Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Deadline)   Kate Winslet reunites with 'Titanic' director James Cameron and is so happy she just blue herself   ( deadline.com) divider line
    More: Followup, ongoing Avatar adventure, global juggernaut Titanic, Cameron's Avatar, opposite Idris Elba, Star, Sequel, Reader Oscar winner, Kate Winslet  
•       •       •

2322 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 04 Oct 2017 at 11:20 AM (2 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



56 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-10-04 08:36:24 AM  
"Draw me like one of your Na'vi girls, Ja'ku..."

Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.
 
2017-10-04 09:29:45 AM  
She can call me "Titanic", because I would have been happy to go down with her on her maiden voyage.

/Call me, Kate. It's not too late.
 
2017-10-04 09:34:16 AM  

Farking Clown Shoes: Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.


It's not.  You nailed it.
 
2017-10-04 09:35:24 AM  
Is she playing Stella?
 
2017-10-04 09:40:30 AM  

Farking Clown Shoes: "Draw me like one of your Na'vi girls, Ja'ku..."

Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.


What new technology? It looked like every other 3D movie.
 
2017-10-04 11:22:20 AM  
she knows
www.overduereview.com
 
2017-10-04 11:30:30 AM  
There's got to be a better way of saying that.
 
2017-10-04 11:32:26 AM  
Breasts
 
2017-10-04 11:36:20 AM  

Mugato: Farking Clown Shoes: "Draw me like one of your Na'vi girls, Ja'ku..."

Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

What new technology? It looked like every other 3D movie.


"To film the live-action sequences of Avatar, he used a modified version of the Fusion camera. The new 3D camera creates an augmented-reality view for Cameron as he shoots, sensing its position on a motion-capture stage, then integrating the live actors into CG environments on the viewfinder. "It's a unique way of shooting stereo movies," says visual-effects supervisor Stephen Rosenbaum. "Cameron uses it to look into the environment; it's not about beating people over the head with visual spectacle." This immersive 3D brings a heightened believability to Avatar's live-action sequences-gradually bringing viewers deeper into the exotic world of Pandora."

I remember seeing Jaws 3D in the theater. The 3D effects in Avatar were profoundly better.
 
2017-10-04 11:36:26 AM  

DubyaHater: Breasts


Enjoy!

img.fark.net
 
2017-10-04 11:40:29 AM  
She has not aged well.

img.fark.net
 
2017-10-04 12:07:14 PM  

elvisaintdead: Farking Clown Shoes: Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

It's not.  You nailed it.


It's still one of the prettiest movies I've ever seen. Too bad Cameron didn't read more Joseph Campbell.
 
2017-10-04 12:09:41 PM  

Mugato: Farking Clown Shoes: "Draw me like one of your Na'vi girls, Ja'ku..."

Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

What new technology? It looked like every other 3D movie.


It was a combination of some newer 3D tech along with advances in motion capture.  It looked better than other 3D at the time, but I don't think the advances were meteoric by any means.

Stereoscopic 3D in film is inherently flawed as it's always just enhancing depth that we can already perceive in 2D.  Until it becomes more interactive and introduces parallax, then it's just going to be a neat trick.
 
2017-10-04 12:12:41 PM  

Joey Jo Jo Jr Shabadu: a neat trick


I think he said soon you won't need glasses. That's a pretty neat trick.
 
2017-10-04 12:41:26 PM  

devilEther: Mugato: Farking Clown Shoes: "Draw me like one of your Na'vi girls, Ja'ku..."

Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

What new technology? It looked like every other 3D movie.

"To film the live-action sequences of Avatar, he used a modified version of the Fusion camera. The new 3D camera creates an augmented-reality view for Cameron as he shoots, sensing its position on a motion-capture stage, then integrating the live actors into CG environments on the viewfinder. "It's a unique way of shooting stereo movies," says visual-effects supervisor Stephen Rosenbaum. "Cameron uses it to look into the environment; it's not about beating people over the head with visual spectacle." This immersive 3D brings a heightened believability to Avatar's live-action sequences-gradually bringing viewers deeper into the exotic world of Pandora."

