PDA

View Full Version : ...Avatar kinda sucked



Pages : [1] 2

Made It Ma!
05-08-2010, 05:04 AM
Rewatching it now on DVD...and I knew this would happen...it doesn't hold up. Without the big screen this movie's weaknesses are exposed. The acting is terrible, the script is super awful, and the cinematography is uninspiring. The Dark Knight held up, The LOTR films held up, but Avatar is a mess. I thought it was wanky when it was in theaters, but was entertained...it's officially bad.

tonym
05-08-2010, 05:08 AM
Agreed. Also, watch it with Rifftrax.

Boris the Blade
05-08-2010, 05:10 AM
It's not bad.

dmh3000
05-08-2010, 05:41 AM
Main problem I've always had was with the length. If I ever do get the DVD, I'm just going to jump right to the ending fight scenes.

RebootedCorpse
05-08-2010, 05:50 AM
sigh

Urgur the Gurgur
05-08-2010, 06:00 AM
Rewatching it now on DVD...and I knew this would happen...it doesn't hold up. Without the big screen this movie's weaknesses are exposed. The acting is terrible, the script is super awful, and the cinematography is uninspiring. The Dark Knight held up, The LOTR films held up, but Avatar is a mess. I thought it was wanky when it was in theaters, but was entertained...it's officially bad.

So basically it has the same problems that all of cameron's movies have had since true lies?

I've actually never seen it. Even the trailers I saw in the theater didn't look all that interesting. From what i've heard it wasn't that great unless in IMAX. Maybe I'll netflix it out of some morbid curiosity.

Gideon Gloom
05-08-2010, 06:28 AM
I saw it in the cinema and didn't think very much of it. Obviously, the effects were impressive and the 3-D element added to the spectacle, but I thought the story and characterisation was so bad that a 10-year-old would have been embarrassed to admit to being responsible for it. It frustrates me how sometimes it seems like movie producers make a choice between script and effects, and either don't think you can have both or don't need both. Maybe I'm biased in that I'm a writer, but I'm a story man first and foremost. I have nothing against good effects, but for me that needs to be the cherry on top of the cake, whereas Avatar had one hell of a cherry, but forgot to bring the cake... I think that metaphor just about managed to hold up!

schizorabbit
05-08-2010, 06:34 AM
MORE "Avatar Sucks" posts!!!! How exciting!!!

Mylazycat
05-08-2010, 06:38 AM
I saw it in the cinema and didn't think very much of it. Obviously, the effects were impressive and the 3-D element added to the spectacle, but I thought the story and characterisation was so bad that a 10-year-old would have been embarrassed to admit to being responsible for it. It frustrates me how sometimes it seems like movie producers make a choice between script and effects, and either don't think you can have both or don't need both. Maybe I'm biased in that I'm a writer, but I'm a story man first and foremost. I have nothing against good effects, but for me that needs to be the cherry on top of the cake, whereas Avatar had one hell of a cherry, but forgot to bring the cake... I think that metaphor just about managed to hold up!

Sadly, given the huge gobs of money Avatar made just off of looking nice and nothing else, Hollywood will continue to believe that great affects attached to any old generic script will reap the bucks.

Gideon Gloom
05-08-2010, 06:43 AM
Sadly, given the huge gobs of money Avatar made just off of looking nice and nothing else, Hollywood will continue to believe that great affects attached to any old generic script will reap the bucks.

Yeah, I reckon you're spot on with that. When I saw the early box office figures, I shook my head and shed a quiet tear for another nail in the coffin of story! :surrend:

Tom Burgos
05-08-2010, 07:00 AM
I loved it. Easily the best film of 2009. And I watched on DVD on a crappy 19 inch screen, and it hasn't lost an iota of its emotional power. I am soooo looking forward to the sequels!

Butler
05-08-2010, 07:26 AM
I loved it. Easily the best film of 2009. And I watched on DVD on a crappy 19 inch screen, and it hasn't lost an iota of its emotional power. I am soooo looking forward to the sequels!

Get this man a doctor!

Foolish Mortal
05-08-2010, 07:28 AM
Sadly, given the huge gobs of money Avatar made just off of looking nice and nothing else, Hollywood will continue to believe that great affects attached to any old generic script will reap the bucks.
The fact that every year they keep churning out these horrible "Look! The animals are talking and doing human things! Who cares about story!" CGI fests suggests you are right.

The Hodag
05-08-2010, 07:30 AM
But more importantly, does anyone still like Peter Jackson's King Kong now that we've had five years to reflect on its badness?

Fake Pat
05-08-2010, 07:33 AM
I loved it. Easily the best film of 2009. And I watched on DVD on a crappy 19 inch screen, and it hasn't lost an iota of its emotional power. I am soooo looking forward to the sequels!

No. No matter how much you loved it, and even if you would argue it's ultimately the best, it's not an "easy" pick.

Hurt Locker, Up, Inglorious Basterds, Up In The Air...and that's just off the top of my head.

Fake Pat
05-08-2010, 07:33 AM
But more importantly, does anyone still like Peter Jackson's King Kong now that we've had five years to reflect on its badness?

I still think there's a good movie in there, it's just buried in a lot of boring crap.

JamesV
05-08-2010, 07:34 AM
I still think there's a good movie in there, it's just buried in a lot of boring crap.

I was gonna say this.

A trimmed down, 90 minutes to 2 hour version that keeps the drama, tension and excitement going.

It's just bloated.

The Hodag
05-08-2010, 07:37 AM
I still think there's a good movie in there, it's just buried in a lot of boring crap.

Man, I can't remember a thing from it accept that horribly showy fight where a bunch of CGI monsters are suspended by vines, balletically fighting.

Marc Lombardi
05-08-2010, 07:40 AM
Juno was AWESOME!

Marc Lombardi
05-08-2010, 07:42 AM
Yeah, I reckon you're spot on with that. When I saw the early box office figures, I shook my head and shed a quiet tear for another nail in the coffin of story! :surrend:
I heard that after Avatar hit DVD the motion picture academy has decided to no longer hold the Oscars/Academy Awards. They figured that no more movies worth any sort of awards will ever be made now because story has been killed.

Fake Pat
05-08-2010, 07:43 AM
Man, I can't remember a thing from it accept that horribly showy fight where a bunch of CGI monsters are suspended by vines, balletically fighting.

I think the vast majority of the stuff once they get back to NYC is solid. It's a bit ridiculous at times, but in an earnest way that completely worked for me.

The scene with giant bugs was extremely well done.

Jason California
05-08-2010, 07:58 AM
Sigourney Weaver says the only reason Cameron did not get the best director nod is because he does not have tits.

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 08:00 AM
I loved it. Easily the best film of 2009. And I watched on DVD on a crappy 19 inch screen, and it hasn't lost an iota of its emotional power. I am soooo looking forward to the sequels!

:no:

Jason California
05-08-2010, 08:02 AM
Juno was AWESOME!


I keep hearing that. I should see it one day.

Tom Burgos
05-08-2010, 08:08 AM
No. No matter how much you loved it, Actually, yes.
It was awesome, and the best of 2009. :)

Jason California
05-08-2010, 08:11 AM
Actually, yes.
It was awesome, and the best of 2009. :)


Keep on truckin Tom, don't let them bring you down.

Kurt Russell Crowe
05-08-2010, 08:20 AM
hehe. Yeah, it is really shitty. It's the shittiest movie of 2009, easily.

Bervda
05-08-2010, 08:33 AM
At least Powder Blue has Jessica Biel stripping.

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 08:45 AM
Actually, yes.
It was awesome, and the best of 2009. :)

The academy would have words with you good sir.

http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/828/hurtlockerposterm.jpg

Matt Jay
05-08-2010, 09:11 AM
The academy would have words with you good sir.

http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/828/hurtlockerposterm.jpg

This was much better than Avatar, but I almost fell asleep in the theater.

For my money, District 9 was the best movie of 2009. A moving action flick with meaningful things to say, some of which were not presented in a way that did not insult the viewer's intelligence. I need to buy that DVD now that I think about it...

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 09:12 AM
This was much better than Avatar, but I almost fell asleep in the theater.

For my money, District 9 was the best movie of 2009. A moving action flick with meaningful things to say, some of which were not presented in a way that did not insult the viewer's intelligence. I need to buy that DVD now that I think about it...

I would agree that District 9 was also a better movie that Avatar. Hell, I would argue that every other movie that was nominated for Best Picture this year was better than Avatar.

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 09:41 AM
Rewatching it now on DVD. Without the big screen this movie's weaknesses are exposed.

That's your problem. Your TV sucks and you're using last decades technology to watch movies.

It more than holds up on blu-ray and a 120HZ HDTV.

The Human Target
05-08-2010, 09:41 AM
But more importantly, does anyone still like Peter Jackson's King Kong now that we've had five years to reflect on its badness?

Now that was a fucking terrible movie.

I still haven't seen Avatar.

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 09:47 AM
The academy would have words with you good sir.

http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/828/hurtlockerposterm.jpg

James Cameron's HUUUUUGE bank statement would have words with you good sir. ;)

Sam Little
05-08-2010, 09:52 AM
I was unimpressed with Avatar, but I quite enjoyed Jackson's King Kong. And District 9 was definitely my favorite film of 2009.

Mylazycat
05-08-2010, 09:54 AM
Hell, I would argue that every other movie that was nominated for Best Picture this year was better than Avatar.

Along with at least 5 other films that weren't nominated.

Joe Kalicki
05-08-2010, 09:58 AM
Avatar was significantly better than The Blind Side.

I as so bored with Jackson's Kong when I saw it in the show, but I haven't seen it since while meanwhile I've become a huge fan of the original, and enjoyed the 70s version a lot as well, so I'm going to be watching it again soon to see what I think now.

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 10:08 AM
The only thing I didn't like about Jackson's Kong was Adrien Brody. Terrible casting choice.

c. page
05-08-2010, 10:13 AM
i enjoy jackson's kong well enough, although it really is pretty damn bloated, and should've been a good 2 hours at most.

there's a lot of stuff from the beginning that they could have cut out.

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 10:14 AM
James Cameron's HUUUUUGE bank statement would have words with you good sir. ;)

Right.

Because a film's box office take is what determines how good a movie is ...

Which clearly means that Will Smith's movie Hancock ($227,946,274) was a better movie than Clint Eastwood's movie Unforgiven ($101,157,447).

:roll:

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 10:17 AM
Right.

Because a film's box office take is what determines how good a movie is ...

Which clearly means that Will Smith's movie Hancock ($227,946,274) was a better movie than Clint Eastwood's movie Unforgiven ($101,157,447).

:roll:

Snobbery.

If millions of people watch it and enjoy it that means it's a good film. Period. Everything else is meaningless.

The Human Target
05-08-2010, 10:22 AM
Snobbery.

If millions of people watch it and enjoy it that means it's a good film. Period. Everything else is meaningless.

I find the logic of that argument highly flawed.

GelfXIII
05-08-2010, 10:22 AM
well, different strokes, I guess. I loved Avatar in the theaters, and I loved it on the blu-ray. Best film of 2009? no, I give that to Hurt Locker, which was clearly a superior film all around, but take nothing away from Avatar. It doesn't have to be the 'best of 2009', it was just a great, entertaining bit of escapism. Sometimes thats all I want.

GelfXIII
05-08-2010, 10:28 AM
Snobbery.

If millions of people watch it and enjoy it that means it's a good film. Period. Everything else is meaningless.


I find the logic of that argument highly flawed.

I agree with HT here. Populism does not equal quality. A billion Chinese people love to eat intestines. It tastes gross to me. A gazzillion people like Lady Gaga. I think she sounds like shit. There is no empirical measure for the quality of an artistic endeavor, it's very subjective. I'm sure somewhere, there's someone who thought Catwoman was fun and enjoyable and "good". I'm not one of them, but that doesn't mean they're wrong.

Jason California
05-08-2010, 10:29 AM
I enjoyed Avatar for what it was. The same way I enjoyed the first 2 Transformers movies. Sometimes the visual spectacle is worth it alone, and for me it was.

Andrew
05-08-2010, 10:30 AM
Snobbery.

If millions of people watch it and enjoy it that means it's a good film. Period. Everything else is meaningless.

Plenty of people watching it doesn't mean plenty of people liked it.

Because really, it wasn't very good.

JamesV
05-08-2010, 10:31 AM
Snobbery.

If millions of people watch it and enjoy it that means it's a good film. Period. Everything else is meaningless.

The problem here is whether or not someone liked it or thought it was good, they had to pay for it.

It's not like you only paid if you enjoyed it. I'm sure millions upon millions of people enjoyed it or loved it, but it made money off of people who disliked it, who barely liked it, who only went to see the effects, and who hated it.

Foolish Mortal
05-08-2010, 10:31 AM
Snobbery.

If millions of people watch it and enjoy it that means it's a good film. Period. Everything else is meaningless.
Nonsense.

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 10:33 AM
Snobbery.

If millions of people watch it and enjoy it that means it's a good film. Period. Everything else is meaningless.

I don't think it's snobbery at all. I enjoyed Avatar for what it was. I just think that it's not even in the top 100 best films ever made. Box office plays no part in how good a movie is. There are lots of movies that are bad and do well in the box office.

Fucking Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes made $180,011,740. The travesty of a movie Wild Hogs made $168,213,584. The movie 2012 made $166,112,167. Horton Hears a Who! ... $154,529,187. Godzilla ( 1998 ) ... $136,023,813. Wild Wild West ... $113,745,408. All of these were the American Box office take.

And what did The Shawshank Redemption make in the US?

$28,341,469

So I think that your theory of money equaling quality is beyond flawed.

Oh yeah ... http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/showpost.php?p=179961&postcount=1

Just in case there's debate from good old Thud be sure to check out his honorable mentions. :)

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 10:35 AM
I agree with HT here. Populism does not equal quality. A billion Chinese people love to eat intestines. It tastes gross to me. A gazzillion people like Lady Gaga. I think she sounds like shit. There is no empirical measure for the quality of an artistic endeavor, it's very subjective. I'm sure somewhere, there's someone who thought Catwoman was fun and enjoyable and "good". I'm not one of them, but that doesn't mean they're wrong.

And Catwoman made $40,202,379 in the US. Out grossing The Shawshank Redemption by a cool $11,860,910.

;)

I AM GROOT!
05-08-2010, 10:41 AM
If people are saying it was one of the worst movies of 2009, I really don't think they saw too many movies. Was it the best movie of the year? No. It certainly wasn't the worst, though.

The visual effects were, no doubt, outstanding. The story was decent. And honestly, I don't regret spending my money on it, because it held my attention for two and a half hours, and I could enjoy it simply for what it was: escapism.

I guess, for me, that's good enough. Yeah, I could see flaws in it, but it wasn't enough to pull me out of the experience. Different strokes, I guess...

