• Introducing Image Options for ResetEra 2.0! Check the left side navigation bar to show or hide images, avatars, covers, and embedded media. More details at the link.
  • Community Spotlight sign-ups are open once again for both Gaming and EtcetEra Hangout threads! If you want to shine a spotlight on your community, please register now.

Wkd Box Office - 5•10-12•19 - Pikachu does like Ash and fails to be #1, Endgame's Arceus-like run slows, Tolkien can't Hustle audience interest

What difference does it make if they're in action or not? We're talking about believability/realism as a character, and his animations/mocap/level of detail is on a completely different level. I'd say Planet of the Apes is the only thing you could argue as better in that regard, but again, an animal character.
That’s what I’m saying. When I see Snoke all I can see is Serkis on a chair almost hamming it up. When I see Thanos or Hul, I see the actual characters. They seem real. There is no breaking in the suspension of disbelief there. Let’s agree to disagree here because this is completely pointless.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,607
Rocket has more character than any Na’vi in Avatar. Thanos too. Those 2 are incredible achievements in term of cgi and characterization.

Those Avatar gifs up there are uncanny and atrocious. However If i’m to believe the cameron fans here i’m hoping Avatar 2 makes another huge leap in animation and effects, after all it could benefit the whole scope of filmmaking.
 
Oct 25, 2017
17,730
USA
That’s what I’m saying. When I see Snoke all I can see is Serkis on a chair almost hamming it up. When I see Thanos or Hul, I see the actual characters. They seem real. There is no breaking in the suspension of disbelief there. Let’s agree to disagree here because this is completely pointless.
Lol.... I don't think you know what ham is. He doesn't look or seem real, but Thanos does (and I think Thanos looks quite good)? Strange take
 

jett

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,960
Jfc, I leave for 5 minutes and it’s back to MCU bashing. You guys don’t have to shit on Thanos to make Avatar look good for Pete’s sake
What an interesting take.

By interesting I mean totally bizarre and the complete opposite of what is going on. Then again you're the one claiming MCU fans were reasonable, right? lol
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,773
Jfc, I leave for 5 minutes and it’s back to MCU bashing. You guys don’t have to shit on Thanos to make Avatar look good for Pete’s sake
It's embarrassing in both directions, honestly.

"Avatar is more impressive because the MCU is 22 films" - as if grooming and growing an audience over a decade of films is not an historic achievement. Nor has a sequel ever set the new high water mark.

"Avatar was just big because of 3D" - besides being not true, it hardly matters why it was successful when it set such an untouchable record.

Or legs (Avatar) vs. huge opening (Endgame) - as if either accomplishment isn't total insanity that was considered impossible at the time.

Et cetera, ad nauseum.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,951
Can it be two more weeks already so that Endgame can finally surpass Avatar and I don't have to see more Avatar nitpicking?

Some of people's most beloved movies will be torn to shred if they had as much scrutiny put onto them as Avatar.
If it makes a difference mine is out of love.

Cameron is capable of much better; I'm hoping Avatar 2 is his Martian instead of Alien: Covenant.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,951
Come on, the visuals were the only thing Avatar had going for people who hated it and now those are considered bad by today's standard? Jimbo just can't win with you people lol
I mean the visuals can still be amazing and I take issue with the CGI characters lack of emotion/uncanniness.

Avatar is a technically marvel, not perfection. That title belongs to Fury Road my friends.
 
Rocket has more character than any Na’vi in Avatar. Thanos too. Those 2 are incredible achievements in term of cgi and characterization.

Those Avatar gifs up there are uncanny and atrocious. However If i’m to believe the cameron fans here i’m hoping Avatar 2 makes another huge leap in animation and effects, after all it could benefit the whole scope of filmmaking.
This. And even then I don't think anyone understimates what Cameron did with CGI, it was an important achievement. But far from the best we've seen since then.
 
Oct 28, 2017
1,322
If it makes a difference mine is out of love.

Cameron is capable of much better; I'm hoping Avatar 2 is his Martian instead of Alien: Covenant.
This is also me in a nutshell. Cameron was a masterful film maker who created wonderful films. Then, after over a decade of wait since Titanic, we were promised an epic sci fi action adventure. Instead we got Avatar. Fucking Avatar.

I remember coming out of Avatar just confused and mixed. Like i tried really hard to like it but just came out disappointed
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
15,372
How is the BO tracking for John Wick? Better than 2?

Which is why I'm keeping it to non-human non-animal. I agree that it's the best example but I'm talking about having to create a character essentially from the ground up, like Thanos, Snoke, Avatar, etc.
Ah, I thought you meant non-human / animal character, not non-human/animal. Might be due to recency, but I’d say it’s Ruffalo Hulk in Endgame.
 
Oct 25, 2017
17,730
USA
How is the BO tracking for John Wick? Better than 2?


Ah, I thought you meant non-human / animal character, not non-human/animal. Might be due to recency, but I’d say it’s Ruffalo Hulk in Endgame.
He looks impressive but I don't think it's close to being on the same level. None of the CGI in Marvel films in particular has been among the best on that front IMO. Not to say they look bad by any means, Hulk and Thanos both look very good.
 
