Timewaster's Guide Archive
Departments => Movies and TV => Topic started by: Patriotic Kaz on December 21, 2009, 07:28:27 PM
-
Outstanding plot, above par acting, and good special effects combined with it's raw originiallity was just mind blowing! This thread is for all things Avatar!
-
I was depressed that I couldn't sit through it a second time right after I finished it the first time.
It was SOOO amazing!
-
I just saw it. I went with my sister who had already seen it. We have similar tastes so I was ready to love it too, and there were tons of things I liked, but I ended up having a lot of mixed feelings about it. To avoid spoilers I'll just say that while there were many things I liked, I doubt this will be a movie I would want to buy or see too many times after this.
Maybe it was just too cool for me. :-\
-
I really, really liked it. However, that's because I read reviews, and I knew what to expect. With the right expectations I really enjoyed it.
-
You should PM me and tell me what things in particular Frog. I'm interested to hear.
-
I never even saw the extended trailer... but maybe it just struck a chord with me in some way due to my background, I don't know. This movie is on my top 10 movie list along with Gladiator, Tombstone, & Dead-Poets Society
-
I saw this in 3D, and was absolutely amazed. Cameron used 3D to give depth, to immerse rather than to impress. I imagine it must be similar to the experience of the people who watched color films or talkies for the first time (I've seen people who despised the story recommend it to other people who would despise the story simply for the visuals).
Now, elsewhere on the internet I've seen people complain that the story was trite, cliched, and unoriginal. My counter to that accusation is that an old, simple story told well is much better than a new and complex story told poorly. And James Cameron told his story very well indeed.
It wasn't as good as District 9, but it was up there with it.
-
I liked it a lot. It wasn't original, but it was well executed. Nothing was over the top for me, and I bought the whole thing.
The 3D didn't work well for me. I forgot my glasses so that may have been an issue but I haven't yet had a great 3D experience. The 3D did work for Karen and she feels it contributed to the movie, but now she's had a headache for hours.
-
I had never seen the idea of "beaming the self" into some other body so i called it original (though on a tangent i don't agree with the concept of originality b/c everything man has done was just a newer version of something much older including war) However I heard a story about James Cameron being an arse to a guy who told him he worked 2 minimum wage jobs and saved up to go to the movies with his family and if he would just sign a poster for him... James Cameron told him to f off. James Cameron was this guy's hero how the hell can you do something like that?
-
Everything I've seen about Cameron has been good, especially when it comes to fans, so I looked up the incident you were talking about.
I found this (http://gawker.com/5434728/john-mayers-trenchant-takedown-of-tmzs-james-cameron-fan-snub-smear-tape?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+gawker%2Ffull+%28Gawker%29). It seems that he was ambushed at an airport after a long flight and there was a lot of fishy run abouts from TMZ about it.
-
I saw it, and I have to agree with Frog. It was good, but it didn't exactly blow me away. I mean, I enjoyed it, and (had I paid) it would have been worth the money, but it seemed to lack something. I'm not sure what it is that it lacked, but for me there just was something missing that allowed me to really connect with it.
-
I saw a different article and no photage... that one wouldn't play for me anyways
-
It linked to this (http://www.tmz.com/videos?autoplay=true&mediaKey=5b74efdd-b97d-43fe-80dc-f5a5836704ae) and this one (http://www.tmz.com/videos?autoplay=true&mediaKey=5b74efdd-b97d-43fe-80dc-f5a5836704ae).
Notice in the second one before he actual says it there is a skip in the video. That's what the article was talking about. And listen to the stuff the guy keeps saying. He basically sounds like a troll. Seems to me like his whole purpose was to get the reaction he got.
Also note: The guy makes $15 an hour. Not two min wage jobs.
-
I definitely thought the 3-D added to the experience, though I did get a headache. There may have been mitigating factors, however. I will see it in IMAX 3D in a few days and we'll see if that gives me a headache, too.
Now, elsewhere on the internet I've seen people complain that the story was trite, cliched, and unoriginal. My counter to that accusation is that an old, simple story told well is much better than a new and complex story told poorly. And James Cameron told his story very well indeed.
It wasn't as good as District 9, but it was up there with it.