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 10:47 AM
If people are saying it was one of the worst movies of 2009, I really don't think they saw too many movies. Was it the best movie of the year? No. It certainly wasn't the worst, though.

The visual effects were, no doubt, outstanding. The story was decent. And honestly, I don't regret spending my money on it, because it held my attention for two and a half hours, and I could enjoy it simply for what it was: escapism.

I guess, for me, that's good enough. Yeah, I could see flaws in it, but it wasn't enough to pull me out of the experience. Different strokes, I guess...

Oh yeah. For sure there were way worse movies that came out this year. I just thought it was a sort of OK story with amazing effects that turned it into an alright movie.

I'll be picking up the Bluray when the deluxe version comes out.

Foolish Mortal
05-08-2010, 10:50 AM
If people are saying it was one of the worst movies of 2009, I really don't think they saw too many movies. Was it the best movie of the year? No. It certainly wasn't the worst, though.

The visual effects were, no doubt, outstanding. The story was decent. And honestly, I don't regret spending my money on it, because it held my attention for two and a half hours, and I could enjoy it simply for what it was: escapism.

I guess, for me, that's good enough. Yeah, I could see flaws in it, but it wasn't enough to pull me out of the experience. Different strokes, I guess...
Avatar was not even close to the worst movies of 2009.

But for anyone to say it was one of the best movies of the year or best of the decade, is overrating it.

Its special effects are absolutely A-class. The best of the best.

But its story and acting are mediocre. I can't put a seriously flawed movie like Avatar on the 'best of the year' list.

I AM GROOT!
05-08-2010, 10:52 AM
Oh yeah. For sure there were way worse movies that came out this year. I just thought it was a sort of OK story with amazing effects that turned it into an alright movie.

I'll be picking up the Bluray when the deluxe version comes out.

The story had moments of potential, where if Cameron had just pushed it a bit further, it could have been amazing. It didn't get to that point, but the story held together fairly cohesively. I'm hopeful that any sequel that comes from this will balance the story and visual effects better, but we'll just have to wait and see.

I AM GROOT!
05-08-2010, 10:54 AM
Avatar was not even close to the worst movies of 2009.

But for anyone to say it was one of the best movies of the year or best of the decade, is overrating it.

Its special effects are absolutely A-class. The best of the best.

But its story and acting are mediocre. I can't put a seriously flawed movie like Avatar on the 'best of the year' list.

Oh, and I definitely wasn't saying it should necessarily be best of the year in terms of quality; again, it had flaws - the story being one of them - but some people just seemed to be decrying it as an abomination against nature (a slight exaggeration, of course ;) ).

Tom Burgos
05-08-2010, 11:05 AM
http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/828/hurtlockerposterm.jpg

Nice little film that put me to sleep. But congrats to Bigelow for becoming a Trivial Pursuit entry.

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 11:09 AM
Nice little film that put me to sleep. But congrats to Bigelow for becoming a Trivial Pursuit entry.

Wow. That's pretty condescending for no reason. Just out of curiosity, how many awards did the last movie you directed get?

And also an achievement I think that with a budget of only 15 million this "nice little film" managed to do what Cameron obviously was gunning to do with his (estimated because the actual budget has never been disclosed) 750 million dollar movie ... win best picture.

But congrats to Cameron to not only losing but to losing to his ex wife who was seated right in front of him at the Oscars.

Ray G.
05-08-2010, 11:15 AM
I think the vast majority of the stuff once they get back to NYC is solid. It's a bit ridiculous at times, but in an earnest way that completely worked for me.

The scene with giant bugs was extremely well done.

I enjoyed everything except the ridiculously bloated, indulgent 45 minutes before the story even gets started.

Skull Island and the return to New York were pretty great.

As for Avatar, even as someone who absolutely despised the script and its implications, I was swept up in the scope while seeing it in the theater. As an example of cinema's power to enthrall, it's fantastic.

By the same token, I'm not surprised it doesn't hold up too well on DVD.

Ray G.
05-08-2010, 11:19 AM
I would agree that District 9 was also a better movie that Avatar. Hell, I would argue that every other movie that was nominated for Best Picture this year was better than Avatar.

Having watched all of them, I would put it above The Blind Side and A Serious Man, and neck and neck with Precious. I didn't like any of those at all.

Joe Kalicki
05-08-2010, 11:27 AM
Having watched all of them, I would put it above The Blind Side and A Serious Man, and neck and neck with Precious. I didn't like any of those at all.

Oh man, A Serious Man was probably my favorite movie from last year.

Ray G.
05-08-2010, 11:28 AM
Oh man, A Serious Man was probably my favorite movie from last year.

I love most of the Coen brothers' movies, but the entire thing seemed like a bad farce that didn't go off at all. Dead baby comedy, if you will. Especially the last scene.

Joe Kalicki
05-08-2010, 11:32 AM
I love most of the Coen brothers' movies, but the entire thing seemed like a bad farce that didn't go off at all. Dead baby comedy, if you will. Especially the last scene.

I thought it got its point across pretty effectively and was fun to watch with a great lead performance.

Tom Burgos
05-08-2010, 11:35 AM
Wow. That's pretty condescending for no reason. Just out of curiosity, how many awards did the last movie you directed get?

Right, I forgot we have to make film (or comics, or art) in order to have "the right" to critique them.

By the way, the same Hollywood that gave the Oscar to Bigelow is the same Hollywood that will continue greenligthing more films written, directed and done by men than by women by a large marging, the same Hollywood that will continue under-using, underpaying, and undermining female artists behind the camera, and the same Hollywood that will not give Bigelow the same career and or clout they would give another, less talented male director.
I love that she won an Oscar, and I truly hope I'm wrong, but in 10 years she will likely be...just an entry on Trivial Pursuit. That's just Hollywood.

Ryan Elliott
05-08-2010, 11:35 AM
Nice little film that put me to sleep. But congrats to Bigelow for becoming a Trivial Pursuit entry.


http://www.the-online-homebrew-company.co.uk/shop/catalog/images/GeordieBitter.jpg

Bedlam66
05-08-2010, 11:36 AM
Now that was a fucking terrible movie.

I still haven't seen Avatar.
I really like the redesign of Kong.

Marc Lombardi
05-08-2010, 11:38 AM
When I read all of the posts in this thread, I shook my head and shed a quiet tear for another nail in the coffin of hyperbole! :surrend:




My point is that not everything has to be THE BEST or THE WORST. Nor does everyone's opinion of something have to fall in line. But clearly there is a segment that thinks something is the greatest thing it the world proven by the fact that Avatar is the highest grossing film of ALL TIME -- somewhere where hyperbole is appropriate. There is also a segment that feels it's shit (let's call them the vocal minority). Then can we at least agree that the fact that more than $2-Billion worth of international movie-goers paid to see this movie time and again and the fact that the Motion Picture Academy nominated it for many awards, including Best Picture, means that the movie certainly has its merits and deserves praise. Like it or not, it's like nothing we have seen before and will influence what we see in the movies from now on.

NeverWanderer
05-08-2010, 11:41 AM
I thought Juno was great.

Marc Lombardi
05-08-2010, 11:45 AM
I thought Juno was great.
I keep hearing that! You should start a thread about it.

NeverWanderer
05-08-2010, 11:53 AM
I keep hearing that! You should start a thread about it.

I just might!


In other news, I completely agree with your above post. :thumb:

MayorMitch100
05-08-2010, 12:20 PM
The effects were insane, but the story and the over the top hatred for the industrial complex was a little much. How many different times can society tell us not to destroy the rain forest?

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 01:17 PM
Right, I forgot we have to make film (or comics, or art) in order to have "the right" to critique them.

By the way, the same Hollywood that gave the Oscar to Bigelow is the same Hollywood that will continue greenligthing more films written, directed and done by men than by women by a large marging, the same Hollywood that will continue under-using, underpaying, and undermining female artists behind the camera, and the same Hollywood that will not give Bigelow the same career and or clout they would give another, less talented male director.
I love that she won an Oscar, and I truly hope I'm wrong, but in 10 years she will likely be...just an entry on Trivial Pursuit. That's just Hollywood.

I would argue that she was a firmly established and well regarded director before The Hurt Locker. That even prior to the oscar she won she was more than a trivial footnote.

She directed a cult favorite vampire film that many still call a fun film with Near Dark. She gave us an over the top fun action movie that people still enjoy with Point Break. Strange Days ... a movie written by James Cameron. And she directed several episodes of the great cop drama Homicide: Life on the Street.

The Hurt Locker was really just another in a decent list of good work she's done.

I really think it comes off as sour grapes for you to belittle her win as a footnote because of your personal preference of another film.

And while I don't think that Avatar is the best (or worst) movie made last year I do think that every best picture (of the ones I saw) nominee from this year was better. Just my opinion.

I thought that Avatar was a technically amazing movie. The use of CG and motion capture was the single best use of those techniques I've ever seen on the screen.

But I also think that if you took the script and just read it you'd more clearly see how bad the script is. And outside of Zoe Saldana (who was good) I think that the acting was pretty week. The star of the film (Worthington or whatever his name is) is probably the least charismatic leading man I've ever seen in a big budget film. I think that Cameron is so wrapped up in the technical aspects of the film (which are truly amazing) that the stuff that I think are most important in a film (like a solid story, good dialogue and solid acting) fall to the wayside.

capntightpants
05-08-2010, 01:19 PM
Avatar was not even close to the worst movies of 2009.

But for anyone to say it was one of the best movies of the year or best of the decade, is overrating it.

Its special effects are absolutely A-class. The best of the best.

But its story and acting are mediocre. I can't put a seriously flawed movie like Avatar on the 'best of the year' list.

Stop with the logic! Avatar can only be one or the other!!! Best or worst! No in betweens!

Hyperstorm
05-08-2010, 01:21 PM
Kinda sucked? I think not.

Try totally sucked.

I gave it a miss on big screen because nothing about the trailer made me think "I must see this" and then when I got it out on DVD I turned it off after 10 minutes since it looked like a kids' movie to the point of the stupid blue thing running with this dopey look on it's face. Yes, I get that it was the first time a paraplegic was walking again, but it was enough to convince me I didn't need to see anything beyond that point.

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 01:36 PM
Kinda sucked? I think not.

Try totally sucked.

I gave it a miss on big screen because nothing about the trailer made me think "I must see this" and then when I got it out on DVD I turned it off after 10 minutes since it looked like a kids' movie to the point of the stupid blue thing running with this dopey look on it's face. Yes, I get that it was the first time a paraplegic was walking again, but it was enough to convince me I didn't need to see anything beyond that point.

The action scenes at the end are pretty cool.

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 01:46 PM
I don't think it's snobbery at all. I enjoyed Avatar for what it was. I just think that it's not even in the top 100 best films ever made. Box office plays no part in how good a movie is. There are lots of movies that are bad and do well in the box office.

Fucking Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes made $180,011,740. The travesty of a movie Wild Hogs made $168,213,584. The movie 2012 made $166,112,167. Horton Hears a Who! ... $154,529,187. Godzilla ( 1998 ) ... $136,023,813. Wild Wild West ... $113,745,408. All of these were the American Box office take.

And what did The Shawshank Redemption make in the US?

$28,341,469

So I think that your theory of money equaling quality is beyond flawed.

Oh yeah ... http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/showpost.php?p=179961&postcount=1

Just in case there's debate from good old Thud be sure to check out his honorable mentions. :)

:eek: That's awesome. Kind of makes me want to make a new top 20 list, see if anything has changed in the last 5 years.

I still think most the Avatar hate is snobbery though. I don't really get it. If a majority of the people who watch a film like it then to me that makes it a good movie. I don't know why people want to make things more complicated than that.

Kurt Russell Crowe
05-08-2010, 01:50 PM
I would argue that she was a firmly established and well regarded director before The Hurt Locker. That even prior to the oscar she won she was more than a trivial footnote.

She directed a cult favorite vampire film that many still call a fun film with Near Dark. She gave us an over the top fun action movie that people still enjoy with Point Break. Strange Days ... a movie written by James Cameron. And she directed several episodes of the great cop drama Homicide: Life on the Street.

The Hurt Locker was really just another in a decent list of good work she's done.

I really think it comes off as sour grapes for you to belittle her win as a footnote because of your personal preference of another film.

And while I don't think that Avatar is the best (or worst) movie made last year I do think that every best picture (of the ones I saw) nominee from this year was better. Just my opinion.

I thought that Avatar was a technically amazing movie. The use of CG and motion capture was the single best use of those techniques I've ever seen on the screen.

But I also think that if you took the script and just read it you'd more clearly see how bad the script is. And outside of Zoe Saldana (who was good) I think that the acting was pretty week. The star of the film (Worthington or whatever his name is) is probably the least charismatic leading man I've ever seen in a big budget film. I think that Cameron is so wrapped up in the technical aspects of the film (which are truly amazing) that the stuff that I think are most important in a film (like a solid story, good dialogue and solid acting) fall to the wayside.

Hey, she didn't make one of the top grossing films of all time so she probly isn't on the Burgos radar. I mean Near Dark(awesome) is no Titanic(suckville)

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 01:52 PM
This thread reminds of this old joke:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v605/thudpucker/comicbook_header.jpg

bartleby
05-08-2010, 02:01 PM
If a majority of the people who watch a film like it then to me that makes it a good movie. I don't know why people want to make things more complicated than that.

The majority of people who watch movies like most of the movies they watch. That doesn't make the movies good.

THWIP!
05-08-2010, 02:01 PM
:eek: That's awesome. Kind of makes me want to make a new top 20 list, see if anything has changed in the last 5 years.

I still think most the Avatar hate is snobbery though. I don't really get it. If a majority of the people who watch a film like it then to me that makes it a good movie. I don't know why people want to make things more complicated than that.

I don't understand how you can believe that. It makes no sense. Because by that logic if everyone liked shit then shit must be good.

THWIP!
05-08-2010, 02:03 PM
Nice little film that put me to sleep. But congrats to Bigelow for becoming a Trivial Pursuit entry.

Jesus Christ. You are one bitter man.

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 02:10 PM
:eek: That's awesome. Kind of makes me want to make a new top 20 list, see if anything has changed in the last 5 years.

I still think most the Avatar hate is snobbery though. I don't really get it. If a majority of the people who watch a film like it then to me that makes it a good movie. I don't know why people want to make things more complicated than that.

Here's the thing though. If the title of this thread was ... Wild Hogs kinda sucked people would have come in here and said, well yeah it did and that would be that.

Maybe a few of us would have made jokes about how dumb "the masses" were for seeing a movie this awful.

Then we would have spent a few minutes tearing the thing apart because it was a lowest common denominator targeted bland and boring comedy with no real redeeming qualities.

And you know what, a few of us would be pissed that shit like Wild Hogs was making a lot of money while some other better film was languishing in the theaters at the same time.

And everyone would have pretty much agreed.

