Escape to the Movies: Avatar

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

It probably a good movie, maybe even a great one, but that doesn't fix the fact it doesn't appeal to me. The overflow of hype created on the internet and the crappy trailers made me lose any interest I might have had in it.
When the creators of something throw their product into my face yelling "You must like this because it is the best!" I take a few steps back. It's the same reason I lose interest in most American humor films because they take a fart joke and slam it into my face screaming "You must laugh because this is funny!"

AlbinoHero:
It probably a good movie, maybe even a great one, but that doesn't fix the fact it doesn't appeal to me. The overflow of hype created on the internet and the crappy trailers made me lose any interest I might have had in it.
When the creators of something throw their product into my face yelling "You must like this because it is the best!" I take a few steps back. It's the same reason I lose interest in most American humor films because they take a fart joke and slam it into my face screaming "You must laugh because this is funny!"

This is often a good reason why you ignore the hype. I completely blanked the hype from my mind and did watch one trailer because I know what hype can do for the perception of a movie. I watched it and for me I thought it was a great film. You may think differently but I would suggest giving the movie a chance before you make your judgements on the movie being good or bad.

I dunno, I'm still on the fence about this one. I mean, it could be good, but I can't shake this contrived eco-freindly vibe I'm getting from it.

Also, as a member of Deviantart, I can guarantee with some level of certainty that this shit is going to happen. A sad truth. Makes the rest of us look bad.

Watch this movie, you will love it. Even if you hate it you'll at lease be able to say why.

Sovvolf:

AlbinoHero:
It probably a good movie, maybe even a great one, but that doesn't fix the fact it doesn't appeal to me. The overflow of hype created on the internet and the crappy trailers made me lose any interest I might have had in it.
When the creators of something throw their product into my face yelling "You must like this because it is the best!" I take a few steps back. It's the same reason I lose interest in most American humor films because they take a fart joke and slam it into my face screaming "You must laugh because this is funny!"

This is often a good reason why you ignore the hype. I completely blanked the hype from my mind and did watch one trailer because I know what hype can do for the perception of a movie. I watched it and for me I thought it was a great film. You may think differently but I would suggest giving the movie a chance before you make your judgements on the movie being good or bad.

I can respect that. Though I need to survive the holiday before I see it, but that's another story...

The Wah:

mr Awsome:

orangeapples:

mr Awsome:
[quote="orangeapples" post="6.162366.4162604"]
and to answer the question above "Why do all the animals have six legs except for the Na'vi?"
Thats like saying why dont humans have four legs like all the animals on Earth. They all have six legs on Pandora just like they all have four legs on Earth

well, the thing is that you're doing a 180 turn on your outlook from bad to awesome which is why it is great, but I'm only doing a 90 turn from mild interest to awesome which is not that great to me.

and for that last part: kangaroos and birds have 2 legs. Not "all the animals on Earth" have 4 legs

oh true i didnt think about them...but all we saw in the movie were horse-like things, dragon-like things, rhino-like things, and tiger-like things and im pretty sure those animals all have four legs in real life.....if dragons existed that is... so maybe the animals in the movie that correspond to the animals in real life all have less legs than the rest of the animals in the movie

All animals on earth have 4 limbs. Humans, Kangaroos, Dogs, Birds, Lizards, Fish, all of them. Hmmm, maybe I should clarify that a little more; All animals with backbones, past and present, have four limbs (that should clear up the "Octopus, Squid, Snail and Slug" Brigade). Arachnids and insects are not animals, btw.

All animals, with backbones, in the past had four limbs. The MegaFauna fossils show this, the dinosaur fossils show it as well.

All animals that we saw in Avatar, except the Na'vi, had 6 limbs. This is why I found it weird that the Na'vi didn't have the same number of limbs as the rest of the fauna on the planet. For some reason, Na'vi had 4 limbs. Maybe they didn't evolve on the planet? Maybe that is the plot-line for the inevitable sequels.

Well we werent talking about limbs. we were talking about legs, the limbs of propulsion.

Batfred:
Good review as always and you understand your audience. 2:56, yes that's all we wanted to hear!

Thank you.

