Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Brien · Aug 21, 2009, 03:40 AM

Finally!

Trailer is out on apple.com here.

Hoping that it lives up to the hype.

ctt1wbw · Aug 21, 2009, 06:15 AM

I bet it will. The trailer looks awesome. James Cameron is brilliant and diverse. He can go from Terminator to Titanic. Great director.

mattyb · Aug 21, 2009, 06:17 AM

It does look good, bit confused about the story though.

- - e r i k - - · Aug 21, 2009, 07:00 AM

What's to be confused about? It's Starship Troopers versus the Fern Gully pixies!!

starman · Aug 21, 2009, 08:28 AM

It seems to be more than that. Putting the mind of a disabled marine into the body of an alien, of a species we're apparently at war with, makes an interesting story. Maybe. We'll see.

Wiskedjak · Aug 21, 2009, 09:05 AM

Visually, looks interesting. Story, looks not very unique. As with almost everything these days, I'll wait for it to show up on DVD.

ort888 · Aug 21, 2009, 10:11 AM

Uh. Yeah. I don't know. The way those blue dudes look just throws the whole thing off. I got a very creepy kind of vibe from them. They look like generic internet furrie porn come to life... like they were drawn by a sexually frustrated fat woman from Idaho who wears lace up SCA boots to her office job and plays D&D with a bunch of 40 something neckbeard guys every Tuesday night. The modeling on them is so irritating on some sort of subconscious level that it really makes everything else not matter.

It kinda looks like Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within meets the Star Wars Prequels plus furries.

Wiskedjak · Aug 21, 2009, 10:50 AM

Originally Posted by ort888

it kinda looks like final fantasy: The spirits within meets the star wars prequels plus furries.

qft

RAILhead · Aug 21, 2009, 11:17 AM

Me three. ^^^

olePigeon · Aug 21, 2009, 11:24 AM

Furries finally got a Hollywood movie. Good for them.

Edit: Someone already made the furry reference. Damn it!

ort888 · Aug 21, 2009, 12:14 PM

You can never have enough furries references.

Thorzdad · Aug 21, 2009, 12:15 PM

Looks interesting, at least visually...which is usually the strongest part of any Cameron movie. But, yeah, I have to say that, at least from what is implied in the trailer, the main story looks pretty predictable and thin. I'm sure there will be sub-plots to raise the tension. And being in the middle of a war is certainly one way to crank-up the noise/excitement.

I'm wondering about the facial CG. A lot of what I saw in the trailer definitely took a drive through uncanny valley, and was distracting.

reader50 · Aug 21, 2009, 12:58 PM

The movie is a mix of CGI and real photography. Cameron wants to make it so you can't tell which parts are which.

pooka · Aug 21, 2009, 01:44 PM

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the 3d aspect of this project. From everyone thats actually seen it demonstrated, the gist is that we're supposed to be in for a treat. Of course, the tech could be amazing and the story suck.

olePigeon · Aug 21, 2009, 01:47 PM

Meh. I'll wait for TRON 2.

Thorzdad · Aug 21, 2009, 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by pooka

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the 3d aspect of this project. From everyone thats actually seen it demonstrated, the gist is that we're supposed to be in for a treat. Of course, the tech could be amazing and the story suck.

Of course, that could easily be a major point of fail, too. I mean, if the success of the film hinges on people seeing it in 3D, you're automatically cutting-out a huge piece of your audience. 3D screens, while growing, are still far from ubiquitous. Unless the release is limited to only 3D screens, I suspect a huge part of this film's audience will not be seeing it in 3D and, thus, not seeing it correctly, apparently.

Chuckit · Aug 21, 2009, 02:12 PM

They showed a ton of footage from this movie at Comic-Con. It looked pretty good, though I think "Starship Troopers meets Ferngully" is disturbingly accurate. I do not tend to think about furries very much, so that sort of thing didn't even occur to me.

I think it will be OK even not in 3D. From what I saw, they actually avoid all the "needs 3D or it looks retarded" stuff that a lot of 3D movies do. I think it's just for immersion.

carterx · Aug 21, 2009, 02:34 PM

I agree, it looks good but the story at least with the trailer is a bit messed up. Either-way, at least the CG looks good.

ctt1wbw · Aug 21, 2009, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

Meh. I'll wait for TRON 2.

Me too, in a big way. I remember seeing the first one in the theater on opening week. I paid about two bucks to see it.

Shaddim · Aug 21, 2009, 08:39 PM

A $200M movie about Furries, it was bound to happen.

starman · Aug 21, 2009, 09:23 PM

Originally Posted by Shaddim

A $200M movie about Furries, it was bound to happen.

They're tall and blue. Where the F do you all get furries from? Just because they look different?

starman · Aug 21, 2009, 09:24 PM

THIS is a furry. Quick google search found it.