I remember seeing Jaws 3D in the theater. The 3D effects in Avatar were profoundly better.


We're spoiled today but old school 3D looked like

i.ytimg.com
 
2017-10-04 12:43:28 PM  

Jingle Strangle: Joey Jo Jo Jr Shabadu: a neat trick

I think he said soon you won't need glasses. That's a pretty neat trick.


So he's gonna produce plays?

Oh, I remember the days on Fark when 3D was gonna dominate movies forever and fogeys were laughed at as Luddites for claiming it wasn't that new a trick and that not all movies needed it.
 
2017-10-04 12:52:08 PM  

Fano: We're spoiled today but old school 3D looked like

[i.ytimg.com image 480x360]


That's really scary!
 
2017-10-04 01:10:51 PM  
Fano:
We're spoiled today but old school 3D looked like

[i.ytimg.com image 480x360]


Pourquoi the flowers?
 
2017-10-04 01:34:44 PM  

Fano: devilEther: Mugato: Farking Clown Shoes: "Draw me like one of your Na'vi girls, Ja'ku..."

Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

What new technology? It looked like every other 3D movie.

"To film the live-action sequences of Avatar, he used a modified version of the Fusion camera. The new 3D camera creates an augmented-reality view for Cameron as he shoots, sensing its position on a motion-capture stage, then integrating the live actors into CG environments on the viewfinder. "It's a unique way of shooting stereo movies," says visual-effects supervisor Stephen Rosenbaum. "Cameron uses it to look into the environment; it's not about beating people over the head with visual spectacle." This immersive 3D brings a heightened believability to Avatar's live-action sequences-gradually bringing viewers deeper into the exotic world of Pandora."

I remember seeing Jaws 3D in the theater. The 3D effects in Avatar were profoundly better.

We're spoiled today but old school 3D looked like

[i.ytimg.com image 480x360]


we really don't see enough SCTV references here, well done!
 
2017-10-04 01:37:16 PM  

Jingle Strangle: Joey Jo Jo Jr Shabadu: a neat trick

I think he said soon you won't need glasses. That's a pretty neat trick.


Yeah, very neat, and we've seen some implementations of this already in other mediums.  However it's still just more of the same process, just without the annoyance of glasses.
 
2017-10-04 01:53:17 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2017-10-04 01:55:32 PM  
Mr Cameron's next leap in film tech:
img.fark.net
 
2017-10-04 01:57:03 PM  

Jingle Strangle: Joey Jo Jo Jr Shabadu: a neat trick

I think he said soon you won't need glasses. That's a pretty neat trick.


His new movie is going to give everyone Lasik surgery while they watch? That sounds dangerous.
 
2017-10-04 01:57:27 PM  

Fano: Oh, I remember the days on Fark when 3D was gonna dominate movies forever and fogeys were laughed at as Luddites for claiming it wasn't that new a trick and that not all movies needed it.


Yeah, that was quite a few years ago. Farkers were saying "I can't wait for this trend to go away". They are still waiting.

I definitely agree not all movies need it. Goodfellas does not need to be rendered in 3D. But the Jurassic Park and Titanic 3D re-releases were fantastic. Hateful Eight? No. Guardians of the Galaxy? Hell yeah.
 
kab
2017-10-04 01:58:39 PM  

Farking Clown Shoes: Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.


Star Wars isn't a terribly special or unique story either, but as a kid seeing it for the first time in a theater, it was absolutely mind blowing.    Now you know why Avatar made so much money.
 
kab
2017-10-04 02:00:10 PM  
Also, Kate Winslet is stunning.

MrBallou:
/Call me, Kate. It's not too late.

No no, call me first please.
 
2017-10-04 02:25:58 PM  

elvisaintdead: Farking Clown Shoes: Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

It's not.  You nailed it.


No, because most everyone will check out the next Avatar out of curiosity, even if they aren't incredibly enthusiastic. That sets expectations nice and low.