And in my mind (and I would guess a lot of the other "snobbish" Avatar haters) the only difference between Wild Hogs and Avatar is that there was no fancy CGI or amazing 3D to mask how bad the story and acting was in Wild Hogs (unless you count John Travolta's hair piece).

To me. Avatar was just another shitty movie in a long line of shitty movies that "the masses" flocked to see while better movies were being overlooked.

And I would be fine if someone came in here and said that the movie was flawed but they still enjoyed it. But as a serious fan of film for someone to claim that it was "the best movie of the year" is insulting.

Again. I mean seriously. How would you have reacted if someone had came on the board a few years back and said, "Dude, Catwoman was the greatest movie of the year. It was way better than Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and a way better superhero film than The Incredibles was."

I think my head would explode. That's all I'm saying.

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 02:12 PM
The majority of people who watch movies like most of the movies they watch. That doesn't make the movies good.

Why doesn't it?

How can a movie that appeals to hundreds of millions of people and just recently set records for DVD and Blu-ray sales be a 'bad' film?

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 02:12 PM
The majority of people who watch movies like most of the movies they watch. That doesn't make the movies good.

:)

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 02:13 PM
Why doesn't it?

How can a movie that appeals to hundreds of millions of people and just recently set records for DVD and Blu-ray sales be a 'bad' film?

Because its not a very good film.

Wait. How about this:

Snuggies appeal to millions of people. It still doesn't make it a good product.

McDonalds appeals to billions of people. It still doesn't make it good. Or food. ;)

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 02:19 PM
I think that might be the answer I've been looking for.

Avatar is McDonalds of the film world. It appeals to everyone without being any good for you at all.

Fake Pat
05-08-2010, 02:20 PM
Actually, yes.
It was awesome, and the best of 2009. :)

I wasn't arguing any part of that, was I?

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 02:25 PM
Here's the thing though. If the title of this thread was ... Wild Hogs kinda sucked people would have come in here and said, well yeah it did and that would be that.

Maybe a few of us would have made jokes about how dumb "the masses" were for seeing a movie this awful.

Then we would have spent a few minutes tearing the thing apart because it was a lowest common denominator targeted bland and boring comedy with no real redeeming qualities.

And you know what, a few of us would be pissed that shit like Wild Hogs was making a lot of money while some other better film was languishing in the theaters at the same time.

And everyone would have pretty much agreed.

And in my mind (and I would guess a lot of the other "snobbish" Avatar haters) the only difference between Wild Hogs and Avatar is that there was no fancy CGI or amazing 3D to mask how bad the story and acting was in Wild Hogs (unless you count John Travolta's hair piece).

To me. Avatar was just another shitty movie in a long line of shitty movies that "the masses" flocked to see while better movies were being overlooked.

And I would be fine if someone came in here and said that the movie was flawed but they still enjoyed it. But as a serious fan of film for someone to claim that it was "the best movie of the year" is insulting.

Again. I mean seriously. How would you have reacted if someone had came on the board a few years back and said, "Dude, Catwoman was the greatest movie of the year. It was way better than Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and a way better superhero film than The Incredibles was."

I think my head would explode. That's all I'm saying.

I guess I'm not a serious fan of film. I'm one of "the masses", when I watch a movie I either like it or I don't. For me it doesn't go much beyond that.

I liked avatar a lot. Yes, the story is Dances with Smurfs but there was so much more to the movie than plot. I saw things in that movie I had never seen done before. It's a truely revolutionary film.

bartleby
05-08-2010, 02:25 PM
Why doesn't it?

How can a movie that appeals to hundreds of millions of people and just recently set records for DVD and Blu-ray sales be a 'bad' film?

Quality of a movie isn't purely subjective. There are criterion by which it can be measured objectively. Liking something isn't synonymous with something being good. You can like something that's bad and not like something that's good. Just because more people like it than dislike it, it doesn't make it good.

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 02:26 PM
Because its not a very good film.

Wait. How about this:

Snuggies appeal to millions of people. It still doesn't make it a good product.

McDonalds appeals to billions of people. It still doesn't make it good. Or food. ;)


It doesn't have a very good plot. It is, however, an excellent film. There is a lot more to a movie than story. What it does well makes up for what it lacks.

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 02:32 PM
Quality of a movie isn't purely subjective. There are criterion by which it can be measured objectively. Liking something isn't synonymous with something being good. You can like something that's bad and not like something that's good. Just because more people like it than dislike it, it doesn't make it good.

Well said. I love lots of movies that I know are really bad.


It doesn't have a very good plot. It is, however, an excellent film. There is a lot more to a movie than story. What it does well makes up for what it lacks.

I agree that the special effects are really great. But I don't think that makes up for how bad the script is. And the script (in my opinion) is the basis for a film. If the script is bad it's almost impossible to make a great movie out of it.

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 02:40 PM
I agree that the special effects are really great. But I don't think that makes up for how bad the script is. And the script (in my opinion) is the basis for a film. If the script is bad it's almost impossible to make a great movie out of it.

Not for me.

Fifth Element had a bad script and I love that film. The story in Fifth Element is complete garbage, and it has one of the worst endings I can think of.

I completely overlook the script though because I love everything else about it. The atmosphere, the sets, the costumes, the music, the acting. I love Fifth Element. I've watched it 20 times and I'll probably watch it 20 more.

A script is just a component. It doesn't make or break a movie.

Xander Boune
05-08-2010, 02:42 PM
Haters gonna hate

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 02:45 PM
Not for me.

Fifth Element had a bad script and I love that film. The story in Fifth Element is complete garbage, and it has one of the worst endings I can think of.

I completely overlook the script though because I love everything else about it. The atmosphere, the sets, the costumes, the music, the acting. I love Fifth Element. I've watched it 20 times and I'll probably watch it 20 more.

A script is just a component. It doesn't make or break a movie.

I love The Fifth Element as well. But I would argue that I love The Fifth Element in spite of (or maybe because of) how bad it is. I acknowledge that it's a bad movie and love it anyway.

Just like I like Avatar in spite of it being a bad film.

My beef is not with people who like Avatar. My beef is with people who think that it's actually a good movie.

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 02:47 PM
Quality of a movie isn't purely subjective. There are criterion by which it can be measured objectively. Liking something isn't synonymous with something being good. You can like something that's bad and not like something that's good. Just because more people like it than dislike it, it doesn't make it good.

Shouldn't all the pieces of a movie be weighted before an overall objective judgement of good or bad is given?

Acting, direction, set design, special effects, ect. Avatar more than excelled at most aspects a film can. It literally broke new ground. I think people who say (not that you are one of them Bart) "I didn't like the story. Fail" are being unfair to the film and those who worked on it.

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 02:52 PM
Shouldn't all the pieces of a movie be weighted before an overall objective judgement of good or bad is given?

Acting, direction, set design, special effects, ect. Avatar more than excelled at most aspects a film can. It literally broke new ground. I think people who say (not that you are one of them Bart) "I didn't like the story. Fail" are being unfair to the film and those who worked on it.

CGI was brilliant.

Acting was bad. Plot was boring and predictable. Diolouge was bad. And the direction was so technical (and that aspect was good) that it didn't manage to bring any real heart to the film (in my opinion).

It stole many of it's only strong elements from previous films and characters. To me the overall was more bad than good. So much of it (like the set design which just felt like warmed over Aliens sets) was just poached from better movies so I don't count it as a redeeming aspect of the movie.

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 02:54 PM
I love The Fifth Element as well. But I would argue that I love The Fifth Element in spite of (or maybe because of) how bad it is. I acknowledge that it's a bad movie and love it anyway.

Just like I like Avatar in spite of it being a bad film.

My beef is not with people who like Avatar. My beef is with people who think that it's actually a good movie.

I disagree with the label 'bad movie' being applied to Fifth Element. It's really not a bad movie, it simply has a bad plot. Much like other good movies might have bad special effects or bad acting. Movies can overcome bad elements and be good on the whole.

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 02:57 PM
CGI was brilliant.

Acting was bad. Plot was boring and predictable. Diolouge was bad. And the direction was so technical (and that aspect was good) that it didn't manage to bring any real heart to the film (in my opinion).

It stole many of it's only strong elements from previous films and characters. To me the overall was more bad than good. So much of it (like the set design which just felt like warmed over Aliens sets) was just poached from better movies so I don't count it as a redeeming aspect of the movie.

Ah, that's where we disagree then. I think the acting was fine, Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana, Sigourney Weaver all did a good job. The set design blew me away, I loved it. The atmosphere of the film was great. Can't complain about sound. I liked the direction too, I'm a big fan of Cameron as a director.

Xander Boune
05-08-2010, 02:58 PM
My beef is not with people who like Avatar. My beef is with people who think that it's actually a good movie.

It's a Golden Globe best picture winner and a Oscar best picture nominee, holds 82% on rotten tomatoes and an 84 on Metacritic. There is obviously more to this movie than the specific criteria you wish to judge it on, and you calling it a bad movie doesn't make it one.

Fake Pat
05-08-2010, 02:59 PM
It's a Golden Globe best picture winner and a Oscar best picture nominee, holds 82% on rotten tomatoes and an 84 on Metacritic. There is obviously more to this movie than the specific criteria you wish to judge it on, and you calling it a bad movie doesn't make it one.

All that proves is that people like it.

Again, people like it =/= good.

Xander Boune
05-08-2010, 03:00 PM
Quality of a movie isn't purely subjective. There are criterion by which it can be measured objectively. Liking something isn't synonymous with something being good. You can like something that's bad and not like something that's good. Just because more people like it than dislike it, it doesn't make it good.

Since you gave it 4.5/5 stars, did you just really really like it or did you think it was a very good movie?

Xander Boune
05-08-2010, 03:01 PM
All that proves is that people like it.

Again, people like it =/= good.

Aren't the consensus of critics and awards won the way that people can generally agree that something is good?

Foolish Mortal
05-08-2010, 03:03 PM
My beef is not with people who like Avatar. My beef is with people who think that it's actually a good movie.
I have less of a beef with people who want to say it's a good movie, and more of a beef with people who want to say it's one of the best of 2009, or THE best of 2009.


Shouldn't all the pieces of a movie be weighted before an overall objective judgement of good or bad is given?

Acting, direction, set design, special effects, ect. Avatar more than excelled at most aspects a film can. It literally broke new ground. I think people who say (not that you are one of them Bart) "I didn't like the story. Fail" are being unfair to the film and those who worked on it.
I'm not taking any credit away from Avatar's technical achievements. It deserves every accolade and every bit of recognition it gets for it's technical achievements.

But to say Avatar as a whole is better than The Hurt Locker, Inglorious Basterds, Up in the Air, A Serious Man, or Up, I say it is not better than them.

Fake Pat
05-08-2010, 03:05 PM
Aren't the consensus of critics and awards won the way that people can generally agree that something is good?

No, not necessarily.

Xander Boune
05-08-2010, 03:06 PM
No, not necessarily.

Well if there are no reasonable metrics then good is entirely subjective and not worth arguing about.

Fake Pat
05-08-2010, 03:07 PM
If technical acheivements alone can make something a great movie, Final Fantasy XIII is Oscar-worthy.

Fake Pat
05-08-2010, 03:08 PM
Well if there are no reasonable metrics then good is entirely subjective and not worth arguing about.

No, you can make good, objective arguments about the merits of art without citing other people's opinions.

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 03:11 PM
No, you can make good, objective arguments about the merits of art without citing other people's opinions.

You can but Xander is right. The consensus of critics and awards won is the way people generally agree that something is good.

bartleby
05-08-2010, 03:12 PM
Since you gave it 4.5/5 stars, did you just really really like it or did you think it was a very good movie?

I haven't been speaking in specific terms related just to AVATAR. Everything I've said in this thread was taking a discussion about AVATAR and extrapolating it to the general concept of film criticism.


Yeah, I gave AVATAR 4.5 stars, based mostly on the technical spectacle of it. As time has passed, my disdain for the other elements has caused me to temper my opinion of the film overall. Because so much of what I like about AVATAR was the 3-D presentation, I doubt I'll ever watch it again, unless I eventually buy a 3-D television.

But to answer your question, I rate movies based on how much I liked them. I don't think assigning a numerical value does film criticism justice.

Fake Pat
05-08-2010, 03:14 PM
You can but Xander is right. The consensus of critics and awards won is the way people generally agree that something is good.

Majority opinion doesn't mean a thing beyond "most people think this".

Foolish Mortal
05-08-2010, 03:19 PM
You can but Xander is right. The consensus of critics and awards won is the way people generally agree that something is good.
The general opinion of Crash was about 50/50. Half hated it, half loved it. There was enough there to get it an Oscar nomination.

Just shows you don't necessarily need to have a consensus to get an Oscar nod.

Fake Pat
05-08-2010, 03:20 PM
The general opinion of Crash was about 50/50. Half hated it, half loved it. There was enough there to get it an Oscar nomination.

Just shows you don't necessarily need to have a consensus to get an Oscar nod.

Now THAT'S a shitty movie. :)

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 03:30 PM
The general opinion of Crash was about 50/50. Half hated it, half loved it. There was enough there to get it an Oscar nomination.

Just shows you don't necessarily need to have a consensus to get an Oscar nod.

Crash is at 76% on Rotten Tomato. 196 critics. 148 liked it, 48 didn't.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1144992-crash/

The Oscar's are simply one award of many though. It's a consensus of critics and awards won that matters. Otherwise, as Xander also said, if there are no reasonable metrics then good is entirely subjective and not worth arguing about.

Xander, you're on a roll today. :)

JamesV
05-08-2010, 03:54 PM
At this point I'm confused... If the movie makes a lot of money and a lot of people see it does it make it good?

Or if a whole bunch of critics and awards say its good, its good?

Cause a lot of times.. those are diametrically opposed to each other...

Gideon Gloom
05-08-2010, 04:05 PM
I heard that after Avatar hit DVD the motion picture academy has decided to no longer hold the Oscars/Academy Awards. They figured that no more movies worth any sort of awards will ever be made now because story has been killed.

Ah now, Mr Pimp (if, indeed, that is your real name), I'm willing to guess you got the point I was trying to make. Agreeing with it, of course, is a different matter. Disagreeing is perfectly fine, but, to borrow an old line, sarcasm is the last refuge of the imaginatively bankrupt, particularly when it's as weak as the above! ;)

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 04:13 PM
Ah now, Mr Pimp (if, indeed, that is your real name), I'm willing to guess you got the point I was trying to make. Agreeing with it, of course, is a different matter. Disagreeing is perfectly fine, but, to borrow an old line, sarcasm is the last refuge of the imaginatively bankrupt, particularly when it's as weak as the above! ;)

10 commas in 3 sentences. Well done sir! :eek:

Ryan Elliott
05-08-2010, 04:17 PM
10 commas in 3 sentences. Well done sir! :eek:


Commas, are pretty, awesome, T,hu,d,.

