paul-d9 t1_j4sg433 wrote
This is the very definition of a cult classic. Doesn't sound great on paper but everything about it was well done and better than it had any right to be considering the budget.
We would have an overall higher quality of cinema if the answer now wasn't to just throw money at everything. We'd have less self indulgent and overlong films like Avatar and more films that have to make use with what they've got and usually have less company interference.
kevlarbuns OP t1_j4si1dt wrote
I love the setting. Love the premise. Love the gang styles. There are some deep, deep flaws, but I found way more to love than hate.
paul-d9 t1_j4sjmnt wrote
I like my movies like I like my music, without all the rough edges sanded off.
kevlarbuns OP t1_j4sjsvo wrote
Lol, Foo Fighters came right to mind
paul-d9 t1_j4skfnd wrote
I'm not the hugest fan of their music but I love them because Dave Grohl is a solid human being and he deserves to prosper.
kevlarbuns OP t1_j4smrb3 wrote
Grohl is rad. The albums are just very very clean.
Plarzay t1_j4u6hmf wrote
I watched this film last year for the first time! Completely agree with the sentiment here, honestly it had a quality about it that was just not present in so much I'd seen recently. Unlike anything I'd seen released in the last 10+ years.
Doodle_Brush t1_j4t1pwv wrote
It also had one of the best video game adaptions of all time.
paul-d9 t1_j4t2k9y wrote
Agreed. You could tell the team had a love for the film.
opiate_lifer t1_j4txdt2 wrote
I absolutely love this genius scene:
onairmastering t1_j4t805b wrote
What? never see European/Asian cinema? those guys are still killing it. Just look at Nicolas Winding Refn, he's been doing his own thing and looks amazing every time, go get some education in foreign cinema.
[deleted] t1_j4vc6nr wrote
[deleted]
SonofBeckett t1_j4t8yxc wrote
Movies like Dead for a Dollar? I’ve gotta say Walter Hill is low key one of my favorite filmmakers of all time, from Warriors to Brewster’s Millions to the madness that was Streets of Fire. I think there are still really interesting filmmakers out there, and it’s easy to forget that 1979 also gave us Airport ‘79 and 1941. Bloated, studio cash ins and overindulgence are not a new thing.
GapDragon t1_j55gspo wrote
Dang, but I loved Streets of Fire. No idea about the relation to Warriors, though.
SonofBeckett t1_j55h7cr wrote
Same director
GapDragon t1_j55hj7g wrote
Cool!
Sigaromanzia t1_j4spcqq wrote
To be fair, it's been over a decade between the first and second Avatar.
paul-d9 t1_j4sypq9 wrote
There have been plenty of mediocre big budget movies that rely solely on special effects since then. Otherwise Michael Bay wouldn't have a career.
Using James Cameron as an example, let's look at his movies in the 80s and 90s. You had spectacular films like Aliens and Terminator 1/2. Yes they were heavy in special effects but it never felt like a crutch. You had memorable characters and they were exciting. I don't remember a single character name from Avatar and I think I've seen it twice.
Sigaromanzia t1_j4t9h8y wrote
I'm not saying there aren't cgi fests that only exist as screen candy. I'm saying Avatar is just a couple of movies over a decade apart, whereas movies like Fast and Furious are popped out every 5 seconds along with the spin-offs.
Your point is totally fine, just saying Avatar isn't really the best example.
And more into Avatar, it's really just a James Cameron passion project. He's trying to push the medium, while also having an affinity for open water based projects like The Abyss and Titanic; two other sfx spectacles that pushed envelopes.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments