Topic: Avatar Trailer

[ScaryTooth]

Went and saw it today. Loved it. The story is a tad cliche, and slightly predictable, but it's so well done. I was entertained the entire way through. And I love the world of, Pandora. All the inhabitants, and flora. Most of the movie is CGI, and it is freaking amazing. The only time I thought of it as CGI was when I was thinking. "damn, I can't believe that's CGI." It's pretty incredible. I really enjoyed the story, even though it was a little bit cliche.

Go see it. It's awesome. I want to live on Pandora...

[Quemaqua]

Basically everything you just said is why I will never watch this movie.

[ScaryTooth]

You won't see it because it's awesome?

[Quemaqua]

Because it's cliche and entirely CG.

[Pugnate]

Went and saw it today. Loved it. The story is a tad cliche, and slightly predictable, but it's so well done. I was entertained the entire way through. And I love the world of, Pandora. All the inhabitants, and flora. Most of the movie is CGI, and it is freaking amazing. The only time I thought of it as CGI was when I was thinking. "damn, I can't believe that's CGI." It's pretty incredible. I really enjoyed the story, even though it was a little bit cliche.

Go see it. It's awesome. I want to live on Pandora...

Did you see it in a 3D theater?

[ScaryTooth]

It's not that cliche, it's a good story. There are some twist and turns. And the art work, and eye candy are absolutely beautiful.

Yeah, I went and saw it in 3D. It was a treat to the eyes. There are these little spores here and there in the forest, and they kind of float right out in front of you. There is some depth to the movie too. As they walk through the forest, and they movie limbs of trees and plants, they swing back almost like they are going to hit you in the face. It's sweet!

[Quemaqua]

Yeah, see... I don't prefer CG (generally speaking) and I think the whole 3D movie thing is unbelievably stupid.

[W7RE]

Yeah, see... I don't prefer CG (generally speaking) and I think the whole 3D movie thing is unbelievably stupid.

This is actually sort of why I DID go to see it. I thought the 3D was gonna be lame, and I wanted to see for myself. Every 3D movie I've seen before looks like it has paper cutouts on different points in the Z plane, and it's usually one object flying at the camera. This looked way better than that, to the point that now I'm excited about the idea of this stuff taking off.

I actually came home and started searching around to see if there was a way to use the same glasses with any of my games. I thought I remembered messing with WoW settings that partially split the image and had some different options, but can't find them now. If all these new TVs and monitors that support 3D without glasses work as well as this movie did, I would love for it to catch on.

[scottws]

Just got back from seeing it in 3D.  It was completely awesome and I was blown away.  There is nothing else I have to add that others haven't said.

And Que, what's up with you man?  Are you just anti-establishment or what?  It's as if there is anything big and popular, you automatically hate it.  I bet if something like the original Doom came out today and had an impact on gaming like that game did, you would hate that too.

[Quemaqua]

God damn it, I'm so tired of that comment.  No, that's fucking false.  I like plenty of things that everyone else likes.  How many ultra-mega-popular games do I have in my house right now?  How many popular movies do I own?  How many popular TV shows have I enjoyed?  Just because I generally happen to like things that are off the beaten path doesn't mean I hate everything that's popular.  It's entirely on a case by case basis.  Yeah, a lot of popular shit is utter drivel that tries to reach a wide audience and thereby fails to make any considerable impact one way or the other, but not all of it.

I'll reserve the rest of my comments.

Anyway... with games, I can *sort of* see the 3D thing, in very limited circumstances... if it's done well enough to provide some sort of tangible value (though this is in serious question for me).  For movies, I just really have no desire to see anything in 3D, no matter how good.  You're watching through a window, through a very limited field, and the illusion of greater depth is simply at odds with the entire medium as a whole at the most basic level as far as I'm concerned.  I think it's stupid, regardless of how well the effect is carried out.  It's goofy and hamfisted and does nothing to increase my enjoyment of a film.

