James Cameron's "Avatar"

[lazarus]

I'm sorry, but that looks pretty lame.

It's a little sad that Cameron doesn't seem to have improved on the Lucas CGI worlds and creatures at all, and in fact they look even LESS realistic.

 

[GirlsAloudFan]

It's just a sci-fi/adventure film at the end of the day, right? So all of the squawking about the CGI will be forgotten if Cameron delivers a great story with some great action. And I have a feeling this will do that. So, yeah, whatever.

Also, the alien girl is really hot. And I don't like it when she cries.

 

[Lancemc]

I'm sorry, but that looks pretty lame.

It's a little sad that Cameron doesn't seem to have improved on the Lucas CGI worlds and creatures at all, and in fact they look even LESS realistic.

I'm not sure how you can say they look less realistic than the Lucas creations. Well, strike that, maybe you can. I have a lot of problems with this trailer... the way it's cut, how they choose to represent the film world and its creations, etc. I'm not sure about the actual Avatar/Na'vi designs yet. They might have skewed a bit too close to human design, and I think that's what causing most people to recoil initially. I did at first. But the more I watch this and look at the stuff in detail the more impressed I'm becoming. There's some major uncanny valley stuff going on, but I think by the time we're watching a full film it will pass.

I'm glad you brought up the Lucas comparision though, because that's the first thing I thought of. Although I do think it's a great forward evolution of what Lucas accomplished in the prequel films. The fidelity and detail of the environments specifically here is far ahead of Revenge of the Sith, although much in a similar style. And as for the creature designs, as I said, I do think they're a considerable improvement, but there's a lot here that causes one to recoil at first. Which I think will pass. This trailer certainly doesn't do the film any service. It's also hard to say how the advances performance-capture and virtual camera stuff expresses in the film too, because the trailer doesn't offer anything longer than 2-seconds of unbroken footage, which is frustrating. And of course you have shitty quicktime compression to account for.

 

[If you shout...]

I'm sorry, but that looks pretty lame.

It's a little sad that Cameron doesn't seem to have improved on the Lucas CGI worlds and creatures at all, and in fact they look even LESS realistic.

This. 1000 times, this. This looks hilariously bad. Wow. I am floored. Actually lol'd, when those horses started "running."

 

[lazarus]

Just further proof that ILM is the gold standard. And I disagree with Lance about the environments featured here. Maybe they are more detailed, but they simply don't look more real than what's in the prequels.

 

[Irvine511]

yes, i, too, thought of the prequels, and felt it looked like Episode 7?

but who knows.

i did note that it was all blue, like every last Cameron film. blue, blue, blue.

 

[If you shout...]

Just further proof that ILM is the gold standard.

Again, laz knows all. So true. Cannot stand WETA, as a general rule.

 

[Lancemc]

And I disagree with Lance about the environments featured here. Maybe they are more detailed, but they simply don't look more real than what's in the prequels.

Well, not much more to say about this until we get to see the film in full... but yeah, as of now I couldn't disagree more.

 

[lazarus]

Wait, WETA did this, not Digital Domain?

Oh god it's gonna be bad.

CAVE TROLL!!

 

[Lancemc]

What I will say is that while ILM is certainly the gold standard for digital effect work, I do like WETA for how balls-out crazy and ambitious they can be. They usually try things far beyond the currently accepted limits of the art form. Sometimes they fall flat on their faces (see parts of King Kong), but sometimes they succeed astonishingly (see the other parts of King Kong). Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe ILM has still attempted anything as massively ambitious as King Kong yet. I mean, while it's a virtue that they almost always execute their projects perfectly, ILM tends to focus on more precise deliberate work. So yeah, ILM > Weta. But I give Weta a lot of credit for their ballsiness, and I'd wager their greatest singular successes still outshine ILMs best work by quite a margin, even if they have to fumble their way through a lot of work to get there.

