wizard of Oz.


Posted by Schadenfreude on Dec-30-2009 16:27:

quote:
Originally posted by Ravemontreal
Funny, I never enjoyed a Tim Burton movie, except a NIghtmare Before Christmas and maybe mildley enjoyed Edward Scissorhands.

It always look good, but I never enjoy them. Don't know why.

And he should really get over his man crush for Johnny Depp, it:s ridiculous to cast teh same guy over and over again.


that is why i said that it was lazy casting. The Mad Hatter and Willy Wonka are almost the same character. The novel is a classic though, so it should be hard to fuck up that script.

I am so scared that the Rum Diary will be bad. Fear And Loathing is in my top 10 favourite movies of all time for sure.


Posted by Schadenfreude on Dec-30-2009 16:28:

also Beetlejuice was a decent movie for the lulz.


Posted by WittyHandle on Dec-30-2009 16:34:

Seriously, how can anyone not love Beetlejuice?

As for Willy Wonka, I got a weird Michael Jackson vibe from the way Depp did it.


Posted by Schadenfreude on Dec-30-2009 16:36:

It was not an oscar worthy movie, but for its time it was really ahead of the curve.

The dinner scene has always cracked me up so much...maybe i'm just a sucker for Harry Belafonte songs


Posted by Johnny Jon on Dec-31-2009 00:21:

Thumbs way up for fear and loathing in Las Vegas: Benicio played real well in that one too along with Depp. "GET IN!" that grin on Depp's face saying that to Toby Mcguire, priceless. Avatar was good movie, very nice looking picture but again not overwhelmly impressed, enough action to keep your attention. Cute story, i agree with the version of it being a kid's movie for adults.

Not too excited about upcoming movies, im a big promotor of "its not because it was a good thing as a video game or as a cartoon/comic that it will be as a movie" i have mixed feelings about Prince of Persia, especially with Gyllenhaal staring it. Book of Eli looks half decent but will probably be a copy paste of something done before as i smell a hint of the game "Fallout 3". Inception looks real nice indeed. 2009 wasnt a big movie year imo.


Posted by 84th Ave. on Dec-31-2009 09:51:

quote:
Originally posted by Schadenfreude
maybe it is just me, but i don't go to see a movie for cheesy in your face non stop visuals.

do you like pro wrestling too?

I want to get involved in a plot. I want to be kept thinking. I used to like stupid movies once in awhile as a guilty pleasure, because there were less of them back in the day. For the last 5 years at least, it is almost nothing but stupidity coming out of Hollywood. All you have to do is look at how they are raping everything from the 80's/early 90's at the moment to show you that there are no new ideas.

Hollywood has become trance.

300 was brutal. The last 2 films i actually enjoyed on Imax were The Dark Knight and Disney's Earth. They were both visually stunning and had some substance to them. Had they had none, the visuals would not be enough.

Avatar is the Ed Hardy of movies. Just a shitload of crap thrown onto something that ends up being hideous, yet the people who don't like to think the most gravitate to it


i used to love pro wrestling

all your reasons i agree with you, but your missing the point. This movie set the visual bar above anything else. Dark Knight was one of my favorites movies as well, but you cannot compare the two, 'visually'.

like i said before, i would go pay another 9 dollars just to see the visuals again, not to be amazed by the story or characters

Hollywood has become the present, which is filled with technology. Forget the original and brilliance of the 80s and 90s.


Posted by 84th Ave. on Dec-31-2009 09:53:

and Edward Scissorhands is classic!


Posted by klobo on Dec-31-2009 17:15:

quote:
Originally posted by sonic monkey
I just came back from the movies and I got to say that the film is
amazing. Totally worth the money but here's my quick non-spoiler review:

+Mind Blowing Visuals
+Predictable but EPIC movie
+Sigourney Weaver!!!

-No memorable dialogues
-No memorable action sequences
-Weak Character development

All in all, I really enjoyed this movie but it was missing some elements that made previous James Cameron movies a classic imo. Remember the unforgetable (stylish) moments or the iconic characters we had with Terminator, Aliens, etc... ? Maybe my expectations were a bit high for a James Cameron movie but it was still a great experience.


yay,somebody that has the exact thoughts i had about the movie!!


Posted by WittyHandle on Dec-31-2009 20:53:

quote:
Originally posted by 84th Ave.
all your reasons i agree with you, but your missing the point. This movie set the visual bar above anything else. Dark Knight was one of my favorites movies as well, but you cannot compare the two, 'visually'.

like i said before, i would go pay another 9 dollars just to see the visuals again, not to be amazed by the story or characters

Hollywood has become the present, which is filled with technology. Forget the original and brilliance of the 80s and 90s.


I don't think anyone's missing the point here. Some people are happy with accepting a movie for its visual appeal, and others need a good story. Both together are great, but this rarely happens.

I'd watch a film with a good story again (Dark Knight is a perfect example), but not one just for the visuals (such as Avatar). You might feel the opposite of this. Po-tay-to, po-tah-to.

As for saying that originality in Hollywood is forgotten, I disagree. It may be less common, but not gone altogether.


Posted by Vermz on Dec-31-2009 21:10:

Well I never went to the theater to see an Hollywood kind of movie only based on VFX. I think it's pretty lame, but Avatar is something new. I think they managed to do an awesome job and it's a nice step forward, that's why I like this movie.


Posted by 84th Ave. on Dec-31-2009 21:53:

quote:
Originally posted by WittyHandle
I don't think anyone's missing the point here. Some people are happy with accepting a movie for its visual appeal, and others need a good story. Both together are great, but this rarely happens.

I'd watch a film with a good story again (Dark Knight is a perfect example), but not one just for the visuals (such as Avatar). You might feel the opposite of this. Po-tay-to, po-tah-to.

As for saying that originality in Hollywood is forgotten, I disagree. It may be less common, but not gone altogether.


i know where you are coming from, personally I am more into movies that have a rich story line with detail to characters, plot, etc.

my point is that I love to watch those movies in the comfort of my own home, i dont need an IMAX experience for those type of movies (like Blow, The Departed, etc)

going to the theater and getting what you get out of avatar is incomparable, again the visuals

I think alot of people were just expecting alot out of Cameron, I too, was expecting a more of a rich story, it was bland and predictable


Posted by Marcus007 on Dec-31-2009 22:52:

you guys are so off

that movie was epic... an achievement in cinema that had all the factors of a memorable blockbuster.. yes it's not dark like terminator but it is in no way comparable to Phantom Menace or any of the Star Wars prequels.. LAFFFFF

3D MOTHER FUNKERS!!! 3DDD!!!


Posted by WittyHandle on Jan-01-2010 00:52:

^^ Dude I just can't relate.

If I see a smoking hottie from across the room, walk up to her, & chat her her up just to find out she's an idiot, it's goodbye wood.

Same principal applies to pretty much everything else.


Posted by Ninja Francis on Jan-01-2010 15:01:

When I drink a guinness, I don't expect it to taste chocolate even if I like both.


Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.