[scottws]

God damn it, I'm so tired of that comment.  No, that's fucking false.  I like plenty of things that everyone else likes.  How many ultra-mega-popular games do I have in my house right now?  How many popular movies do I own?  How many popular TV shows have I enjoyed?  Just because I generally happen to like things that are off the beaten path doesn't mean I hate everything that's popular.  It's entirely on a case by case basis.  Yeah, a lot of popular shit is utter drivel that tries to reach a wide audience and thereby fails to make any considerable impact one way or the other, but not all of it.

Hey man, it was just an observation.  And it's not an observation of you liking more niche or lesser-known things.  It's me seeing you hating popular things, constantly.  Hey I agree with you that there is a lot of mainstream crap and just because a lot of people like something doesn't mean it actually any good or gets a pass from me.  That said, I feel like I give a lot of things a fair shake.  It's just that you seem pretty dismissive in a lot of cases.  Maybe you have good reason to and I just see the final opinion that is the result of a lot of research and inner dialog.

Honestly, it's nothing personal and I'm not trying to be judgmental.  I just think you would be better served sometimes by being more open to some things, even if they are mega-popular or have a ton of hype behind them.  I don't know you aside from the few minutes a day I spend on here so if your musings on here are just the output of a lot of previous processing, I apologize.  Again, it's just an observation.

Anyway... with games, I can *sort of* see the 3D thing, in very limited circumstances... if it's done well enough to provide some sort of tangible value (though this is in serious question for me).  For movies, I just really have no desire to see anything in 3D, no matter how good.  You're watching through a window, through a very limited field, and the illusion of greater depth is simply at odds with the entire medium as a whole at the most basic level as far as I'm concerned.  I think it's stupid, regardless of how well the effect is carried out.  It's goofy and hamfisted and does nothing to increase my enjoyment of a film.

See, this is what I mean:  "I think it's stupid, regardless of how well the effect is carried out."  You're being dismissive.

That said, I do see what you are saying in this paragraph.  I saw the movie tonight and my post earlier in this thread prior to seeing the movie about its 3D and how you are forced to focus on what James Cameron wants to focus on is pretty true.  The movie doesn't allow our eyes and brains to always truly focus on the object we want to look at.  This is a current limitation of the technology that I'm sure they'll figure out someday.  Probably not soon though.

However, despite this limitation, Avatar is easily the best 3D movie to date and nothing else comes even remotely close.  And honestly, the focus issue is really only noticeable in scenes with a huge amount of depth to them and there are less of those than you would think.

And while the 3D is pretty awe-inspiring sometimes in this movie, the movie would stand tall even in 2D form.  It really is very good.

[Quemaqua]

Well, how would I say it in a way that doesn't sound dismissive?  I mean... I think it's stupid.  I don't like the effect, it doesn't do anything for me.  I don't like the trend of seeing movies do this all the time.  I don't think there's really a good way to say you think something is dumb, most of the time.  What can I say... it just isn't for me.

I can see applications for it in the future, if other technology comes to bear on the formula, but just taking a flat movie and trying to add depth?  Doesn't work for me.  I can't take these films seriously.

And I don't know if the movie is good or bad because I haven't seen it... all I can say is that the advertising has pretty much made me want to make sure that I never, ever spend any money on it, because it looks absolutely fucking terrible.  Maybe the movie's great, sure... Dragon Age had the worst advertising ever and turned out to be a pretty okay game.  But still... why would I go out of my way to take the risk?

[scottws]

I don't know... maybe because a shit ton of people really liked it?  I mean look at this thread alone.  The people here aren't all the "sheep" you talk about sometimes, are they?  You know them.

I thought the advertising sucked as well.  I was not interested in seeing the movie at all until I read that Wired article.  After reading it, I was really excited to see it and you know what?  It was better than I thought it would be.  It exceeded my expectations.