OK, I've just got back from the Cinema and everything that you said (Moviebob) was right. I SHALL rent out Drag me to Hell and I SHALL give G.I. Joe another subjective attempt. I'll even try watching Up.

bartholen:
"The plot was kept so basic to not distract us from all this immersion"?????!!!!????

I laughed my ass off when I saw Avatar's trailer. If there's one thing I can't stand about movies, it's clichés. What does Avatar have that hasn't been done a billion times before? Kinda reminds me of Gears of War: compensating poor story with amazing visuals. If I don't care about the characters or their motivations, I can't give less of a shit about the rest of the whole movie.

Please, somebody tell me that Avatar has some unique twist, turn, moment, character, new idea or ANYTHING that would make me want to watch massive battle scenes again. What I've seen thus far doesn't give away any of the previously mentioned.

And before you all start ripping my post to pieces: my opinion is based entirely on what I've seen and heard about the movie, I haven't seen it.

thats the reason I wont go see it, I haven't heard a single good thing about the plot, and for as much as they spent making it the could have had a great script

i burst out laughing when they were talking about "unobtainium"
and the cat people are basicly elves crossed with night crawler, the world was made by Roger Dean, the choppers stolen from Fallout 3 and the mech suits stolen from the matrix.
and though no one probably will know what i mean, they seem to have taken a lot from the "beyond the deepwoods" book series.
hes stolen a bunch of peoples ideas, but come out with something thats very fun to watch.

oh, and it's way more brutal then a 12A rating suggests.

Gildan Bladeborn:
Blargh, even after hearing about how it's a wonderful film that I really should see, I just can't muster any enthusiasm about it. It's like there's a switch in my brain controlling enthusiasm that the initial teaser trailer flipped to the off position.

After careful analysis, I've concluded that the reason I can't get behind this film is that I appear to be incapable of taking the blue cat people seriously and think they look ridiculous. I hate that this is a deal-breaker, but that's apparently how I'm wired.

My family ended up going to see this as our Christmas outing: I don't take back anything I said about the trailers and how they seemed to be tailor-designed to not interest me, because that's still true - but man am I very glad they dragged me along with them because the film was in fact very good and I found it highly enjoyable.

So if the character design seems like a deal-breaker for you, go see it anyway at a matinee showing or something, the odds are good you'll have the same reaction to the film proper.

Everyone is aying how goosd this film is, I hope it can live up to my expectations when i get to watching it.

I was hoping to see this one anyways. Glad to know it's not a bad idea.

And as the idea was put forward; no I wouldn't do her. Without knowing anything of her personality or background and working entirely off of her appearance, I find neither dreadlocks nor blue skin particularly attractive. Although, the elongated hands with the off finger count might make it interesting for at least third base.

It's not that I have heard the whole "nature is GOOD while science is BAD" a few dozen times - it doesn't matter how well told it is, the basic moral of Avatar is STUPID.

I just love it how a GIGANTIC WESTERN ENTERTAINMENT CONGLOMERATE utilizing HIGHLY ADVANCED COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY made by a WESTERN WHITE-AS-HELL DIRECTOR WHO LIVES IN A FRICKIN MANSION wants to spin a yarn about how living without hospitals or medicine or technology is absolute paradise and how any technology is evil and horrible and polluting and wrong.

My problem with Avatar is that it is essentially a billion dollar episode of CAPTAIN PLANET. Heck, they've even got BLUE PEOPLE in it.

The movie is, on an intellectual level, so achingly dull.

Now, I am not a "manifest destiny" type guy. I am not a "hell-yeah guns are great" type republican. I am probably the first among a group to mourn the destruction of the Native Americans by European expansion. I take environmental matters very seriously.

But the plot is so blazingly transparent, cliched, and utterly ridiculous that I just can't take it seriously for one microsecond.

Not only that movie lacks imagination. Not just plot wise - although the creatures and the environment looks real pretty, the aliens are stock characters who are basically blue people. So in this universe, we can travel millions of light years to a completely new world.... only to find blue Native Americans. Wow. That's some quality "imagination" going on there.

So we travel millions of light years to find a race of people with the same bone structure as humans, same social structure as native Americans, same emotions, same troubles, same sexual dimorphism..... and we call this film "imaginative"? "Creative"? Not for a frickin SECOND.

All the CGI in the world can't make up for a flimsy plot, one-dimensional characters and a criminal lack of imagination.