Phileas · Aug 21, 2009, 09:44 PM

Cold blooded, technologically advanced humans vs blue, in touch with nature, emotionally mature furries.

How could that possibly end?

- - e r i k - - · Aug 21, 2009, 10:02 PM

It'll probably end with starman exploding if we keep calling them furries.

Eug · Aug 21, 2009, 11:06 PM

Looks interesting, but the CG faces still look about as realistic as Final Fantasy and Polar Express.

P.S. After watching Up in 3D, I now officially hate 3D movies. Given the choice, I'd rather save a few bucks and go to the 2D version. In fact, I'd pay more to go to the 2D version.

Atheist · Aug 22, 2009, 12:28 AM

How is it that a disabled man, in an apparent era of gravity defying machines and wizbang technology, finds himself in a 20th century wheelchair? Yeah, that's totally plausible.

ghporter · Aug 22, 2009, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by Atheist

How is it that a disabled man, in an apparent era of gravity defying machines and wizbang technology, finds himself in a 20th century wheelchair? Yeah, that's totally plausible.

Field-expedient equipment. Their military is equipped to handle operational situations, not something special like a paraplegic. And there's not much you can do in terms of design beyond the current developmental level of a manual wheel chair.

As for a really more likely reason: it would have made the production much, much more expensive to give him some sort of anti-grav chair, and the more logical robotic leg assist solution (which is currently in development, by the way) would have made the story point of this guy's disability less interesting.

pooka · Aug 22, 2009, 11:19 AM

Originally Posted by Atheist

How is it that a disabled man, in an apparent era of gravity defying machines and wizbang technology, finds himself in a 20th century wheelchair? Yeah, that's totally plausible.

Maybe he doesn't have health insurance.

Chuckit · Aug 22, 2009, 12:27 PM

Originally Posted by Atheist

How is it that a disabled man, in an apparent era of gravity defying machines and wizbang technology, finds himself in a 20th century wheelchair? Yeah, that's totally plausible.

Because people actually do still sue older technology? I still see people using those crappy old manual lawnmowers.

analogue SPRINKLES · Aug 22, 2009, 12:48 PM

Other than those blue people which look really damn fake and the somewhat overly lush jungle that make it look like that Kameo xbox game i think it will be pretty damn cool. He is one of my favorite directors.

Goldfinger · Aug 22, 2009, 03:28 PM

All the Apple trailers lead to QTlogo with questionmark or incorrect URL errors for the HD streams. Anyone else having this problem ?

ThinkInsane · Aug 22, 2009, 05:38 PM

I just watched it and it worked fine for me.

Railroader · Aug 22, 2009, 08:54 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Because people actually do still sue older technology? I still see people using those crappy old manual lawnmowers.

Shut your mouth!!!

I had a small lawn and had a manual push reel lawnmower. It self sharpened the blades, and cut the grass like a scissors instead of smash cutting it leaving a jagged edge that browned quickly. It never ran out of gas and was pretty easy to push. Almost silent, and completely odor free. It had a pretty narrow cutting width, but with the small lawn I had it only took about 15 minutes longer.

Now I have a 10 year old 15HP John Deere rider and I hate it. It is an awesome lawn mower, but compared to the manual reel mower it is horrendous to use. I only use it because it was donated and I have two multi-acre lawns to mow each week.

Shaddim · Aug 22, 2009, 09:57 PM

Originally Posted by starman

They're tall and blue. Where the F do you all get furries from? Just because they look different?

Anthropomorphic animals... with tails... Why don't YOU tell ME where I got the idea?

ghporter · Aug 23, 2009, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by Railroader

Shut your mouth!!!

I had a small lawn and had a manual push reel lawnmower. It self sharpened the blades, and cut the grass like a scissors instead of smash cutting it leaving a jagged edge that browned quickly. It never ran out of gas and was pretty easy to push. Almost silent, and completely odor free. It had a pretty narrow cutting width, but with the small lawn I had it only took about 15 minutes longer.

Now I have a 10 year old 15HP John Deere rider and I hate it. It is an awesome lawn mower, but compared to the manual reel mower it is horrendous to use. I only use it because it was donated and I have two multi-acre lawns to mow each week.

A vintage reel lawn mower could indeed be pretty crappy. But one that's well kept up, or a new one could indeed be a very cool tool. Plus I know a lot of people dumping their gas mowers for reel mowers because of the smell and noise, not to mention they're greener and you get a bit more exercise from using them. "Old and busted" = crappy, but not all reel mowers are old and busted.

And again, without using antigravity and motors, what else could you do with a manual wheel chair?

voodoo · Aug 23, 2009, 03:45 PM

Hm .. After seeing the trailer and judging from the name I can't shake the feeling this is a World of Warcraft movie set in the future.

Chuckit · Aug 23, 2009, 04:13 PM

Originally Posted by voodoo

Hm .. After seeing the trailer and judging from the name I can't shake the feeling this is a World of Warcraft movie set in the future.