If you don't want to see the movie that's fine.  It's not like it negatively affects me or anyone else in any way.  No one is going to be personally offended or anything like that.  I just think it seems pretty typical coming from you.  Here comes something with a lot of hype behind it.  You automatically hate it.  You automatically think it sucks.  Maybe those words are a bit to strong.  You're... "not interested".

[Quemaqua]

Well, no offense to you guys, but you, W7, and scary aren't exactly on the same page with me when it comes to a lot of this stuff.  You guys routinely like things that I think suck (and vice versa).  Not all the time, sure, but on a semi-regular basis.  If it were someone whose opinions were generally more on par with my own, I'd be more apt to reconsider.  But I hardly ever get out to the theater these days anyway.  I barely even watch TV.  It just isn't something I like to waste my time on, so something has to be pretty special for me to care.  Even if the movie were obviously pretty cool instead of really shitty looking on top with cool underneath, chances would be high that I wouldn't go see it.  This one just happens to hit pet peeves of mine and comes from a director I don't like.

Anyway, I remember having a couple of exchanges with you about stuff where everyone told you it wasn't the way you thought it was, and you said, "Meh... it doesn't matter, I just don't care," and admitted outright that you're very closed-minded about a lot of stuff, so this seems a little funny coming from you.  Some movie thing (ironically) and something about food.  I don't remember exactly.  But no, I don't automatically think anything sucks.  I think stuff sucks when it gives me a reason to think it.  Cliched sci-fi action movie in 3D with lots of CG directed by James Cameron... that's pretty much the perfect recipe for making me think something is going to suck.

[Pugnate]

It is a pity there are no 3D capable theaters here. I might have to take that trip to Dubai to watch it.

[W7RE]

I don't think you can compare the 3D gimmick in other movies to the 3D in this movie. The effect is similar, but looks way better. Like I said already, that's partly why I wanted to see this movie in 3D: to see if it was the same old shit, or actually good. And it WAS actually good.


BTW with the technological limitation of that results in some parts being out of focus, I don't think this would apply to video games, since they render everything instead of capturing it on film. I assume the filming method is to use 2 cameras side by side. For a game, I assume it would just split the display of objects based on location, and nothing would be blurry.

[idolminds]

3D movies have a ways to go. I'm sure theres a movie just waiting to be made that justifies it, a movie that would lose a lot by not being in 3D. It just feels gimmicky now, especially when theres all those zoom around/flyby shots that are basically there to show off how 3D everything is. And thats just the impression I get from pretty much every 3D movie. "This shot was made exclusively for those glasses you are wearing."

Avatar looks like something I'd rent just to see what the hype was about. Though to be fair I haven't been to a theater in forever so its not like I'm picking on this one specifically.

[W7RE]

What are "all these 3D movies"? I thought the trend of making them went out in the early 90s and was being brought back by Avatar. If there's other 3D movies out there that look this good, I want to know about them. Seriously the only ones I can name are Jaws 3D, Friday the 13th 3D, and Evil Dead 2. So when I hear "all these 3D movies" that's what I think of, and I wouldn't compare Avatar to those AT ALL.

[Quemaqua]

There've been a ton of movies.  I remember a few, but Wikipedia fills in the rest: Spy Kids, Ghosts of the Abyss, Polar Express, Open Season, The Ant Bully, Monster House, Journey to the Center of the Earth, Bolt, My Bloody Valentine, Coraline, Monsters vs. Aliens, Up, and The Final Destination.  That's skipping a few of the more obscure ones or non-US releases.

I'm sure you'll mention that most of these are kiddie movies and that you think the quality of this 3D is so much better, but that's still not really my point, as my argument isn't about the quality of the 3D effect, it's that I think the concept is fundamentally stupid.

[ScaryTooth]

Whats wrong with CGI? It's good art. It has just as much artistry involved in it than any other form of art. Especially in Avatars instance. I mean, it's seriously a beautiful looking movie. I commend the people involved. I felt very immersed in a gorgeous alien world. It felt real, I got to escape reality for a bit and go to a really awesome place.