Gideon Gloom
05-08-2010, 04:19 PM
When I read all of the posts in this thread, I shook my head and shed a quiet tear for another nail in the coffin of hyperbole! :surrend:




My point is that not everything has to be THE BEST or THE WORST. Nor does everyone's opinion of something have to fall in line. But clearly there is a segment that thinks something is the greatest thing it the world proven by the fact that Avatar is the highest grossing film of ALL TIME -- somewhere where hyperbole is appropriate. There is also a segment that feels it's shit (let's call them the vocal minority). Then can we at least agree that the fact that more than $2-Billion worth of international movie-goers paid to see this movie time and again and the fact that the Motion Picture Academy nominated it for many awards, including Best Picture, means that the movie certainly has its merits and deserves praise. Like it or not, it's like nothing we have seen before and will influence what we see in the movies from now on.

Looking at how you started that post, it seems you still have a bee in your bonnet (bug up your ass is perhaps the appropriate phrase for Americans) about my earlier post on Avatar's success and my views on the quality of its story, or lack thereof. Considering how you follow it up, I feel the need to clarify, as least as it relates to me and my views. I couldn't agree more that not everything has to be the best or the worst. The tendency to label everything under the "it's awesome" or "it sucks" system makes me tear my hair out, as it is a dreadful short-cut to thinking.

As for Avatar, spectacular effects, the 3-D thing was fun, but the acting, characterisation, and story were appalling... to me. I've seen worse movies this year, and no doubt will see worse again, and it wasn't without merit, but I just think it was and is a shame that more often than not you can plot an almost perfectly inverse relationship between size of budget and quality of story. And, yes, I know this a subjective judgment... That's kind of assumed.

Gideon Gloom
05-08-2010, 04:21 PM
10 commas in 3 sentences. Well done sir! :eek:

Unfortunately, you'll be disappointed with my follow-up post. I just couldn't maintain that kind of standard, y'know?

Gideon Gloom
05-08-2010, 04:22 PM
10 commas in 3 sentences. Well done sir! :eek:

And, in my defence, it's gone 1am over here, and I have had several beers. This attentiveness to commas in the midst of a booze haze probably reveals terrible things about my personality, but, c'est la vie!

Stark Raving
05-08-2010, 04:29 PM
I find this thread thoroughly entertaining.

Carry on...

Ryan Elliott
05-08-2010, 04:30 PM
I find this thread thoroughly entertaining.

Carry on...


More entertaining than Avatar!

Hey-Oh!

Thudpucker
05-08-2010, 04:38 PM
I find this thread thoroughly entertaining.

Carry on...

Would you like it in a house?
Would you like it with a mouse?

Foolish Mortal
05-08-2010, 04:47 PM
Crash is at 76% on Rotten Tomato. 196 critics. 148 liked it, 48 didn't.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1144992-crash/
The problem with that is a lot of critics that slammed Crash, and some even put it on their "worst of the year" lists aren't tracked by RT.

King of Mars
05-08-2010, 05:00 PM
If technical acheivements alone can make something a great movie, Final Fantasy XIII is Oscar-worthy.The film isn't just a technical achievement, it's an example of superb, visual storytelling.

Fake Pat
05-08-2010, 05:03 PM
The film isn't just a technical achievement, it's an example of superb, visual storytelling.

I agree.

edit: whoops, i though you said "a film", not "the film".

Tom Burgos
05-08-2010, 05:04 PM
More entertaining than Avatar!

Hey-Oh!
This thread is certainly more successful than that Wolfman turkey!

Hey-Oh!

Fake Pat
05-08-2010, 05:05 PM
I read a great article one time about how Avatar is terrible because it's completely self-defeating.

I'm gonna try and dig it up.

Tom Burgos
05-08-2010, 05:08 PM
I love The Fifth Element as well. But I would argue that I love The Fifth Element in spite of (or maybe because of) how bad it is. I acknowledge that it's a bad movie and love it anyway.

Just like I like Avatar in spite of it being a bad film.

My beef is not with people who like Avatar. My beef is with people who think that it's actually a good movie.

Wow. So in other words, you have a beef with people who have an opinion that differs from yours regarding Avatar.

Does that mean you hate me? Cuz I still think AVATAR was indeed the best film of 2009.

Ryan Elliott
05-08-2010, 05:09 PM
This thread is certainly more successful than that Wolfman turkey!

Hey-Oh!


http://www.marriedtothesea.com/052806/small-n-bitter.gif

JamesV
05-08-2010, 05:10 PM
That is the creepiest fucking thing I've seen in a wild. Jesus Christ that Granny is gonna haunt my dreams.

Tom Burgos
05-08-2010, 05:13 PM
That granma is creepy yet funny!

Fake Pat
05-08-2010, 05:19 PM
It's driving me crazy trying to find that article, but the basic point is that Avatar was flawed from step one because the film itself destroys it's own point. It's "technology < nature", but all the "nature" is just technology. It's "Look at this bitchin' tree we made on the computer! Doesn't nature rule?".

Reminds me a lot of "Funny Games". You're gonna have a pretty hard convincing me that a movie that disproves it's own point is the "best" anything.

Ryan Elliott
05-08-2010, 05:34 PM
That is the creepiest fucking thing I've seen in a wild. Jesus Christ that Granny is gonna haunt my dreams.


I think she's holding a knife too.

The Hodag
05-08-2010, 05:55 PM
It's driving me crazy trying to find that article, but the basic point is that Avatar was flawed from step one because the film itself destroys it's own point. It's "technology < nature", but all the "nature" is just technology. It's "Look at this bitchin' tree we made on the computer! Doesn't nature rule?".

That might be overthinking it (though I'd be interested to read the article). Avatar's super green, very pro-environment, but is it actually anti-technology?

Why should techology be off limits to promote an environmental agenda anyway? Does the National Geographic Society need to take down its website? Are computer graphics taboo on nature specials?

I'm not saying Avatar's some airtight environmental fable - it's filled with dopey messages and overly enamored of primitive culture - but in the end Cameron was just using his particular talents and financial resources to instill in audiences an awe of nature. Unless he mowed down a rainforest to do it, who're we to say he's wrong?

oconnellmd
05-08-2010, 06:00 PM
Main problem I've always had was with the length.

And you honestly expect me to NOT drop a "that's what she said" here? You put a bow on top of it!

:)

dmh3000
05-08-2010, 06:25 PM
And you honestly expect me to NOT drop a "that's what she said" here? You put a bow on top of it!

:)

Yeah, I pretty much walked right into that one.

(That one too).

JoeE
05-08-2010, 06:27 PM
It's driving me crazy trying to find that article, but the basic point is that Avatar was flawed from step one because the film itself destroys it's own point. It's "technology < nature", but all the "nature" is just technology. It's "Look at this bitchin' tree we made on the computer! Doesn't nature rule?".

Reminds me a lot of "Funny Games". You're gonna have a pretty hard convincing me that a movie that disproves it's own point is the "best" anything.

Using that same logic (which I kind of agree with), an even bigger issue is that Jake Sully's transformation is possible only through the use of human technology.

stevapalooza
05-08-2010, 06:44 PM
I was disappointed that none of the blue things ever rapped. When I see a CGI creature I expect it to rap at some point. Call me crazy.

dmh3000
05-08-2010, 06:49 PM
I was disappointed that none of the blue things ever rapped. When I see a CGI creature I expect it to rap at some point. Call me crazy.

And then get a shotgun to the head?

Wigner's Friend
05-08-2010, 06:52 PM
I like Avatar as a special effects blockbuster, but it's story talks down to the audience with such disdain that I could never love it. Comparing the simplistic story structure and cardboard cutout characters with other stories with similar premises and it really falls apart. Heart of Darkness, Rio Grande, Lawrence of Arabia, To Kill a Mockingbird, and District 9 hit on the complexities of identity as well as the mutual interactions between two cultures with separate values.

LeggoMyEggolas
05-08-2010, 07:06 PM
I like Avatar as a special effects blockbuster, but it's story talks down to the audience with such disdain that I could never love it. Comparing the simplistic story structure and cardboard cutout characters with other stories with similar premises and it really falls apart. Heart of Darkness, Rio Grande, Lawrence of Arabia, To Kill a Mockingbird, and District 9 hit on the complexities of identity as well as the mutual interactions between two cultures with separate values.

Pretty much my feelings on it. Now I won't begrudge those that do like it, and I can't deny the technical achievement of the movie, but the subtle-as-a-sledgehammer message is a bit off-putting. And similarly, I felt District 9 handled a similar story much, much better.

Pia Guerra
05-08-2010, 07:12 PM
Highest grossing is not the same as highest attendance. Sure it made a lot of money since it costs more to see it in 3-D and IMAX, but as far as butts in seats goes, Avatar didn't even beat the Graduate. (http://mrob.com/pub/film-video/topadj.html)

My subjective opinion: it sucks. It's a suckedity suck suck suckfest. Hated it in the theater, have no interest in seeing it ever again. Bleagh.

And King Kong is too damn long. I remember turning it on at the cove scene when they captured Kong, watched it from that point on and damn, brilliant movie. Really, the Skull Island stuff doesn't even need to be there.

dmh3000
05-08-2010, 07:53 PM
Highest grossing is not the same as highest attendance. Sure it made a lot of money since it costs more to see it in 3-D and IMAX, but as far as butts in seats goes, Avatar didn't even beat the Graduate. (http://mrob.com/pub/film-video/topadj.html)


Yeah, but the point is it made money. What would you rather invest in? A movie that'll make money but sucks, or a movie that won't make as much money but is good?

Does anyone have any links to James Cameron commenting on reviews and opinions of people that didn't like it? Does he agree with them or does he think it's a masterpiece? I'd just like to see his opinion, since this was something he put his heart into.

michealdark
05-08-2010, 07:59 PM
I think it's terrible that they come up with this big ass production with all these killer effects and this really preachy "save our resources, including our native peoples" story, and the DVD comes out with NO SPECIAL FEATURES! Fuck that. I don't care if the movie's good or not, I'm interested in the background of the story, the special effects, the production, etc. This is a movie where so much of that takes up the bulk of it, and you don't let us in on the secrets? Fuck you, James Cameron. I am not buying your movie until you give me special features.

stephenp01
05-08-2010, 08:00 PM
I'm glad I saw it in the theater because the story is ok but I was just going for the 3-D that I'd heard so much about. And it was impressive. I might buy it someday but no time soon.

Stupendous Man
05-08-2010, 08:06 PM
But more importantly, does anyone still like Peter Jackson's King Kong now that we've had five years to reflect on its badness?

I love King Kong! Come on, it's got Kong fighting T-Rexs, three of them! what more do you people want?

Joe Kalicki
05-08-2010, 08:07 PM
I love King Kong! Come on, it's got Kong fighting T-Rexs, three of them! what more do you people want?

The problem with King Kong is that people actually wanted less, not more.

Stupendous Man
05-08-2010, 08:14 PM
I love The Fifth Element as well. But I would argue that I love The Fifth Element in spite of (or maybe because of) how bad it is. I acknowledge that it's a bad movie and love it anyway.

Just like I like Avatar in spite of it being a bad film.

My beef is not with people who like Avatar. My beef is with people who think that it's actually a good movie.

fifth element is bad?? This is news to me.

Pia Guerra
05-08-2010, 08:15 PM
Yeah, but the point is it made money. What would you rather invest in? A movie that'll make money but sucks, or a movie that won't make as much money but is good?

Does anyone have any links to James Cameron commenting on reviews and opinions of people that didn't like it? Does he agree with them or does he think it's a masterpiece? I'd just like to see his opinion, since this was something he put his heart into.

I guess I just don't see all that heart, or at least nowhere near as much as say, the Abyss, the first movie he claimed was something he wanted to do since he was 17 and was way more engaging. And oh yeah, it didn't costs a gazillion dollars because the flashiest bit of CG was the water tentacle and the rest was interesting in-camera and underwater effects. I mean, come on, who didn't hold their breath during that gutwrenching drowning scene?

The characters in Avatar were cardboard cutout jokes, couldn't relate to any of them. At all.

Foolish Mortal
05-08-2010, 08:17 PM
I guess I just don't see all that heart, or at least nowhere near as much as say, the Abyss, the first movie he claimed was something he wanted to do since he was 17 and was way more engaging. And oh yeah, it didn't costs a gazillion dollars because the flashiest bit of CG was the water tentacle and the rest was interesting in-camera and underwater effects. I mean, come on, who didn't hold their breath during that gutwrenching drowning scene?

The characters in Avatar were cardboard cutout jokes, couldn't relate to any of them. At all.
The Abyss by far is Cameron's best work. The director's cut is especially good.

Rod Nunley
05-08-2010, 09:23 PM
The film isn't just a technical achievement, it's an example of superb, visual storytelling.

I can agree with this. You could almost reedit the film with no dialogue and make it a really cool silent movie. I guess I just don't think that Cameron had a great grasp on the script and it drove me nuts. Bad scripts just take me right out of a movie.


Wow. So in other words, you have a beef with people who have an opinion that differs from yours regarding Avatar.

Does that mean you hate me? Cuz I still think AVATAR was indeed the best film of 2009.

Nah. Beef was just the first thing that came to my mind. I will say that it boogles my mind when people love something that I didn't like or that I just hated. I can't wrap my head around someone liking something that I really don't.

I don't hate or disprove of anyone who likes a movie I don't like. Hell, my wife loves The Mighty Ducks and I still manage to sleep in the same bed as her. ;) Everyone's entitled to their opinion, even if I don't understand it I suppose.


I like Avatar as a special effects blockbuster, but it's story talks down to the audience with such disdain that I could never love it. Comparing the simplistic story structure and cardboard cutout characters with other stories with similar premises and it really falls apart. Heart of Darkness, Rio Grande, Lawrence of Arabia, To Kill a Mockingbird, and District 9 hit on the complexities of identity as well as the mutual interactions between two cultures with separate values.

Well said. I really like James Cameron movies. I guess I was also really disappointing that he did something so cliche and simple with a story that had the potential to be so great. I feel like Avatar just didn't measure up to his other work.


fifth element is bad?? This is news to me.

Bad in that it's pulpy silly sci fi stuff. It's over the top and all over the place but has so much fun that it doesn't matter in the least. I actually really love that movie but would also argue that it's not a particularly good film.

The Hodag
05-08-2010, 09:30 PM
Bad in that it's pulpy silly sci fi stuff. It's over the top and all over the place but has so much fun that it doesn't matter in the least. I actually really love that movie but would also argue that it's not a particularly good film.

I think that's pretty much the case. I heard that Besson based it on some story he wrote as a kid, and it feels that way, but the execution's a ton of fun.

