Musician Forum - Band Discussion Board - BandMix

The movie:

Seen it?

We did last night, first time I've been to a theater in probably a year, maybe more.
Was also my first 3D flick.
I like animation anyway.
Detest Sigourney Weaver

The movie, in a word.

AWESOME depth.

Like animation, action, and 3D ? Worth the bread IMO.

Cool, going to see it tonight with my son. It got an A+ review in the paper, which I've never seen before. Why don't you like SW? She was way cool in Alien and Ghostbusters.

I'm glad to get the reviews here. Kathy Lee made me hate it already - "It's a love story, & not a sci-fi shoot 'em up film." Gawd I hate her guts & everything that holds them in! Too much estrogen on my tv these days!

Anyway...I might go see it now. That bee-otch had me thinking it was a chick flick.

I did not care for the Alien series of movies (till they got their butts kicked by the P-man)
Weavers just not a good actress in my book. Ghost Busters is cool though.
One of my frequent no brainer home repeats ya know.

Love story? Yes, between two warriors in conflict. Won't say more don't want to spoil it.
Chick flick? Yes. But not just! I don't do chick flicks.
If you like action animation and 3D to boot.

It's definitely worth the trip. OK


Go see it ..................... then tell me I,m wrong.

sanshouheil wrote:I did not care for the Alien series of movies (till they got their butts kicked by the P-man)
Weavers just not a good actress in my book. Ghost Busters is cool though.
One of my frequent no brainer home repeats ya know.

Love story? Yes, between two warriors in conflict. Won't say more don't want to spoil it.
Chick flick? Yes. But not just! I don't do chick flicks.
If you like action animation and 3D to boot.

It's definitely worth the trip. OK

Go see it ..................... then tell me I,m wrong.

It looks very good to me. I am going to see it this week with my son.

I just saw it today.

The only negative, for me, was the story. We've seen this particular arc before; there is nothing new here in terms of story. It is, in a word, predictable.

But it makes up for it in every other way that counts. Visually it is stunning, and vast. When you consider how difficult it is to do CGI animation on even flat surfaces, it is amazing to see what Cameron's crew has done with the dense forest world of Pandora.

The use of bio-luminescence is particularly interesting and visually attractive. I really liked some of the 'ideas' that Cameron had, specifically the 'connection' between the Na'vi, the creatures, and the land. I thought how Cameron did that was really interesting and fairly original. And it's just staggering to realize that everything you see on the screen is CGI. It's amazing.

I saw it in 2D, BTW. I wanted to see it as a "film' and judge it on those merits before I saw the 3D gimmick along with it. I will definitely go back and see it in 3D now to compare the two cuts.

Overall, it is entertaining and interesting. Cameron has obviously poured his heart into this and you can see that on the screen. He's been very careful here, which you have to be when you have a film that runs 160 minutes. The thing I noticed the most was how well the film is paced, considering how long it runs and how much material Cameron has to get through. Normally, a film this long, the pacing will be off, maybe for very large portions of the film. But here, Cameron has done a great job the film moves at the right pace for the entire running time. Cameron never lingers too long on moments that could easily be overdone.

The other thing that is really nice is that Cameron lets us 'see' the world. With all the effort that he's put into crafting this marvelous CGI world, it would really have sucked if he would have cut short the visual experience with something like the lame hand-held shaky-cams so prevalent in recent films (I'm looking at you, 'Bourne Supremecy', and you, 'Bourne Ultimatum'). The world is so beautiful and magnificent and Cameron lets the camera linger on it. He uses a lot of big, pulled-back shots (sometimes with the zoom effect; you can clearly noticed the influence that Joss Whedon 's 'Firefly' television series and his film 'Serenity' had on Cameron's shooting style) and lots of panning, and doesn't go overboard with the quick-cutting and A.D.D. editing, so we get to really see what is on screen. And to me, that's the best thing about the film - we get to SEE it, and I enjoyed that a lot.


To some other comments in this thread: Weaver, to me, is a great actress; she has a lot of range, and if you've seen her body of work that becomes fairly evident. I think she's just fine here, given what she has to work with, and her Avatar is really spot-on. She's wonderful in movies like "The Ice Storm" and Ridley Scott's original 'Alien", which for me is one of my top five films of all time. If you ever get a chance to watch the 25th anniversary edition of Alien on DVD, do so with the director's commentary on. Scott is a master craftsman and it's really wonderful to sit through that film and listen to him talk about his decisions and how they pulled certain things off. You will not find that commentary elsewhere; the Quadrilogy commentary has Scott along with many other people, and so his insigh gets lost in the competition for everyone speaking.

Overall, a good film. I saw some movies I really liked this year, like Sam Rockwell in 'Moon', and 'District 9'. This is going into my favorite list for 2009 as well. I can't say what film I liked 'most' this year because the stuff I liked I REALLY liked, but this is up there with those films, for sure, and I will be going back for a repeat viewing.

CF - What are you, some sort of film critic??
Arent you supposed to be a guitar player or sumthin?

Good critique Colors. I went to see it last night, the 8:05 was sold out so we bought 9:15 seats. The story is not bad but it uses themes we've all seen before; man as the evil alien, corporate greed trampling innocense, the underdog banding together to save their land, and of course the star crossed lovers from different cultures that somehow find each other. But chick flick? Not hardly. Most movies are about overcoming great obstacles for love. Stay home and watch the Discovery Channel if you can't handle a little love with your epic movie.

jimmydanger wrote:Why don't you like SW? She was way cool in Alien and Ghostbusters.