Then, when the new story is unexpectedly great, and the movie itself is an incredibly fun and entertaining experience, as Cameron has accomplished for numerous other films, it will fundamentally change the perception of the whole franchise. Then everyone who doubted will look foolish.
 
2017-10-04 02:32:33 PM  

meera's frog spear: Fano: Oh, I remember the days on Fark when 3D was gonna dominate movies forever and fogeys were laughed at as Luddites for claiming it wasn't that new a trick and that not all movies needed it.

Yeah, that was quite a few years ago. Farkers were saying "I can't wait for this trend to go away". They are still waiting.

I definitely agree not all movies need it. Goodfellas does not need to be rendered in 3D. But the Jurassic Park and Titanic 3D re-releases were fantastic. Hateful Eight? No. Guardians of the Galaxy? Hell yeah.


Damn straight. Dr Strange was AWESOME in 3D.

Anyway, it can't end until we get Nature Trail to Hell.
 
2017-10-04 02:38:40 PM  

Corn_Fed: elvisaintdead: Farking Clown Shoes: Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

It's not.  You nailed it.

No, because most everyone will check out the next Avatar out of curiosity, even if they aren't incredibly enthusiastic. That sets expectations nice and low.

Then, when the new story is unexpectedly great, and the movie itself is an incredibly fun and entertaining experience, as Cameron has accomplished for numerous other films, it will fundamentally change the perception of the whole franchise. Then everyone who doubted will look foolish.


Welcome to Fark, Mr. Cameron. I won't be seeing any of your Avatar movies except maybe on Netflix, but if it helps any, I think Aliens and Terminator 2 still hold up as some of the greatest sci-fi movies ever made. Instead of pulling a Lucas, why not quit while your legacy is still intact?
 
2017-10-04 02:44:51 PM  

Mugato: Farking Clown Shoes: "Draw me like one of your Na'vi girls, Ja'ku..."

Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

What new technology? It looked like every other 3D movie.


No it did not.  Avatar was gorgeous.  It took a steaming dump on all 3D which had come before, let alone 2D.

Tech catches up, though.
 
2017-10-04 02:45:16 PM  

EdgeRunner: Corn_Fed: elvisaintdead: Farking Clown Shoes: Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

It's not.  You nailed it.

No, because most everyone will check out the next Avatar out of curiosity, even if they aren't incredibly enthusiastic. That sets expectations nice and low.

Then, when the new story is unexpectedly great, and the movie itself is an incredibly fun and entertaining experience, as Cameron has accomplished for numerous other films, it will fundamentally change the perception of the whole franchise. Then everyone who doubted will look foolish.

Welcome to Fark, Mr. Cameron. I won't be seeing any of your Avatar movies except maybe on Netflix, but if it helps any, I think Aliens and Terminator 2 still hold up as some of the greatest sci-fi movies ever made. Instead of pulling a Lucas, why not quit while your legacy is still intact?


I think I did pretty good with The Abyss, and admit it--Titanic wasn't no slouch.
 
2017-10-04 02:49:37 PM  

Fano: Jingle Strangle: Joey Jo Jo Jr Shabadu: a neat trick

I think he said soon you won't need glasses. That's a pretty neat trick.

So he's gonna produce plays?

Oh, I remember the days on Fark when 3D was gonna dominate movies forever and fogeys were laughed at as Luddites for claiming it wasn't that new a trick and that not all movies needed it.


You're making shiat up. According to many on Fark, Avatar was going to be the biggest bomb in box office history.
 
2017-10-04 02:49:59 PM  

kab: Farking Clown Shoes: Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

Star Wars isn't a terribly special or unique story either, but as a kid seeing it for the first time in a theater, it was absolutely mind blowing.    Now you know why Avatar made so much money.


That's retconning.  Even the opening text itself was something brand new in sci fi and fantasy.  Star Wars was Ur. It was the stone upon which the future was set.
 
2017-10-04 02:53:52 PM  

kab: Farking Clown Shoes: Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

Star Wars isn't a terribly special or unique story either, but as a kid seeing it for the first time in a theater, it was absolutely mind blowing.    Now you know why Avatar made so much money.