I do waver on whether or not Ruby Rhod was just a horrible fucking mistake, though. I mean, I've learned to live with him in a way I never could with, say, Jar Jar, but he gets waaaaaaaay too much screentime. I'd rather have spent that screentime with most any other character. Bruce, Milla, Oldman, the Priest, even the "Wake up, time to die" guy from Blade Runner. :lol:

NeverWanderer
05-08-2010, 09:48 PM
Bad in that it's pulpy silly sci fi stuff. It's over the top and all over the place but has so much fun that it doesn't matter in the least. I actually really love that movie but would also argue that it's not a particularly good film.

Does that really make it "bad" though? :) I love almost everything about that movie, from the crazy design to the outrageous characters to the simple love story... it just hits all the right notes with me. It's not serious or psychologically complex or possessing of any kind of underlying message other than "Love is good, and being a good person is generally pretty cool" (which maybe turns off the more cynical audiences), but it never struck me as aspiring to anything like that. It's a simple, fun, positively-empowered sci-fi fantasy movie. The acting fits the tone, the writing is fun and clever, and the pacing and general filmmaking are solid... how is that bad? :)


I think that's pretty much the case. I heard that Besson based it on some story he wrote as a kid, and it feels that way, but the execution's a ton of fun.

I do waver on whether or not Ruby Rhod was just a horrible fucking mistake, though. I mean, I've learned to live with him in a way I never could with, say, Jar Jar, but he gets waaaaaaaay too much screentime. I'd rather have spent that screentime with most any other character. Bruce, Milla, Oldman, the Priest, even the "Wake up, time to die" guy from Blade Runner. :lol:

See my above rant (which ended up longer than I'd originally intended) for why I love Ruby. He's funny! Along with the universal "Bad" gauge, there seems to be this belief that "if it's loud, it can't be funny." To that I say pfeh. "The Jerk" was loud, and people love that flick. I think Ruby Rhod was great. The perfect comedic note for that movie. :)

dmh3000
05-08-2010, 10:42 PM
I guess I just don't see all that heart, or at least nowhere near as much as say, the Abyss, the first movie he claimed was something he wanted to do since he was 17 and was way more engaging. And oh yeah, it didn't costs a gazillion dollars because the flashiest bit of CG was the water tentacle and the rest was interesting in-camera and underwater effects. I mean, come on, who didn't hold their breath during that gutwrenching drowning scene?

The characters in Avatar were cardboard cutout jokes, couldn't relate to any of them. At all.

Guess it could be a new marketing scheme he was trying. "If I say I put my heart and soul into this, maybe people will want to see it more."

The Hodag
05-08-2010, 10:52 PM
Does that really make it "bad" though? :) I love almost everything about that movie, from the crazy design to the outrageous characters to the simple love story... it just hits all the right notes with me. It's not serious or psychologically complex or possessing of any kind of underlying message other than "Love is good, and being a good person is generally pretty cool" (which maybe turns off the more cynical audiences), but it never struck me as aspiring to anything like that. It's a simple, fun, positively-empowered sci-fi fantasy movie. The acting fits the tone, the writing is fun and clever, and the pacing and general filmmaking are solid... how is that bad? :)

I don't think anyone here thinks it's bad. In fact it's one of the more universal liked movies I know.

But would I have liked it more with a stronger story, sharper comedy, and less Ruby Rhod? I think so. I know the raucousness is part of the appeal for many, but I think the delivery could've been smarter, slyer, funnier, cooler.


See my above rant (which ended up longer than I'd originally intended) for why I love Ruby. He's funny! Along with the universal "Bad" gauge, there seems to be this belief that "if it's loud, it can't be funny." To that I say pfeh. "The Jerk" was loud, and people love that flick.

I wouldn't say "can't be funny," but I'd probably say "is less funny to me." I like The Jerk, though. When I was a kid it made me cry at the end, but then I was happy 'cause the built themselves a bigger house.


I think Ruby Rhod was great. The perfect comedic note for that movie. :)

Bzt. Bzzzt! BZZZT!

Marc Lombardi
05-09-2010, 03:56 AM
The majority of people who watch movies like most of the movies they watch. That doesn't make the movies good.
Not true. If the person likes the movie then the movie is good to them. What you should have said is "The majority of people who watch movies like most of the movies they watch. That doesn't mean I think those movies are good."

Marc Lombardi
05-09-2010, 04:02 AM
Snuggies appeal to millions of people. It still doesn't make it a good product.
Yes it does. You may not like the idea of one but it sells a shitload of products and the people who like it are happy. Therefore, "good" product.


McDonalds appeals to billions of people. It still doesn't make it good. Or food. ;)
Again, it may not be GOOD for you but enough people buy it often enough for me to call it "good" food.

A lot of people here seem to be hung up on the idea that just because they DON'T like something that it cannot possibly be "good." Good is an OPINION. When a vast majority of people call something good then it should be universally understood that said thing is considered "good."

Going back to what THWIP said: If 4/5th of the world started eating SHIT...actual shit...because they liked it, then YES, the idea is that the general consensus believed shit was good, therefore making shit good.

Marc Lombardi
05-09-2010, 04:04 AM
Quality of a movie isn't purely subjective. There are criterion by which it can be measured objectively. Liking something isn't synonymous with something being good. You can like something that's bad and not like something that's good. Just because more people like it than dislike it, it doesn't make it good.

Wrong. Define good for me. Define quality.

Foolish Mortal
05-09-2010, 04:32 AM
When I think of the Fifth Element, I remember....nothing.

And that's the problem with it. There's nothing memorable about it. It's like cotton candy. It looks amazing, and is cool to eat, but ultimately it's without any substantive, lasting value.

The thing I remember most about it is the one reviewer who said it was "This generation's 'Star Wars'!" :lol:

bartleby
05-09-2010, 04:44 AM
When I think of the Fifth Element, I remember....nothing.

And that's the problem with it. There's nothing memorable about it. It's like cotton candy. It looks amazing, and is cool to eat, but ultimately it's without any substantive, lasting value.

The thing I remember most about it is the one reviewer who said it was "This generation's 'Star Wars'!" :lol:

Everybody knows that this generation's STAR WARS is AVATAR...and by everybody, I mostly mean Tom Burgos.

Gideon Gloom
05-09-2010, 05:43 AM
Everybody knows that this generation's STAR WARS is AVATAR...and by everybody, I mostly mean Tom Burgos.

Jesus, does that mean five more fucking movies and enough merchandising spin-offs to make your head spin? Christ, I wonder what Cameron's equivalent of the Ewoks will be... *shudder*

that bastard
05-09-2010, 06:18 AM
I wouldn't say AVATAR "sucked" but I think it got a bit blown out of proportion by people. Kind of like that year GLADIATOR won best picture. I remember sitting there like "REALLY? Gladiator? SERIOUSLY?" I mean, it was good, but it wasn't THAT good.

AVATAR was beautiful. Of that, there is no argument. I think the CGI environments and creatures were MUCH better than the Navi (The Navi still seemed to have that "We're CGI" stiffness to them which was odd because, again, the animals and environments were awesome. But as a TECHNICAL achievement it is top drawer, no doubt about it.

The main issue I have is that it's really nothing new, story-wise. FORGETTING the fact that, yes, it is blatantly FERN GULLY meets POCAHONTAS, it is also derivative of James Cameron's OWN movies primarily ALIENS. And not just a LITTLE...

Tough-as-nails Latino woman? CHECK
Clueless company man? CHECK
Ellen Ripley? CHECK (come on...She was Ellen Ripley with a sociology degree).
Space Marines? CHECK
Intergalactic Mining Company? CHECK
etc. etc. etc.

The way I got around this, mindset-wise, was just to assume that the mining company was just a branch of Wayland-Utani and this was going on during Ripley's stasis. I also decided that Sigourney Weaver's Dr. Grace Augustine was Ellen Ripley's daughter under an adopted name.

I just honestly had to do that. I liked the movie more after being in that mindset.

dmh3000
05-09-2010, 06:41 AM
When I think of the Fifth Element, I remember....nothing.

And that's the problem with it. There's nothing memorable about it. It's like cotton candy. It looks amazing, and is cool to eat, but ultimately it's without any substantive, lasting value.

The thing I remember most about it is the one reviewer who said it was "This generation's 'Star Wars'!" :lol:

I thought it was a fun little flick. Main thing I remember is the gun that shoots the target no matter where you're pointing it. And the bald villain, what's his name. And Mila Jovovich kicking ass in a skin tight suit that got wet at one point, but that could just be because I was 13 when I first saw it. Oh, and the fact that the only black main character (President was more secondary) was ineffectual comic relief.

If I ever did a big blockbuster action movie, it would be nothing but a two-dimensional action piece. Barely any story, half naked girls beating the crap out of each other while getting sprayed with water, lots of explosions and gun fire, some amusing dialogue and then Chuck Norris comes in and disarms a nuclear warhead by kicking it, even though not one part of that scene will make sense.

I just want something that can be enjoyed rather than dissected. And then I'll do all the character exploration and depth in the sequels, when I can have a bigger budget to satisfy the people who want special effects as well.

NeverWanderer
05-09-2010, 07:46 AM
And that's the problem with it. There's nothing memorable about it. It's like cotton candy. It looks amazing, and is cool to eat, but ultimately it's without any substantive, lasting value.


...to you. :)

I find it very memorable and possessing great value, as do many others. It touches on idealistic aspects of human nature that most people are too cynical to acknowledge anymore. Basic stuff, but y'know, sometimes the basics need revisiting. And not all of them have to be revisited by showing how horrible things would be otherwise; sometimes they can be revisited simply by embodying what they preach.

Foolish Mortal
05-09-2010, 07:48 AM
...to you. :)

I find it very memorable and possessing great value, as do many others. It touches on idealistic aspects of human nature that most people are too cynical to acknowledge anymore. Basic stuff, but y'know, sometimes the basics need revisiting. And not all of them have to be revisited by showing how horrible things would be otherwise; sometimes they can be revisited simply by embodying what they preach.
Well I'm glad it connected with you. It didn't with me.

NeverWanderer
05-09-2010, 07:53 AM
Well I'm glad it connected with you. It didn't with me.

It's too bad that it didn't connect with you, but, y'know, not everybody is gonna like everything. :)

I'm only defending against the generalized criticism. Person criticism is entirely in your court.

Foolish Mortal
05-09-2010, 07:56 AM
It's too bad that it didn't connect with you, but, y'know, not everybody is gonna like everything. :)

I'm only defending against the generalized criticism. Person criticism is entirely in your court.
All criticism is from a personal perspective. It only becomes general when like-minded criticisms are collected together in clumps.

Tom Burgos
05-09-2010, 08:07 AM
Everybody knows that this generation's STAR WARS is AVATAR...and by everybody, I mostly mean Tom Burgos.
LOL
At least I wasn't part of the bunch of people who called Serenity our generation's Star Wars (Talk about off the mark). And by 'bunch' I mostly mean Bartleby and the other two Browncoats who still claim that Serenity didn't flop... :)

bartleby
05-09-2010, 08:11 AM
LOL
At least I wasn't part of the bunch of people who called Serenity our generation's Star Wars (Talk about off the mark). And by 'bunch' I mostly mean Bartleby and the other two Browncoats who still claim that Serenity didn't flop... :)

Don't let facts hold you back. You know good and well I've never bullish about SERENITY's box office or cultural impact.

King of Mars
05-09-2010, 09:01 AM
I can agree with this. You could almost reedit the film with no dialogue and make it a really cool silent movie. I guess I just don't think that Cameron had a great grasp on the script and it drove me nuts. Bad scripts just take me right out of a movie.



I don't think the script was 'bad'. It was what it needed to be...a solid foundation for Cameron to build his visual masterpiece on. I'll concede that, on its own, the scripted material would probably seem rather pedestrian...but movies are a visual medium and Avatar is a great example of visual storytelling. There are a lot of examples, throughout cinematic history, of directors using their technical skill and vision to transcend the limitations of their scripted material and make great films. I think that's what Cameron did here.

The Human Target
05-09-2010, 09:06 AM
Man, I am so proud that this war is still going on.

I think I'm gonna have to go rent Avatar so I can play for real.

Tom Burgos
05-09-2010, 09:13 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100426/ap_en_mo/us_film_avatar_dvd

The Human Target
05-09-2010, 09:16 AM
Wouldn't it be trippy if I thought Avatar was really good after seeing it?

bartleby
05-09-2010, 09:17 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100426/ap_en_mo/us_film_avatar_dvd

I feel like we're running in circles here, but just because a lot of people liked something, it doesn't mean that it doesn't suck.

Tom Burgos
05-09-2010, 09:19 AM
Wouldn't it be trippy if I thought Avatar was really good after seeing it?

True. :)

Thudpucker
05-09-2010, 09:39 AM
I feel like we're running in circles here, but just because a lot of people liked something, it doesn't mean that it doesn't suck.

I present for your inspection these two posts:


Aren't the consensus of critics and awards won the way that people can generally agree that something is good?


Well if there are no reasonable metrics then good is entirely subjective and not worth arguing about.

I now direct you to Rotten Tomato:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/avatar/

Avatar is at 82%. 261 film critics reviewed the film. 214 of them say Avatar is a good film. Only 47 critics say it is a bad film.

Avatar is, objectively, a good film. It has been evaluated and labeled 'good' by a majority of movie experts.

Foolish Mortal
05-09-2010, 09:44 AM
Avatar is, objectively, a good film. Iti has been judged and found 'good' by a majority of film experts.
I would say in my objective opinion that Avatar is a good film. But it is not a great film, nor an Academy Award Best Picture worthy film.

When it lost to the Hurt Locker, it lost deservedly so.

Tom Burgos
05-09-2010, 09:50 AM
I present for your inspection these two posts:





I now direct you to Rotten Tomato:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/avatar/

Avatar is at 82%. 261 film critics reviewed the film. 214 of them say Avatar is a good film. Only 47 critics say it is a bad film.

Avatar is, objectively, a good film. It has been evaluated and labeled 'good' by a majority of movie experts.

But remember this is the benbo, and AVATAR wasn't a superhero film, an ultraviolent gorefest from Tarantino or directed by Whedon/Nolan/Apatow. Therefore it sucks... :)

Boris the Blade
05-09-2010, 09:58 AM
But remember this is the benbo, and AVATAR wasn't a superhero film, an ultraviolent gorefest from Tarantino or directed by Whedon/Nolan/Apatow. Therefore it sucks... :)
Why shit on the Bendis Board? I don't think those things you listed are universally beloved here either. Lots of people here liked Avatar. You post here too, you are representative of the board. It's not nice to shit on the board.

Foolish Mortal
05-09-2010, 09:59 AM
But remember this is the benbo, and AVATAR wasn't a superhero film, an ultraviolent gorefest from Tarantino or directed by Whedon/Nolan/Apatow. Therefore it sucks... :)
You're not good at analyzing consensuses. :no:

bartleby
05-09-2010, 10:00 AM
Avatar is, objectively, a good film. It has been evaluated and labeled 'good' by a majority of movie experts.