Avatar: Basically a Captain Planet Episode.

People attempting to defend this film by saying that 'originality is dead' and 'so what if the theme has been done before' need to go and see a decent movie. I come back to my previous UP reference. There is a movie with originality in it. Avatar just takes EVERY SINGLE cliche they could dig up and throws it in your face with the subtly of an airborne whale shark. The stumbling new comer needs a partner to guide him- well obviously its going to be a female who will obviously turn to be the love interest. Is there no sense of brotherhood that they could choose to portray instead? Could they not instead have cast a female as the lead human and tackle the issue of patriarchy while they were at it? The stupidity and simplicity of this film insults the intelligence of the viewer. Go back to watching Borat or something if you find this type of poor plot excusable.

And before anyone else gets on my case:

Yes, I cannot stand that so many aliens in so many films basically look like, and act like, people. That is why I could never get behind star-trek. I mean, I have taken courses in evolutionary biology, and I am familiar with the concept of convergent evolution, in which creatures evolve similar characteristics due to similar environmental pressures.

But come on - blue people? Seriously? An entirely different ecosystem, a potentially entirely different biological system, and you get... blue people?

Same as with star trek, in which the "aliens" were people with funny noses or brows. A criminal lack of imagination. At least star-wars had ALIEN aliens, even though some of them were a bit too "human" looking for my tastes.

Cameron had millions of dollars of highly advanced technology. He could have crafted ANY sort of alien. And he didn't. He took the easy way out, and crafted an alien which wasn't alien at all. Just so he could attempt to pull at our heartstrings.

Let me put this to you: If avatar's moral message is so good, why did he have to make the aliens look like people? Why did he have to shoe-horn in a romance plot? Simple: it's easy to do so. It's easy to create a tale when your aliens are essentially just humans.

If that's the case, why even bother setting this up on another planet?

Maybe some people can overlook the incredibly simplistic plot and the horrendous hypocrisy that this film represents (as movie-bob pointed out, Avatar is brought to you by RUPERT FREAKING MURDOCH!!!!!!), but I cannot. I simply can't.

You know what a good film about aliens is? Solaris. In which people find an alien which is an ACTUAL FRICKIN ALIEN. An alien which is NOT human in the slightest. An alien which is actually original and interesting. Something other than a color-palette swapped human with a funny hose.

I just saw it, and it blew me away. Yes there were issues with it, but i was so immersed in this world that all of them didn't become apparent until i tried to find and complain about something. Fantastic filmaking and the CG dropped my jaw.

And, incedentally, no. As I was too busy admiring sam worthington's avatar, which got decidedly less screen time

screw you bob, i'd totally lay with that 10'ft hotty.

anyway, saw it tonight, it had me bored a couple of times,but i guess that was because it is a fairly long movie, which is actually a good thing. The characters and the environment where beautifully rendered and like you said the directing and execution really felt like they were done with a lot of heart and passion.

Korolev:
And before anyone else gets on my case:

Yes, I cannot stand that so many aliens in so many films basically look like, and act like, people. That is why I could never get behind star-trek. I mean, I have taken courses in evolutionary biology, and I am familiar with the concept of convergent evolution, in which creatures evolve similar characteristics due to similar environmental pressures.

But come on - blue people? Seriously? An entirely different ecosystem, a potentially entirely different biological system, and you get... blue people?

Same as with star trek, in which the "aliens" were people with funny noses or brows. A criminal lack of imagination. At least star-wars had ALIEN aliens, even though some of them were a bit too "human" looking for my tastes.

Cameron had millions of dollars of highly advanced technology. He could have crafted ANY sort of alien. And he didn't. He took the easy way out, and crafted an alien which wasn't alien at all. Just so he could attempt to pull at our heartstrings.

Let me put this to you: If avatar's moral message is so good, why did he have to make the aliens look like people? Why did he have to shoe-horn in a romance plot? Simple: it's easy to do so. It's easy to create a tale when your aliens are essentially just humans.

If that's the case, why even bother setting this up on another planet?

Maybe some people can overlook the incredibly simplistic plot and the horrendous hypocrisy that this film represents (as movie-bob pointed out, Avatar is brought to you by RUPERT FREAKING MURDOCH!!!!!!), but I cannot. I simply can't.

You know what a good film about aliens is? Solaris. In which people find an alien which is an ACTUAL FRICKIN ALIEN. An alien which is NOT human in the slightest. An alien which is actually original and interesting. Something other than a color-palette swapped human with a funny hose.

curious, what do you think about the aliens of "District 9".

I saw this film in 3D last night. The plot's as stale and overused as everyone has said, even to the point where I could predict future scenarios. This wasn't a twist movie in the least. I couldn't even get excited about the graphics. Thanks to playing JRPGs - especially SE offerings, I've been conditioned to seeing high quality CGI. Honestly, I'd be looking at a landscape and comparing it to something I saw in a game. So, the graphics were nice, but didn't blow my mind. They did a very good job in meshing CGI with live actors, though.

I didn't dislike the film, but the cookie cutter plot and characters did detract from the prettiness of the cgi. But at least it took less time than FFXII, which left me with the same feeling.

Just as the MovieBob told us, Avatar's plot is extremely formulae, and if you've lived past the age of 15 you will definitely be able to predict most "twists" in the plot.

However, the movie brilliantly epitomizes everything what the scifi and fantasy genres are about, and it will leave you with a melted face. Never has escapism looked so good on screen. I absolutely loved the movie, and yes, I'd definitely tap that.

This is an amazing film.

Yes the plot may be entirely predictable, but that does not stop it being one of the best films i have ever seen.

And see it in 3D! I have seen both, and 3D is at least 10x better than 2D.

Looks like another hippie fapfest. And its more about the smurfs then the blue paint because it also calls to the "hippie commune" crowd who also make it a point to agravate me on a daily basis.

Rather be a Marine thank you very much.

ZAch055:
Watch this movie, you will love it. Even if you hate it you'll at lease be able to say why.

I can say that I don't like it from here. I'm not going to flush any more money towards this.
Same reason I didn't like Walle/Up. Its made by people who don't give a shit about the environment for the people who DO give a shit about the environment and if they can plaster the name "Marines" on the obvious antagonist/bad-guy side just to smear them all the better for the director.

To think that people today are more interested in visuals than story elements is nothing less than theater travesty. Visuals should be one of many tools to enhance and further a solid plot, but this movie reverses that idea. It seems like the only purpose of any excuse for a story is to lure the audience into two hours of Cameron throwing money at CG. Back when all we had was plays to entertain the masses, there was so much emphasis on setting, characters, plot, and most of all dialogue, because those were the only tools they had to weave their story. Nowadays any big shot with a fat wallet can pay his way into a blockbuster because any idiot can look at all the pretty colors and be satisfied.

DreamingMerc:
Probably because such an introspective would cause most peoples head to explode, that and they need a return of investment for this picture given that your general movie goer just wants to unwind after the days work and be entertained not mentally challenged.

See, this is what utterly pisses me off about this film. It's target audience is so wide, the decision to have terrible plot and pre-digested message is so marketable, the average consumer will have to put zero mental effort into the movie to enjoy it. The point of this film is to make money, and a simpler mental landscape means any dim-witted plankton will pay through the nose for a "deep message" with of course, "amazing visuals". The perfect film for estranged family members, dumb dates you're trying to score with, or your frat house bros.

There's a reason why so much of the internet dismisses this movie because of South Park's "Dances with Smurfs" comment. Why would you watch a movie that gives away so much by being so simple? What's the damn point if everything is already laid all out there like in the trailers? It's "Coraline syndrome" all over again. They could have left some sort of engaging mystery or plot developments in there, but the movie just fails miserably in that department.

Here's two alternative plotlines that would take the basic element of Avatar and make it twice as good.

First off, the serious one. The director made sure to make the human military seem vague and not affiliated with any real country. They made them out to be mercenaries looking to get rich off of unnecessarily committing genocide on hippie land. Why not thicken the plot in two ways. One by changing the military personnel to be closely affiliated with a world government of Earth such as "The Federation" (Star Trek), "The Human Alliance" (Mass Effect), or "The United Nations Space Command (Halo)" and be sure to mention that America is a member. And let's substitute this money rock "Unobtainium" for something vital to the survival of humanity. Scenario A: Super pandemic or plague on Earth and we need the Na'vi plant life to make a cure. But "Oh no!" they won't let us harvest it because they're hippies who think plants have souls. Scenario B: A global disaster on Earth (Global Warming, The Sun going dark, "Deep Impact") forces humanity to search for a new home world. We discover the Na'vi planet, but there's not enough room or resources for both species to live in peace. So we have to either conquer their home world to save humanity or we starve in space.

What would this create? Legitimate conflict. The movie would be about the gritty reality about having to wage war on a peaceful foreign culture for the survival of your own species. The main character would have much more of an internal struggle about his duty to his country. Does he stay a Na'vi just to fit in and get laid at the expense of dooming humanity, or does he swallow hard and betray the Na'vi so that his civilization and all his loved ones continue to exist?

And second alternative theme, screw the ideology of "imperialism bad, hippies good!" and let's substitute the vague greedy humans with the Zerg from Starcraft. Not sure why they're there. Could be after minerals or Vespene Gas. Could just be viciously trying to devour all life in the galaxy. It throws the black and white polarization and the childish "moral message" out the window. Instead of clinging to their feelings and the heartrending political moral high ground of "No, don't rape our land for profit" they have to try and outsmart and outfight another alien race that are ruthless killing machines. And let's see just how good your primitive arrows work on hyrdalisks. I don't care which side wins, but I'd love to see masses of hippies being run down by a real alien threat they can't garner sympathy from.

I have to say, I've heard a bunch of people say that the trailer for Avatar sucked and apparently there have been a bunch of jokes about it but I never heard any of them. Maybe it's because I have been avoiding the press/trailers because I wonted to go in fresh but by the end of the first teaser I knew Avatar was going to be awesome. And I didn't even really know who James Cameran was or what other films he had done. Now I had seen and loved a lot of his films, and I find it kind of amazing that this one guy made all those grate films. But my point is, I decided this film would be awesome on the strength of the first teaser trailer alone.

I have to agree that the story was fearly predictable, but it was so well told with such good characters I didn't care. I was so surprised when I stepped out of the movie theatre and it was 3hrs latter.

It even left me thinking about it's main themes days after I'd seen it. I think that's a measure of a good movie.

Anyway, grate video, some one guessed you would be doing Sherlock Holmes soon. I have to say, even though it's probably going to be a "butchered" version of the Holmes character the film dose look like fun.

This movie looks like a rare one that pleases me, by providing a totally new universe and culture, and exploring it deeply. Sure the story may have been told before, but that isn't the point. If the message is good, it bears repeating, if the message reinforces good, it still bears repeating.

Besides... the blue aliens look sexy.

robbins123:

funguy2121:

robbins123:

Oh, sorry? :P

But you seem to really be slighting Zimmer. Gladiator, THE FREAKIN' LION KING, and pirates of hte carribean all had amazing scores.

Edit- He was also picked to do Modern Warfare 2's
EDit2- He also did The Prince of Egypt and King Arthur as well.

Those are subjective statements. PIRATES was at least more thematic, but I wouldn't declare that music awesome. And the Lion King? Yawn.

In art all statements are subjective so I don't see how that really means anything as I could have just said that at the beginning of this quoting and there'd be nothing else to be said. So now I'll say it, "those are subjective statements, and really I don't give a damn what you think" : )

Oh, don't go and trivialize your own statements! I was expressing that we haven't seen anything approaching an epic, thematic score like Braveheart in about a decade and a half.

funguy2121:

robbins123:

funguy2121:

robbins123:

Oh, sorry? :P

But you seem to really be slighting Zimmer. Gladiator, THE FREAKIN' LION KING, and pirates of hte carribean all had amazing scores.

Edit- He was also picked to do Modern Warfare 2's
EDit2- He also did The Prince of Egypt and King Arthur as well.

Those are subjective statements. PIRATES was at least more thematic, but I wouldn't declare that music awesome. And the Lion King? Yawn.

In art all statements are subjective so I don't see how that really means anything as I could have just said that at the beginning of this quoting and there'd be nothing else to be said. So now I'll say it, "those are subjective statements, and really I don't give a damn what you think" : )

Oh, don't go and trivialize your own statements! I was expressing that we haven't seen anything approaching an epic, thematic score like Braveheart in about a decade and a half.

Braveheart is more than a decade and a half old? Wow, how time has passed. Anyway, alright. In at least the past 10 years there hasn't been a truly epic score, I'll go with that.

With all that money you'd think Cameron would have demanded more...

MovieBob:
movie review

when did you become me?

that review might as well have been performed by me. that was perfect down to almost every detail. i love how you brought up the irony of having spent huge amounts of cash on the computer animation for what is supposed to be the most nature-loving species within the next 5 or so solar systems.

well done review, whoever you are.

Spectre39:

There's a reason why so much of the internet dismisses this movie because of South Park's "Dances with Smurfs" comment. Why would you watch a movie that gives away so much by being so simple? What's the damn point if everything is already laid all out there like in the trailers? It's "Coraline syndrome" all over again. They could have left some sort of engaging mystery or plot developments in there, but the movie just fails miserably in that department.

What would this create? Legitimate conflict. The movie would be about the gritty reality about having to wage war on a peaceful foreign culture for the survival of your own species. The main character would have much more of an internal struggle about his duty to his country. Does he stay a Na'vi just to fit in and get laid at the expense of dooming humanity, or does he swallow hard and betray the Na'vi so that his civilization and all his loved ones continue to exist?

There is nothing more to be said then you are correct. This is one of the films weak points,the balance of characterization between the two races, or lack of any motivation at all really then "I want money" coming from the military personnel. I suppose this is the whole, these aren't soldiers they're mercenaries argument, but that's not quite true either given the nature of the private military world in regards to whom fills their ranks. While you can find bad seeds of fuck nuggets with heavy weapons, as you would in any military organization private or national, there also exists a solid portion of professional, well trained experienced operatives. You said it yourself Cameron made a point to not characterize the military, so the audience wouldn't feel much if any at all compassion when they start getting schwacked regularly.

I would agree the mineral in question should have been some sort or cure for a disease, preferable one that cures some child targeting pandemic. Shifting the human drive from profit to survival. Giving a humanity a high cost high reward psychology.

Personally I would have licked to have seen more conflict between the two races, open arms would be preferred. Such as civilian humans on humanitarian efforts out in the bush get ambushed by a Na'vi element, try to surrender and or escape and get executed. Blur the lines between righteous and villainous, demonstrate that neither side can claim a "moral" high ground. Hell show humans trying to save other humans from being slaughtered, give them some characterization of compassion and empathy, hell even some good humor now and again.

In all there are a number of things missing that would have made this a very good movie, how it stands however is at least functional and enjoyable enough to let some of that go, least I think so.

James Cameron isn't just one of the driving forces of pop culture, he obviously is a big fan of what others put out there beside himself (as the reference to Unobtanium made blindingly obvious).
Not only is the plot his take on the 'Mighty Whitey' trope(the only hope of the Noble Savages is one of the hostile heavily armed aliens is one of those very aliens though this time from across the ocean of stars rather than the waves of the Atlantic)but the Na'vi are unmistakably the Ronso tribe from Final Fantasy X though more evolved from Lemur-like prosimians rather than lions (and no unicorn horns), the mechs look as if they come straight out of Mech Warrior or Starship Troopers and the mounts look like the dragons from Panzer Dragoon.
Like anything else created in such a way, the sum is greater than its parts. God of War and the entire filmography of Quentin Tarantino don't have an original idea between them but they make up for it in style.

Greater writers than James Cameron realized the futility of trying to be completely original, especially if what they want to accomplish doesn't require a whole new kind of narrative. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thirty-Six_Dramatic_Situations
The plot is as similar to Dances with Wolves or Last of the Mohicans or The Last Samurai as Full Metal Alchemist is to Suikoden 3 (with True Runes swapped out for Philosopher's Stones and Yuber for Homonculi). His greatest success to date was a trite love story shoehorned into historical fiction, so it isn't as if unoriginality is going to hurt him. He already paid his dues with The Terminator, anyway.