I mean, it's just another form. I like art in all of it's forms, and this is good. I don't see any reason to bash it. Did you hate Wall-E? or Toy Story? Incredibles? I mean, sometimes it's overused in shitty movies that try to cover up their shittyness with lame special effects. This is not like that though. It is a quality movie.

And yeah, there have been quite a few 3d movies as of late. I saw Up, Monsters vs Aliens, Coraline, and something else that I can't recall. Most of it decent, didn't enjoy "Up", or "MvA" as much as I thought I would, they were just okay.

 But those movies didn't take it near to the level Avatar does.

[nickclone]

I'm with Que on this, I think 3D is a lame gimmick that doesn't work well.

I like CGI, but I believe CGI should only be used in two ways:

1. If there is absolutely no other way to pull off the effect realistically ( i.e. the dragon in The Goblet of Fire).

2. When CGI is used, you should look at it and not think "Wow, thats CGI". I think it should blend seamlessly with the movie, and those fake cat people aren't doing it for me.

[ScaryTooth]

It is gimmicky. But I think the general consensus is that Avatar has done it the best so far. It doesn't seem gimmicky. It seems like more of a tool to immerse you in this cool ass world.

And the Na-Vi look real as shit in the movie. I didn't once think of them as CGI characters. Only to question weather or not I was looking at something real or artificial.

[Cobra951]

Up (Pixar) is also 3D.  That movie doesn't push it, though.  It's there just for added effect, but doesn't throw ping-pong balls at your face or anything like that.

Stereoscopy is simply a tool.  How well it works depends on how the artist employs it.  The tech itself is so simple that it has worked perfectly for a long time.  There's no way to prevent the focus problem, other than have infinite depth-of-field focus (and even that would look unnatural, if less so, since we don't have that with our eyes).  Only by having a real 3D projection (hologram?) could that be solved.

I am interested in the movie.  I hope I get to see it in a 3D theater.  The few times I go to movie theaters, it's usually with my brother Tony.  Unfortunately, his vision in one eye is so bad that he gets nothing out of stereoscopy, so this time it wouldn't be with him.

[scottws]

Well, no offense to you guys, but you, W7, and scary aren't exactly on the same page with me when it comes to a lot of this stuff.  You guys routinely like things that I think suck (and vice versa).  Not all the time, sure, but on a semi-regular basis.  If it were someone whose opinions were generally more on par with my own, I'd be more apt to reconsider.  But I hardly ever get out to the theater these days anyway.  I barely even watch TV.  It just isn't something I like to waste my time on, so something has to be pretty special for me to care.  Even if the movie were obviously pretty cool instead of really shitty looking on top with cool underneath, chances would be high that I wouldn't go see it.  This one just happens to hit pet peeves of mine and comes from a director I don't like.

Anyway, I remember having a couple of exchanges with you about stuff where everyone told you it wasn't the way you thought it was, and you said, "Meh... it doesn't matter, I just don't care," and admitted outright that you're very closed-minded about a lot of stuff, so this seems a little funny coming from you.  Some movie thing (ironically) and something about food.  I don't remember exactly.  But no, I don't automatically think anything sucks.  I think stuff sucks when it gives me a reason to think it.  Cliched sci-fi action movie in 3D with lots of CG directed by James Cameron... that's pretty much the perfect recipe for making me think something is going to suck.

Hey, again I wasn't trying to personally attack you.  I will freely admit that I've unintentionally trolled some threads and that I'm not a perfect individual.  There are some things I am definitely closed minded about.  Usually it's stuff related to food, RPGs, or fantasty type stuff.  History shows me that there are certain foods I don't or won't like, I only get into 5% of all RPGs I play, and I've liked few (any?) games, books, or movies that were in a fantasy setting.