I can imagine Avatar being one of these cases where the studio overreaches what the technology is quite ready to allow, but I'm sure there will be plenty of highlights throughout the film that show they're still capable of doing the best creative work in town, even if other parts don't quite pay off the risks. And for the record this was a collaboration between Weta and Digital Domain. And I think ILM even had their hands in a few sequences as well.

Also, I think something like District 9 proves that when Weta adopts a more classical ILM strategy to digital effect work, they can absolutely go toe to toe with them at their own game. But personally, I always admire big crazy ambitious creative decisions, even if they don't work out in the end (though I don't expect this of Avatar, given what little we've seen).

 

[thatsnotmypuppy]

It looks pretty impressive. I remember reading the leaked script years ago after Cameron had stated he wasn't making it - meh - I hope they rewrote it.

 

[powerhour24]

OK, minus having no story or dialog, the first 2/3 is astounding, and the effects throughout are top notch, but the hype that Cameron spun himself that he could never live up to, and the alien character design just might kill it.

Possibly if they toned the blue down it would look less retarded, someone get them that memo in the next few months.

If Sam Worthington's name had been mentioned in the marketing for this or for Terminator Salvation, he'd have become one of the world's biggest stars already, even if both ended up as disappointments.

I think someone summed this movie's possible fate up nicely on another board: 'Is Avatar the Segway of filmmaking?"

 

[powerhour24]

Oh and from what I've read, other companies did the bulk of the effects on District 9, people are throwing their accolades at WETA simply because of Peter Jackson's connection. It seems WETA did some work, but not a lot.

Vancouver visual effects studios manufacture District 9's alien look

 

[powerhour24]

Also, this is hilarious:

YouTube - JAMES CAMERON'S AVATAR - OFFICIAL TRAILER (2009)

And the awesome thing is it kind of predicted people's reactions to the second half of the trailer, well before it actually came out.

 

[Jive Turkey]

ILM hasnt produced anything close to the photorealism of Gollum. Just look at the scene when Frodo and Sam first capture him in the direct, harsh sunlight. then have a look at Yoda in any of the prequels; choose your scene. no comparison

 

[U2DMfan]

WETA did King Kong.

Specific scenes maybe the worst CGI (all things considered) I've ever seen in my life.

Specifically when the dinosaurs and shit come running at them. Fucking silly.

 

[Jive Turkey]

There was some super shitty CGI in the prequels too (air taxi scene?). The contrast of the live actors against the CGI backgrounds was quite jarring at times. We should be comparing the best of what each has to offer. I think WETA's best is better than ILM's best at this point.
(I'm a lifetime starwars fan too. When I was 3, my parents asked me what I wanted to be when I got older. My answer was 'Yoda'. It pains me to say Gollum looks better)

 

[U2DMfan]

I actually wish Lucas would have went old school...a mix, at least. Not (more or less) complete green screen. Sure ILM did some great work on the prequels, but I am talking more about uniform visuals across the two trilogies. That shit bugs me, discontinuity.

Not having seen most of the LOTR trilogy I must disqualify myself from that direct comparison, although I have seen that particular Gollum scene, and I must agree it's pretty sweet.

Anyhow, I just wanted to point out how laughable those King Kong sequences were.

 

[LMP]

WETA loses some credibility for the fucking ghost army at the end of Return of the King. It's like they ran out of funds on the effects budget and decided to put up some clear pictures on popsicle sticks, running around n' shit.

The background work, especially on Coruscant, is what makes Lucas' digital work astounding. The character work wasn't quite there, and I'm not sure if Cameron's cracked it either, but he's damn close. It's all in the eyes and the mouth when it comes to digital/mo-cap stuff.

Pandora looks like the prequel series' Felucia on acid.

 

[U2DMfan]

Coruscant looked great

I'm currently trying to think of something original to add to the current Star Wars thread...

 

[Jive Turkey]

WETA loses some credibility for the fucking ghost army at the end of Return of the King. It's like they ran out of funds on the effects budget and decided to put up some clear pictures on popsicle sticks, running around n' shit.

worst...characters....evar.

I thought they nearly ruined the movie. So generic and boring and they didnt fit in at all with the rest of the world.