Er…because it's about an uneasy alliance of humans, elves, mechanically inclined midgets, formerly enslaved monsters, hippy cows, Rasta trolls, religiously confused aliens with a broken spaceship and magic-addicted anime characters fighting against a former holy warrior who has gone on to become the leader of an undead army?

voodoo · Aug 23, 2009, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Er…because it's about an uneasy alliance of humans, elves, mechanically inclined midgets, formerly enslaved monsters, hippy cows, Rasta trolls, religiously confused aliens with a broken spaceship and magic-addicted anime characters fighting against a former holy warrior who has gone on to become the leader of an undead army?

How about some spoiler tags!!

(I kid of course)

Wiskedjak · Aug 23, 2009, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by Eug

P.S. After watching Up in 3D, I now officially hate 3D movies. Given the choice, I'd rather save a few bucks and go to the 2D version. In fact, I'd pay more to go to the 2D version.

Seconded. 3D is the new CGI and seems to be nothing more than a ploy to get people to watch the moving in the theatre rather wait to watch it in HD at home with better sound systems, less line ups and no gum on the floor.

reader50 · 10:09 PM

There is a new theatrical trailer out. Not on the QT trailers page yet, you can view it on YouTube. It gives a much better plot description.

Edit: it has been uploaded to bittorrent in 1080p. The youtube link only gives 480p.

RAILhead · Oct 31, 2009, 06:04 PM

Meh. Still looks lame, typical, a storyline that's been done a million times, etc., etc.

analogue SPRINKLES · Oct 31, 2009, 10:57 PM

Yikes. I hate to say that unless Cameron name was attached to this it looks REALLY bad and I wouldn't see it. We already know the story based on that trailer.... human takes on disguise of blue people, finds out blue people are actually cool and fighting for their planet,then same pretend blue guy fights against humans with blue people, everyone makes friends in the end, humans are bad.

The effects for the blue people look REALLY fake to me still, Jar Jar fake.

I'll still see it but other than some cool effects it looks like it will blow.

ort888 · Oct 31, 2009, 11:12 PM

The second trailer is WAY worse then the first one. Wow, that looks... uh, really bad.

reader50 · Nov 1, 2009, 01:37 AM

I liked the extra info to work with. For example, the mineral they are after must be a natural room-temp superconductor. You got to see the sample levitating above the magnetic parts bowl.

Hence the flying buttes - erosion removed the surrounding material, but the buttes remained in position with respect to Pandora's magnetic field. Which also fits with that location having to be rich in the mineral.

Atmospheric pressure must be higher, which explains why larger animals can fly (including with riders) and the choppers having smallish ducted blades. Haven't figured out yet what makes the atmosphere unbreathable. The more obvious contenders conflict with oxygen.

Oh wait, people mean the plot. The trailer does seem to give it away, but I'm hoping for quality from Cameron.

Mac007 · Nov 1, 2009, 04:41 AM

No, I'd say it's more like Dances with Wolves in space.

Spheric Harlot · Nov 1, 2009, 08:41 AM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

Furries finally got a Hollywood movie. Good for them.

Edit: Someone already made the furry reference. Damn it!

SpaceMonkey · Nov 3, 2009, 08:35 AM

Originally Posted by Mac007

No, I'd say it's more like Dances with Wolves in space.

Bingo.

Eug · Dec 11, 2009, 01:38 PM

Originally Posted by Eug

Looks interesting, but the CG faces still look about as realistic as Final Fantasy and Polar Express.

P.S. After watching Up in 3D, I now officially hate 3D movies. Given the choice, I'd rather save a few bucks and go to the 2D version. In fact, I'd pay more to go to the 2D version.

The initial reviews are glowing.

Now I'm torn. 3D movies give me a headache, but some of the descriptions suggest this has to be seen in 3D instead of 2D. ie. It's not a 3D-ified 2D movie, but a movie that built for 3D (and not just for the sake of 3D), and much more so than most previous 3D movies.

Oh, and was it $300 million to make, or $200 million? The article says $200 mil now, but others still say $300 mil. $300 million seems stupidly high.

ort888 · Dec 11, 2009, 01:50 PM

Yeah, the early buzz is pretty spectacular.

Sounds like the dialog is very cheesy, but the movie is more interesting then the trailers let on and the spectacle of the whole thing is over the top.

SpaceMonkey · Dec 11, 2009, 01:51 PM

Originally Posted by Eug

The initial reviews are glowing.

Now I'm torn. 3D movies give me a headache, but some of the descriptions suggest this has to be seen in 3D instead of 2D. ie. It's not a 3D-ified 2D movie, but a movie that built for 3D (and not just for the sake of 3D), and much more so than most previous 3D movies.

Oh, and was it $300 million to make, or $200 million? The article says $200 mil now, but others still say $300 mil. $300 million seems stupidly high.

Including marketing, some estimates near $500 million.