I don't necessarily disagree with that. Burgos was that the one that seemed to be making the point that it was good based on the number of Blu-Rays sold. That's an erroneous assumption. Sales figures don't necessarily indicate whether something is good or bad.

bartleby
05-09-2010, 10:02 AM
Why shit on the Bendis Board? I don't think those things you listed are universally beloved here either. Lots of people here liked Avatar. You post here too, you are representative of the board. It's not nice to shit on the board.

It's what he does. He gets all annoyed when someone disagrees with his tastes but constantly shits on other people's opinions, dismissing them as groupthink or people trying to appeal cool by what they claim to like.

Boris the Blade
05-09-2010, 10:05 AM
This thread is the Avatar of Avatar threads, because all it did was take elements from other Avatar threads, and while it may be entertaining, it is really just the same content, repackaged.

Snark. Snark.

Tom Burgos
05-09-2010, 10:07 AM
This thread is the Avatar of Avatar threads, because all it did was take elements from other Avatar threads, and while it may be entertaining, it is really just the same content, repackaged.

Snark. Snark.


Love it! :)

(But I doubt this thread will end up having more pages than any other thread in the history of the benbo anyway)

Boris the Blade
05-09-2010, 10:09 AM
Love it! :)

(But I doubt this thread will end up having more pages than any other thread in the history of the benbo anyway)

Certainly not once you adjust for inflation.

Tom Burgos
05-09-2010, 10:19 AM
Certainly not once you adjust for inflation.

Must be that stupid thread about Gone With The Wind or something... :mad:

Joe Kalicki
05-09-2010, 10:36 AM
The Fifth Element is a great movie.

King of Mars
05-09-2010, 11:02 AM
Wouldn't it be trippy if I thought Avatar was really good after seeing it?I will be stunned if you like Avatar. :)

King of Mars
05-09-2010, 11:13 AM
Why shit on the Bendis Board? I don't think those things you listed are universally beloved here either. Lots of people here liked Avatar. You post here too, you are representative of the board. It's not nice to shit on the board.I kinda see his point. It's strange to see people gushing over Kick-Ass and Iron Man 2 while, at the same time, bashing a groundbreaking film like Avatar. Of course, some of it can be attributed to different tastes and preferences, but I do think it's indicative of a general lack of objectivity in some folks.

Rod Nunley
05-09-2010, 11:45 AM
Here is what I decree. We are all right ... but we are also all wrong.

Always.

Tom Burgos
05-09-2010, 11:59 AM
Here is what I decree. We are all right ... but we are also all wrong.

Always.


And never.

:rock:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9b/Luigi_Pirandello.jpg

Rod Nunley
05-09-2010, 12:09 PM
And never.

:rock:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9b/Luigi_Pirandello.jpg

I disagree. ;)

russw
05-09-2010, 12:38 PM
Agreed. Also, watch it with Rifftrax.

Haven't seen the film and this the version I intend to watch....

Marc Lombardi
05-10-2010, 09:50 AM
I just want to add one more thing, a comparison between Avatar and another movie that many people here (and around the world) would consider to be a GOOD movie.

Avatar:
82% rating on Rotten Tomatoes (261 total reviews)
94% rating on Rotten Tomatoes among the top 36 critics on the site
$747,292,481 in domestic box office sales
4 Golden Globe nominations (including Picture & Director)
2 Golden Globe wins (Best Picture & Best Director)
9 Academy Award nominations (including Picture & Director)
3 Academy Award wins

Mystery "Good Movie"
94% rating on Rotten Tomatoes (269 total reviews)
90% rating on Rotten Tomatoes among the top 42 critics on the site
$553,316,061 Domestic box office sales
1 Golden Globe nomination
1 Golden Globe win
8 Academy Award nominations
2 Academy Award wins


Fairly comparable, right? Both around the same in box office domestically (if $200Million plus difference can be considered about the same), both recognized by the Academy and the Golden Globes as being worthy of nomations outside of the standard techincal categories (special effects & sound effect) for movies of this genre. Both critically acclaimed on Rotten Tomatoes with scores in the 90s among the top critics on the site.


That mystery movie is The Dark Knight. So it's hard to call one good and not the other. It's hard to call one bad and not the other. Regardless of what your own personal feelings may be towards either movie, the numbers and the facts show that both APPEAR to fall under the category of being a "good" movie.

Tom Burgos
05-10-2010, 09:56 AM
I just want to add one more thing, a comparison between Avatar and another movie that many people here (and around the world) would consider to be a GOOD movie.

Avatar:
82% rating on Rotten Tomatoes (261 total reviews)
94% rating on Rotten Tomatoes among the top 36 critics on the site
$747,292,481 in domestic box office sales
4 Golden Globe nominations (including Picture & Director)
2 Golden Globe wins (Best Picture & Best Director)
9 Academy Award nominations (including Picture & Director)
3 Academy Award wins

Mystery "Good Movie"
94% rating on Rotten Tomatoes (269 total reviews)
90% rating on Rotten Tomatoes among the top 42 critics on the site
$553,316,061 Domestic box office sales
1 Golden Globe nomination
1 Golden Globe win
8 Academy Award nominations
2 Academy Award wins


Fairly comparable, right? Both around the same in box office domestically (if $200Million plus difference can be considered about the same), both recognized by the Academy and the Golden Globes as being worthy of nomations outside of the standard techincal categories (special effects & sound effect) for movies of this genre. Both critically acclaimed on Rotten Tomatoes with scores in the 90s among the top critics on the site.


That mystery movie is The Dark Knight. So it's hard to call one good and not the other. It's hard to call one bad and not the other. Regardless of what your own personal feelings may be towards either movie, the numbers and the facts show that both APPEAR to fall under the category of being a "good" movie.

The main difference is that TDK is a superhero film directed by a fan-favorite. (And yes, I know someone will snarkily add "And an actual good film")
Add the fact that Cameron is generally regarded as an egomaniac douchebag, and he directed another film considered by many as "too crappy melodramatic and girly for all that box office and Oscars", that is the biggest-grossing film ever behind Avatar, and you can see why subjectivity could be part of the equation when it comes to all the fanboy backlash against Avatar.

Marcdachamp
05-10-2010, 10:32 AM
But more importantly, does anyone still like Peter Jackson's King Kong now that we've had five years to reflect on its badness?

Nope. Not at all.

PeterSparker
05-10-2010, 10:38 AM
Yes it does. You may not like the idea of one but it sells a shitload of products and the people who like it are happy. Therefore, "good" product.


Again, it may not be GOOD for you but enough people buy it often enough for me to call it "good" food.

For the previous decade the two best selling albums were The Beatles No 1's' followed closely by N'Sync's No Strings Attached. So that means that they are equally "good"? Nonsense. And that's using any objective criteria you want to apply. Just because a lot of people see, consume, or buy something means it must be "good"? How ridiculous.

So the fact that Citizen Kane was a box office dud means it must rate lower than Wild Hogs because more people paid money to see that? Makes no sense. A lot of people paid money to see Star Wars:Episode 1, doesn't make the film any more "good".





A lot of people here seem to be hung up on the idea that just because they DON'T like something that it cannot possibly be "good." Good is an OPINION. When a vast majority of people call something good then it should be universally understood that said thing is considered "good."

And a lot of people here seem to be hung up on the idea that just because they LIKE something that it can't possibly "suck".


Going back to what THWIP said: If 4/5th of the world started eating SHIT...actual shit...because they liked it, then YES, the idea is that the general consensus believed shit was good, therefore making shit good.

No, it would still be shit.



Just like Avatar.

Foolish Mortal
05-10-2010, 10:42 AM
The main difference is that TDK is a superhero film directed by a fan-favorite. (And yes, I know someone will snarkily add "And an actual good film")
Add the fact that Cameron is generally regarded as an egomaniac douchebag, and he directed another film considered by many as "too crappy melodramatic and girly for all that box office and Oscars", that is the biggest-grossing film ever behind Avatar, and you can see why subjectivity could be part of the equation when it comes to all the fanboy backlash against Avatar.
I have absolutely no personal beef with James Cameron. In my opinion, he wrote and directed two of the best science fiction films ever made.

This is about Avatar, and Avatar alone. I think it's a good, but heavily flawed movie.

Joe Kalicki
05-10-2010, 10:46 AM
I have absolutely no personal beef with James Cameron. In my opinion, he wrote and directed two of the best science fiction films ever made.

This is about Avatar, and Avatar alone. I think it's a good, but heavily flawed movie.

Which I think makes the comparison with TDK even more apt.

Taxman
05-10-2010, 10:57 AM
Which I think makes the comparison with TDK even more apt.Avatar vs. TDK, where to begin . . .

Both were incredibly ambitious in entirely different ways.

Avatar does not reach the heights of TDK, nor does it seem to putter out as did the other.

TDK has Nestor Carbonell, Avatar had Michelle Rodriguez. Michell Rodriguez dies in Avatar, so that's a plus.

Avatar succeeds where it was focused which was on the visual while TDK hiccups on the narrative which is where it seemed to be focused.

Still . . . pretty close.

Marc Lombardi
05-10-2010, 10:57 AM
For the previous decade the two best selling albums were The Beatles No 1's' followed closely by N'Sync's No Strings Attached. So that means that they are equally "good"? Nonsense. And that's using any objective criteria you want to apply. Just because a lot of people see, consume, or buy something means it must be "good"? How ridiculous.

While I understand that just because something sells and is popular it does not mean it is "good" to you, to the millions of people who purchase it that thing IS good...and if that group of people make the majority of the population of the world then there is some merit to saying that, yes, this means this must be "good." Why is that so hard for people to understand. Is spaghetti good? Is pizza good? Is beef teriyaki good? There are people who love all three. There are people who hate all three. But because there are more people who love them than hate them I think it's safe to say that they are good.


So the fact that Citizen Kane was a box office dud means it must rate lower than Wild Hogs because more people paid money to see that? Makes no sense. A lot of people paid money to see Star Wars:Episode 1, doesn't make the film any more "good".
Sales are not the ONLY determining factor and the post I put up today should give you some insight into where my information, and my belief that Avatar was a good movie, is backed up by others.


And a lot of people here seem to be hung up on the idea that just because they LIKE something that it can't possibly "suck".
And a lot of people seem hung up on the idea that because they don't like something that it MUST suck.


No, it would still be shit.

Just like Avatar.
I wasn't disputing whether shit was shit. I was saying that if enough people liked eating shit over and over again then there must be something that changed to make people believe that shit no longer tastes bad. Otherwise, why would they eat it over and over and over again?

PeterSparker
05-10-2010, 11:23 AM
While I understand that just because something sells and is popular it does not mean it is "good" to you, to the millions of people who purchase it that thing IS good...and if that group of people make the majority of the population of the world then there is some merit to saying that, yes, this means this must be "good." Why is that so hard for people to understand. Is spaghetti good? Is pizza good? Is beef teriyaki good? There are people who love all three. There are people who hate all three. But because there are more people who love them than hate them I think it's safe to say that they are good.
Sorry because a bunch of teenage girls buy something does not mean it is good at all, and not just to "me". Are cigarettes "good" because a lot of people smoke them? This line of thinking just makes zero sense to me.



Sales are not the ONLY determining factor and the post I put up today should give you some insight into where my information, and my belief that Avatar was a good movie, is backed up by others.

And my belief that it is a very bad movie is backed up by others. ?



And a lot of people seem hung up on the idea that because they don't like something that it MUST suck.
Nice try, but those people aren't the ones in some guys thread trying to explain to him how his opinion is wrong.



I wasn't disputing whether shit was shit. I was saying that if enough people liked eating shit over and over again then there must be something that changed to make people believe that shit no longer tastes bad. Otherwise, why would they eat it over and over and over again?

This hypothetical is just stupid on a few levels, but the one thing not in dispute is that it would still be shit. My point stands.

But we don't agree, lets leave it at that. I form my own opinions, I'm not looking for validation from the masses who flock to a whole series of films that I think suck. So I would never buy that argument no matter how many different ways you tried to present it.

JamesV
05-10-2010, 11:30 AM
Can we all just agree that Team Avatar-Good is the sparkles in sunlight side and Team Avatar-Not Good is the Werewolf side?

Rod Nunley
05-10-2010, 11:40 AM
I have absolutely no personal beef with James Cameron. In my opinion, he wrote and directed two of the best science fiction films ever made.

This is about Avatar, and Avatar alone. I think it's a good, but heavily flawed movie.

Oh yeah. T2 and Aliens are two of my all time favorite sci fi films. Dear god how I love them.

And yet I still mostly disliked Avatar. Of course a big part of why I disliked it was because I do like James Cameron and felt like I had already seen this same movie from him before. It just felt like a retread of the same stuff he had done before.

Sort of the reason that I didn't love The Darjeeling Limited was because Wes Anderson had already made a better movie about sons relationships with their fathers with The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, The Royal Tenenbaums and Rushmore before it.

I stand by the statement that Avatars biggest crime was how unoriginal it was.

JamesV
05-10-2010, 11:47 AM
Oh yeah. T2 and Aliens are two of my all time favorite sci fi films. Dear god how I love them.

And yet I still mostly disliked Avatar. Of course a big part of why I disliked it was because I do like James Cameron and felt like I had already seen this same movie from him before. It just felt like a retread of the same stuff he had done before.

Sort of the reason that I didn't love The Darjeeling Limited was because Wes Anderson had already made a better movie about sons relationships with their fathers with The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, The Royal Tenenbaums and Rushmore before it.

I stand by the statement that Avatars biggest crime was how unoriginal it was.

Avatar is actually the only Cameron film I don't like.

I love T1 and T2 (even if parts of it dialogue wise are cringe-worthy dated). I love Aliens.
The Abyss is just oozing with brilliance.
True Lies is one of the funnest movies you can watch.
And Titanic once I was no longer a 13 year old boy and went back to watch it, is a very solid period love story with some amazing visuals. In fact, I think Titanic is more visually groundbreaking then Avatar is (when you compare what was happening before the movie to what's in the movie. And I don't mean that Avatar isn't visually impressive -- it is, but I think Titanic is the bigger achievement).

Marc Lombardi
05-10-2010, 11:49 AM
Sorry because a bunch of teenage girls buy something does not mean it is good at all, and not just to "me". Are cigarettes "good" because a lot of people smoke them? This line of thinking just makes zero sense to me.

And my belief that it is a very bad movie is backed up by others. ?

Nice try, but those people aren't the ones in some guys thread trying to explain to him how his opinion is wrong.

This hypothetical is just stupid on a few levels, but the one thing not in dispute is that it would still be shit. My point stands.

But we don't agree, lets leave it at that. I form my own opinions, I'm not looking for validation from the masses who flock to a whole series of films that I think suck. So I would never buy that argument no matter how many different ways you tried to present it.