Meh, I'd argue that Avatar was a superior film to District 9. The more I think about District 9, the more disappointed I am with that third act. I felt it needed a big reveal when there was none. The first two thirds of District 9 were excellent, however, but that ending... It's not something I really want to see again. But I digress :P
Avatar executed what it did so incredibly well that I can't complain at all. I seriously loved every minute of it. Totally engrossing.
-
This is not the thread for a debate about District 9. The important part is that you agree with me on Avatar: that it was an excellently told story.
Even the detractors seem to agree that the visuals were amazing.
-
Absolutely. Well told story, excellent visuals... A positively excellent experience :P
-
everyone I know in real life who has seen this movie thought it was, at best, a fair to middling flick with poor graphics.
Frankly, I wanted to see this movie before the commercials came out, and now, I dont. so I wont. Might download it when it comes out on DVD, but thats it.
-
You are a liar or a troll. Some people thought the story was bad, but everyone has praised the graphics.
-
poor graphics.
Now that's just silly.
-
Arafan, i am no troll. Just watching the commercials in HD tells me that, at best, the visuals are low rate. any idiot with a 10 year old MAC could cook up something similar. And ther eis nothing worse than that half-cartoon/half-live feel. Disney's Christmas Carol and Tom Hank Polar Express did the same thing. Both junk.
Miyabi: how is it silly? Oh, sure, the graphics were better than anything made by the syfy channel, but even from the commcerials you can compare to other graphical feats like Transformers, GI Joe, Pirates of the Caribbean, etc. Not even close. And for te budget this movie had, the graphics should match anything that has come out to date.
and you know, I ama geek, a nerd, whatever you want to call me. and I am 40. I know BAD graphics. (Krull anyone?) Maybe you have to be a teen to appreciate this type of animation. I sure dont.
-
(Krull anyone?)
OYE! you can say anything you want about avatar, but no one talks bad about krull when i'm around!!
I haven't seen avatar yet, though i want to. We might hopefully go see it this weekend or something (my girlfriend has all ready seen it and wants me to go with her to see it again).
It'll likely be in 3D. I like digital 3D.
-
I only saw a few previews, and they don't compare even closely to the way the movie was. Go and see it, then come back and tell me the graphics sucked.
-
I only saw a few previews, and they don't compare even closely to the way the movie was. Go and see it, then come back and tell me the graphics sucked.
I definitely agree.
And now, I'm leaving to go see the movie in IMAX 3D :D
-
I only saw a few previews, and they don't compare even closely to the way the movie was. Go and see it, then come back and tell me the graphics sucked.
I definitely agree.
And now, I'm leaving to go see the movie in IMAX 3D :D
I now desire to see this film in 3D on an omnimax screen....
-
I only saw a few previews, and they don't compare even closely to the way the movie was. Go and see it, then come back and tell me the graphics sucked.
I definitely agree.
And now, I'm leaving to go see the movie in IMAX 3D :D
DDDDD:
/me is JEALOUS!
[/color]
-
I was supposed to go see it in IMAX 3D but the friend i was supposed to see it with had his parents call a family night (and he's the youngest at 19 who the hell has a family night when it's a bunch of adults / semi-adults)
-
Back from the IMAX showing. The film was just as engrossing on a second watch-through.
-
/me hates Eric.
-
well, it isnt being shown with closed captioning in IMAX, so thats out. Maybe, just maybe, the local theater with captioning will have it at some point, but they prefer to do the chick flicks with captions. And I certainly wouldnt drive to watch this movie. Like I said, everyone I know who has seen it, hated it.
-
We must have friends who have complete opposites in tastes, mtlhddoc2. I found the movie still engrossing the second time through. And like you, I thought the previews were iffy, but in my opinion the full movie works exceptionally well. I think as long as you aren't expecting anything more than Pocahontas in space for story, you'll like it. But, I've been wrong before.
((Also, there's huge waits for IMAX showings, so for you, I don't think it's worth it in the slightest.)
-
Well, I did find one person who loved it. But he also though Star Wars Episode 1 was the greatest movie ever, so......
-
Just got back from seeing it in 3D. I thought it was great, and the visuals, IMO were quite stunning. Best animation I'd seen in any movie I can remember.
-
The visuals of this movie were fantastic. There aren't any better at the moment. Not just the motion capture, but the Pandora visuals were incredible. The story? Well, it could have been better. It's just Dances With Wolves...In Space. It was executed well enough, but I don't like predicting every plot point.
