Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neruz]

Toxic as in physiological damage from it, unbreathable as in you don't get any oxygen from it?

Exactly.


The fact that people didn't die from breathing the air, but did ovbiously show signs of not being able to breathe it, suggests that Pandoran air lacks oxygen, and is thus unbreathable by humies.

You'll also notice that the air wasn't toxic to eyes or skin, so it's most likely it's just plain unbreathable.

[ChairmanPoo]

IE: the difference between CO and CO2

[Alexhans]

Watched Avatar in 3d...

I had a lot of fun.

There's a lot of plot errors and clichés that made my day.

It's still a good movie.

And the graphics are one of the most oustanding I've ever seen.  Arguably the best we've seen so far.

Maybe I'll write something mocking the movie a bit... But I don't regret watching it.

Those who complain too much should stop watching this movies.  This is not transformers, not 2012 (although it has a sim¡lar amount of advertising).  It's not a classic.  It's not Plot-Error-proof like Star Wars (far from it) but it doesn't terribly suck.

You realise that entire argument revolves around the humans having absolutely no morals at all and being perfectly willing to decimate potentially an entire planet and all the living things as well as indiscriminate slaughter of intelligent beings (women and children) many of whom have probably never engaged in any hostilities, just for monetary gain?

Sure, Humans are assholes, but there are limits; the company guy wasn't very nice, but he wasn't a complete monster.

Right... Because that never happened... Cortez and Pizarro are just 2 names that come to mind...

[Neonivek]

My Father and my Older Sister watched it

The both hated it. Though mostly because it was too long.

[Alexhans]

My Father and my Older Sister watched it

The both hated it. Though mostly because it was too long.

So they hated Titanic, Star Wars, The Lord of the Rings, King Kong (pete jackson), Benjamin Button, <insert more long movies here>, etc.

They knew how long it was beforehand...  Their fault

IIRC, Dr.Zhivago was 4 hs long.. Somebody watched it?

[Neonivek]

Yes because when someone says "Too long" they obviously meant the movie was relentlessly amazing but its length murdered then. *SARCASM*

I don't understand your objection Alexhans.

[Alexhans]

Ok.... Neo...  You should've taken the red pill, btw... if you say they hated it because it was too long and don't offer any other explanation then you're not making any point whatsoever...

I know it's hard to communicate over the interwebz... but give it a try...

two sentences saying someone hated the movie are bound to get a response.

Do you know what the word hate implies?  Ok, then...

[redacted123]

-

[Jude]

You realise that entire argument revolves around the humans having absolutely no morals at all and being perfectly willing to decimate potentially an entire planet and all the living things as well as indiscriminate slaughter of intelligent beings (women and children) many of whom have probably never engaged in any hostilities, just for monetary gain?

Sure, Humans are assholes, but there are limits; the company guy wasn't very nice, but he wasn't a complete monster.

I take it you've never been to a history class in your life, then

[Alexhans]

His point is perfectly clear, he's saying that it was too long for them, if you were to elaborate then I guess you could say that the film was so long that the plot became less interesting and felt slow and boring, the action became repetitive or maybe their legs just got stiff, I know mine did. However, to say it was "too long" sums all of that up nicely and is completely adequate.

No... I asked him if those same people who thought that Avatar was too long (and not "relentlessly amazing but its length murdered then") had the same feelings towards some known LONG movies...

apparently... it wasn't just the lenght.  What would've made it better?  removing 30 minutes and adding explosions right off the bat?  Or what?

[Neonivek]

Stany is pretty much correct and there was one long movie my older sister enjoyed but said she would have enjoyed more if it was shorter.

Though no they don't have anything against long movies.

If it was only an Hour and Thirty minutes they probably would have enjoyed it more. If it was overall better and didn't drag on after that point they would have enjoyed it more.

[Alexhans]

if it was 1:30 it would've removed the plot entirely to just skip to, like someone said, a flashy nVidia demo....

I'll say it yet again, you said that they bothHated it. 

advice for everyone who likes short movies... Rent a dvd and watch them at home in 2 segments.  As if it were a series.

[Neonivek]

if it was 1:30 it would've removed the plot entirely to just skip to, like someone said, a flashy nVidia demo....

I'll say it yet again, you said that they bothHated it. 

advice for everyone who likes short movies... Rent a dvd and watch them at home in 2 segments.  As if it were a series.

It is like you don't know what it means for a movie to be Too Long other then for it to be too long.

There is more at play then length in a movie that is too long.

Watch Spiderman 3 to understand the "Too long" position without simply arguing "Ohh you just hate long movies"

"if it was 1:30 it would've removed the plot entirely to just skip to"

No I am sure you could sum up the plot in 1:30 and had plenty of action. You just wouldn't be able to show off as much special effects.

[Alexhans]

if it was 1:30 it would've removed the plot entirely to just skip to, like someone said, a flashy nVidia demo....

I'll say it yet again, you said that they bothHated it. 

advice for everyone who likes short movies... Rent a dvd and watch them at home in 2 segments.  As if it were a series.

It is like you don't know what it means for a movie to be Too Long other then for it to be too long.

There is more at play then length in a movie that is too long.

Watch Spiderman 3 to understand the "Too long" position without simply arguing "Ohh you just hate long movies"

"if it was 1:30 it would've removed the plot entirely to just skip to"

No I am sure you could sum up the plot in 1:30 and had plenty of action. You just wouldn't be able to show off as much special effects.

Ok... I'm not going to get a clear explanation from you... pretending that you could cut that movie in half is just lame.  You say there would be plenty of action but not so much special effects?  sigh...

And Spiderman 3 is a horrific movie regardless of the time it wastes without ever considering something called plot consistency and minimal common sense. 
It's has all sort of stupid clichés and it's characters don't act acordingly with their supposed personalities.

[redacted123]

-