 

[LMP]

Coruscant looked great

I'm currently trying to think of something original to add to the current Star Wars thread...

Best EU character?

worst...characters....evar.

I thought they nearly ruined the movie. So generic and boring and they didnt fit in at all with the rest of the world.

Those are the sorts of choices that really hold me back from enjoying the LOTR movies. I hate saying, but I find them, with the exception of the battle in Two Towers, to be pretty boring.

 

[Jive Turkey]

The background work, especially on Coruscant, is what makes Lucas' digital work astounding. The character work wasn't quite there, and I'm not sure if Cameron's cracked it either, but he's damn close.

Coruscant does look pretty sweet. Then again, the matte paintings in the original trilogy were pretty sweet too.
I'm with DMfan though. They needed less green screen. Theres no grittiness in the prequels like there was in the originals. And the scenes inside the Jedi Temple on the long walkway/bridge thing looked fucking horrible.
But the prequels did give us Sebulba. One of the coolest creatures in the series.

As far as Avatar goes, the visuals do look cartoony, especially when they're right next to the real actors. Sometimes early trailers have not-quite-finished CGI, so hopefully they can tighten it up a little before the release. Either way, it looks like it could be a fun movie. I'm looking forward to it

 

[No spoken words]

It's sad that I could talk about Star Wars all fucking day and night.

I am a big LOTR fan, be it the books or the films, but I agree....the fucking ghost army was a big "wtf" for me, smack dab in the middle of some pretty bad-ass action scenes. YLB, we disagree on the films themselves, but, we agree on the worst and best parts, because the battle scenes in The Two Towers is my favorite action sequence as well. Truth be told, though, Fellowship is my favorite of the three, and it's not due to battles or whatnot...I just love how the stage gets set, how the Fellowship is formed, the introduction of these characters that I've loved for a long time are introduced, etc.

Coruscant looks bad-fucking-ass. I've said this before, but if Lucas/ILM made travelogues about fake planets, I'd watch. 2 hours on Kashyyyk? Yes, please.

 

[LMP]

Coruscant does look pretty sweet. Then again, the matte paintings in the original trilogy were pretty sweet too.
I'm with DMfan though. They needed less green screen. Theres no grittiness in the prequels like there was in the originals. And the scenes inside the Jedi Temple on the long walkway/bridge thing looked fucking horrible.
But the prequels did give us Sebulba. One of the coolest creatures in the series.

As far as Avatar goes, the visuals do look cartoony, especially when they're right next to the real actors. Sometimes early trailers have not-quite-finished CGI, so hopefully they can tighten it up a little before the release. Either way, it looks like it could be a fun movie. I'm looking forward to it

Mattes by David Fincher, no less. At least on Jedi. If you look at the behind-the-scenes on the Factory sequence from Clones, it's all green screen. I can't imagine how any actor could do a half-way decent job if they don't commit entirely to something that they can't see. It's like acting without a costume, I think.

I feel the same way about Avatar. And who knows how much difference the 3D will make.

It's sad that I could talk about Star Wars all fucking day and night.

I am a big LOTR fan, be it the books or the films, but I agree....the fucking ghost army was a big "wtf" for me, smack dab in the middle of some pretty bad-ass action scenes. YLB, we disagree on the films themselves, but, we agree on the worst and best parts, because the battle scenes in The Two Towers is my favorite action sequence as well. Truth be told, though, Fellowship is my favorite of the three, and it's not due to battles or whatnot...I just love how the stage gets set, how the Fellowship is formed, the introduction of these characters that I've loved for a long time are introduced, etc.

Coruscant looks bad-fucking-ass. I've said this before, but if Lucas/ILM made travelogues about fake planets, I'd watch. 2 hours on Kashyyyk? Yes, please.

Fellowship is the one I dig from start-to-finish, but I don't love it, you know?

That would be too cool, and things that fans would want, so Lucas wouldn't do it. Or better yet, do it, and fuck it up.