But hey, this is James Cameron. He likes to push the visual envelope. He did it with T2, and now again with Avatar. Most of the people I've talked to that said the visuals were crap, well, they just didn't like the look of the aliens. But really, judging visuals based on a few commercials? Come on now. Go see the movie before you judge it and say "anyone with a 10 year old Mac" can do this. That's just absurd.
-
But the concept of an "Avatar" is pretty cool and while yes the next 5-10 minutes were almost always predictable, you gennerally needed something to pull you "out" of the story long enough to think about it. I liked the story as well as the visuals....
-
well, apparently,m you have to watch it in "3d" which pretty much tells anyone who wears glasses to "prepare to be incredibly uncomfortable for the next 3 hours."
More and more, I read bloggers and have friends tell me not to waste my time. That in fact, the graphics are... a cartoon! Well, gee, Polar Express used the EXACT same technology. Exactly. As did disney's new "Christmas Carol" - push the edge? no, not really, he will tell everyone that he did though, even though it's already been done.
I already downloaded the movie, will probably throw it in this weekend, but really, I have very low expectations. Looks like "Ice Pirates" all over again to me.
-
well, apparently,m you have to watch it in "3d" which pretty much tells anyone who wears glasses to "prepare to be incredibly uncomfortable for the next 3 hours."
I take it you've never seen a movie in 3D, then?
I wear glasses 24/7 (well, not when sleeping, obviously) and the 3D glasses don't bother me at all. They fit OVER your normal glasses.
-
yeah, they dont fit over mine
-
mtlhddoc2, Polar Express did not use the exact same technology. That movie looked hideous. The aliens in Avatar, on the other hand, look no worse than Star Trek aliens played by people with makeup, if not better.
However, personally, I liked the movie a lot in SPITE of having to watch through 3D glasses. I'm done with this iteration of 3D technology; it just isn't a good viewing experience for me. I'll watch a 3D movie next when a new technology comes around. I almost want to go see Avatar again in 2D so I don't have the distraction of the glasses.
-
It's awesome in 2D...
P.S. Is it weird that I've never wanted and so never have watched a movie in 3D (Imax is a different story and the dome is awesome...& a curved screen is a waste of money)
-
I don't mind wearing glasses, but I would like to see it being 3D without glasses. (My uncle was at one point testing a laptop that did that for Pfizer. It was fantastic.)
-
Peter, it is the exact same technology, just with added bells and whistles. If you upgrade the stereo in your Buick, you still have a buick.
-
Are you judging the sound quality or the driving? Or the upholstery? You may as well say movies are the same technology as cave paintings. They're both pictures on flat surfaces, after all.
-
I seriously lol'd. My sister looked at me funny and asked what I was laughing at.
-
I just can't get into this movie, no matter how great the visuals are supposed to be. The plot is nothing more than "Dances With Wolves" meeting science fiction... One friend also described it to me as "Pocahontas with blue people."
Is it really worth seeing even though the plot is tenuously interesting?
-
Yes
-
Are you judging the sound quality or the driving? Or the upholstery? You may as well say movies are the same technology as cave paintings. They're both pictures on flat surfaces, after all.
Peter: no, not the same at all. It is the difference between a donkey cart and a jet engine in your analogy. This movie even describes it as the same thing with more bells and whistles.
-
You're still wrong. For things like Polar Express they used primarily Maya and Alias, for Avatar they used primarily Adobe products. COMPLETELY different products and technologies.
-
Well, since Polar Express used sony's "Cinema 4D" and "Bodypaint 3D", and not either of those above.....
and this film, for 3D capture, used Krakatoa and software from "The Foundry" as well. I am sure they used Adobe products, but then again, i did today too and it wasnt for 3D motion capture filming, which, to my knowledge, Adobe does not do.
-
You're still wrong. For things like Polar Express they used primarily Maya and Alias, for Avatar they used primarily Adobe products. COMPLETELY different products and technologies.
It's also the first movie to use the "Sony Fusion 3D Camera System" that was announced back in 2007, which is an upgrade to their old fusion system that cameron loved using.
Also, if i remember correctly, it was the first film to render the scene in real time as the actors motion captured the scenes.
