The Dink Network

I just saw Avatar like 20 minutes ago and I have one message.

IF IT'S RELEASED IN YOUR COUNTRY, SEE IT NOW BEFORE THEY STOP SHOWING IT IN THEATERS!!

EDIT: AND IF IT'S NOT IN YOUR COUNTRY THEN VISIT ONE THAT IS SHOWING IT!!

Any questions/comments/stupid phrases/agreements?

yes

No.

I'll take this opportunity to choose... /stupid phrases/

"Build a man a fire, and he will be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life."

Maybe if you didn't only have one tiny IMAX the size of 535 m squared and instead had 7 IMAXes, including the largest (1051 m sqed) and the 3rd largest in the world, you would like it more
It must be so hard being from NZ when its so close to Australia, and yet, not Australia

And yet... that seems to be the best part We send you all our rejects and both countries are better for it. Your IQ as a country goes up and - well - so does ours hehe

Plot sucks. only good thing about the movie imo was how the CGI was done.

Random comic 1
Random comic 2
Random comic 3
Random Comic 4

Saw it yesterday at the cinema. I really liked it.

It really isn't as good as everyone seems to think.

avatar was awesome when i saw it and i saw it in 3D

Got me there. Indeed, all NZers I've ever met have been retards, and I've wondered why that was

Cause we kept any that were worth keeping So looks like its working ... for NZ anyway hehe

Have not seen, will not see.

Avatar pulled in about 1.7 billion SEK in just 3 days after the premiere. The movie itself costed 2 billion SEK to make, so Avatar currently holds 'the greatest opening for a movie ever' (I hope my words are right) which isn't a sequel. And the movie itself is truly a masterpiece.

EDIT: Found an interesting list

Seen it 3D. There's no originality in the movie.

I think it is one of the best movies I've watched on cinemas. You should really see it, Skull. I really liked it anyway.

Nah, doesn't seem like my kind of a movie.

and what if u watch it, and you like it?

Uhh... then I have watched it and liked it.

I saw the movie, it was really good! I liked the storyline, the CG was awesome; lifelike even! And the 3D made it even better! The only thing about it was that it took a liberal point of view.

I saw the movie, it was really good! I liked the storyline, the CG was awesome; lifelike even! And the 3D made it even better! The only thing about it was that it took a liberal point of view.

Are you saying that the Navi are for big government, universal health care and all of that other crap?

"Build a man a fire, and he will be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life."

I think we have a winner!

Yes, if your WHARRGARBL is so great that you can't even enjoy that movie, there's something really wrong with you.

Skull is just being pessimistic about modern stuff. The video games thread is heavy proof of that.

I've seen this movie in THREEEEEEEE DEEEEEEEEE and i really liked it

It's a brilliant film. Possibly the greatest spectacle in the history of cinema. I can't see if holding the same appeal in 2d though. The plot and characters are sufficient, nothing more.

Obviously I am a pessimist about modern stuff. There is usually nothing positive to say about it. Now EvilEarl, you are probably just a 10-16 year old kiddo who thinks everything created nowadays is awesome. There is nothing *different* about Avatar than any other nowadays movies. Now go see the original Star Wars. There's a classic for ya that has better special effects than any other movie if you compare how old it is.

And also, if you read EvilEarl's profile, you'd know that he is Asshats number #2.

Skull, the effects they use in the original Star Wars are like thin threads holding spaceship models in front of a black background. How could you even compare that with modern effects? Don't even judge Avatar if you haven't seen it. You seem so immature when you're basically judging all modern things and saying that they aren't as good as before.

There is usually nothing positive to say about it.

There is usually nothing positive to say about it.

There is usually nothing positive to say about it.

There is usually nothing positive to say about it.

Go live in a cave in the woods.

"There is nothing *different* about Avatar than any other nowadays movies".

Yes there is.

Avatar has more advanced and integrated 3d effects than in any other film yet released. That's what makes it special.

Yeh, open your eyes Skull.

I have seen Avatar too and I agree it was awesome. But there is a point to be made: it's not about the 3D effects but the leap forward in movie history. It's different than anything we've seen before. Take early video games for example: visually they were spectacular by the standard of those days but not by today's standards. Star Wars was great back then but the visual techniques have advanced since then. We shouldn't judge the quality of movies back then by today's standards, it's about the leap forward they represented back then. Holding spaceships with thin threads was good quality back then.

