Hey folks, just wondering if anyone has watched the trailer for Avatar, and what they thought of it?
Watch the trailer here
Also, there was some sort of 15 min. screening in some places, did anyone catch that?
Personally, I was unimpressed by the trailer, given the vast amount of hype for the film. I expect to still go and see it, if only because I haven't been to see a 3D film yet, but I won't be bothered if I miss it.
I expect it will be successful, but not Titanic levels of cash.

I have exactly the same impressions.Very underwhelmed by the trailer, but will go see it simply because it is Cameron aka "guy that made T2 and Aliens".He is my favourite director along with Nolan and few others.But yeah, trailer nothing extraordinary.I suppose 3D will make it better.

My trouble with that is we may all just go "wow" at the 3D, and ignore the mediocre film. This will then encourage hollywood types to make mediocre films that rely on 3D... oh wait I think that's already happening without Cameron.

I refuse to look at the trailer. There has been so much hype about this movie I'm sick and tired even to read the title.....

I saw the trailer when I went to see Inglorious Basterds. I feel like I know too much about the film, since James Cameron wouldn't stop talking about it at Ubisoft's E3 conference. I'll be curious to see how many people go to see Avatar expecting M. Night Shamalayan's Last Airbender, and the other way around.

By the way, is Inglorious Basterds any good? I may be seeing it tomrorow.

Get ready for it.... (imagine this being said with a huge echoing voice) IT'S DANCES WITH WOLVES... IN SPAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCEEEEEEE!!!!
I think the effects will be good, the movie will do ok, but it won't be a huge huge success like he's hoping.

Well, this trailer is nothing more than a... trailer, focusing - like the majority of trailers - on "wow" moments.
Anyway, I think I will go see it, because it's James Cameron, and because it's at least a new Cameron movie. He has spent SO much time around the success of Titanic, making sub-water documentaries/fictions, it's good to see him back in business, even if his 3D obsession annoy me.
Funny to see designs that remind a lot of Aliens technology: soldiers' armors, flying ship looking a bit like the dropship, some power-loader machines, etc...
In term of colors and ambience, some shots remind me Kashyyyk in Episode III.
The "alien" design is the weak point for me, let's hope they will be credible and interesting in the movie.

Actually, one of the threads on the Escapist about JC's Avatar had a bunch of posts about people talking about The Last Airbender, who obviously didn't read the main topic or the other replies before they posted. It made me sad for the state of humankind, sad and angry.

The trailer was pretty meh, I don't expect too much of this movie though...

I wasn't impressed. The concept, to me, seems hokey and overplayed. I also have a general rule of thumb that I follow - if I only am interested in a movie for its CGI, then I probably should skip seeing it.

Roger Ebert has a good write-up on his site about how 3D directs your attention on the effect too much and how that takes you out of the story.

Inglorious Basterds is a pretty good film. It's not as mind-blowing as the trailer leads it to be, but it's a very fun film. It's like a Western combined with a WWII film. Brad Pitt's character is hilarious, and every scene is satisfying, although it can go on for a veeeery long time.

This reminds me of The Onion's video about how a film was made based on the trailer for Transformers.
Time and time again, throughout creative media, limitation actually breeds interesting new developments and in my opinion, better films. Let say you can make a film, but every shot has to have the colour red in it somewhere; or lets say the film has to be shot from a continuous first person perspective.
I dunno, without limitations it just seems 'special effects' aren't special. They're just effects now... 3D is the only 'special' thing left I guess (as in viewed through glasses).

I disagree. Coraline, while having the gimmicky pop-out-at-you thing at the very beginning, utilized the 3D in an immersive fashion for the rest of the film. Also, Roger Ebert is a moronic flip-flopper who doesn't know art if it spat in his face. He wrote a negative review of Reservoir Dogs when it first came out (It's his opinion and he's entitled to it), but gave it a glowing review after everyone else loved it. He also claims to not understand the ending to District 9, and that's a perfectly understandable ending. It's open to interpretation, sure, but there's no way in hell you can't get it.