I doubt in 40 years people will still be showing their children Avatar however.
 
kab
2017-10-04 03:06:47 PM  

Burr: kab: Farking Clown Shoes: Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

Star Wars isn't a terribly special or unique story either, but as a kid seeing it for the first time in a theater, it was absolutely mind blowing.    Now you know why Avatar made so much money.

I doubt in 40 years people will still be showing their children Avatar however.


Depends on how many sequels there are, but I'd agree.  I think Avatar has already missed the continuity boat as far as sequels go for that sort of thing.

My point is that we're looking at Avatar from a point of view vastly different from how a kid would have.   It didn't need to be, or pretend to be, some incredibly deep sort of story.
 
2017-10-04 03:08:07 PM  

ExperianScaresCthulhu: kab: Farking Clown Shoes: Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

Star Wars isn't a terribly special or unique story either, but as a kid seeing it for the first time in a theater, it was absolutely mind blowing.    Now you know why Avatar made so much money.

That's retconning.  Even the opening text itself was something brand new in sci fi and fantasy.  Star Wars was Ur. It was the stone upon which the future was set.


No and yes. The Star Wars story was nothing new, even Lucas admits that he borrowed heavily from other sources. However, the movie itself was indeed something new. Audiences had never seen such spectacle before in theaters, and that, combined with a serviceable traditional hero story dressed up in an entirely new, yet accessible mythology, helped propel it to success. (Let's not forget the music and sound design, which entirely hold up 40 years later.)

Avatar had some of those things. It was 3D like we'd never before seen. The CGI was cutting edge, and the story, while nothing entirely new, was serviceable and easily digestible. However, unlike Star Wars, the movie lacked any lasting iconic mythology. Terminator and Aliens spawned sprawling franchises. We all know what happened with Star Wars.

But once Avatar ended, few people really cared about the rest of the universe. Plus, no one quotes Avatar. When was the last time you saw an Avatar quote in the wild? I can't even remember any worthwhile Avatar quotes that would come close to something from Star Wars, Aliens, or Terminator. That's the difference. Pop culture forgot Avatar once we got over the tech and other movies used it better. Pacific Rim is still my favorite IMAX 3D experience. And I'd watch that movie in a heartbeat rather than Avatar.
 
2017-10-04 03:10:04 PM  

Corn_Fed: EdgeRunner: Corn_Fed: elvisaintdead: Farking Clown Shoes: Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

It's not.  You nailed it.

No, because most everyone will check out the next Avatar out of curiosity, even if they aren't incredibly enthusiastic. That sets expectations nice and low.

Then, when the new story is unexpectedly great, and the movie itself is an incredibly fun and entertaining experience, as Cameron has accomplished for numerous other films, it will fundamentally change the perception of the whole franchise. Then everyone who doubted will look foolish.

Welcome to Fark, Mr. Cameron. I won't be seeing any of your Avatar movies except maybe on Netflix, but if it helps any, I think Aliens and Terminator 2 still hold up as some of the greatest sci-fi movies ever made. Instead of pulling a Lucas, why not quit while your legacy is still intact?

I think I did pretty good with The Abyss, and admit it--Titanic wasn't no slouch.


The Abyss? You mean the test footage for Terminator 2's liquid metal effects? Sure, that was a movie too, I guess. It was no Piranha though.
 
2017-10-04 03:40:42 PM  

kab: Farking Clown Shoes: Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

Star Wars isn't a terribly special or unique story either, but as a kid seeing it for the first time in a theater, it was absolutely mind blowing.    Now you know why Avatar made so much money.


Eh, even at the time, I didn't enjoy the movie that much

My main complaint about the movie was about how much the bad guys enraged me; I do not like feeling that much anger.
 
2017-10-04 03:57:54 PM  

browntimmy: Fano: Jingle Strangle: Joey Jo Jo Jr Shabadu: a neat trick

I think he said soon you won't need glasses. That's a pretty neat trick.