Skull is entitled to his own opinions though. He's obviously wrong about the special effects part, but effects like that aren't rally what usually makes the movie, it takes an incredible storyline, as well as a good cast. I haven't seen Avatar yet due to my claustrophobia, but I may see the Blue-Ray release.

We'll just see. In 1 year, nobody will talk about Avatar anymore. It will be completely forgotten, unless there comes a sequel. It will be forgotten because new movies that idiotic people like to call "awesome" are going to be made. No movie these days are awesome enough to maintain their popularity to become classics.

Avatar has more advanced and integrated 3d effects than in any other film yet released. That's what makes it special.

And are you saying THAT'S what makes it special? No no no no no, you just made me want to see it even less than I wanted before, which was about 0%.

Skull, the effects they use in the original Star Wars are like thin threads holding spaceship models in front of a black background. How could you even compare that with modern effects?

Hehe, another one of those who try to challenge old special effects against new special effects. Sure, new movies have nice special effects and that stuff. While back in the days, you had to bust your ass to create special effects, while nowadays a simple kid with the slightest bit of special effect talent could create basic special effects. I give much more respect to the older guys for actually WORKING to do those effects, but these guys have so much easier time to do the effects. That is why the new movie do not become classics, not to even mention the fact that movies nowadays have really bad storylines.

And no, original Star Wars actually looks very real. The blue dudes in Avatar just look like blue pieces of annoyange on the screen.

You seem so immature when you're basically judging all modern things and saying that they aren't as good as before.

Of course it's not. It's modern stuff.

I don't understand you. You seem to give no respect to the old classics which are, in fact, much better than the new ones. Talk about games or movies or anything, modern stuff cannot beat old classics.
You seem the kind of people who don't even realise movies have always been MADE. You just seem to think that old movies appeared to the cinemas all by themselves, while in fact MUCH more work was put into them.

I'd never actually heard of Avatar until that other thread about it, which is odd because I love that sort of thing.
Anyway, went to see it at the Imax recently, it's great! Yes, the plot was pretty straightforward and predictable, but who cares

Yes, the plot was pretty straightforward and predictable, but who cares

That is exactly what I meant.

"While back in the days, you had to bust your ass to create special effects, while nowadays a simple kid with the slightest bit of special effect talent could create basic special effects."

And then also any simple kid with the slightest bit of special effect talent could create basic special effects. I've almost finished watching the extended extras for Lord of the Rings (another groundbreaking 'classic'), an incredible amount of work goes into these films and you can't just brush that off. If you prefer older films, fine, but the good old ones are no better than the good new ones! Leaving aside personal preference for the genres.

Like lots of films. Plot isn't (always) everything.

Back in the days, it took one month only to create what kid's create these days with Windows Movie Maker.

You actually brought up a very good movie. Lord of the Rings is one of the very few movies created in 2000 century to be an awesome one. But then again, the latest part is 7 years old and a classic so...

Back in the days, it took one month only to create what kid's create these days with Windows Movie Maker.

How is that an argument in favor of anything? Technology advances and the time to create/manufacture something is reduced. But that doesn't mean anything. It doesn't diminish the effects, it just says something about the required time. Avatar can't be created with Windows Movie Maker and many new techniques were developed by the Avatar crew; it has been a lot of work to create Avatar and the fact that a kid may be able to create it in a few hours in 2075 doesn't diminish it now or then.

I was answering to what Sparrow said.

What's the point in this. I don't like Avatar, I certainly don't have to. I want to give respect to classic movies (and games for that matter). I'm ready to forget about this, but I have a right to say my opinion about things.

Of course it's not. It's modern stuff.

I don't understand you. You seem to give no respect to the old classics which are, in fact, much better than the new ones. Talk about games or movies or anything, modern stuff cannot beat old classics.
You seem the kind of people who don't even realise movies have always been MADE. You just seem to think that old movies appeared to the cinemas all by themselves, while in fact MUCH more work was put into them.

Skull's right i that aspect. nothing can beat the classics. It's true people had to work hard to acheive the effects that we can so easily make. Sure, you can make walls vanish or ghost images to appear whenever, but with the ways they did it back then, it was just so creepy how real it would look.
Any idiot can get Flash and make something, and pro'lly give up halfway through. People didn't rely on computers, they had to actually use their brains to creat these things. (don't act shocked at this revelation, you use yor brain all the time.)

