The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

by **b.lumpkin** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 11:06 am

The last thing this movie needs is more story. It was already a gerbillion boring hours

by **Grayson** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 11:07 am

Greg wrote:I couldn't get into the movie not because it was similar to certain other things and themes from other stories, but mostly because it was insanely predicable at every single turn.

This.

I had a friend who was really, REALLY excited about this movie. After we watched the first trailer, I told him from start to finish what I thought the plot was going to be. He told me there was no way I could correctly deduce the events of an entire movie from one trailer and we made a bet. Each trailer that followed only strengthened my point and reduced my interest until the movie finally came out and I refused to go see it but aside from my initial predicitions, I kept my mouth shut. My friend was so pissed at me because somehow I had "ruined" the movie. It wasn't until the movie came out on HBO that I finally sat down and watched it. I was horrified to see how correct I was. In my opinion it was just an awful and predictable movie and all of the aliens including the Na'vi looked terrible.

by **Grayson** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 11:26 am

TS Cenation wrote:To answer question on "the argument", it's is the prevailing rule on these boards that anything that is extremely popular is bad/sucks/unoriginal, pretty much with any internet site boards this is the case. Sometime over the last 10 years or so the cool or "it" thing to do is to hate or criticize anything that is excepted as "good" by the mass public. In some case it's true but in more case it is just the "hatin to be hatin" syndrome. That being said if you don't like something for whatever reason, thats perfectly within your rights to hate on in all day, and I ain't judging you on that.

Troy, I like you man but I absolutely hate this argument so this is not a personal attack at you, this is just my opinion about the "it's cool to hate it" argument. I just don't see why my opinion or anybody else's opinion has to be on some bandwagon. If I hate something and 3 out of 5 people agree with me, that doesn't mean that we hate it because it's "cool" to hate it nor does it mean that the 2 people who love it only love it because it's "cool." This defense tactic seems to have been created by people who, for whatever reason, can't seem to cope with the idea that some people don't agree with them.

To put it another way, I don't care if one person or a million people like or dislike something. That in no way shape or form has anything to do with my personal feelings toward that same thing. I suspect that the same could/should be true about pretty much everybody else here or else I think that our hobbies and the things that we discuss would be tremendously different.

by **Doc Jon** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 11:43 am

Sakie wrote:
Troy, I like you man but I absolutely hate this argument so this is not a personal attack at you, this is just my opinion about the "it's cool to hate it" argument. I just don't see why my opinion or anybody else's opinion has to be on some bandwagon. If I hate something and 3 out of 5 people agree with me, that doesn't mean that we hate it because it's "cool" to hate it nor does it mean that the 2 people who love it only love it because it's "cool." This defense tactic seems to have been created by people who, for whatever reason, can't seem to cope with the idea that some people don't agree with them.

To put it another way, I don't care if one person or a million people like or dislike something. That in no way shape or form has anything to do with my personal feelings toward that same thing. I suspect that the same could/should be true about pretty much everybody else here or else I think that our hobbies and the things that we discuss would be tremendously different.

Yet, the argument holds merit.

There were people on this very message board HOPING for this movie to fail. They wanted to see it go down in flames. And that can be typical among fandom.

Not saying it about you per se, but there are people that love to jump aboard and hate on something.

by **rdrsfn82** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 11:44 am

Hating Avatar isn't because it's cool to hate it, it's because it's a 3 hour movie with no plot, bad acting, and effects that only look good at a theater on a 3D screen. At home, it's like watching a really long Final Fantasy or Mass Effect cut scene, but without getting to play the game.

by **Doc Jon** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 11:49 am

rdrsfn82 wrote:Hating Avatar isn't because it's cool to hate it, it's because it's a 3 hour movie with no plot, bad acting, and effects that only look good at a theater on a 3D screen. At home, it's like watching a really long Final Fantasy or Mass Effect cut scene, but without getting to play the game.

Eh, I disagree on most points.

There most certainly was a plot. That's not even arguable. Yes, it is a plot that has been used many times before, but it's still there.

Bad acting? Maybe you're talking about Worthington, and I don't think he's particularly good, but I thought he was ok here. Weaver is always good, Ribisi was good, and so was the rest of the cast, but c'est la vie.

