http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unobtainiumjord wrote:
I'm sure that word was used in a film prior to avatar.
It has been for awhile.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unobtainiumjord wrote:
I'm sure that word was used in a film prior to avatar.
Genuine scientific term.DonFck wrote:
"Unobtanium". I mean, come on.
Genuine gay term. "can't-get-it-anywhereium". Yes, I read the wiki article, I'm a wiki scholar on that subject now. It's still a stupid-ass name. Combine it with 9-foot smurfs, multicolored flying dragons, a testosterone-pumped colonel/general/whatever and "I see you"-lines, and all you get is once good directors gone senile.M.O.A.B wrote:
Genuine scientific term.DonFck wrote:
"Unobtanium". I mean, come on.
all im saying is that inception had a fantastic premise and narrative concept but they pinned it to a shoddy plot.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Is unobtanium your greatest complaint? Get real. I didn't require a fleshed out backstory to enjoy Alien, and I didn't for Avatar either. I viewed the moon-planet as the main character in Avatar. They sure spent enough time designing the environment.
The difference between that and the new Star Wars movies SW became all about the special effects, which was a complete turn-around from what we new from episodes 4-6, where all Lucas really had to work with is character and plot (though still cheesy) dynamics. Nothing could be more bland than how he had Amidala portrayed. Natalie Portman's a pretty decent actress, but you wouldn't know it from Star Wars.
Creativity at it's best.DonFck wrote:
"Unobtanium". I mean, come on.
Perhaps the most succinct and accurate movie review I've seen. Ever.DonFck wrote:
From Paris With Love: 6/10
Guaranteed Luc Besson action. Travolta brings his Travolta.
Last edited by rdx-fx (2010-08-30 00:42:26)
could've gone deep into the realm of art house tripe with too much self-conscious handling of the dreams-within-dreams theme too.Uzique wrote:
... the point is im tired of plots hinging upon some energy-crisis bullshit, PERIOD.
you could have made a film about dreams, the subconscious and dreams-within-dreams WITHOUT the global capitalism/energy political bullshit.
Ehem *cough cough* he also made this in 2000rdx-fx wrote:
Perhaps the most succinct and accurate movie review I've seen. Ever.DonFck wrote:
From Paris With Love: 6/10
Guaranteed Luc Besson action. Travolta brings his Travolta.
'If you liked John Travolta in Pulp Fiction, you'll absolutely love him in... well.. everything he's done since 1994. It's the same damn character, in a new suit'
Only one of two movies I've actually walked out on.Varegg wrote:
Ehem *cough cough* he also made this in 2000
http://nerdiest-kids.com/wp-content/upl … 6264_3.jpg
Last edited by rdx-fx (2010-08-30 03:06:18)
I prefer it to TQOS's bad guy who oh no, is stealing all the water to charge a slightly increased rate for it!Uzique wrote:
... the point is im tired of plots hinging upon some energy-crisis bullshit, PERIOD.
you could have made a film about dreams, the subconscious and dreams-within-dreams WITHOUT the global capitalism/energy political bullshit.
It did happen IRL, but they underplayed what happened lulzghettoperson wrote:
I prefer it to TQOS's bad guy who oh no, is stealing all the water to charge a slightly increased rate for it!Uzique wrote:
... the point is im tired of plots hinging upon some energy-crisis bullshit, PERIOD.
you could have made a film about dreams, the subconscious and dreams-within-dreams WITHOUT the global capitalism/energy political bullshit.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2010-08-30 04:12:26)