It's because your opinion is unfounded; you say you don't like Avatar, but you haven't seen the film. It's one thing to say you don't have an interest in the film... but to say you don't like it? You've got no grounds for that.

Also, yes, what makes this film so special is the 3d CGI. It's truly breathtaking. It will most certainly be talked about for years to come; I'd be stunned if it wasn't.

"I give much more respect to the older guys for actually WORKING to do those effects" - Now that's a rather ignorant statement, Skull. I'd wager that a ton of man-hours and effort went into creating the effects for Avatar. It's not like they just slapped them together in a few spare days.

What's the point in this. I don't like Avatar, I certainly don't have to. I want to give respect to classic movies (and games for that matter). I'm ready to forget about this, but I have a right to say my opinion about things.

I've never said you can't have your own opinion. I simply said that you shouldn't judge when you haven't even watched it. How could you not like something you haven't seen??

How could you not like something you haven't seen??

Trust me, I just know I would not like it even if I went and saw it.

Now that's a rather ignorant statement, Skull. I'd wager that a ton of man-hours and effort went into creating the effects for Avatar. It's not like they just slapped them together in a few spare days.

Sabre, I think you understood my point wrong, because I explained it a little unclearly. What I meant was that back in the days, it was obviously much more harder to work on those special effects and still, the classics have almost egual effects as the new ones. Another thing I meant was that they actually had to BUILD the computers that they made the special effects with. So they literally busted their ass for making the effects.

Also, yes, what makes this film so special is the 3d CGI. It's truly breathtaking. It will most certainly be talked about for years to come; I'd be stunned if it wasn't.

Nobody can say anything about that, because nobody can see to the future, but somehow I have the feeling that what you said will not happen. I'll guess there's just the opinion of waiting and seeing.

Trust me, I just know I would not like it even if I went and saw it.

Hehe, here you were criticizing Krisknox for commenting a game he hadn't played. Now you're eligible for an opinion about a movie you never saw?

Avatar is stretching the limits of what movies can do. Whether or not you're stretching the limits now or 50 years ago doesn't really matter. Just because we now have much larger pyramids doesn't make the great pyramid of Giza unimpressive, even today.

Meta, have you actually been paying attention to this thread? I am defensing the old classic, that Oddworld -game is. Now, I have seen the trailer/teaser of Avatar, but Krisknox probably has not seen Oddworld trailer/teaser, so he can't even tell what style of a game is it, but as I said, I've seen the teaser of Avatar and know what style of a movie it is, so yeah, that's completely different thing.

Avatar is stretching the limits of what movies can do

That's the thing. I don't see Avatar scretching the limits of what movies can do anyhow. It is just another movie with special effects and a bad storyline, like almost every movie of these days.

Just because we now have much larger pyramids doesn't make the great pyramid of Giza unimpressive, even today.

That is kind of a bad example, seeing as pyramids are such old buildings (is that the right word for that?). Anyway, let's take skyscrapers as examples instead.
If you take the world's very first scryscrapers and put them to battle against the new skyscrapers, the old scyscrapers have taken a lot more guts to make. Nowadays we have all sorts of machines that can help us make those giant buildings but back in the days, there were only very few machines and much more was made with human hands, and took a lot more time. So without a guestion, the old workers and the old buildings themselves deserve more respect than the ones we build nowadays.

FULL MARKS FOR BIOSHOCK!? Say whaaaat?

"That's the thing. I don't see Avatar scretching the limits of what movies can do anyhow. It is just another movie with special effects and a bad storyline, like almost every movie of these days".

That's the thing. You don't see Avatar stetching the limits of what movies can do because you haven't seen it's technology in use and don't know how much it improves the cinematic experience. It's not just another movie with special effects and a bad storyline.

I have seen the trailer/teaser of Avatar

The trailer didn't show the best part of the movie, thus you can't judge the whole movie by that.

Do you know why I'm arguing with you, Skull? It's because every time someone mention they like a new game of movie, you're saying that game or movie sucks without having a good point why they're so bad. You're just saying that older things are better.

Of course you can have your opinions. But they sucks. Sucks balls.