Maybe he really wanted to get people to consider the environmental message, I don't know. He definitely seemed to want to get people to leave their comfort zones a little including what they allow themselves to find attractive. It was no accident that Jake's Avatar was a hybrid between man and Na'vi (bridging the gap before seeing the real thing...so to speak)and that he had himself a nice long run wearing nothing but a hospital gown. It was even less accident that even their ancestor species resembles lemurs, one of our species evolutionary cousins. He didn't challenge expectations too much on what kind of plot you can have in such a movie, but one thing at a time.
Really, I suspect that he mostly just wanted to entertain us with the dazzling visuals (made possible by the latest IMAX cameras and multi-million dollar silicon workstations. No trees were harmed in the filming of the movie!)and the novel ideas added to the well worn tale. The Home Tree was nifty even if just a sci-fi version of a sacred tree. So was the whole 'Hair is a literal antenna to God/dess' idea.

Of course, that aside, Cameron's a big enough wheel to have gotten characterization in Hollywood movies turning in a new direction but he chose the safe path.

I, too, have had enough with seeing aliens behaving so much like humans, convergent evolution or no. At least he could have made up a new culture to go along with to differences in anatomy and atmosphere for the humans to clash with...or explain it away as the influence of imported human land revering cultures, maybe even by way of some Native American character. The primary conflicts could have been more internal, between the teachings of different groups of missionaries. If the Na'vi had been less human in behavior, the last scene would have made a more powerful statement. I doubt that it would have been on par with the last scene of The Island of Doctor Moreau but it would have been up there.
Wait, wasn't there an Escapist article about this anthropocentrism in sci-fi? Oh, here it is.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_140/3009-Mass-Effect-Saves-Humanity-for-What

To its credit, the movie stayed away from the tired Humans as underdog garbage that hamstrings most man vs. aliens movies. Our species hasn't been underdogs since we discovered metal working if not earlier when we discovered fire.

Comparing it to another movie of the same type that came out this year: the Na'vi were infinitely less annoying than those blasted Prawn,Jake was far more endearing than Wikus,the mech scenes were about dead even (one featuring one mech making a stand against dozens of attackers while the other had a knife fight between faux-Ronso and Mech that ends with a guy getting skewered on gigantic arrows. That was practically worth the price of admission right there!) and setting it on a distant planet made its analogue to real world events less painful to endure, giving it a bit of an edge over District 9. (The fact that it didn't have Nigerian crime lords with pet hyenas and a craving for humanoid flesh might also have tipped it further towards favorable for me!)

Watch it in IMAX, preferably with non-sci-fi geeks, and you'll enjoy yourself. There's nothing quite like getting someone from a housing project to watch and thoroughly enjoy a movie that doesn't 'keep it real'! Cameron most certainly did something right if Avatar could manage that.

i've never seen dancing with wolves, and stop with the big voice thing. kinda anoying

7.5 at best, not trying to be clever, but it IS the same story we've heard thousands of times, so i didnt really need to see james cameron wank off infront of me for almost 3 hours. bob brings up the point of the movie being better with a few twists and turns and hes right, another problem i have is the whole "here comes the cavalry" at the end with the all mother, why did she wait, if she was going to intervene, why not do it right away, i know maybe im looking for too much realism out of this film, but isnt that wat we want to see in a story told that many times? something new? graphics arent enough to make this movie amazing, 3D or not, the movie was good, go see it, it was a GOOD movie, but i hope it doesnt win awards, because it doesnt deserve them, predictable.

and if the word unobtainium doesnt make this movie go down at least a point and a half for everyone, thats sad.

bartholen:
"The plot was kept so basic to not distract us from all this immersion"?????!!!!????

I laughed my ass off when I saw Avatar's trailer. If there's one thing I can't stand about movies, it's clichés. What does Avatar have that hasn't been done a billion times before? Kinda reminds me of Gears of War: compensating poor story with amazing visuals. If I don't care about the characters or their motivations, I can't give less of a shit about the rest of the whole movie.

Please, somebody tell me that Avatar has some unique twist, turn, moment, character, new idea or ANYTHING that would make me want to watch massive battle scenes again. What I've seen thus far doesn't give away any of the previously mentioned.

And before you all start ripping my post to pieces: my opinion is based entirely on what I've seen and heard about the movie, I haven't seen it.

It certainly isn't a movie of cliches. Yes, the story is familiar to people who have a good base of film knowledge or literature knowledge for that matter, but the characters really are interesting and the world really does immerse the viewer. The action bits are kept to a minimum, and really only appear in significant doses in the last quarter. Avatar is definitely worth at least one viewing.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here