I finally watched it. My low expectations going in were not exceeded.
Is the sequel better?
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
I finally watched it. My low expectations going in were not exceeded. Is the sequel better?
I finally watched it. My low expectations going in were not exceeded.
Is the sequel better?
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
|
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Also it was too fricking long.
Its worse.
These movies are for the same lowforeheads who watch Hunger Games films. Worse than capeshit.
filtered homosexuals
>worse than capeshit
Doubt
Uncanny valley furgay bait is infinitely worse than Spider-Man film #4342 and Batman film #90342
Hunger Games was infinitely better. I even went into it wanting to hate it as a Battle Royale rip off.
1 is good but the rest sucked
2 was a good follow up but yeah it went to shit after. It would have been better if they kept the Hunger Games going but somehow manipulated it to President Snow and some of his cronies participating whoever kills off who ends up in control. Would've been neat to see a snowy mountain/forest hunger games arena.
Hunger Games is the 2nd worst movie I've ever paid to see in a theater. 1st was Anaconda from 1997.
low quality bait.
I'm sorry, what are you defending here? The story is rote as frick, there's not even enough strings to grasp at from my point of view.
pleb filtered
Don't bother. You'll just get filtered again.
The sequel is ok but it is largely banking on the fact that there are going to be sequels to further explain things.
this.
it also felt less... stressful? less tense?
i think they're going to make the next one a constant downer
Less tense? That last hour though
Avatar was one of those movies you just had to see on a big screen, because on a small screen the special effects wouldn't look nearly as good and the forgettable plot and characters would have to try and fail to carry the movie.
That's shitty, though. A movie being entirely about its visual panache at the expense of...you know, actually being a movie, is not how the medium should be used.
>a movie's focus shouldn't be on the visuals
Why don't you read a book or watch a play then?
Don't give me that, the best movies are praised for good use of well-developed characters or a gripping story.
Yes, but the focus is almost always on the cinematography, which is what Citizen Kane is best known for.
I might be willing to praise creative cinematography.
Like Birdman, which has the look of something shot in a contiguous take. That's creatively using the visual medium to convey something new and different.
I accede that visually Avatar was unmatched in its day and still holds up (although I can see things like not properly casting shadows in some scenes that do reflect a bit of the CGI standard at the time).
I didn't say Avatar was a good movie. I don't regret watching it though.
I don't regret watching it either but as I mentioned I didn't have a lot of high marks that I expected it to achieve. I probably won't watch it again, though (although maybe it might be a little more bearable now that I've actually seen the story--The Super Mario Bros. Movie felt like it dragged out in places the first time but the second and third viewings were more well-paced in my head since I already understood the story beats).
Wait for 3 to come out in 2024. As it is, Way of Water is only half a movie.
You're a year off. It's releasing in 2025.
No, the original is a decent movie and is fair superior to the mediocre plodding sequel.
Maybe the new flash movie would be more your speed, Cameron's movies have too much testosterone