Yes I agree with this. I don't know what goggles people are using to say that Avatar's visuals look badly or have dated.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
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
- Thread starter OrangeAtlas
- Start date
- Status
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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
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
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.
Ok.. so apparently you don't know what it is you're even linking too because you're just lazily posting synonyms. Snoke in TLJ is not an example of hamming it up.
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.
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.
Not when Dawn/War of the Planet of the Apes exist. Nothing has matched Caesar
I originally said non-human non-animal, in the post you quoted. 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
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.
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:
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.
Stop leaving out my boi Rocket.
He is awesome and I love the Trash Panda.
It will finally dethrone Endgame. I think John Wick 3 over Pokemon OW is possible, or it will get close.
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.
No doubt about that. I stand by that being the best CGI character I've ever seen.
Charlie from BOT predicts $5.7M for Endgame and $5.4M for Pikachu.
https://forums.boxofficetheory.com/...g-470-pdp-369/?do=findComment&comment=3856621
https://forums.boxofficetheory.com/...g-470-pdp-369/?do=findComment&comment=3856621
Pre-sales are extremely strong. Trades have it at $30-35M, but I'm expecting at least $40M based on pre-sales.
Is it? Like I said those are nitpicks, I had to actively rewatch those scenes to notice something didn't look quite right. It's not something I'd find in my first, second or even third viewing of the movie.
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
For me, I don't think any CG character has yet to top the ones featured in Dawn and War for the Planet of the Apes.
To each his own.
Those nitpicks eat at me everytime I watch the movie.
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.
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.
It's a wrinkled old dude sitting in a chair for 5 minutes. Not even close.
Let me extend an olive branch between both sides of this debate and remind you that Tim Burton made this and it made over $1 billion at worldwide box office
Look at this piece of shit
Look at this piece of shit
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.
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.
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.
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.
This is the real reason the Australian customs force punished Johnny Depp.
Burton Alice in Wonderland was butt-ugly. It didn't even look good in 2010.
That would be the crossing of the streams between Endgame and IW
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.
I really do.
Also need to watch Fury Road, and the newer Apes flicks.
Yep. Disney rode those Avatar 3D coattails for all they were worth. They actually kicked Avatar off a tonne of screens thanks to their engagement for Alice.
That piece of shit also kickstarted Disney's trend of remaking their animated films in live-action.
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.
- Status