I always detested her too..

I liked her in Working Girl- simply because her character lost in the end..

BUT,

I really liked her in Galaxy Quest. It was her best movie ever IMO. LOL.

I wanna see Avatar, but my wife seems to not want to, so it will probably wait for DVD, but that's a HUGE win for me anyways, cause I got this awesome surround system (I used to set them up for a living) that is 20x better than the crap sound in the theater

The sound system at the theater I saw it in was awesome. I have a Bose 5.1 system on my home theater that I love as well but that was only a small element of this movie. You must see it in 3D to get the full effect; not sure how that would work on your home system.

gtZip wrote:CF - What are you, some sort of film critic??
Arent you supposed to be a guitar player or sumthin?

As much as I love playing the guitar and playing music in general, if I could do any *one* thing with my life, I'd be a film director. I absolutely love the medium.

I figured out I loved film a bit too late in life, however. I wish I would have realized it when I was about 20 years old. I would have pursued it as a career.

The film industry is something I try and keep up on and I try and learn as much about the craft as I can. Watching film, to me, is kind of like wine tasting. If you don't know anything about it you may not understand what makes a good film or a bad film. There's a process of education that goes on, and eventually you reach a level of education where you get to the point where you can't stomach the bad stuff. I can't watch bad films anymore; I just can't do it.

On the other hand, I don't know jack about red wines, something I've started to drink recently due to doctor's suggestion... so I am having to go through that educational process, which is kind of fun.


But anyway... back to film. I love it, and I love the masters. I have a real admiration for the directors who can consistently deliver great films. Ridley Scott is probably my favorite, certainly Spielberg and Peter Jackson, and I really like Martin Scorsese's work too. Newer guys like David Mamet and Chris Nolan have reached a point in their careers where I'll watch anything they do. And I think Duncan Jones and Neil Blomkamp are guys to watch now too.

Kramerguy wrote:

jimmydanger wrote:Why don't you like SW? She was way cool in Alien and Ghostbusters.

I always detested her too..

I liked her in Working Girl- simply because her character lost in the end..

BUT,

I really liked her in Galaxy Quest. It was her best movie ever IMO. LOL.

I wanna see Avatar, but my wife seems to not want to, so it will probably wait for DVD, but that's a HUGE win for me anyways, cause I got this awesome surround system (I used to set them up for a living) that is 20x better than the crap sound in the theater

I love Galaxy Quest.

Don't wait to see this film on DVD though. There are very few films that I would say you *must* see on the big screen, but this certainly is one of them. If you have to go by yourself, then go by yourself. But go see it Kramer.

ColorsFade wrote:

gtZip wrote:CF - What are you, some sort of film critic??
Arent you supposed to be a guitar player or sumthin?

As much as I love playing the guitar and playing music in general, if I could do any *one* thing with my life, I'd be a film director. I absolutely love the medium.

I figured out I loved film a bit too late in life, however. I wish I would have realized it when I was about 20 years old. I would have pursued it as a career.

The film industry is something I try and keep up on and I try and learn as much about the craft as I can. Watching film, to me, is kind of like wine tasting. If you don't know anything about it you may not understand what makes a good film or a bad film. There's a process of education that goes on, and eventually you reach a level of education where you get to the point where you can't stomach the bad stuff. I can't watch bad films anymore; I just can't do it.

On the other hand, I don't know jack about red wines, something I've started to drink recently due to doctor's suggestion... so I am having to go through that educational process, which is kind of fun.


But anyway... back to film. I love it, and I love the masters. I have a real admiration for the directors who can consistently deliver great films. Ridley Scott is probably my favorite, certainly Spielberg and Peter Jackson, and I really like Martin Scorsese's work too. Newer guys like David Mamet and
Chris Nolan have reached a point in their careers where I'll watch anything they do. And I think Duncan Jones and Neil Blomkamp are guys to watch now too.

Well Colors, I dont think theres any age bias in the film industry like there is in the rock n roll industry, so you could still persue it if you wanted to.
(I could be wrong)

Move to Cali and go to UCLA film school.
Also... why not work your way in to the soundtrack side of things?

82 movies were made in Michigan last year while Hollywood shot 72% less than the year before. Move to Detroit for the home of rock & roll and movies!

gtZip wrote:
Well Colors, I dont think theres any age bias in the film industry like there is in the rock n roll industry, so you could still persue it if you wanted to.
(I could be wrong)

Move to Cali and go to UCLA film school.
Also... why not work your way in to the soundtrack side of things?

I'm not really a soundtrack guy; I just don't think that I compose music that way or think about it like that. I'm very much a neophyte when it comes to composition.

And the other thing is, I'm just not that interested in film score. I love listening to other people's work, especially stuff out of the ordinary that I find really interesting (for instance, Cliff Martinez's work on the 'Solaris' soundtrack), but I'm not that interested in doing it myself.

On the other hand, I have a huge passion for making film. I watch so many movies and quite often I find myself saying, "I would have done that part differently", or "I would have cut that scene" or "I would pace that tighter"... I love the idea of telling a story.

Short of taking your suggestion (going to L.A. and attending film school) I think the other way I might break into it is screenwriting. I enjoy writing, I just need to dedicate more time to the craft. Because writing is the same idea - you're telling a story. Only the medium is different.

I would love to go to film school though... no idea how I would manage that at this stage in my life, but I think it's probably something I need to seriously start investigating, because the more I think about it the more I really want to do it.