They also used a new way of using motion capture for facial expressions. (which was just a specialized helmet with a small camera in their face.)
-
I'm not sure if they used it for the motion capturing, but they used it for nearly everything else.
-
It may be nothing new but the execution is well done.
-
So I watched the movie in 3D, and I feel that it was worth the $11 I spent on it, which is saying something, since I am a little stingy when it comes to forking out that kind of money on a flick. That being said, it was . . . lacking. The movie was black and white (metaphorically speaking of course), with no shade of grey anywhere to be seen. Essentially the characters and character motivations were flat and uninteresting, yet at the same time fun to watch and well executed. The plot was trite and tired and preachy, yet at the same time gripping in its execution. Paradoxical, I know, but true. To analogize, it was like seeing a tricked out chevy pinto, with fireballs on the sides and led lights underneath, and a horn that plays the Al Gore National Anthem when honked . . . cool to see, but in the end, it's still a pinto, and you're only going to get so much mileage out of that. The movie was beautiful and well done, and as long as you don't pay too much attention to the man behind the curtain, you'll enjoy it.
-
I think the car analogies are getting us nowhere.
Avatar does not have an original story, and many of the characters have little depth. However, for me, it hit all the right emotional moments at the right times. The film was beautiful and had a fantastic atmosphere, but ultimately if it had not hit those emotional beats it would not have been satisfying to me. But it was.
-
Er, Peter, you just said the same thing I did, only using different words, and noticeably lacking--and scornful of--car metaphors. (I happen to like the car metaphors, but then I'm the metaphor kinda guy. Besides, it was meant for entertainment value, and not to be taken completely seriously. Way to be the murderer of fun. . .)
I also found the film satisfying because it hit the right emotions at the right moments. Then again, I kind of liked Eragon (the book--the movie was hideous) for the same reasons. It was trite, predictable, and somewhat lacking in depth, but it was a page turner that held your attention. I read through it once for pure popcorn pleasure, but had no intention of coming back. Avatar has a little more staying power because of the eye candy, but not much. I'll probably watch it again to appreciate the beauty of the film and the excellent execution, but that's about all the mileage I'll get out of it.
-
I dislike car metaphors..... and i think the movie wasn't necessarily a masterpiece but b/c it was so much fun it does rank in my top 10 (I feel the same way about Zelazny's Jack of Shadows. However it is not in my top 10 books more like 25 and it happens to be a collectible)
-
Avatar does not have an original story, and many of the characters have little depth. However, for me, it hit all the right emotional moments at the right times. The film was beautiful and had a fantastic atmosphere, but ultimately if it had not hit those emotional beats it would not have been satisfying to me. But it was.
I think you summed it up here. In spite of the unoriginal story, the execution of it, combined with the incredible visuals, made AVATAR a great movie. It had flaws, but so does every other Cameron movie. They are still almost all great movies.
I also wear glasses, and I had no probs with the 3D. I enjoyed the 3D. I do want to see it in 2D at some point for comparison, but that will likely be on bluray.
As for all this arguing on whether the visuals are good or not...discuss it after you've watched the movie on a format other than some guy recording it in the theater.
-
Emmy DVD's arent good enough?
Very rarely will you find a torrent taht was some idiot taping in a theater. they are usually copies of Emmy DVDs.
-
Emmy DVD's arent good enough?
Very rarely will you find a torrent taht was some idiot taping in a theater. they are usually copies of Emmy DVDs.
Bleh. DVDs.
Im kidding. Hopefully you get a moment (or 3 hours) to watch the movie. It isn't the best movie EVAH, but it is entertaining. The blue aliens and the world of Pandora are all very awesome CG. Many of the other creatures...well, not nearly as good. There is a section where displacer beasts...err...viperwolves are chasing the main character around. Very poor CG. Yeah.
A friend of mine just wrote up a super long review comparing the movie to the original scriptment that Cameron made in the mid 90's. A great review that highlights the movies strengths and weaknesses. Once he posts it somewhere I'll link it.
-
An interesting set of videos:
http://www.theweek.com/article/index/104725/Top_4_AvatarPocahontas_mashup_videos
-
So, Avatar hasn't even been out for a month and it is the second highest grossing movie of all time (unadjusted for inflation), behind Titantic. That's immensely remarkable.