Oct 28, 2017
2,934
I mean the visuals can still be amazing and I take issue with the CGI characters lack of emotion/uncanniness.

Avatar is a technically marvel, not perfection. That title belongs to Fury Road my friends.
I do agree that there's an uncanniness to certain characters since they didn't have the same amount of effort put into them as the leads (Sigourney Weaver gif) but it doesn't hamper my overall view of the movie as a technical marvel because those are nitpicks compared to greater issues like the story being yet another white savior tale.

Avatar is not perfect but some people here are being hyperbolic about how bad it looks especially in comparison to something that isn't much of a step-up like the MCU.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,951
I do agree that there's an uncanniness to certain characters since they didn't have the same amount of effort put into them as the leads (Sigourney Weaver gif) but it doesn't hamper my overall view of the movie as a technical marvel because those are nitpicks compared to greater issues like the story being yet another white savior tale.

Avatar is not perfect but some people here are being hyperbolic about how bad it looks especially in comparison to something that isn't much of a step-up like the MCU.
But when your vision involves selling this world of cgi characters that is a...problem.
 
Nov 1, 2017
2,762
How is the BO tracking for John Wick? Better than 2?
$30-35M, maybe $40M+ with strong WOM. I'm hoping for John Wick 3 to greatly exceed tracking with a $50M+ OW, but $30-35M is already on par with John Wick 2.
https://variety.com/2019/film/news/avengers-endgame-box-office-john-wick-chapter-3-1203214880/
I was curious about this too. All credit to stealthyfrog for looking for the info. About the same as John Wick 2, but I think most of us hopes it opens higher.

John Wick is awesome
 
Dec 22, 2017
556
It's embarrassing in both directions, honestly.

"Avatar is more impressive because the MCU is 22 films" - as if grooming and growing an audience over a decade of films is not an historic achievement. Nor has a sequel ever set the new high water mark.

"Avatar was just big because of 3D" - besides being not true, it hardly matters why it was successful when it set such an untouchable record.

Or legs (Avatar) vs. huge opening (Endgame) - as if either accomplishment isn't total insanity that was considered impossible at the time.

Et cetera, ad nauseum.
you are like a light in the darkness
 
Oct 25, 2017
727
You all drunk .

Avatar CG is acceptable, but very dated. It's the actors that elevate it above the plasticine look and give it character. Thanos CG is a comp gen removed... because it's a comp gen removed. But with a less cohesive art style. Gollum without Serkis performance isn't believable at all. Still screens look terrible today. The Naa'vi escape that by being a comp gen removed from that. The fact that Avatar is like 99% CG is both insanely impressive,and partly the reason parts haven't aged well.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,014
You all drunk .

Avatar CG is acceptable, but very dated. It's the actors that elevate it above the plasticine look and give it character. Thanos CG is a comp gen removed... because it's a comp gen removed. But with a less cohesive art style. Gollum without Serkis performance isn't believable at all. Still screens look terrible today. The Naa'vi escape that by being a comp gen removed from that. The fact that Avatar is like 99% CG is both insanely impressive,and partly the reason parts haven't aged well.
Gotta look at Gollum in The Hobbit.
 
Oct 26, 2017
8,649
Earth 616
Jatinder is reporting $5.7m for Endgame, $5.4m for Pokemon.

First time it dips below IW, but it's probably recovering well into the weekend since what truly hurt IW legs last year was Deadpool 2. John Wick 3 will be big, but far from Deadpool 2 big. Also, not really direct competition like DP2.

Impressive jump for Pokemon, all things considered. It should break into $200m dom ir even something like close to $250m.

You all drunk .

Avatar CG is acceptable, but very dated. It's the actors that elevate it above the plasticine look and give it character. Thanos CG is a comp gen removed... because it's a comp gen removed. But with a less cohesive art style. Gollum without Serkis performance isn't believable at all. Still screens look terrible today. The Naa'vi escape that by being a comp gen removed from that. The fact that Avatar is like 99% CG is both insanely impressive,and partly the reason parts haven't aged well.
This. Also, I fully expect Cameron to use all the advancements with CGI in the next films and take the crown again on that department. Today, Thanos, Hulk, Rocket and Groot are Kings.
 
Oct 25, 2017
17,730
USA
It’s a wrinkled old dude sitting in a chair for 5 minutes. Not even close.
What does this have to do with how impressive a character is in terms of CGI/tech/implementation in the film. Gollum isn't an action star and many of his most famous scenes are just emoting and expression. He's still regarded as one of the most impressive CGI characters ever. This is a bad metric.
 
Oct 26, 2017
8,649
Earth 616
What does this have to do with how impressive a character is in terms of CGI/tech/implementation in the film. Gollum isn't an action star and many of his most famous scenes are just emoting and expression. He's still regarded as one of the most impressive CGI characters ever. This is a bad metric.
Gollum is leaps and bounds more impressive than Snoke. Snoke is a plot device of a character. And this is coming from someone that sees The Last Jedi as the best Star Wars film of all time. Snoke by itself isn't not even close of a highlight of that.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,014
Yeah I honestly don't find Snoke that impressive. But I might be biased because I'm not a huge fan of his design.

Alita is probably the most impressive CG character this year. Though I still think Neytiri and Caesar are more convincing.