The Last AirbenderFollow

ah that is right he did say he was 12. There were others too who were either too old, or not old enough.

No Toph, the first movie only covered the Book of Water, Toph won't appear unless they decide to do a second movie covering the Book of Earth.

This is going to be very useless information for people who are trying to avoid spoilers, since you put it in an area that they won't be reading.

I paid $10 for my ticket, was a waste. I should have just waited until I could rent it..

Is it worth it to watch this movie on 3d? What can you say? I've seen the trailer and it's great. I like the effects of this movie but the question is.. Is it works on 3d?

I watched the bootleg & found it tolerable. Granted, I've never seen an entire episode of the cartoon. Ya, there was a lot of bad acting, but at the same time the kid from Slumdog did a decent job as the prince. Also, I gotta say, the "main" bad guy of this flick (the guy who leads the attack on the water city) I only know as as coorespondant on The Daily Show, & I think he did a decent job being "serious" throughout the whole thing. Guys a comedian & they hired him for a part that had 0 humor.

In fact, the movie had like, 0 humor which is down right retarded for a "kids" movie. It was also cut together poorly & didn't really get you to care about any other characters besides The Airbender & The Prince. When the Princess died, I didn't give a ****. I cared even less that the Water Bender's brother was sad about it.

I would say it was better than live action Dragonball movie & Wolverine: Origins, though.

Edited, Jul 8th 2010 8:51am by Omegavegeta

Are you trippen out? This movie was no way better they the Wolverine movie >.>
Now I've never seen the Dragonball one, did they even put it on DVD? Or was it so much fail the just put it under the rug?

I'm going to have to strap myself in and watch this movie at the best of Ray and the kids. The kids watch the cartoon endlessly on Nick and I'm wearing sunglasses and sleeping in the theater when we go.

What's up with the 3D craze these days? I even saw a theater advertising a "4D cinema experience", where the fourth dimension, apparently, is sprinklers spraying you with water during the movie. That's not a fourth dimension, guys. Seriously, height, width and length, that's three dimension. The fourth is arguably time, in which case every single 2D movie we've seen has been 3D already, and every 3D movie has been 4D. Adding physical effects to a virtual experience doesn't add another dimension, it just means you get sprayed with damn water during the movie.

Something I imagine would only add to the annoyance of watching a 3D movie in the first place. Those glasses, although not as hopelessly unstylish as the old cardboard red-and-blue disco things, are still uncomfortable, at least for someone who isn't used to having two pieces of transparent material half an inch from his eye for two hours. And the 3D effects, while neat and all, didn't provide me with much when I saw Alice in Wonderland, for instance. Yes, watching a guy throw a spear at me was cool, if I wasn't busy flinching every other second, partially due to the strain of trying to not focus on the glasses instead of the movie, but also because every time someone did throw a spear at me, my self-preservation reflexes would go into the red.

3D was cool, but let's give it a rest until someone comes up with a working, affordable hologram projector, okay?

It's a way for studios to cover for shoddy writing and mediocre acting. It's also something that is(at least for the moment) solely available in theaters or to people with bleeding edge home theater systems. It's also something that is extremely difficult to pirate

writing and acting: the guild strike was an unmitigated disaster, and due to the time frame involved in producing a big-budget film, we should just now be seeing fully post-strike screenplays. and as far as acting? we haven't had a really bankable leading man/woman since tom cruise lost his mind. pitt and damon are past their prime, same with clooney. daniel craig had a chance with the bond roles(almost always a good springboard) but the studios finances went in the toilet depriving him of a vehicle. and the writing has sucked, making chicken salad from chickensh*t will get you recognition, but chicken salad won't get you fame.

tech: this is big, theaters were in a great chance of dieing off, home systems were too good, dvd/blu-ray were too available. there was, some would say is, no reason to spend gas/time and get gouged on concessions for the "theater experience" since the experience wasn't all that much better than home. thankfully this is temporary, 3d home systems are already available, and like hd will slowly percolate through the marketplace and theaters will have to find a new gimmick

piracy: this was BS, but it's one of the worst kinds. studios started to believe their own spin. they felt that they needed something to combat the fact that every movie is available online within a week and latched on to 3d for its technical difficulties. again temporary, 3d capable graphics cards entered the market around the same time as 3d televisions. they do have an advantage that most of the tried and true methods for getting a 0-day movie digitized won't pick up 3d. the 3d dvd market is screwed however.