And I'm dragging two of my friends to see it later in the week.
-
I liked titanic, but i enjoyed Avatar much more.
-
Avatar does not have an original story, and many of the characters have little depth. However, for me, it hit all the right emotional moments at the right times. The film was beautiful and had a fantastic atmosphere, but ultimately if it had not hit those emotional beats it would not have been satisfying to me. But it was.
I think you summed it up here. In spite of the unoriginal story, the execution of it, combined with the incredible visuals, made AVATAR a great movie.
Eh...the visuals made it entertaining to watch in the moment. I do not believe that that equates to "a good movie".
The more I've thought about Avatar, the unhappier I've been with it. When it first ended, I thought "wow, that was great", but my opinion has since degraded a good bit. The biggest problem, as a couple insightful friends pointed out, is the lessons that this movie is likely to teach the Hollywood decision makers, and the audiences of cinema.
1) A massive SFX budget can be used in place of any kind of originality or character development, and is easier to wave in front of prospective audiences with pre-release trailers.
2) Going forward, if the SFX of your 2010+ release aren't on par with those of Avatar, you're out-of-date. If you can't afford that level of SFX, you can just fire some writers to make up the difference.
This is an issue that can also be seen in the video game industry. In fact, it's considerably more pronounced over there.
-
Being entertaining is the name of the game, so I don't get how you can say it isn't a "good" movie after your first sentence it's contradictory.
-
This is an issue that can also be seen in the video game industry. In fact, it's considerably more pronounced over there.
I completely agree with you here. It's hard to find a game with a really good story. I personally would rather have substandard graphics and a great story.
I personally liked the story from Avatar, even if it was unoriginal.
-
This movie could hit $700 million. $40 million this past weekend, and early this week it will pass $500 million. Serious legs.
-
Saw it for the third time, though in 2D this time. I missed the 3D, actually, but it still hit every chord right on the button. People were behind me saying "Awesome!" or laughing at the precise moments I knew things were going to happen. To me, I think this is the success of the film.
-
Exactly.
People talk about appealing to the lowest common denominator. I don't think Avatar did that. But I think it appealed to the broadest common denominator (to remove it from the realm of math terminology). It hits the beats that the vast majority of people are going to like, and it does it in a way that's a treat to the senses.
What the best movie of all time is is going to be different for everyone because people's tastes are different. But so many people can agree that this movie is pretty darn good.
-
kinda unrelated, but it would seem avatar has started racking up a kill count (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100119/wl_asia_afp/entertainmentfilmhealthavatartaiwan).
-
kinda unrelated, but it would seem avatar has started racking up a kill count (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100119/wl_asia_afp/entertainmentfilmhealthavatartaiwan).
It's ironic because I thought you were referring to its killing at the box office (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=avatar.htm). But yeah, I guess your point is true too!
-
So Avatar started out stronger than titanic, meaning it could gross more in the end.
-
kinda unrelated, but it would seem avatar has started racking up a kill count (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100119/wl_asia_afp/entertainmentfilmhealthavatartaiwan).
It's ironic because I thought you were referring to its killing at the box office (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=avatar.htm). But yeah, I guess your point is true too!
Heh, that's exactly what I thought when my friend told me something along the same lines as what I posted, then he linked me to that.
-
So Avatar started out stronger than titanic, meaning it could gross more in the end.
I'd imagine it will.
-
Being entertaining is the name of the game, so I don't get how you can say it isn't a "good" movie after your first sentence it's contradictory.
Rubbish. Plenty of media can be entertaining in a kneejerk, reactive sort of way without actually being good. One of the most entertaining experiences I've had at the movies in recent years was sitting in a packed theatre on the opening night of Snakes on a Plane, but that was still a TERRIBLE movie.
Avatar didn't do anything remotely noteworthy besides pushing visuals to levels greater (and more expensive) than ever.
Well, I guess the insane amount of money it's making is also noteworthy, but I believe you get my meaning.
I personally liked the story from Avatar, even if it was unoriginal.
It was indeed unoriginal, but that's not necessarily surprising. Virtually everything is just re-packaging an existing story; the challenge is to do so in an interesting, innovative, engaging way. This was Pocahontas in space, it didn't even really try to do anything interesting other than visuals, because the creators figured (correctly, unfortunately) that they didn't need to.
