Fop 1 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 The main issue nagging at me throughout this snooze fest of a thread is how will the issue of the glasses be handled at the cinema. If I get a new pair then that's fine, but I don't want to have to wear some that some greasy charver had on half an hour ago. Also, will you be able to watch this at home eventually? Cos how many sets of glasses will you get say if you buy the DVD? and if you get one, that means you have to take turns to watch it. I mean it just sounds not worth bothering with tbh. Come up with a good script and you don't need 3D. They'd prefer it didn't transfer to the home. It's basically an anti-piracy measure. Fish wouldn't dream of downloading Avatar because the 2D version isn't the film. The director says you have to see it 3D to see it properly....and rather than being £6.50....you have to pay £9.50....but you can't keep the glasses or anything and pay £6.50 next time....you have to pay more because they need new projectors and that....not because they'll be showing 3D films for years....but because they'll be showing digital films for years....but digital is lower quality than film.....so they can't exactly charge more for a poorer picture....but it saves the studios money when they make the film and add effects....so we're getting it whether we like it or not....and funding it. You think anti-piracy measures (that just happen to help rake in more investment) are a bad thing? Why don't you have done with it and suck my cock? "One swallow doesn't make a spring". (he doesn't like questions much, Fop wouldn't like to be the coffee shop server that asks Chris "would you like milk with that" ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 25, 2009 Author Share Posted August 25, 2009 The main issue nagging at me throughout this snooze fest of a thread is how will the issue of the glasses be handled at the cinema. If I get a new pair then that's fine, but I don't want to have to wear some that some greasy charver had on half an hour ago. Also, will you be able to watch this at home eventually? Cos how many sets of glasses will you get say if you buy the DVD? and if you get one, that means you have to take turns to watch it. I mean it just sounds not worth bothering with tbh. Come up with a good script and you don't need 3D. They'd prefer it didn't transfer to the home. It's basically an anti-piracy measure. Fish wouldn't dream of downloading Avatar because the 2D version isn't the film. The director says you have to see it 3D to see it properly....and rather than being £6.50....you have to pay £9.50....but you can't keep the glasses or anything and pay £6.50 next time....you have to pay more because they need new projectors and that....not because they'll be showing 3D films for years....but because they'll be showing digital films for years....but digital is lower quality than film.....so they can't exactly charge more for a poorer picture....but it saves the studios money when they make the film and add effects....so we're getting it whether we like it or not....and funding it. You think anti-piracy measures (that just happen to help rake in more investment) are a bad thing? Why don't you have done with it and suck my cock? "One swallow doesn't make a spring". (he doesn't like questions much, Fop wouldn't like to be the coffee shop server that asks Chris "would you like milk with that" ) When I said "yes" you'd ask "how much?" "nice and milky" "could you define milky?" "towards the light end of the colour spectrum" "that could be yellow, do you want yellow milk?" "I don't think yellow milk exists" "It does if it's banana milkshake, are you saying you want banana milkshake" "no I want coffee" "would you like milk?" etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Why do they sprinkle so much cinnamon/choc on it?? :icon_lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Why do they sprinkle so much cinnamon/choc on it?? :icon_lol: Don't ask him that ffs!!!111 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 25, 2009 Author Share Posted August 25, 2009 Why do they sprinkle so much cinnamon/choc on it?? Don't ask him that ffs!!!111 The irony of YOU saying someone else doesn't like questions by the way.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 13916 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 I blame the fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 When I said "yes" you'd ask "how much?""nice and milky" "could you define milky?" "towards the light end of the colour spectrum" "that could be yellow, do you want yellow milk?" "I don't think yellow milk exists" "It does if it's banana milkshake, are you saying you want banana milkshake" "no I want coffee" "would you like milk?" etc. Why do they sprinkle so much cinnamon/choc on it?? Don't ask him that ffs!!!111 The irony of YOU saying someone else doesn't like questions by the way.... Irony? How so? Are you really saying people purposely ask awkward questions on here for no other reason than to be vexatious? You know you could be right, some people might just do that here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Why sprinkle choc on coffee ffs!!???!!111 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgentAxeman 90 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 one things for sure my bands gonna get some free publicity shameless bump!!! And another one!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 26, 2009 Author Share Posted August 26, 2009 Why do they sprinkle so much cinnamon/choc on it?? Don't ask him that ffs!!!111 The irony of YOU saying someone else doesn't like questions by the way.... Irony? How so? Are you really saying people purposely ask awkward questions on here for no other reason than to be vexatious? You know you could be right, some people might just do that here. http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=663643 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Why do they sprinkle so much cinnamon/choc on it?? Don't ask him that ffs!!!111 The irony of YOU saying someone else doesn't like questions by the way.... Irony? How so? Are you really saying people purposely ask awkward questions on here for no other reason than to be vexatious? You know you could be right, some people might just do that here. http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?...st&p=663643 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 27, 2009 Author Share Posted August 27, 2009 James Cameron's forthcoming Avatar has been trumpeted as the future of cinema, pointing the way to a brave new world of 3D computer-generated film production. But could it be that this future has already come and gone - flopping at the box office back in 2008? The makers of the little-seen animated fantasy Delgo certainly think so and are considering legal action against Avatar's backers 20th-century Fox. "From what we have seen, we are amazed by the visual similarities between the two films," Atlanta-based Fathom Studios said in a statement. "We are considering what legal options may be available to us." Reportedly the first independent CGI animated feature to be made in America, Delgo starred Freddie Prinze Jr and Jennifer Love Hewitt as two love-struck aliens who help save their respective planets from an intergalactic tyrant voiced by Anne Bancroft. Budgeted at an estimated $40m (£24m), the film bowed out with just $700,000 from US cinemas, making it the year's biggest box office failure. Avatar director Cameron has claimed that his film has been in the planning stages since the late 90s, although production did not officially begin until 2006. However, the creators of Delgo reportedly posted "proof-of-concept" imagery on their dedicated website, delgo.com, as far back as 1998. Following last week's screening of 15-minutes of Avatar footage, parallels between the two films were noted by pundits on USA Today, NY magazine and the Huffington Post. According to online movie critic JoBlo, the similarities between Delgo and Avatar are "pretty damn conclusive and practically warrant a likeness lawsuit from the lowest-grossing movie ever to be filed against the director of the highest-grossing movie ever". http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/aug/26...o-james-cameron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 27, 2009 Author Share Posted August 27, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 Crazee uh!