James Cameron's Avatar - news, rumors, castings..

[Terrell]

All he's said is that this is the best CGI to date and it couldn't have been done 10 years ago, both of those statements are correct.

The second part of that statement is true. The first part is highly debateable, and I'd say dead wrong. Transformers and Davey Jones are more impressive than anything I've seen here, and so was Kong by Weta.

But I'll reserve final judgment when the film is finished.

[Solid Snake PAC]

the 1st part will always be topped by whatever else comes out. Many films have stated that 1st part..years later..they're topped. To date? Maybe. For the Na'vi...I've pretty amazed.

[Groucho]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake PAC

the 1st part will always be topped by whatever else comes out. Many films have stated that 1st part..years later..they're topped.

Except The Matrix: Reloaded which had un-replicable effects.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Originally Posted by Groucho

Except The Matrix: Reloaded which had un-replicable effects.

Wanna elaborate on that one. I don't want to respond to you unless I know what moments you're actually speaking of.

[Groucho]

Before the movie came out, the SFX guy was overplaying his hand and stating that nobody would be able to ever replicate them.

In his defense, I don't think anybody's actually bothered to try.

[Fanboy]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake PAC

the 1st part will always be topped by whatever else comes out. Many films have stated that 1st part..years later..they're topped. To date? Maybe. For the Na'vi...I've pretty amazed.

"The best ... to date" by definition precludes them from being compared to whatever follows.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Originally Posted by Groucho

Before the movie came out, the SFX guy was overplaying his hand and stating that nobody would be able to ever replicate them.

In his defense, I don't think anybody's actually bothered to try.

hahahaha. Oh...you dashing internet fiend, you.

Fanboy: I understand what it is. Guess I could've explained better but....eh.


I will probably be downed for this but...no one whole film will ever be as phenomenal as maybe 1 or several scenes where it all just clicked. T2 has some great CGI that holds today in some parts. Not all of it..but some oh hey yes. Davy Jones holds well for what he is, and that's an even bigger deal cuz of what Davy Jones is is fucking hard to believe it's that good. PotC2 as a whole....ehhhh...it's got good CGI but...Davy Jones was the best looking thing in there. No film with a great amount of CGI will ever be steadily consistent....YET (if ever...I mean...you never know). Avatar may have moments where it's just jaw dropping and other times..it's just good-great cgi. And you know what...I can live with that.

[redrum]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/bu...atar.html?_r=2

When global marketing expenses are added, “Avatar” may cost its various backers $500 million.

[Solid Snake PAC]

fuck me....wow. that's a lot of money. So from who exactly is all that money from? Like how much of it is Fox's input?

[TallGuyMe]

this will be the biggest flop in cinematic history.

(yes, the same was said for Cameron's Titanic, but do you REALLY think pre-teen girls are going to see this movie 20 times in the theatre?)

[Drop]

I think the movie will do pretty well, but probably be seen as a dissappointment. It'll definitely make over 100 million, so it won't be a total bomb. But it won't be a smash, at most I see it making 225 million. Depending on how good it is.

I'm not that interested in it. I'm not sure what to think of Cameron anymore, he has made some great films, so I want to trust him, but it has been a long while. The trailers have not excited me at all. The CG doesn't impress me much either, which I hoped would give me that extra reason to see it on the big screen. It doesn't look bad at all, but I was really hoping for a big leap.

All the major CGI films are really impressive in close up. Beowulf did look photoreal in some closeups, Wiglaf for example. No dead eyes there. The problem is big crowd scenes, they just can't put the detail into them, and don't even try. I think Zemeckis said that each minute costs 1 million dollars no matter what is going on. So obviously you can put a hell of a lot more work into the details of just one face than a large crowd of people. And it's a bit jarring when we go from these beautiful shots to shoddy large crowds. I can't imagine the day when that contrast doesn't exist.

[toddly6666]

So Avatar is going to basically be a better version of SURROGATES, but unlike Bruce Willis, Sam Worthington wants to stay in his Navi body?

[fumanstan]

I can easily foresee discussion here on whether or not the final box office take for this constitutes a bomb or not. Like Superman Returns or King Kong. In which we'll see arguments about budget, advertising budget, domestic gross, worldwide gross, and home video sales.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Originally Posted by toddly6666

So Avatar is going to basically be a better version of SURROGATES, but unlike Bruce Willis, Sam Worthington wants to stay in his Navi body?

Also....it's by Jim Cameron the director of T2 over the guy that did T3 (horrid plot hole ridden film). BUT that may figure into your this being better than Surrogates.

No offense to Cameron..but I have a fucking real hard time seeing this thing make 500 million. 250...I can see that but....500 million? damn...

[sauce07]

when your last film makes 1.8 billion worldwide in theaters, it doesn't matter how much your next film loses.

[Ash Ketchum]

Originally Posted by sauce07

when your last film makes 1.8 billion worldwide in theaters, it doesn't matter how much your next film loses.

What a great tag line for the poster!

[redrum]

"See it or don't see it...we still made 1.8 billion"

[riley_dude]

Lets just hope it is not another CGI-laden crap fest like G.I. Joe.
I have faith in Cameron that it will not.

[maingon]

Originally Posted by riley_dude

Lets just hope it is not another CGI-laden crap fest like G.I. Joe.
I have faith in Cameron that it will not.

come on your comparing Cameron to Summers? Cameron is one of the best action film directors today. I am suprised on how much crap people are saying about this movie, it seems most are just blasting this movie because of the hype. I think the newest trailer is perfect, GI-Joes CGI cant compare to this movie. GIJoe visuals are pretty bad.

[Draven]

Originally Posted by riley_dude

Lets just hope it is not another CGI-laden crap fest like G.I. Joe.
I have faith in Cameron that it will not.

All I know is that G.I. Joe looked cool from the trailers (and I think it delivered. Just watched it again on Blu-ray the other night and that's a damn fun flick).

Haven't seen anything about Avatar that has gotten me that excited though.

[Solid Snake PAC]

It's a fun flick but it's nothing amazing. Probably Sommers' best film sure....but...Cameron's Terminator is a much better and enjoyable film than G.I. Joe. For some reason I love that music in T1.

[dan30oly]

Originally Posted by maingon

come on your comparing Cameron to Summers? Cameron is one of the best action film directors 17 years ago. I am suprised on how much crap people are saying about this movie, it seems most are just blasting this movie because of the hype. I think the newest trailer is perfect, GI-Joes CGI cant compare to this movie. GIJoe visuals are pretty bad.

Fixed.

[Solid Snake PAC]

True Lies would like to talk to you....



Damnit...this only makes me wish to see another Arnold and Cameron team up..

[Hokeyboy]

Did anyone figure out which specific day it was when James Cameron crapped in dan30oly's Ovaltine?

[Tom Creo]

2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th(1997)