Saw it for the third time, though in 2D this time. I missed the 3D, actually, but it still hit every chord right on the button. People were behind me saying "Awesome!" or laughing at the precise moments I knew things were going to happen. To me, I think this is the success of the film.
I'd say that just means it was painfully predictable :(
-
Saw it for the third time, though in 2D this time. I missed the 3D, actually, but it still hit every chord right on the button. People were behind me saying "Awesome!" or laughing at the precise moments I knew things were going to happen. To me, I think this is the success of the film.
I'd say that just means it was painfully predictable :(
Once you see a movie three times in two weeks, yeah, they tend to do that regardless of the quality of writing. Y'know, because I've seen it three times...
-
anyone think taht maybe, just maybe, it is the highest grossing of all time, or will be because tickets are twice as much? (and more!)
-
They make calculations based on the inflation of ticket prices and number of screenings. There was a major discussion about this when Dark Knight came out and people brought up the same question.
-
but they are not using that now. Just straight numbers. Titanic was $700 Million, I think, and if adjusted for inflation it would be around $1.2 billion. Avatar has a long way to go to get there.
-
If you adjust for inflation all the way back, Gone with the Wind is unlikely to ever be surpassed. http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm
-
The most expensive movie ever made, in real dollars, was Birth of A Nation which glorified the KKK, it cost about 2 bucks for admission in 1915 (approximately $40.00) today and was the most popular movie in the US when released. I'm surprised I didn't see it on your list Peter.
-
According to Wikipedia, Birth of a Nation took in only a bit more than $10 million, equivalent to $200 million in 2007 dollars. So it wouldn't make the list.
-
That site is way helpful.
Thanks Peter.
-
The highest grossing film of all time adjusted for inflation is Gone with the Wind and it is the highest by alot. There were alot less releases back then and it ran for a year.
www.boxofficemojo.com
Has the reciepts of movies, but it does not adjust for inflation. I think I saw Roger Ebert come up with the highest grossing films once adjusted for inflation. I think that is where I saw the stuff about Gone with the Wind.
I am a programmer so by nature I really like science fiction. So do alot of the nerds that I work with. None of us thought this movie was that good and people got caught up in the effects. I really did not think the 3D was anything all that special. The story was generic. Alot of the story was just an excuse to show off the special affects. I like James Cameron. I thought the lower budget science fiction film District 9 was much better.
The movie was not bad. I give it a B. It was kind of generic.
-
I saw it in 3D and loved it. There was really no good part, during the last two thirds, to get up and use the restroom.
I should mention that I went into the movie knowing nothing about it. Everything I'd heard beforehand (which consisted of 'James Cameron is making a movie called Avatar' and 'it's expensive') for some reason led me to believe it was a live-action adaptation of Avatar: The Last Airbender. The reason I saw it was because my girlfriend and I went to the theater, not knowing at all what they were showing. Only two movies had showtimes starting within the next half hour - Avatar and Sherlock Holmes. We flipped a coin.
The 3D was the best I've ever seen... having seen a total of two movies now in 3D. ;D
-
guessingo, the link I gave is for the list adjusted for inflation, and it does have Gone with the Wind on top.
-
Thanks peter. I have wondered for a while that when people talk about all time gross they talk about domestic first and then maybe world wide. They act like domestic is more important.
I wonder if there is a total world wide gross. It is about how much money you make total.
-
Odd question, simple answer Americans are by nature arrogant, we believe in the superiority of our culture.... witness the "attempt" to setup a republic in the Middle East. Majority rule w/ minority rights isn't going to fly there....but this is a tangent.
-
I forget where this article was... but the Chinese government removed Avatar in 3d from theaters. They were selling too many tickets and hurting Chinese movies. Supposedly they limit the release of foreign movies in China to protect Chinese movies.
-
I saw that article as well Guessingo.
-
Avatar was nominated for a Best Picture Oscar? Come on now. A fun movie, deserving of the Oscar for best effects, but not Best Picture worthy by a long shot. Now I remember why I hate the Oscars.
Edit: And neither does Avatar deserve the Oscar for best Score. That closing Titanic-rehash song was shameful and should immediately disqualify it. The score for Sherlock Holmes is the best of the rest.
