First Negative review by Andrew Vulver
Of course from the completly anal, pompous & complete ****e The Guardian.
-
First Negative review by Andrew Vulver
Of course from the completly anal, pompous & complete ****e The Guardian. -
Ebert gave it four stars and had this to say about 3D:
Cameron promised he'd unveil the next generation of 3-D in "Avatar." I'm a notorious skeptic about this process, a needless distraction from the perfect realism of movies in 2-D. Cameron's iteration is the best I've seen -- and more importantly, one of the most carefully-employed. The film never uses 3-D simply because it has it, and doesn't promiscuously violate the fourth wall. He also seems quite aware of 3-D's weakness for dimming the picture, and even with a film set largely in interiors and a rain forest, there's sufficient light. I saw the film in 3-D on a good screen at the AMC River East and was impressed.Comment
-
Fantastic review.
I'm sure the critics will still whine but this movie is looking brilliant, affter all the criticism, it's all unjust.
Can't wait to see it.Last edited by Wools; 12-12-2009, 13:24.Comment
-
More trustworthy review from Empire: http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/...asp?FID=133552
Verdict paragraph for those who are lazy:
It’s been twelve years since Titanic, but the King of the World has returned with a flawed but fantastic tour de force that, taken on its merits as a film, especially in two dimensions, warrants four stars. However, if you can wrap a pair of 3D glasses round your peepers, this becomes a transcendent, full-on five-star experience that's the closest we'll ever come to setting foot on a strange new world. Just don’t leave it so long next time, eh, Jim?Comment
-
The worry I have is that Avatar is receiving very similar reviews to what Titanic received and that was perhaps the most critically over-rated films I can remember. The films that beat for those oscars...Originally posted by Wools View PostComment
-
Titanic was a good film and had a wonderful cast of characters. Yes it was a love story but i watched it again last week after not seeing it for mabee 7 or 8 years and it reminded me why it was so successful. It was essentially a story that was so well told and that had so many good & interesting characters its impossible not to like.Comment
-
Not quite impossible.Comment
-
well yeah mabee impossible was the wrong word but it was a very good film. When it won 11 oscars i was a little suprised and only expected say 4 or 5 for it but its def one of the best films of the 90s.
I am just about to book my Avatar ticket anyway for an advanced screening in 3D on the 17th in Cardiff. At ?10.55 its a bit steep but its my first 3d feature and im a big fan of Camerons films and have a good vibe about Avatar so im looking forward to it.Comment
-
Titanic was rank.
And that Empire review is iffy. 4 stars for the standard presentation but 5 for the 3d. It's still the same film. As ever it's best to form your own opinion.Comment
-
Titanic was slaughted by the critics at the time and was subjected to the same tabloid sentiments that Avatar has had thrown at it.Originally posted by abigsmurf View Post
I don't think Titanic was overated at all, likewise many people have already made up their minds about Avatar and will review it accordingly.Comment
-
Well only one more day to go and I am really starting to feel excited now. I've probably not feel so keen to see a film since the Lord of the Rings sequels.
Having watched the Toy Story reissue in 3D, I already have a feel for the experience and I'm sure others will be doing what I did at various points throughout that film (taking off the glasses for a second to check how 2D/3D compare) It's quite a weird experience at first, but you soon get used to it.
I also saw the Avatar trailer in 3D when I went to see Toy Story and can confirm that it makes a BIG difference to seeing it in 2D; so I can see where the Empire review is coming from.Don't look at me, I'm irrelevant.Comment
-
I can't wait for 20:45 tomorrow.
Comment
-
I don't know where to start. That was incredible! Amazing visuals and not once was I bothered about the CGI, for the time I was watching the film the Na'vi were real. It had action and emotion. What an imagination Cameron has.Comment
-
Completely agree mate. What an amazing film. I was one of the seemingly few people who believed right from the word go that this would be a fantastic film. Just the ambition alone is worthy of praise but thankfully there is a great film underneath all the technology. It's not the all out action film I was expecting and has moments of real emotional depth. Which may seem odd to some but not if you have seen the director's cuts of T2 or The Abyss.
The 3D only felt noticeable for the first few minutes and after that you forgot about it. There were lots of great little 3D moments though where you intentionally notice it; especially with characters in the foreground and when all the 'jellyfish' are moving around.
I can see how some people might not enjoy the film because it does favour the story over the action in lots of places but it truly is a great spectacle.Don't look at me, I'm irrelevant.Comment
-
Good to hear... After reading some reviews I am utterly pumped to see this in 3D on sunday.
How was the pacing of the movie overall? I know its a good 2.5 hours but does it drag in any places at all? I told the mrs we were going to see it on sunday (it was initially a surprise but she saw the cinema email) and she stated "oh we're going to watch another CGI action movie..."
I then showed her the HD trailer on Xbox LIVE and I think she was pleasantly surprised.Comment
Comment