BerserkFury Posted February 13, 2012 Report Share Posted February 13, 2012 I completely disagree with that idea renketsu. Albert Einstein was the on who said the secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources but nonetheless I think he meant that in an engineering type of sense. Like where humans get the idea to develop the next big technological breakthrough. But when it comes to movies, they're mostly invoked by inner human feelings and ous species develops those in more complex manners as we evolve. Meaning that if we're constantly evolving, there wont ever be a shortage of feeling invoked movie themes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mom Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 (edited) I think a more simple answer would be: As more new shit happens in history, the more new movies we'll have that's about them or has aspects within the movie themselves that relates to them. Edited February 15, 2012 by TMRaven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirtless Crackhead Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 Whatever, I dislike movies that promote primitivism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mom Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 What if in Avatar 2 all the na'vi were sitting around their bonfire taking DMT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirtless Crackhead Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 Still wouldn't like it. I hope Avatar 2 is mankind returning to that planet, and neutron bombing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Acid Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 I was expecting this... world is money hungry. one awesome movie means they have to make more. im not expecting much from the sequels. batman suprised me how the second was better than the first but that's rare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirtless Crackhead Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 They make more movies in a series so long as they make money and the property rights holders can be paid enough to let them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Acid Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Yup, but they don't do that for some television series... ever heard of Surface? or the typical example to all sic-fi fans: Firefly. Funny thing is the main actor (don't remember his name) tried to buy the rights to the series to bring it back, knowing that all the past actors are willing to take part and that they definitely have the funding and support from the fans, they just did not want to give the rights away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirtless Crackhead Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 That's when it's time for a create re-visioning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 fuck the navi! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Acid Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 That's when it's time for a create re-visioning.No matter what we make it'll always be something already made... its nearly impossible to make something purely innovative, sadly enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirtless Crackhead Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 Innovation is tough, rehashing old shit, i.e. remakes; is much easier to profit of off. Best part, the property rights holders are many times dead or broke, so they are easier to get onboard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerserkFury Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Dood is talking about this, I think: yeah thats right thats what I was talking about. & I stand by my point. I do agree that the world is ever insatiably money hungry but you gotta take into account those few directors and produces that truly aspire to create movies and forms of self expression and art. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rachis Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 I think people need to learn the difference between "I don't like this" and "this is bad." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirtless Crackhead Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 Sometimes it's both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rachis Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 Avatar may not have been very original, but it was presented pretty well. Story aside, it was a cool movie to watch. Doesn't make it bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mom Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 What's bad about avatar is it ushered in the era of 3d movies that weren't rendered well for 3d. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 It also made movies with CGI a lot harder to watch cuz they just aren't as sik with it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirtless Crackhead Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 Still, fuck Avatar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 Pandora sorta does look like Bolivia huh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirtless Crackhead Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 You nailed it buddy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rachis Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) Avatar looked damn impressive with 3-D. The industry then thought that the same thing would apply to every other movie they tried. This obviously failed, but it's mainly because they tried doing it with movies that really don't need to be viewed in 3-D in the first place. Avatar was begging for it. The environment felt huge and I believe that it was designed that way on purpose. However, Avatar has been my only good 3-D experience. Overall I think it's painfully obvious that 3-D tech just isn't ready yet nor do I find it necessary for most things anyways. Edited February 24, 2012 by Rachis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirtless Crackhead Posted February 25, 2012 Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 Yeah, problem being 3D is hardly anything more than a gimmick, it doesn't make/break a movie. If that's Avatar's best feature, which I think it is, it doesn't really say good things about the movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rachis Posted February 28, 2012 Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 (edited) I agree that 3D tech is just not ready yet. However, that's not saying it can't be implemented very well and save for the ridiculously painful intro I would have to say that Avatar did an excellent job with it. You'd have to, you know, actually see Avatar in 3D to have a justified opinion on it. And yes, 3D absolutely does make Avatar a better movie. Edited February 28, 2012 by Rachis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR Posted February 28, 2012 Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 Avatar in 3D was fucking awesome The script was garbage but I didn't even care cuz it looked so rad. Pretty much ruined CGI-based movies for me lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.