So he's gonna produce plays?

Oh, I remember the days on Fark when 3D was gonna dominate movies forever and fogeys were laughed at as Luddites for claiming it wasn't that new a trick and that not all movies needed it.

You're making shiat up. According to many on Fark, Avatar was going to be the biggest bomb in box office history.


Well, before, yes. Then once it made a trillion bucks that tune changed.
 
2017-10-04 03:59:09 PM  

Joey Jo Jo Jr Shabadu: Mugato: Farking Clown Shoes: "Draw me like one of your Na'vi girls, Ja'ku..."

Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

What new technology? It looked like every other 3D movie.

It was a combination of some newer 3D tech along with advances in motion capture.  It looked better than other 3D at the time, but I don't think the advances were meteoric by any means.

Stereoscopic 3D in film is inherently flawed as it's always just enhancing depth that we can already perceive in 2D.  Until it becomes more interactive and introduces parallax, then it's just going to be a neat trick.


It's still the same basic premise. Two 2D frames in front of each other. A View Master. A Pop up Book. We're not talking about holograms here.
 
2017-10-04 03:59:57 PM  

Corn_Fed: elvisaintdead: Farking Clown Shoes: Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

It's not.  You nailed it.

No, because most everyone will check out the next Avatar out of curiosity, even if they aren't incredibly enthusiastic. That sets expectations nice and low.

Then, when the new story is unexpectedly great, and the movie itself is an incredibly fun and entertaining experience, as Cameron has accomplished for numerous other films, it will fundamentally change the perception of the whole franchise. Then everyone who doubted will look foolish.


pics.me.me
"Also, what movie was the audience watching?"
 
2017-10-04 04:08:26 PM  
They'll be big blue visual orgasma-fests that everyone will see "out of curiosity" and because it'll be fun on the big screen, regardless of good the movies are. So everyone complaining now, will go see it and complain some more and Cameron will have his trillion-dollar hit.
 
2017-10-04 04:12:43 PM  

Mugato: It's still the same basic premise. Two 2D frames in front of each other. A View Master. A Pop up Book. We're not talking about holograms here.


I know.  That's what I said in the second part of my quote.
 
2017-10-04 04:12:57 PM  

Corn_Fed: EdgeRunner: Corn_Fed: elvisaintdead: Farking Clown Shoes: Maybe it's just me, but Dances with Smurfs was only successful because it was the first movie to use the new 3D technology. The story wasn't anything special and it certainly hasn't aged well.

It's not.  You nailed it.

No, because most everyone will check out the next Avatar out of curiosity, even if they aren't incredibly enthusiastic. That sets expectations nice and low.

Then, when the new story is unexpectedly great, and the movie itself is an incredibly fun and entertaining experience, as Cameron has accomplished for numerous other films, it will fundamentally change the perception of the whole franchise. Then everyone who doubted will look foolish.

Welcome to Fark, Mr. Cameron. I won't be seeing any of your Avatar movies except maybe on Netflix, but if it helps any, I think Aliens and Terminator 2 still hold up as some of the greatest sci-fi movies ever made. Instead of pulling a Lucas, why not quit while your legacy is still intact?

I think I did pretty good with The Abyss, and admit it--Titanic wasn't no slouch.


Titanic was pretty awful. But, I knew a girl who saw it 7 times in theaters. If you had just filmed Leonardo DiCaprio eating a ham sandwich, she probably only would have watched it 6 times.
 
2017-10-04 04:19:32 PM  

Truthman: They'll be big blue visual orgasma-fests that everyone will see "out of curiosity" and because it'll be fun on the big screen, regardless of good the movies are. So everyone complaining now, will go see it and complain some more and Cameron will have his trillion-dollar hit.


I'm going to bet... not. I'm not rooting for a movie to fail but it'll be nine years since the original when it comes out, I don't hear anyone foaming at the mouth to see another one. And 3D is getting tired. I dunno, maybe I'm wrong, we'll see.
 