Now it's enough of arguing from my part. LAWL.

The trailer didn't show the best parts of the movie, but it did show me enough to not like the movie.

Now EvilEarl, you are probably just a 10-16 year old kiddo who thinks everything created nowadays is awesome.

I have an appreciation for the old classics, whether they be video game or movie. (The original series for Spyro and Crash Bandicoot, anyone?) Very few things created nowadays are even decent, whether they be celebrities, books (that's why classics are old), government policies, jokes (who wants to travel back in time to kill Chuck Norris so the jokes about him never existed?), and other crap. Avatar is good, now that I've calmed down, but I think we've just raised the bar too high for all the wrong things (Avatar gets massive debate about how good it is while leaders of various countries, including my own, f*ck up half the stuff they touch.)

And also, if you read EvilEarl's profile, you'd know that he is Asshats number #2.

Is that an honor or an insult to be accused of being his alternate account? I doubt that guy knows what half the crap in my profile is about.

if anyone insults starwars again ill rip every single organ out of their body.

Skin is considered an organ, but it isn't in their body so you can't rip it out, you can only rip it off.

That's one of the most fitting uses I've ever seen of the flame warriors page. =)

While I don't share Skull's sentiments about everything new sucking, I do agree about special effects and Avatar not being an all-time classic. CGI, in general, looks like crap. You're aware that you're looking at a computer graphic, it doesn't look like it belongs in a movie. While real hand-built special effects are usually easily recognizable as such, it's not obtrusive like CGI, the stuff is still really there. Star Wars is a good example. Compare any of the creatures in the original trilogy to the CGI creatures that were added in the "improved" version.

About Avatar, while it will probably be lauded as a groundbreaking movie for years to come, and after that get honourable mentions as the movie that brought movies to a whole new level, as a story, it doesn't make the cut. Once new movies come that surpass it technologically, it'll be largely forgotten. Who remembers movies now that had nothing going for them except groundbreaking graphics 20 years ago?

I haven't seen Avatar, however, and I'm sure I will be blown away by the 3D when I do.

@fb5
heh yeah i was gonna say somthing like that, since your dick is an external organ also, but for a reason i cant say due to an unnamed persons duck army, i decided against it.

Erwin: Yeah, I was going to go with 'Hotfeetbonca', but I decided against it.
Pillbug: Sounds....erotic.

Who remembers movies now that had nothing going for them except groundbreaking graphics 20 years ago?

A lot of people. But given that the older members of this forum are in their mid-twentys, we're not going to remember those films.

Jus' saying, like.

Once new movies come that surpass it technologically, it'll be largely forgotten.

Yes of course. Everybody forgot about Star Wars a few years after its release. Nobody considered it a classic, and it certainly gained no fan-base.

Who remembers movies now that had nothing going for them except groundbreaking graphics 20 years ago?

~20 years ago, the film Total Recall was made. It was one of the first films to use pre-rendered 3d graphics. Everybody's forgotten about that too. To the point that they're remaking it.

I haven't seen Avatar, however
I didn't read the book but...

Personally I liked Avatar. In the cinema I found a half eaten small popcorn container under my seat.

Dude, nobody forgot about Star Wars. Anyone over 8 years old these days still knows the original Star Wars, but give no respect to it because they are arses.

You see that thing over there, Skull? That thing flying into the distance. That was his point.

I think you missed it.

And maybe you have missed every post Striker ever has posted on this forum.

You see that thing over there, Skull? That thing flying into the distance. That was my point.

I think you missed it.

I'm talking about your response to yeoldetoast's post.

Star Wars, nor Total Recall, weren't popular solely because they had snazzy special effects. Is there anything noteworthy in Avatar, other than the stunning 3D visuals?

Plenty of good movies are still known and seen by people today, despite being made decades before our time. However, I do not know a single movie that has survived the test of time just by being technologically impressive at the time it was made. Avatar will live on in box office grossings, in wikipedia articles and as a question in trivia shows, not as a great movie people will watch.

I hate popcorn.

Dude, nobody forgot about Star Wars. Anyone over 8 years old these days still knows the original Star Wars, but give no respect to it because they are arses.

You just fully and irrefutably proved Striker's point.

I just proved what Striker said? Hell, who needs proof for that?