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted October 31, 2009 Author Share Posted October 31, 2009 New Trailer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 6147 Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Wow, real actors mixed with cartoons! Has nee-one seen Bedknobs and Broomsticks? He should have done T4 instead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted December 15, 2009 Author Share Posted December 15, 2009 It's a hit! A fully believable, flesh-and-blood (albeit not human flesh and blood) romance is the beating heart of "Avatar." 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. -Hollywood Reporter 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? -Empire Once again, [Cameron] has silenced the doubters by simply delivering an extraordinary film. There is still at least one man in Hollywood who knows how to spend $250 million, or was it $300 million, wisely. -Roger Ebert Avatar is all-enveloping and transporting, with Cameron & Co.'s years of R&D paying off with a film that, as his work has done before, raises the technical bar and throws down a challenge for the many other filmmakers toiling in the sci-fi/fantasy realm. -Variety Embrace the movie -- surely the most vivid and persuasive creation of a fantasy world ever seen in the history of moving pictures -- as a total sensory, sensuous, sensual experience. -Time Got my tickets booked for tomorrow night. Thoughts to follow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 It will be massive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted December 16, 2009 Author Share Posted December 16, 2009 It will be massive. ...and as a result you'll stop liking it so much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 Hope it does well actually as he's tried to do something a bit different. It'll have to do well given the budget like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SloopJohn 0 Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 It's a hit! A fully believable, flesh-and-blood (albeit not human flesh and blood) romance is the beating heart of "Avatar." 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. -Hollywood Reporter 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? -Empire Once again, [Cameron] has silenced the doubters by simply delivering an extraordinary film. There is still at least one man in Hollywood who knows how to spend $250 million, or was it $300 million, wisely. -Roger Ebert Avatar is all-enveloping and transporting, with Cameron & Co.'s years of R&D paying off with a film that, as his work has done before, raises the technical bar and throws down a challenge for the many other filmmakers toiling in the sci-fi/fantasy realm. -Variety Embrace the movie -- surely the most vivid and persuasive creation of a fantasy world ever seen in the history of moving pictures -- as a total sensory, sensuous, sensual experience. -Time Got my tickets booked for tomorrow night. Thoughts to follow but ebert liked Indiana Jones 4... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted December 16, 2009 Author Share Posted December 16, 2009 (edited) It's a hit! A fully believable, flesh-and-blood (albeit not human flesh and blood) romance is the beating heart of "Avatar." 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. -Hollywood Reporter 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? -Empire Once again, [Cameron] has silenced the doubters by simply delivering an extraordinary film. There is still at least one man in Hollywood who knows how to spend $250 million, or was it $300 million, wisely. -Roger Ebert Avatar is all-enveloping and transporting, with Cameron & Co.'s years of R&D paying off with a film that, as his work has done before, raises the technical bar and throws down a challenge for the many other filmmakers toiling in the sci-fi/fantasy realm. -Variety Embrace the movie -- surely the most vivid and persuasive creation of a fantasy world ever seen in the history of moving pictures -- as a total sensory, sensuous, sensual experience. -Time Got my tickets booked for tomorrow night. Thoughts to follow but ebert liked Indiana Jones 4... Have you read any Pauline Kael? Her thoughts on 'trash' might be of interest to you. http://www.paulrossen.com/paulinekael/tras...dthemovies.html Edited December 16, 2009 by Happy Face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 It will be massive. ...and as a result you'll stop liking it so much Correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted December 17, 2009 Author Share Posted December 17, 2009 I enjoyed it. The 3D was excellent. I've only seen UP previously so I may not be a good judge, but the depth of what was on screen had me wondering if this is what it was like to see Citizen Kane when it was new. There's very little that points out of the screen. Some stuff floats in front but unlike in UP, the floaty things are never what you're supposed to be looking at. They're always out of focus which forces you to keep the characters on screen at the centre of attention, so it's not showy. Otherwise it's all about the screen being your eye and everything on it being progressively further in the distance...exactly as it should be. The story is basically Return of the Jedi, but the allegory has moved from Vietnam to Iraq. Cameron seems to be going around saying it's about the environment. That's bollocks to try and avoid his fellow countrymen boycotting such a blatantly anti-American film (and anti British). I was most worried about the aliens going in, as I thought they looked shit in the trailer. I thought 12 years of perfecting 3D might have left the CGI back in the 90's. But that's not the case at all. They shit on the Ewoks. At no point are they unbelievable as living creatures. Negatives? As has become the norm in everything (Lord of the Rings, Star Wars and Star Trek all spring to mind) there's far too many big monsters chasing people for 10 minutes at a time. We even get the oldest trick in the book of a bigger monster attacking the monster currently attacking the hero. Also, there's about half an hour before the final battle where it drags and I was thinking "get on with it". Not particularly shameful for a film almost 3 hours long. The first chase sequence is edited a bit too quickly for 3d and becomes a blur, but I didn't think any of the other action sequences suffered from that. I don't know if it was my contact lenses or the glasses but my eyes were burning by the end. Nowt that would stop me recommending it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now