2017-10-04 04:40:14 PM  

Truthman: They'll be big blue visual orgasma-fests that everyone will see "out of curiosity" and because it'll be fun on the big screen, regardless of good the movies are. So everyone complaining now, will go see it and complain some more and Cameron will have his trillion-dollar hit.


Wrong. "Everyone" won't go, because "everyone" would include me and I'm just not interested. Why would I rush out to see something I don't care about? Besides, I've got a sweet home theater setup with better snacks, better seats, no idiots ruining the experience with their cellphones, no hour long preshow of trailers and ads to sit through, and I can pause the movie anytime I want for bathroom breaks. Theater attendance isn't down just because of movie quality, it's because the standard experience has fallen way behind home viewing as the preferable option.
 
2017-10-04 05:06:19 PM  

EdgeRunner: Truthman: They'll be big blue visual orgasma-fests that everyone will see "out of curiosity" and because it'll be fun on the big screen, regardless of good the movies are. So everyone complaining now, will go see it and complain some more and Cameron will have his trillion-dollar hit.

Wrong. "Everyone" won't go, because "everyone" would include me and I'm just not interested. Why would I rush out to see something I don't care about? Besides, I've got a sweet home theater setup with better snacks, better seats, no idiots ruining the experience with their cellphones, no hour long preshow of trailers and ads to sit through, and I can pause the movie anytime I want for bathroom breaks. Theater attendance isn't down just because of movie quality, it's because the standard experience has fallen way behind home viewing as the preferable option.


Lighten up Francis
 
2017-10-04 06:10:05 PM  

meera's frog spear: I definitely agree not all movies need it. Goodfellas does not need to be rendered in 3D. But the Jurassic Park and Titanic 3D re-releases were fantastic.


I had a small issue with the Titanic 3D release.  It's small, but I figured Cameron would have known better.  When in modern times there are several shots that show things on monitors.  The images on the monitors (not talking about the monitors themselves) were in 3d.  They shouldn't have been.  For all the time Cameron spent on tiny minute details him screwing this one up surprised me.
 
2017-10-04 07:04:54 PM  

Truthman: EdgeRunner: Truthman: They'll be big blue visual orgasma-fests that everyone will see "out of curiosity" and because it'll be fun on the big screen, regardless of good the movies are. So everyone complaining now, will go see it and complain some more and Cameron will have his trillion-dollar hit.

Wrong. "Everyone" won't go, because "everyone" would include me and I'm just not interested. Why would I rush out to see something I don't care about? Besides, I've got a sweet home theater setup with better snacks, better seats, no idiots ruining the experience with their cellphones, no hour long preshow of trailers and ads to sit through, and I can pause the movie anytime I want for bathroom breaks. Theater attendance isn't down just because of movie quality, it's because the standard experience has fallen way behind home viewing as the preferable option.

Lighten up Francis


Sorry grandpa, but home theater is where it's at nowadays. It's just the way of things.
 
2017-10-04 07:16:25 PM  

EdgeRunner: Truthman: EdgeRunner: Truthman: They'll be big blue visual orgasma-fests that everyone will see "out of curiosity" and because it'll be fun on the big screen, regardless of good the movies are. So everyone complaining now, will go see it and complain some more and Cameron will have his trillion-dollar hit.

Wrong. "Everyone" won't go, because "everyone" would include me and I'm just not interested. Why would I rush out to see something I don't care about? Besides, I've got a sweet home theater setup with better snacks, better seats, no idiots ruining the experience with their cellphones, no hour long preshow of trailers and ads to sit through, and I can pause the movie anytime I want for bathroom breaks. Theater attendance isn't down just because of movie quality, it's because the standard experience has fallen way behind home viewing as the preferable option.

Lighten up Francis

Sorry grandpa, but home theater is where it's at nowadays. It's just the way of things.


Grandpa? Nice try, but i happen to have home theater myself.
Not saying ill pay money to see it, but most probably will just because.
Hell, the Emoji movie raked in how much?
 
Displayed 50 of 56 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report