Beamer wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 16:37:
As for Inglorious Basterds, it's my mom's favorite movie of the year. I really have no clue what that says about either the film or my mom, but I haven't seen it yet.

Don't worry, a lot of these people have fallen into the 'Bashing Avatar makes me cool' syndrome.

Don't you dare state an opinion, or relay that of your friends, or else I will take it that you are trying to claim it as fact and fly into a ridiculous posting spree. What a shitty movie it can barely muster an 82% approval rate.

The GEICO Cavemen wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 15:29:
I've (supposedly) implied a few things in this thread when it wasn't my intention also.

The GEICO Cavemen wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 00:31:

Ray Marden wrote on Jan 16, 2010, 23:57:
However, anybody I know that has seen the movie has really loved it - hands down and across a wide range of ages/sex/people/etc.

Wow, guess you don't know a lot of people then. Or the sample size you do know have no idea what a good movie is. If this movie is so great why does it only have an 82% rating on rotten tomatos? I can't say myself, haven't seen it.

The GEICO Cavemen wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 10:08:

Ray Marden wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 00:41:
I can only give my own personal opinion as well as what I have experienced firsthand from interactions with other people. From my perspective, it is a movie that has succeeded through a wide range of ages, both sexes, personality types, etc.

If that somehow offends you or is rise to insults, I am not sure what other data you were expecting, even more so with your reference to RT and the worldwide gross.

What the hell are you talking about? I'm supposed to give more weight to the opinion of you and a few of your friends then of a respected review site like Rotten Tomatoes? How am I insulting you? If anything your short-sided, self centered view is an insult to the rest of us.

ForgedReality wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 15:19:

The GEICO Cavemen wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 15:12:
Whoa, sorry...if I knew you were going to overreact this much I wouldn't have mentioned it. No, you didn't directly state it, you implied it.

Blue, can you re-title this story "Blues News Discussion of Avatar Game: What Went Wrong". Thanks...

Don't worry, dude. Some people are WAY too literal here. It's the same people who complain about a pixel being out of place in a frame of a movie, and let it ruin the entire experience for them.

People like this will be like "READ EXACTLY WHAT I SAID, ASSHOLE!" instead of conceding that there is a lot more to language than the literal. He knows what he was saying, he just wants to go down fighting.

The GEICO Cavemen wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 15:12:
Whoa, sorry...if I knew you were going to overreact this much I wouldn't have mentioned it. No, you didn't directly state it, you implied it.

Blue, can you re-title this story "Blues News Discussion of Avatar Game: What Went Wrong". Thanks...

Ray Marden wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 14:56:
Where did I ever say the entire world must like this movie based upon my opinion? Where did I say my opinion, the opinion of my friends, or the opinions of my associates have to echo the thoughts of billions of people around the globe?

I never said these things and I will not get into your various assumptions that you have openly expressed...

You post a link to RT and then go on numerous rants about only sites like RT mattering. Did you specify that in your first post? No. Is Blue's News one of those sites? No. Did you ask for opinions? Yes.
If you cannot read or lack comprehension, do not get mad at me.
Standing behind what I typed - what I actually typed,
Ray

Beamer wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 14:30:
Worst hole in the movie: "We must learn from the dream walker. The only way to do this, obviously, is to put him with our most eligible female 24/7 and teach him all of our secrets."

The plot was just bland, dull, and often stupid. Sorry if that's not "fun" to me. Not when I can think of several billion ways to spend 3 hours that aren't all 3 bland, dull and stupid.

The GEICO Cavemen wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 14:31:
I see what you're saying, nice post.

Getting back to why the Avatar video game sucks so much (I've neither seen the Avatar movie nor played the video game) my guess would be A) game-to-movie and movie-to-game projects rarely work well and B) Lazy developers and publishers think they can push a sub-standard product and it'll sell based on the strength of the movie alone.

PC games are tough as it is. Great games do poorly (flight sims come to mind) while shitty ones do great (The Sims comes to mind). Still, when it comes right down to it, if you make a great game that appeals to enough people (read, not a flight sim) then it'll do great, for the most part.

On a side note what did you guys think of Inglourious Basterds? RT gives it an 89%. I thought it was OK but I think it gets more credit than it should because of Quentin Tarantino's involvement. Let's say you didn't know he had anything to do with this movie, would you like it just as much? I hate Pitt's cheesy accent in the movie. For example I think The Dark Knight and Iron Man were much better than Inglourious Basterds. In The Dark Knight Heath's performance is second to none (and yes I'd say this even if he hadn't died).