So if your reason for being closed minded about Avatar is because of your last sentence, then hey there is nothing wrong with that.  It's just that I've seen you hate on popular stuff time and time again and to me it seemed like just another example.  It's just something I've noticed about how you represent yourself on these boards, that's all.  In your mind you may think it's a false claim, but it's a pattern I hate to tell you.

Anyway, I went back and checked over some of this thread.  I wish movies were $6.50 here like W7RE says.  Movies here are $9.75 to see them in 2D/non-directors-hall/non-digital.  That's the baseline price.  Jennie and I paid $13.50/ea. to see this movie in 3D last night.  $27.00.  That's crazy.  But I thought it was worth it.

[ScaryTooth]

What you do is go up to the ticket ATM thing, and get child tickets. The kid that takes the ticket doesn't give a shit. He's 16 and that's his first job...

Okay, I did that once. But yeah. Movie prices are kind of crazy. We got to see it for $10 each in 3D. That was the matinee. It's $12.50 otherwise. No one does student tickets anymore either. Which is crappy. I remember when I was a kid, movies were like $4 for a matinee, and $5 regularly. Totally worth my $20 though. Kind of want to go again. But I'm probably going to stay in tonight and watch some Inglorious Basterds.

[scottws]

When Jennie and I got to the theater they weren't seating the movie yet and there was this huge line of people lined up waiting for them to start seating in front of the ticket guy.  The ticket guy lets us know this, doesn't tear our ticket, and directs us to the back of the line.  Jennie asks the guy if we can go to the bathroom and he says ok.  I stand inside the theater area right by the ticket guy and wait for her to come out.  She's a girl, so she takes a long time.  As a few minutes pass, I sort of scoot down the cordoned-off area, and put a guy between us and the ticket dude and lean against the wall.  Jennie comes out and I tell her we should move over to this vending area they have set up that is recessed from the hallway.  Clearly the ticket dude has forgotten about us at this point, but I feel like if he sees us hanging around he will remember and have us escorted out of the theater area.  So we go over to the recessed area where he can't see us and just hang out until they start taking tickets for the movie.  In the meantime, I have Jennie tear our tickets in case someone asks.  Where we are standing is directly across from the theater.  We get in first.  Pretty sweet move.  I love being with a sneaky Jersey girl.  She knows all the tricks and has taught me well.

[W7RE]

I think the tickets here are $8.50. Matinee is $6.50, and there was a $3 charge per ticket for 3D.

Also, I live in a small town in NC, and the movie theater is rarely packed. We saw Avatar at 12:45 pm opening day, and there were probably 6-7 groups (2-4 people each) in the theater. I guess it was probably more crowded later in the day, but still it was opening day. Not that I'm complaining, I like a less crowded theater. The chick in front of my leaned back into my knee during the pre-trailer commercials. It didn't hurt, but I wasn't gonna sit through a 3 hours movie like that. So I moved back a row. Can't do that in a crowded theater.

[ScaryTooth]

Hahaha. That's awesome.

I'm stuck with a nice girl who will do no wrong...

[scottws]

I think the tickets here are $8.50. Matinee is $6.50, and there was a $3 charge per ticket for 3D.

Also, I live in a small town in NC, and the movie theater is rarely packed. We saw Avatar at 12:45 pm opening day, and there were probably 6-7 groups (2-4 people each) in the theater. I guess it was probably more crowded later in the day, but still it was opening day. Not that I'm complaining, I like a less crowded theater. The chick in front of my leaned back into my knee during the pre-trailer commercials. It didn't hurt, but I wasn't gonna sit through a 3 hours movie like that. So I moved back a row. Can't do that in a crowded theater.

Wow, that's crazy.  I think the entire theater was full except for a single seat each directly to the left and right of Jennie and I.  Jennie kept thinking someone would ask us to move over a seat (thus freeing up two seats together) and vowed not to.  I thought that was kind of mean since how bad would moving one seat over really hurt our view?  We were in first and had the best seats in the house already.  What would one seat over really hurt?