We'll agree to disagree. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind on their opinion. I was merely trying to point out common sense would stipulate that a movie that has a favorable rating with critics whose job it is to rate movies and was nominated (and won) awards specifically designed to reward the best movies on an annual basis -- that this movie is a good movie.

I didn't like The Thin Red Line. I thought it was awful. But it was nominated for a bunch of awards. And lots of important people whose job it is to say whether movies are good or not liked it. So while I may think it was a shitty movie I'm not going to tell people they are wrong when they say it's a good movie.

I think you also have a hard time differentiating between "good" and "good for you." At least in your cigarette metaphor.

Thudpucker
05-10-2010, 11:53 AM
I form my own opinions, I'm not looking for validation from the masses who flock to a whole series of films that I think suck. So I would never buy that argument no matter how many different ways you tried to present it.

Forming your own opinion? That is what is known as your personal opinion. Everybody has one. They don't mean much and they certainly can't be argued with.

What Shadowline Pimp, and others, are talking about is a consensus. The consensus is that Avatar is a good film.

Marc Lombardi
05-10-2010, 11:56 AM
What Shadowline Pimp, and others, are talking about is a consensus. The consensus is that Avatar is a good film.
The consensus also thinks N*Sync was a good band. "But how can N*Sync be good?! I hate bubblegum pop. NERD-RAGE!!!! RAAAAHHHAHHR!!!!!"

Thudpucker
05-10-2010, 11:58 AM
The consensus also thinks N*Sync was a good band. "But how can N*Sync be good?! I hate bubblegum pop. NERD-RAGE!!!! RAAAAHHHAHHR!!!!!"

:lol:

Marc Lombardi
05-10-2010, 12:00 PM
:lol:

Conversely, I also think N*Sync was shit. And not even the tasty kind that people started eating earlier in this thread.

Mylazycat
05-10-2010, 12:00 PM
The whole world loves MacDonalds. Loves it!

MacDonalds is not good food.

JamesV
05-10-2010, 12:02 PM
Conversely, I also think N*Sync was shit. And not even the tasty kind that people started eating earlier in this thread.

This brings up something interesting.

Consensus opinion can change over time and even looking at the Metacritic scores of N*Sync towards the end (or looking at Britney as another example) were not that high.

There is a lot to be said for initial consensus reaction (both ways good/bad) and what the reaction is over time, yknow?

Marc Lombardi
05-10-2010, 12:03 PM
The whole world loves MacDonalds. Loves it!

MacDonalds is not good food.

Over 1 Billion Served think you are wrong.

Joe Kalicki
05-10-2010, 12:04 PM
The whole world loves MacDonalds. Loves it!

MacDonalds is not good food.

Not good for you, but it tastes good.

Marc Lombardi
05-10-2010, 12:04 PM
This brings up something interesting.

Consensus opinion can change over time and even looking at the Metacritic scores of N*Sync towards the end (or looking at Britney as another example) were not that high.

There is a lot to be said for initial consensus reaction (both ways good/bad) and what the reaction is over time, yknow?

Taste changes. Agreed.

Joe Kalicki
05-10-2010, 12:07 PM
I think we can all agree, Avatar would have been better with an N*Sync soundtrack.

Caley Tibbittz
05-10-2010, 12:10 PM
I still mostly disliked Avatar. Of course a big part of why I disliked it was because I do like James Cameron and felt like I had already seen this same movie from him before. It just felt like a retread of the same stuff he had done before.

Sort of the reason that I didn't love The Darjeeling Limited was because Wes Anderson had already made a better movie about sons relationships with their fathers with The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, The Royal Tenenbaums and Rushmore before it.
I haven't seen Aquatic, but I really thought Darjeeling was better than the other two Anderson films (which were also great).

I haven't seen Avatar either, but that's only because I have yet to find a compelling reason to do so.

PeterSparker
05-10-2010, 12:11 PM
We'll agree to disagree. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind on their opinion. I was merely trying to point out common sense would stipulate that a movie that has a favorable rating with critics whose job it is to rate movies and was nominated (and won) awards specifically designed to reward the best movies on an annual basis -- that this movie is a good movie.

I didn't like The Thin Red Line. I thought it was awful. But it was nominated for a bunch of awards. And lots of important people whose job it is to say whether movies are good or not liked it. So while I may think it was a shitty movie I'm not going to tell people they are wrong when they say it's a good movie.

Where did I say someone is "wrong" because they liked Avatar? :?

But you did hit something on the head, I thought Chicago and Crash were just really bad movies. I was more than underwhelmed by The English Patient, Slumdog Millionaire, and The Hurt Locker as well. All are recent Best Picture award winners. So yeah, I'm just someone who doesn't share the Academy's sensibilities much in any way. So it would be par the course for me that Avatar would be another. (and since that's been my experience, bringing up the Academy to me is a particularly unconvincing argument) I'm not begrudging technical awards for the film, that's never been my criticism. Its the god-awful screenplay, dialogue, and acting where I part ways with the Academy. But if them liking it means something to you, then yeah, we can just agree to disagree.


think you also have a hard time differentiating between "good" and "good for you." At least in your cigarette metaphor.

Since I'm having such a "hard time" with it, then maybe you could explain what is "good" about N'Synch and what it is I am missing in my evaluation of them. Thanks

Caley Tibbittz
05-10-2010, 12:12 PM
Not good for you, but it tastes good.

I tried their Angus burger a few months back. And, no.

PeterSparker
05-10-2010, 12:14 PM
The consensus also thinks N*Sync was a good band. "But how can N*Sync be good?! I hate bubblegum pop. NERD-RAGE!!!! RAAAAHHHAHHR!!!!!"
I didn't say I hate bubble-gum pop, what are you talking about? I asked since you put so much stock into sales I wanted to know if they are as "good" as the Beatles. If the argument is then laughable or funny, it's on you end.

Marc Lombardi
05-10-2010, 12:16 PM
Since I'm having such a "hard time" with it, then maybe you could explain what is "good" about N'Synch and what it is I am missing in my evaluation of them. Thanks
I'm the wrong person to ask. You should consult with one of the billions of screaming girls who bought their CDs and saw their concerts. Or the folks who nominated (and awarded them, where applicable) with the following:


Academy of Country Music Awards

2000

Got nomination for Academy of Country Music Award
category Top Vocal Event of the Year for "God Must Have Spent A Little More Time On You"
shared with Alabama

American Music Awards


2002

Won American Music Award
category Favorite Pop/Rock Band/Duo/Group

2002

Got nomination for American Music Award
category Favorite Pop/Rock Album for "Celebrity"

2001

Won Internet Fans Artist of the Year Award


2001

Got nomination for American Music Award
category Favorite Pop/Rock Band/Duo/Group

2001

Got nomination for American Music Award
category Favorite Pop/Rock Album for "No Strings Attached"

2000

Got nomination for American Music Award
category Favorite Band/Duo/Group

1999

Won American Music Award
category Best Pop New Artist


Billboard Video Music Awards


1998

Won Billboard Video Music Award
category Best Clip (Dance) for "I Want You Back"

1998

Won Billboard Video Music Award
category Best New Artist Clip for "I Want You Back"

1998

Got nomination for Billboard Video Music Award
category Best New Artist for "Tearin' Up My Heart"


Blockbuster Awards


2000

Won Blockbuster Award
category Favorite Song from a Movie for "Music Of My Heart"

1999

Won Blockbuster Award
category Favorite New Artist - Group


Blockbuster Entertainment Awards


2001

Won Blockbuster Entertainment Award
category Favorite CD

2001

Won Blockbuster Entertainment Award
category Favorite Group - Pop

2001

Won Blockbuster Entertainment Award
category Favorite Single for "Bye Bye Bye"

2001

Got nomination for Blockbuster Entertainment Award
category Favorite Group


Grammy Awards


2003

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Best Pop Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal for "Girlfriend"

2002

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Best Pop Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal for "Gone"

2002

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Best Pop Vocal Album for "Celebrity"

2001

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Record of the Year for "Bye Bye Bye"

2001

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Best Pop Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal for "Bye Bye Bye"

2001

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Best Pop Vocal Album for "No Strings Attached"

2000

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Best Pop Collaboration with Vocals for "Music Of My Heart"
shared with Gloria Estefan
2000

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Best Country Collaboration with Vocals for "God Must Have Spent A Little More Time On You"
shared with Alabama

Juno Awards


2001

Got nomination for Juno Award
category Best Selling Album for "No Strings Attached"


Kids' Choice Awards


2001

Got nomination for Kids' Choice Award
category Favorite Song for "Bye Bye Bye"

2001

Got nomination for Kids' Choice Award
category Favorite Singing Group

2000

Got nomination for Kids' Choice Award
category Favorite Musical Group

2000

Got nomination for Kids' Choice Award
category Favorite Song from a Movie for "Music Of My Heart"


MTV Europe Music Awards


2001

Got nomination for MTV Europe Music Award
category Best Pop Act


MTV Video Music Awards


2002

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Video of the Year for "Gone"

2002

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Best Group Video

2002

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Best Pop Video for "Girlfriend" (Remix)
shared with Nelly
2001

Won MTV Video Music Award
category Best Group Video for "Pop"

2001

Won MTV Video Music Award
category Best Pop Video for "Pop"

2001

Won MTV Video Music Award
category Best Dance Video for "Pop"

2001

Won MTV Video Music Award
category Viewer's Choice for "Pop"

2001

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Breakthrough Video for "Pop"

2000

Won MTV Video Music Award
category Best Pop Video for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Won MTV Video Music Award
category Viewer's Choice for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Video of the Year for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Best Group Video for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Best Dance Video for "Bye Bye Bye"

1999

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Best Group Video for "Tearin' Up My Heart"

1999

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Best New Artist Video for "Tearin' Up My Heart"

1999

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Best Pop Video for "Tearin' Up My Heart"

1999

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Viewer's Choice for "Tearin' Up My Heart"


MuchMusic Video Music Awards


2000

Won MuchMusic Video Music Award
category Favorite International Group for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Got nomination for MuchMusic Video Music Award
category Best International Video for "Bye Bye Bye"


People's Choice Awards


2002

Won People's Choice Award
category Favorite Musical Group or Band

2001

Won People's Choice Award
category Favorite Musical Group or Band


Radio Music Awards


2000

Won Radio Music Award
category Song of the Year: Top 40/Pop Radio for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Won Radio Music Award
category Artist of the Year: Top 40/Pop Radio


Teen Choice Awards


2002

Won Teen Choice Award
category Choice Hook Up for "Girlfriend"
shared with Nelly
2002

Got nomination for Teen Choice Award
category Choice Single for "Girlfriend"
shared with Nelly
2001

Won Teen Choice Award
category Choice Single for "Pop"

2001

Won Teen Choice Award
category Choice Album for "Celebrity"

2001

Won Teen Choice Award
category Choice Concert

2000

Won Teen Choice Award
category Choice Pop Group

2000

Won Teen Choice Award
category Song of the Summer for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Won Teen Choice Award
category Choice Music Video for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Won Teen Choice Award
category Choice Single for "Bye Bye Bye"

1999

Won Teen Choice Award
category Album of the Year for "'N Sync"

PeterSparker
05-10-2010, 12:30 PM
I'm the wrong person to ask. You should consult with one of the billions of screaming girls who bought their CDs and saw their concerts. Or the folks who nominated (and awarded them, where applicable) with the following:


Academy of Country Music Awards

2000

Got nomination for Academy of Country Music Award
category Top Vocal Event of the Year for "God Must Have Spent A Little More Time On You"
shared with Alabama

American Music Awards


2002

Won American Music Award
category Favorite Pop/Rock Band/Duo/Group

2002

Got nomination for American Music Award
category Favorite Pop/Rock Album for "Celebrity"

2001

Won Internet Fans Artist of the Year Award


2001

Got nomination for American Music Award
category Favorite Pop/Rock Band/Duo/Group

2001

Got nomination for American Music Award
category Favorite Pop/Rock Album for "No Strings Attached"

2000

Got nomination for American Music Award
category Favorite Band/Duo/Group

1999

Won American Music Award
category Best Pop New Artist


Billboard Video Music Awards


1998

Won Billboard Video Music Award
category Best Clip (Dance) for "I Want You Back"

1998

Won Billboard Video Music Award
category Best New Artist Clip for "I Want You Back"

1998

Got nomination for Billboard Video Music Award
category Best New Artist for "Tearin' Up My Heart"


Blockbuster Awards


2000

Won Blockbuster Award
category Favorite Song from a Movie for "Music Of My Heart"

1999

Won Blockbuster Award
category Favorite New Artist - Group


Blockbuster Entertainment Awards


2001

Won Blockbuster Entertainment Award
category Favorite CD

2001

Won Blockbuster Entertainment Award
category Favorite Group - Pop

2001

Won Blockbuster Entertainment Award
category Favorite Single for "Bye Bye Bye"

2001

Got nomination for Blockbuster Entertainment Award
category Favorite Group


Grammy Awards


2003

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Best Pop Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal for "Girlfriend"

2002

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Best Pop Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal for "Gone"

2002

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Best Pop Vocal Album for "Celebrity"

2001

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Record of the Year for "Bye Bye Bye"

2001

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Best Pop Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal for "Bye Bye Bye"

2001

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Best Pop Vocal Album for "No Strings Attached"

2000

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Best Pop Collaboration with Vocals for "Music Of My Heart"
shared with Gloria Estefan
2000

Got nomination for Grammy Award
category Best Country Collaboration with Vocals for "God Must Have Spent A Little More Time On You"
shared with Alabama

Juno Awards


2001

Got nomination for Juno Award
category Best Selling Album for "No Strings Attached"


Kids' Choice Awards


2001

Got nomination for Kids' Choice Award
category Favorite Song for "Bye Bye Bye"

2001

Got nomination for Kids' Choice Award
category Favorite Singing Group

2000

Got nomination for Kids' Choice Award
category Favorite Musical Group

2000

Got nomination for Kids' Choice Award
category Favorite Song from a Movie for "Music Of My Heart"


MTV Europe Music Awards


2001

Got nomination for MTV Europe Music Award
category Best Pop Act


MTV Video Music Awards


2002

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Video of the Year for "Gone"

2002

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Best Group Video

2002

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Best Pop Video for "Girlfriend" (Remix)
shared with Nelly
2001

Won MTV Video Music Award
category Best Group Video for "Pop"

2001

Won MTV Video Music Award
category Best Pop Video for "Pop"

2001

Won MTV Video Music Award
category Best Dance Video for "Pop"

2001

Won MTV Video Music Award
category Viewer's Choice for "Pop"

2001

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Breakthrough Video for "Pop"

2000

Won MTV Video Music Award
category Best Pop Video for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Won MTV Video Music Award
category Viewer's Choice for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Video of the Year for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Best Group Video for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Best Dance Video for "Bye Bye Bye"

1999

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Best Group Video for "Tearin' Up My Heart"

1999

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Best New Artist Video for "Tearin' Up My Heart"

1999

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Best Pop Video for "Tearin' Up My Heart"

1999

Got nomination for MTV Video Music Award
category Viewer's Choice for "Tearin' Up My Heart"


MuchMusic Video Music Awards


2000

Won MuchMusic Video Music Award
category Favorite International Group for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Got nomination for MuchMusic Video Music Award
category Best International Video for "Bye Bye Bye"


People's Choice Awards


2002

Won People's Choice Award
category Favorite Musical Group or Band

2001

Won People's Choice Award
category Favorite Musical Group or Band


Radio Music Awards


2000

Won Radio Music Award
category Song of the Year: Top 40/Pop Radio for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Won Radio Music Award
category Artist of the Year: Top 40/Pop Radio


Teen Choice Awards


2002

Won Teen Choice Award
category Choice Hook Up for "Girlfriend"
shared with Nelly
2002

Got nomination for Teen Choice Award
category Choice Single for "Girlfriend"
shared with Nelly
2001

Won Teen Choice Award
category Choice Single for "Pop"

2001

Won Teen Choice Award
category Choice Album for "Celebrity"

2001

Won Teen Choice Award
category Choice Concert

2000

Won Teen Choice Award
category Choice Pop Group

2000

Won Teen Choice Award
category Song of the Summer for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Won Teen Choice Award
category Choice Music Video for "Bye Bye Bye"

2000

Won Teen Choice Award
category Choice Single for "Bye Bye Bye"

1999

Won Teen Choice Award
category Album of the Year for "'N Sync"





Conversely, I also think N*Sync was shit.