Beamer wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 14:30:

This is exactly my stance on why people seem to hate Avatar so much. They go in expecting some revolutionary story-telling event. You're going in with the wrong fucking attitude. Every time I hear someone explain why they didn't like the movie, they always mention the unoriginal plot and occasional corny dialogue. Maybe if they had gone in with a different expectation, they would have seen the movie for what it is meant to be: fun.

You sound like the people that say "How could you not like Transformers? It was awesome! So what if it was poorly directed with enormous plot holes! It was a great movie that needs no thinking!"

My brain has no on/off switch. If something is a huge plot hole it detracts from the movie for me. It makes the movie the equivalent of huffing glue - sure, fun for some people, but just kills brain cells of others.


Worst hole in the movie: "We must learn from the dream walker. The only way to do this, obviously, is to put him with our most eligible female 24/7 and teach him all of our secrets."

The plot was just bland, dull, and often stupid. Sorry if that's not "fun" to me. Not when I can think of several billion ways to spend 3 hours that aren't all 3 bland, dull and stupid.

ForgedReality wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 14:11:

The GEICO Cavemen wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 13:29:
If you're watching this movie expecting some History Channel documentary then yes it's going to suck for you. If you watch it as a MOVIE that does a great job of cranking up the tension then you may like it more. If you wanna watch a documentary then do that. This movie isn't one nor does it claim to be. The majority of negative comments I see about this movie say some variation of "it's not real". It's not supposed to be.

You thought The Hurt Locker "sucked balls" because it's got an absurd, unrealistic story? That's like me saying that Avatar sucks balls because it's the worst Western I've ever seen. It's not supposed to be a Western just like The Hurt Locker isn't a documentary. Flawed logic.

This is exactly my stance on why people seem to hate Avatar so much. They go in expecting some revolutionary story-telling event. You're going in with the wrong fucking attitude. Every time I hear someone explain why they didn't like the movie, they always mention the unoriginal plot and occasional corny dialogue. Maybe if they had gone in with a different expectation, they would have seen the movie for what it is meant to be: fun.

Stop over-analyzing everything and life probably won't suck so much for you people. I saw Avatar in IMAX 3D, and I'm sure the 3d-ness of it had something to do with my level of enjoyment, but I also did not go in with very high expectations of the film. I wasn't analyzing every frame of it looking for plot holes and preparing my compare and contrast thesis paper pitting it against films I'd seen in the past. I merely went in to see a movie and experience the hype surrounding it.

I knew strictly from the trailers and previews that it was probably going to be a somewhat unoriginal plot, but I still felt that the concept of remotely controlling bodies was a pretty novel idea (please don't start listing off other films/books/shows that did the same thing, because I just don't care.), and I thoroughly enjoyed the film for what it has to offer. I felt like it was a joyride from start to finish precisely because I wasn't thinking of the similarities to other movies, and I only even noticed some of the corny one-liners because I had heard them mentioned in reviews, etc. I was more focused on the visuals and the rollercoaster of events that unfolded.

I'm not a fanboy, but maybe if you haters weren't so dead-set on deconstructing every element of every second of the film, and then picking apart the layers of it so that it no longer carries any meaning, you might be able to find the FUN in it, because that's all it's trying to be. Movies are an ENTERTAINMENT MEDIUM, and this community of all people, I would think, would understand that, as your chosen hobbies include gaming, another medium whose sole purpose is entertainment. Stop being so uptight.

This is exactly my stance on why people seem to hate Avatar so much. They go in expecting some revolutionary story-telling event. You're going in with the wrong fucking attitude. Every time I hear someone explain why they didn't like the movie, they always mention the unoriginal plot and occasional corny dialogue. Maybe if they had gone in with a different expectation, they would have seen the movie for what it is meant to be: fun.

The GEICO Cavemen wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 13:29:
If you're watching this movie expecting some History Channel documentary then yes it's going to suck for you. If you watch it as a MOVIE that does a great job of cranking up the tension then you may like it more. If you wanna watch a documentary then do that. This movie isn't one nor does it claim to be. The majority of negative comments I see about this movie say some variation of "it's not real". It's not supposed to be.

You thought The Hurt Locker "sucked balls" because it's got an absurd, unrealistic story? That's like me saying that Avatar sucks balls because it's the worst Western I've ever seen. It's not supposed to be a Western just like The Hurt Locker isn't a documentary. Flawed logic.

Wildone wrote on Jan 17, 2010, 13:20:
I've never been in the Army but thought Hurt Locker SUCKED BALLS..I dont get what the hype is over that movie, the plot was absurd and didn't portray anything realistic Im pretty sure bomb disposal guys dont get to ride buck wild all over the streets doing what they damn well please.