I think he meant "you just fully and irrefutably proved Yeoldtoast's point". But I may be wrong... this is getting confusing

However, I do not know a single movie that has survived the test of time just by being technologically impressive at the time it was made

If George Lucas had shot Star Wars in his garage and had not employed any of the effects from Industrial Light and Magic would it have gained any success whatsoever? Would people go and watch it and say they honestly liked it for the story, though the visuals were monumentally droll?

I can provide more examples if you'd like

Is there anything noteworthy in Avatar, other than the stunning 3D visuals?

An interesting story perhaps, it's well directed, it has a good cast, a decent soundtrack, but then of course there's the LOL IT RIPS OFF DANCES WIV WOLVES!!1! AND POCAH0NTAS!! crew, as if to suggest that no other films made these days have any elements in common with any other plotline from any other film or other medium unless explicitly stated, and that it somehow lessens Avatar as a fine example of modern cinema.
Did you know that Star Wars borrows heavily from Akira Kurosawa's filmography, and was oft compared to Lord of the Rings for similar themes? Not that anyone here is familiar with Akira Kurosawa. I don't hear people denouncing Star Wars because it mildly ripped off something else.

Avatar will live on in box office grossings
Of course it will. DVD sales will be through the roof, and generally people will rent it out from their video shop. It will of course be rerun on television every year, because such a high box office number suggests people actually liked it.

...in wikipedia articles
Suggesting that no other movies have wikipedia articles

not as a great movie people will watch.

Wait a second... So you're telling me that when everyone went and 'saw' Avatar at their local cinemas, they had blindfolds on, or did they buy their tickets and sit outside? Or did they walk in then immediately walk out? I certainly didn't, and nobody else at my cinema did. but I suppose I cannot account for anyone else.

I ate the popcorn, it was delicious because it was free.

Would people go and watch it and say they honestly liked it for the story, though the visuals were monumentally droll?

The visual effects were great at the time and I am sure many people only went and saw it because of them. However, Star Wars ALSO had a great story and that is what is keeping it interesting today, something Avatar does not have.

An interesting story perhaps, it's well directed, it has a good cast, a decent soundtrack, but then of course there's the LOL IT RIPS OFF DANCES WIV WOLVES!!1! AND POCAH0NTAS!!

It has not an interesting story from what I've read. If it has no interesting story it can't be well directed. I don't know any of the cast that played in the movie. Soundtrack is probably the only good thing in the movie.

Did you know that Star Wars borrows heavily from Akira Kurosawa's filmography, and was oft compared to Lord of the Rings for similar themes? Not that anyone here is familiar with Akira Kurosawa. I don't hear people denouncing Star Wars because it mildly ripped off something else.

Did you know that Avatar borrows outside looks of humans as their characters only making them blue with special effects?

DVD sales will be through the roof, and generally people will rent it out from their video shop. It will of course be rerun on television every year, because such a high box office number suggests people actually liked it.

Nobody is going to buy the DVD because it becomes another movie that is shown in TV every half a year on the same channel, and it becomes boring instantly.

Suggesting that no other movies have wikipedia articles

I don't think that was exactly Scratcher's point.

Wait a second... So you're telling me that when everyone went and 'saw' Avatar at their local cinemas, they had blindfolds on, or did they buy their tickets and sit outside? Or did they walk in then immediately walk out? I certainly didn't, and nobody else at my cinema did. but I suppose I cannot account for anyone else.

That's another one of his points I think you understood wrong.

Please people, I did not choose Star Wars as the EXACT movie that is the only one that is a classic. I only chose it in battle against Avatar, because it was the first movie that came to my mind. So quit your yapping about "Star Wars vs. Avatar" and think of "Star Wars" as every classic movie.

Oh also, popcorn isn't that great.

something Avatar does not have.

I tell ye, Sir, once again - Do not judge the movie Avatar if you haven't seen it.

Common answer to this:

But hey! I watched the trailer, and I can probably tell by that!!

Not really. I didn't find the trailer so interesting but I liked the actual movie. Go see the movie. If you really hate it when you've seen it, I'll accept any and all thoughts you have about it.

There are soooo many poorly thought out statements in that post, Skull. I'm not going to go through each individually, 'cos... well, this is getting silly now.