So even all those awards and album sales haven't changed your opinion??

Hm, kind of exactly what I've been saying.




So what exactly is your point again then in bringing up box office numbers?

Marc Lombardi
05-10-2010, 12:44 PM
So even all those awards and album sales haven't changed your opinion??

Hm, kind of exactly what I've been saying.
Yes and no. I'm not talking about opinion. I'm talking about consensus and professionals who know their shit talking about stuff. Just because I don't like something doesn't mean it's not good.


So what exactly is your point again then in bringing up box office numbers?

It was being used as backup to show popularity and in addition to the professional accolates and ratings. People will not go see something over and over and over if the CONSENSUS believes it is bad.

PeterSparker
05-10-2010, 12:50 PM
Yes and no. I'm not talking about opinion. I'm talking about consensus and professionals who know their shit talking about stuff. Just because I don't like something doesn't mean it's not good.



It was being used as backup to show popularity and in addition to the professional accolates and ratings. People will not go see something over and over and over if the CONSENSUS believes it is bad.
You just seem to put a lot more weight into what others think than I do. Not much more to add at this point.

Rod Nunley
05-10-2010, 01:23 PM
I haven't seen Avatar either, but that's only because I have yet to find a compelling reason to do so.

To join in the discussion?

Thudpucker
05-10-2010, 01:26 PM
You just seem to put a lot more weight into what others think than I do. Not much more to add at this point.

Wow.

PeterSparker
05-10-2010, 01:52 PM
wow.

... ?

Thudpucker
05-10-2010, 02:29 PM
... ?

Why do you keep talking about your personal opinion? Personal opinion has nothing to do with what Shadowline Pimp is talking about.

Marc Lombardi
05-10-2010, 03:51 PM
Why do you keep talking about your personal opinion? Personal opinion has nothing to do with what Shadowline Pimp is talking about.
Don't worry. The next time he tokes up it will all suddenly make sense to him.

Joe Kalicki
05-10-2010, 05:14 PM
Well, if nothing else came out of this thread, I'll be watching Peter Jackson's King Kong tonight.

The Hodag
05-10-2010, 05:17 PM
Well, if nothing else came out of this thread, I'll be watching Peter Jackson's King Kong tonight.

Yay, my King Kong snark inspired someone to have fun! :lol:

It's funny, I wasn't that into the Speed Racer movie (liked it okay, just not a ton), but talking about some of the stuff I dug about it in another thread made me want to see it again. Now it's the next thing in my Netflix queue.

I suppose the board's inspired me to want to see a lot of movies over the years.

PeterSparker
05-10-2010, 07:11 PM
Why do you keep talking about your personal opinion? Personal opinion has nothing to do with what Shadowline Pimp is talking about.

Uh, who's opinion should I be talking about then Thud? Someone starts a thread saying that once you strip away the spectacle of seeing Avatar in a 3D theater experience you're left with a pretty bad movie. Something I happen to agree with, and said so at the time it came out. So did Bendis, and a lot of other people for that matter. I'm not in this thread saying otherwise with my panties in a bunch. And why don't you ask Shadowline as well then anyway? He seemed to completely grasp the concept of not thinking something is good even if commercially successful just a few posts above.


I understand that the Tom Burgos' of the world have paid the highest ticket price in history and seen the film over and over again, drivings it's financial success. I understand that more critics than not gave it a positive review, many leaning that way despite its obvious flaws in large part because of the groundbreaking technical aspect. I understand that the same Academy that gave 'Driving Miss Daisy' a Best Picture Oscar, nominated 'Avatar' for many awards last year as well including Best Picture.

Ok, I get all that. And I get that it is all in some cumulative formula supposed to be evidence that the movie I saw with the horrible screenplay and bad dialogue was really, provably "good". I do get all that, I'm just not persuaded by it, and I don't agree. Because something is very popular and has a big impact on the cultural landscape, be it Avatar, McDonald's, N'Sych or American Idol, in no way proves it's "good". And yes, that is just my personal opinion. Now you and I can agree to disagree on this just as he and I have.

jason hissong
05-10-2010, 07:19 PM
Uh, who's opinion should I be talking about then Thud? Someone starts a thread saying that once you strip away the spectacle of seeing Avatar in a 3D theater experience you're left with a pretty bad movie. Something I happen to agree with, and said so at the time it came out. So did Bendis, and a lot of other people for that matter. I'm not in this thread saying otherwise with my panties in a bunch. And why don't you ask Shadowline as well then anyway? He seemed to completely grasp the concept of not thinking something is good even if commercially successful just a few posts above.


I understand that the Tom Burgos' of the world have paid the highest ticket price in history and seen the film over and over again, drivings it's financial success. I understand that more critics than not gave it a positive review, many leaning that way despite its obvious flaws in large part because of the groundbreaking technical aspect. I understand that the same Academy that gave 'Driving Miss Daisy' a Best Picture Oscar, nominated 'Avatar' for many awards last year as well including Best Picture.

Ok, I get all that. And I get that it is all in some cumulative formula supposed to be evidence that the movie I saw with the horrible screenplay and bad dialogue was really, provably "good". I do get all that, I'm just not persuaded by it, and I don't agree. Because something is very popular and has a big impact on the cultural landscape, be it Avatar, McDonald's, N'Sych or American Idol, in no way proves it's "good". And yes, that is just my personal opinion. Now you and I can agree to disagree on this just as he and I have.

Well said.

PeterSparker
05-10-2010, 07:43 PM
Well said.

thanks - and it's funny because the whole exchange was from hours ago when I was still at work. I'm home now after being out tonight, mellowing out, checking the board late and I had to be like, oh wait what was this all about again. :)

Thudpucker
05-10-2010, 08:14 PM
Uh, who's opinion should I be talking about then Thud? Someone starts a thread saying that once you strip away the spectacle of seeing Avatar in a 3D theater experience you're left with a pretty bad movie. Something I happen to agree with, and said so at the time it came out. So did Bendis, and a lot of other people for that matter. I'm not in this thread saying otherwise with my panties in a bunch. And why don't you ask Shadowline as well then anyway? He seemed to completely grasp the concept of not thinking something is good even if commercially successful just a few posts above.


I understand that the Tom Burgos' of the world have paid the highest ticket price in history and seen the film over and over again, drivings it's financial success. I understand that more critics than not gave it a positive review, many leaning that way despite its obvious flaws in large part because of the groundbreaking technical aspect. I understand that the same Academy that gave 'Driving Miss Daisy' a Best Picture Oscar, nominated 'Avatar' for many awards last year as well including Best Picture.

Ok, I get all that. And I get that it is all in some cumulative formula supposed to be evidence that the movie I saw with the horrible screenplay and bad dialogue was really, provably "good". I do get all that, I'm just not persuaded by it, and I don't agree. Because something is very popular and has a big impact on the cultural landscape, be it Avatar, McDonald's, N'Sych or American Idol, in no way proves it's "good". And yes, that is just my personal opinion. Now you and I can agree to disagree on this just as he and I have.

You and Shadowline Pimp are talking about two different things.

SP said "I'm not talking about opinion" and you replied "You just seem to put a lot more weight into what others think than I do."

That's why I said 'wow'.

He's not putting weight in anything. He's not talking about his own opinion at all, he's talking about something that is objective. He's talking about the consensus.

The consensus is what it is. Wether you, or he, agrees with it the consensus does not change. The consensus is that Avatar is "good". That is what an overwhelming percentage of film experts, audiences and award groups have detirmined.

No one says you should agree with the majority. If you think the majority are sheep, unwashed masses, whatever that's totally up to you. It's your thing. Your opinion doesn't change their minds either though. Like it or not you are in the minority opinion.

PeterSparker
05-10-2010, 08:39 PM
You and Shadowline Pimp are talking about two different things.

SP said "I'm not talking about opinion" and you replied "You just seem to put a lot more weight into what others think than I do."

That's why I said 'wow'.

He's not putting weight in anything. He's not talking about his own opinion at all, he's talking about something that is objective. He's talking about the consensus.

The consensus is what it is. Wether you, or he, agrees with it the consensus does not change. The consensus is that Avatar is "good". That is what an overwhelming percentage of film experts, audiences and award groups have detirmined.

No one says you should agree with the majority. If you think the majority are sheep, unwashed masses, whatever that's totally up to you. It's your thing. Your opinion doesn't change their minds either though. Like it or not you are in the minority opinion.
Now it's my turn to say wow, but since you feel I needed another explanation on what we disagree over, thanks then for doing so.

Thudpucker
05-11-2010, 04:24 AM
Now it's my turn to say wow, but since you feel I needed another explanation on what we disagree over, thanks then for doing so.

How can you disagree when you're not even talking about the same thing?

What do you think you're disagreeing about?

schizorabbit
05-11-2010, 04:36 AM
:lol:

This thread is full of Nerd.

Awesome!!!

Thudpucker
05-11-2010, 04:45 AM
Peter keeps blowing my mind.

Instead of dying out after a few days the thread just keeps getting better. This might be my favorite thread ever.

schizorabbit
05-11-2010, 04:56 AM
Soooooooo...

you guys think that when they released the Director's extended cut later, that it's going to significantly change the quality of the film?


[Cameron said]‘So you're gonna see a whole new Avatar. I mean six minutes is really quite significant. And it's not boring stuff. It's all action and things you've never seen. It's like seeing a new Avatar.’

Thudpucker
05-11-2010, 05:05 AM
Soooooooo...

you guys think that when they released the Director's extended cut later, that it's going to significantly change the quality of the film?

'The Abyss' extended cut was great, it did significantly improve the film. After seeing how much was left on the cutting room floor for Abyss maybe there is more Avatar too.

I'm looking forward to the sequel more than seeing an extended version of the original though.

Marc Lombardi
05-11-2010, 05:08 AM
You and Shadowline Pimp are talking about two different things.

SP said "I'm not talking about opinion" and you replied "You just seem to put a lot more weight into what others think than I do."

That's why I said 'wow'.

He's not putting weight in anything. He's not talking about his own opinion at all, he's talking about something that is objective. He's talking about the consensus.

The consensus is what it is. Wether you, or he, agrees with it the consensus does not change. The consensus is that Avatar is "good". That is what an overwhelming percentage of film experts, audiences and award groups have detirmined.

No one says you should agree with the majority. If you think the majority are sheep, unwashed masses, whatever that's totally up to you. It's your thing. Your opinion doesn't change their minds either though. Like it or not you are in the minority opinion.

Well said. It's funny -- you and I disagree so often that when we agree I'm very surprised.

Thudpucker
05-11-2010, 05:11 AM
Well said. It's funny -- you and I disagree so often that when we agree I'm very surprised.

It's kind of fun when that happens.

schizorabbit
05-11-2010, 05:12 AM
'The Abyss' extended cut was great, it did significantly improve the film. After seeing how much was left on the cutting room floor for Abyss maybe there is more Avatar too.

I'm looking forward to the sequel more than seeing an extended version of the original though.


Ditto. It was a completely different--and much much better--movie, especially with the stuff they added at the end (like the apocalyptic tidal wave and the protracted scene(s) between Ed Harris and the aliens). When I first saw it in the theaters, the ending seemed rushed. I was, like, "That's it?" I also loved all the little character stuff that was put back in.

Regarding Avatar, I was hoping to see the scenes they cut at the beginning on Earth. I remember reading about Jake Sully getting into a bar fight in his wheelchair on Earth--stuff like that--but of course, the only thing we get in the theatrical cut is an opening montage with an overlaying narrative.

Joe Kalicki
05-11-2010, 12:55 PM
So I watched the first half of Jackson's Kong last night (up till Ann dances for Kong), and not only is it better than I remember, I actually really like it. It's like two movies in one, looks beautiful, and has a lot of fun references to old Hollywood.

The only thing that bothers me (aside from Jack Black/Colin Hanks together giving me bad Orange County flashbacks) is that Kong looks way too small.

Jef UK
05-11-2010, 01:35 PM
While everybody seemed to see this movie except me, I haven't heard one person say it was good. It's always something like, "oh yeah, it's a really bad movie, but it was so amazing to watch!"

NeverWanderer
05-11-2010, 02:01 PM
While everybody seemed to see this movie except me, I haven't heard one person say it was good. It's always something like, "oh yeah, it's a really bad movie, but it was so amazing to watch!"

I thought it was a good movie, and a great experience.

Thudpucker
05-11-2010, 02:23 PM
While everybody seemed to see this movie except me, I haven't heard one person say it was good. It's always something like, "oh yeah, it's a really bad movie, but it was so amazing to watch!"

It was good. I liked it a lot and bought it on Blu-ray.

Tom Burgos
05-11-2010, 03:11 PM
I thought it was a good movie, and a great experience.

Ditto.
Bring on the sequels.

The Hodag
05-11-2010, 03:19 PM
There are things I like better about the theatrical cut of The Abyss. It's a leaner, tighter flick, and it doesn't get into the heavy-handed message of the director's cut. I like the director's cut, too. Obviously fills out the story and it has big, scary waves, but it also turns into more of a MESSAGE MOVIE.

I'm a big fan, even with some of its flaws, but I might say I actually prefer the theatrical cut on return visits.