But then again, she's from NJ and I had just read a book called "Asshole-ology: The Science Behind Getting Your Way and Getting Away with it" (long story).  So we just glowered at people that even bothered to glance near our direction.  Not only did we have the best seats in the house, but we had a one-seat cushion each direction.

I'm stuck with a nice girl who will do no wrong...

Uh not true!  What about the porn film next door and the whole masturbatory-join-in thing?  Jennie is a true NJ bitch, but she is such a prude.

[nickclone]

The last movie I snuck into was Saving Private Ryan...yes I'm that old. If you're going to sneak in don't do it on a Friday or Saturday night. They have a full staff, the check/tear tickets (even at the movie's entrance with an ID if it's rated R) and theres atleast a few cops there (not good for sneaking in beers).

I recommend going on Sunday night,there is usually just one person selling tickets, no one checking them and no cops.

[scottws]

We didn't really sneak in.  We already bought tickets.  We just went from like 100th in line to 1st.

We did used to sneak into movies though.  We would catch one of those 10:00pm shows and then sneak into on of the 12:00pm or so ones after our movie ended.  We did this with Million Dollar Baby and Batman Begins.  But it doesn't seem like they show movies that late around here anymore.

[ScaryTooth]

Oh, that was the only time. And I think she felt obligated to as a friend or something. Don't think there was any joining in though.

I just mean, morally, she is goody-two-shoes. She is just to sweet to everyone. I don't trust people as much as she does. A bum will come up and aggressively try to get some change from us, and she has to stop, and be all polite and shit to them. I have to just grab her hand and pull her away...Shes not very confrontational with people. It's funny, but kind of annoying sometimes.

[scottws]

I just mean, morally, she is goody-two-shoes. She is just to sweet to everyone. I don't trust people as much as she does. A bum will come up and aggressively try to get some change from us, and she has to stop, and be all polite and shit to them. I have to just grab her hand and pull her away...Shes not very confrontational with people. It's funny, but kind of annoying sometimes.

It's funny you mention the situations with bums.  I have a really hard time reading Jennie sometimes.  She's Hispanic and by nature very family oriented and just a really giving person in general.  But with bums it's weird.  Sometimes she'll nudge me and say:  "Give that guy some money!"  Other times I'll give a guy some money and she'll say "Why in the hell did you just do that?!"  I have never figured out here secret bum code that lets me know what situation is right to give a bum money and which is wrong.

Speaking of her giving nature, we almost had some loser chick with her three kids (her kids are actually all really great) living in our tiny house.  Jennie said it would only be for a few weeks until she got on her feet after leaving her really loser husband, who has automatic weapons.  I had to remind her over and over what a bad idea it would be.  She ended up moving in with some other people.  They were charging her a modest rent of about $700/mo. for the four of them.  They ended up kicking her out after two months after she never paid them a dime or contributed in any way, told them she would not be paying them for several months due to her financial troubles, mooched endlessly, had the cops over several times due to confrontations with her loser husband, and complained mercilessly about their house rules.  To put insult to injury, she also tried to get one of her former hosts fired from his job after he kicked her out.

Now keep that in mind.  After this, she asked Jennie if she could borrow $5,000 and there were also indications she was hoping to move in with us.  This is how giving and caring Jennie can be:  I had to talk her out of both things!

[W7RE]

The last movie I snuck into was Saving Private Ryan...yes I'm that old.

I saw the first Crocodile Dundee movie in a theater. Yes, when it was new.

[scottws]

Oh don't even start this.  I'll raise your Crocodile Dundee (I saw it too) with this:  I saw Empire Strikes Back when it was new at a drive-in (do any of you even know what those are?).  I was barely two, so it was more like my parents couldn't find a babysitter than taking me to see a movie.  Still, I was there!  Hell, I saw Jabba the Hutt's desert skiff from Return of the Jedi under construction in Arizona.