-
I think it was nominated b/c of the sales but I don't think anyone actually voting is seriously considering it.
-
They expanded to 10 best picture nominations. They did this so films could advertise to push DVD sales.
-
FINALLY saw this. It's about time. :)
The visuals really were off the charts. I like spectacle films, so I would have enjoyed it even if it had had a Jackie Chan plot. The best and most original (non-visual) part of the film was the networked, mentally aware biosphere. That was just awesome. As for the plot, well, I expected to have to turn my brain off to enjoy it (like most dumb action/spectacle films), but I didn't. Even if it was very predictable, I still had a great time.
I didn't really get the humans' thinking. First of all, I would expect a lot more than three scientists to be on an alien world with sentient life. I would expect people to actually listen to them. I don't know why a people who had developed interstellar travel had to resort to strip mining, and why they were so tied to that one spot. It felt like the writers were trying to force the "evil alien conquerors" theme without making it deep enough to stick.
Still, great flick.
-
I don't know why a people who had developed interstellar travel had to resort to strip mining, and why they were so tied to that one spot. It felt like the writers were trying to force the "evil alien conquerors" theme without making it deep enough to stick.
Pandora was the only place with that mineral, and earth is becoming a toxic wasteland (visuals of earth are in the Director's Cut).
-
I think the spot ryos was referring to was the ore deposit under the Navi home-tree, and I have to agree that it seemed awfully contrived that they couldn't find another place or another way to get the ore.
-
They talked about this. The richest deposit was under the tree. There is ore elsewhere on the planet, but the richest deposit was under what could be considered the oldest tree. Since we don't know how the mineral is formed, who is to say that there wasn't a logical reason in the original script explaining why it is there (just like there are explanations as to why the mountains float, or why the air is poisonous). I'm just saying, it really wasn't contrived. The richest deposit under one of the oldest areas of the planet? Doesn't sound like a stretch to me.
-
Has anyone yet mentioned the only cringe moment for me in Avatar? The name of the mineral: unobtainium. I think that was it. Oh, brother.
Other than that, I liked the movie in a slightly-detached manner. Mostly because of the tiresome anti-big business, anti-military themes. And the voodoo-like religious thing. But I cried at least twice and thereby increased my younger kids' enjoyment incrementally. Someone had warned me about the long, long ending battle scene and that it was, for her, "Fern Gully on steroids" so my expectations were mercifully low.
-
Interesting,,, I thought AVATAR was really pretty terrible.
It had superb visuals, some decent acting, and a plot that could have been mildly interesting, but... Man... the dialog was SOOOO bad. I basically think of it of a film with the budget of an epic along the lines of Gone with the Wind and Ben-Hur, but the script of a Lifetime flick. For me, gorgeous visuals are simply not enough, though I would still recommend people to see it, to see how far CGI has really come.
Honestly, if this film hadn't had such gorgeous CG, it would have been a colossal failure. It seems that they spent so much money on the visuals, that they didn't have enough to actually pay someone to edit the script.
Also, Mtbikemom, in what way was it anti- big business? Maybe anti-"Military-industrial complex". Very anti-government. But not so much big business... unless you're only referring to the military-industrial complex.
-
Because they weren't technically military, they were mercenaries hired by a large corporation.
-
Jexral, the plot was so forgettable, I hardly remember. Wasn't there a profit motive behind obtaining (ugh) unobtainium? And if so, the military would not logically profit. I thought the militaristic thugs were hired mercenaries, but like I said, I hardly remember. That kinda says it all.
Oh, Miyabi posted only seconds before this. Guess my memory is not completely gone yet. :) Tx!
-
It comes out on DVD EARTH DAY!!!
-
I never really understood why people complained about the term unobtainium. It's been used term since the 1950s. It's not like they just made it up for the movie. It may sound a tad silly, but it is an actual term.
That said, I think I'll wait until a nifty extended edition is released on blu ray to pick it up.
-
@BookstoreGuy - I really want to see that too. I wonder what they left out.
-
@BookstoreGuy - I really want to see that too. I wonder what they left out.
The rest of the movie, obviously. It will now take over 24 hours to watch from beginning to end!
also: This scene (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POaF_P40DxQ) (slightly NSFW, but all hilarious)