And I remember someone saying that the special effects of this movie would be topped by the next Hollywood movie, but I haven't seen that yet. YOu think it looks like a video game? That's cool. But I think the special effects were damn impressive in the film. I know it's CGI, but it moves in a way that's not obviously computer generated.

by **Greg** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 11:54 am

The effects were awesome. But I do feel that was what overshadowed. People were so deep into the effects they didn't mind the poor story. And I need story for me to enjoy any type of effect.

by **Regulator** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:09 pm

It was pretty boring and if it takes you 10 years to make something, you should come up with a better name than UNOBTAINIUM.

by **Doc Jon** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:10 pm

Greg wrote:The effects were awesome. But I do feel that was what overshadowed. People were so deep into the effects they didn't mind the poor story. And I need story for me to enjoy any type of effect.

While I do see your point, I still believe that Cameron's execution of the story was well done.

by **Grayson** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:27 pm

Doc Jon wrote:Yet, the argument holds merit.

There were people on this very message board HOPING for this movie to fail. They wanted to see it go down in flames. And that can be typical among fandom.

This doesn't prove that the argument holds merit it just shows that people are quick to jump to conclusions. Maybe people were like me and saw how predictable the movie was just by watching the trailers. Maybe people didn't like the fact that it was pushing 3D so heavily. Maybe people don't like Sam Worthington. I don't know the exact reasons but there were people who didn't want to see this movie. There were even people who didn't want this movie to succeed. But just because people made up their minds about something in advance doesn't automatically mean that their was some bandwagon that formed for people to hate it because it was the "cool" thing to do. I am sure that a majority of those people had their own reasons for why they reacted the way that they did.

Not saying it about you per se, but there are people that love to jump aboard and hate on something.

True, people do love to hate things but that doesn't mean that there is some mass movement of people whose only reason to hate is because somebody else hates it too. This is my problem with this argument. I am not trying to say who is right or who is wrong. I am just saying that it isn't right to declare that somebody has jumped on a bandwagon simply because their opinion is different from yours and they happen to have people who share a similar opinion as theirs.

There most certainly was a plot. That's not even arguable.

Agreed.

Bad acting? Maybe you're talking about Worthington, and I don't think he's particularly good, but I thought he was ok here. Weaver is always good, Ribisi was good, and so was the rest of the cast, but c'est la vie.

Meh, I always feel that Worthington's performances are wooden and underwhelming. Same can be said for Michelle Rodriguez. Sigourney Weaver did a good job with the material that she was given but that's not saying much. I couldn't get into Zoe Saldana's performance because I could never get past how utterly ridiculous her character and the rest of the Na'vi looked.

And I remember someone saying that the special effects of this movie would be topped by the next Hollywood movie, but I haven't seen that yet. YOu think it looks like a video game? That's cool. But I think the special effects were damn impressive in the film. I know it's CGI, but it moves in a way that's not obviously computer generated.

I agree that the CGI used for the environment and the technology in the film looked incredible, however, when it came to any of the animals or the Na'vi, the CGI wasn't up to par. They just looked bad. The aliens from the Mass Effect series all looked better and more believable than the aliens from Avatar. Of course, that is just my opinion.

by **rdrsfn82** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:34 pm

When I say it had no plot, I don't mean that nothing happened or it wasn't coherent, just that there was no plot that actually mattered or did anything interesting or was involving in any way. The plot wasn't just unoriginal, it was boring.

by **Zechs** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:39 pm

Doc Jon wrote:
T2 almost note for note was Terminator with better effects.

It just baffles me on a comic board that people go with the whole "I liked it better when it was called..." argument. How can you seriously watch and/or read comics if that's your attitude? Practically everything is comics and their movies has been recycled for the past 40 years. But people will defend it to the death in one instance, and then condemn it another.

Oh I know it was note for note in the action sequences. The only difference was Sarah didn't create a timey whimey thing with the future soldier also being John's dad.

At the core the relationship between the T-800 and John was what made the movie. Also.. the T-1000 didn't go apeshit murdering a bunch of cops.

by **misac** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:47 pm

rdrsfn82 wrote:The best thing to come from this movie is when he got pissed at that reporter for asking him what it was like to make an animated movie. The fact he can't accept that this was a cartoon made me laugh.

It was alirght, don't get people going crazy for it though. Is there a lot added on to this version?

by **Doc Jon** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 1:20 pm

rdrsfn82 wrote:When I say it had no plot, I don't mean that nothing happened or it wasn't coherent, just that there was no plot that actually mattered or did anything interesting or was involving in any way. The plot wasn't just unoriginal, it was boring.

Then it had a plot. A plot you may not have liked, but that's not the same thing.

by **Doc Jon** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 1:21 pm

misac wrote:

It was alirght, don't get people going crazy for it though. Is there a lot added on to this version?

I guess. There's scenes of Worthington's character on Earth, which was cool to see.

And a couple added scenes that flech out the story more, like what happened to the school, the Navi hunting and so on.