"If it has no interesting story it can't be well directed. I don't know any of the cast that played in the movie".
The first point is wrong. A film can be well directed without having a good story.

As for the second point... what has that got to do with anything? Just because you haven't heard of people it doesn't mean they aren't excellent actors. Also, Sigourney Weaver is in it. Surely you've heard of her?

I don't know why I'm bothering to continue discussing this. Then again, I do slow down for car crashes.

EDIT: Just to make this clear, I'm not trying to insult you, Skull. But your arguments are quite bizarre

I love Avatar! It's the best movie ever! It doesn't need anything but the visual effects to be awesome! In fact, it doesn't need ANYTHING at all but t exist to be the most awesome movie ever!! It is like every other movie of todays, but it is still a true classic!!

There, happy now?

You still don't get it.

Ok, seriously now.

I would understand if you said Avatar is a good and decent movie of todays, but saying it is the most awesome movie of all time, only because it has good special effects? Also saying that it beats the classics is just silly, Avatar doesn't have a good storyline and plot as far as I've read about it. Not saying that sotryline is the ONLY thing that matters, but a movie needs a good one to survive.

"but saying it is the most awesome movie of all time, only because it has good special effects?"

Nobody said that.

"Also saying that it beats the classics is just silly"

Or that.

Unless I've managed to miss the posts, in which case I'd appreciate it if you pointed me in the right direction. I will then slap whoever wrote those silly, silly words.

Marpro has said something like that in one of his posts in this thread. Not only that, but many people have ONCE AGAIN insulted me only for saying I don't like Avatar and that there are much better movies out there.

No, he didn't. You're making things up to prove your point; discussions don't work like that.

It's like every other movie of today? Reeeeaaaally?

Though having nothing special can be special too. Gotta love this.

Skull, the effects they use in the original Star Wars are like thin threads holding spaceship models in front of a black background. How could you even compare that with modern effects? Don't even judge Avatar if you haven't seen it. You seem so immature when you're basically judging all modern things and saying that they aren't as good as before.

There is usually nothing positive to say about it.

There is usually nothing positive to say about it.

There is usually nothing positive to say about it.

There is usually nothing positive to say about it.

Go live in a cave in the woods.

There is where Marpro insulted both Star Wars and me.

/bangs head against monitor.

Uh Skull, you really don't know what Sabre meant do you? What he meant was not that you had to indicate where Marpro insulted you or starwars but rather he asked you where people said things that lead to these kind of statements from your side:

"but saying it is the most awesome movie of all time, only because it has good special effects?"

"Also saying that it beats the classics is just silly"

So, in other words Sabretrout asked where people said something like this:

Avatar is the most awesome movie of all time only because it has good special effects

Avatar beats the classics

If nobody said that you're just making up points you can dismiss, which is known as a straw man. Which is just bad reasoning.

Read 95% of this thread's posts and you'll find them.

The movie is great. We all got different opinions, but that guy on Youtube is silly. It really got the world, even better than Titatic it seems.

Off Topic: Woah! The poll's results are very even!

Oooohhh!! Time for a new one.

Like I said on the Dink Chat recently about this thread:

<Welcomebot> It all comes down to pride. Those still fighting for dominance within the thread are bound for failiure. Those who accept victory is inevitable, and such a thread has become a War of Attrition, retain their pride. Those who fight further onward are just noobs

'Course, since that was on Welcomebot, most people in the Dink Chat who almost never leave it (except by using /nick """|sleeping or whatever) probably didn't see that. Also; text not in Italics wasn't quoted.

Hey, hey, hey, hey... Since when does "Go live in a cave in the woods" count as an insult?

Pretty much all films have lacklustre stories, and should only be watched for the visuals and possibly the soundtrack. If you want a good story read a freaking book.

I do read books, but even the classics that I've read lately (Animal Farm, 1984, Brave New World) have too many political elements in common with my own country today.

Consequently films based on books still don't have a very good story, just to keep the distinction.

Yeah, it's a shame it seems that you didn't really understand them.

It really got the world, even better than Titatic it seems.

The world is less intellectual now, is all.

The world is less intellectual now, is all.

Why do you think we let politicians do crazy sh*t these days?

In grade 6 (only a few years ago for me) pretty much the whole class read like shoot. H-h-he walk-d-ed to the shop-p. I just left the class behind and read on myself.