I'm trying to think of the first movie I remember seeing in a theater or at a drive-in, and I just can't.  Right now I'm leaning towards The Care Bears Movie.

[Pugnate]

What you do is go up to the ticket ATM thing, and get child tickets. The kid that takes the ticket doesn't give a shit. He's 16 and that's his first job...

Okay, I did that once. But yeah. Movie prices are kind of crazy. We got to see it for $10 each in 3D. That was the matinee. It's $12.50 otherwise. No one does student tickets anymore either. Which is crappy. I remember when I was a kid, movies were like $4 for a matinee, and $5 regularly. Totally worth my $20 though. Kind of want to go again. But I'm probably going to stay in tonight and watch some Inglorious Basterds.

What do you do if you get caught?

Oh I am sorry, I have progeria.

OK that's a horrible disease.

[Cobra951]

No one here can beat me at this game.  I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey when it was new in theaters.  It's a Mad[x4] World too.  Blazing Saddles, Smokey and the Bandit, The Sting . . .

[ScaryTooth]

What do you do if you get caught?

Oh I am sorry, I have progeria.

OK that's a horrible disease.

I dunno. I doubt very much. Like I said, it's a bunch of kids who don't give a shit. Nor should they. Go back and buy a regular ticket? "Oh, sorry, I dunno how I got a kids ticket, must have pushed the wrong button. My bad.

[scottws]

"Oh, sorry, I dunno how I got a kids ticket, must have pushed the wrong button. My bad.

You know what's crazy?  How in the heck are there any tellers any more?  Jennie and I prefer the Rave in West Chester.  It has some tellers, but it also has a bank of ticket machines right inside the entrance.  There is always a line for the tellers but not for the machines.  Why?  I have no idea but it's awesome for us because it's so quick.

On the flip side, occasionally we'll go to Regal in Deerfield Towne Center.  They have a whole one ticket machine and not once have we been able to buy tickets off of it.  It's either broken or it's running some useless informational program all the time.  No, instead we're always waiting in line there, even if it is fast.

There is no way a ticket machine doesn't pay for itself very, very quickly in comparison to paying for a teller.

As far as the original point about having the wrong ticket... I totally see what Scary is saying.  There is no way the kids that work on movie theaters are actually going to challenge you about anything.  They are too intimidated plus they just don't care.

[Quemaqua]

I love the differences between movie theaters in different parts of the country.  Ours are all so utterly crappy, and the people who work at them are often subhuman.  A couple of them are pretty dangerous.  I had "I hate you fuckin' white boy!" yelled at me once when I was coming out of a movie with my wife and a friend of ours, used to regularly hear gunshots at another one that's now closed, and other fun stories like that.  I snuck in beer once, we used to regularly sneak in hamburgers and stuff, and once we even managed to get a freaking pizza in.  I have no idea how we pulled that off.

Movies really are expensive these days, though... puts me off from going a lot of the time, especially if I'm not completely sure about the movie beforehand.

As for the now-old discussion... I get why people would sort of think I'm anti-popular-stuff, scott, just not so much the people here because I would figure they'd see that I like a lot of popular stuff too... but I guess not.  I think it comes down to the fact that most people immediately forget when you like something popular because so does everyone else.  But the minute you dislike something popular, that stands out, especially when you're sometimes vehement in your displeasure as I often am with something that I think is actively negative or bad.  But it never has anything to do with popularity whatsoever.  I do sometimes worry when things I like get popular after not being so, but that's because I worry that the popularity will change the thing, not just because "Oh damn, now I like something that's popular... I better start not liking it".  You know?

But yeah, nick and I are on the same page as far as CG.  I put up with it with certain things, and there are sometimes effects that can't really be achieved without it, but for the most part I prefer my movies to be a CG-free as possible.  Sure it's another form of artistry, but it's one that's used at the expense of other methods of craftsmanship that I think achieve much better-feeling results.