 

[lazarus]

ILM hasnt produced anything close to the photorealism of Gollum. Just look at the scene when Frodo and Sam first capture him in the direct, harsh sunlight. then have a look at Yoda in any of the prequels; choose your scene. no comparison

Actually, I think Yoda was done better than Gollum in Clones and Sith (a new puppet was used for The Phantom Menace), and ILM didn't have the luxury of motion capturing an actor to do so. Andy Serkis was half of that creation.

It makes ILM's accomplishment even more impressive.

Also, I think Watto is more believable than any digital character found in LOTR. The monsters in the arena battle in Clones are better than any creature work in LOTR.

We should also keep in mind that EVERY Clone Trooper, and EVERY Wookie in Sith (save for the Chewbacca scene) was CGI.

 

[Jive Turkey]

If you look at the behind-the-scenes on the Factory sequence from Clones, it's all green screen.

The less I see of that scene, the better

I've only been able to watch Clones twice. The only thing that really saves it for me is Yoda pulling out his lightsaber and fucking shit up at the end. What an epic scene. I stayed away from spoilers before seeing that in the theatre, so I was completely blown away. Apart from that, for me, its by far the worst Starwars movie.

 

[Jive Turkey]

Actually, I think Yoda was done better than Gollum in Clones and Sith (a new puppet was used for The Phantom Menace), and ILM didn't have the luxury of motion capturing an actor to do so. Andy Serkis was half of that creation.

It makes ILM's accomplishment even more impressive.

Also, I think Watto is more believable than any digital character found in LOTR. The monsters in the arena battle in Clones are better than any creature work in LOTR.

We should also keep in mind that EVERY Clone Trooper, and EVERY Wookie in Sith (save for the Chewbacca scene) was CGI.

To be honest, I thought Yoda looked especially shitty in Clones. Theres a scene where they're flying in an open spaceship and the wind is blowing through his hair. The lines and wrinkles in his face looked like textures instead of contours. The lighting on ILM characters always seems slightly off and they have an almost pastel quality to them. Clone troopers are easy because they're so shiny. But the wookies were guys in costume. they were just replicated a whole bunch of times.

Watto was definitely an awesome character and looked amazing, but there was still that sense that he wasnt quite in the scene (though its much less apparent in his case). Gollum just seemed so real and had a weight to him. I'm not talking about his motions, but rather the way he was lit and the way his colour saturation blended so well with the scene.
I have to disagree about the creature scene in Clones. that cat creature looked terrible. Hair is notoriously difficult, but I think Weta pulled it off better with the dog/wolf mounts that the orcs rode on

 

[LMP]

We should also keep in mind that EVERY Clone Trooper, and EVERY Wookie in Sith (save for the Chewbacca scene) was CGI.

There's a good chunk of Wookies that are guys in suits. Specifically before the major battle, but hell yeah, that was impressive.

The Geonosis battle deserves massive kudos, but they almost become part of the environment. Not saying that's a bad thing... it's the Christopher Lee/Yoda lightsaber fight on meth that looks really awkward in retrospect.

 

[lazarus]

The less I see of that scene, the better

I've only been able to watch Clones twice. The only thing that really saves it for me is Yoda pulling out his lightsaber and fucking shit up at the end. What an epic scene. I stayed away from spoilers before seeing that in the theatre, so I was completely blown away. Apart from that, for me, its by far the worst Starwars movie.

Watch Jedi and Clones back to back and guess again.

Jedi: Luke vs. Rancor, Jabba's Skiff Battle, Speeder Bike chase, Luke vs. Vader vs. Palpatine, Death Star space battle (AGAIN), Ewoks/Rebels vs. stormtroopers

Clones: Coruscant night chase, Jango vs. Obi Wan, asteroid field chase (with sonic grenades!), Anakin storms Tusken Raider camp, Anakin/Padme/Obi-Wan vs. monsters, Clones/Jedi vs. Droids/Geonosians/Dooku/Jango, Obi-Wan/Anakin/Yoda vs. Dooku.

NO CONTEST.