EPTJames Cameron's AVATAR series - Page 41
| Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
| ||
|
ShaperofDreams
Canada2492 Posts
| ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On December 27 2009 16:22 horang3 wrote: I would say that he meant shallow in the sense of being easy to understand and without intricacy, either technically or metaphorically, not in the sense of being unimportant or morally questionable. Or "shallow" in the sense that it could have easily fit into a 90-120 minute movie and that much of the movie is cinematic masturbation. On December 27 2009 16:24 Archerofaiur wrote: Shallow tends to imply without worth. Blizzards games are easy to understand but you wouldn't call them shallow. Blizzard's games actually have complicated plots with no true heroes. I wouldn't call it shallow at all. | ||
|
ShaperofDreams
Canada2492 Posts
On December 27 2009 16:24 jalstar wrote: Blizzard's games actually have complicated plots uhh no? | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
[QUOTE]On December 27 2009 16:24 jalstar wrote: [QUOTE]On December 27 2009 16:22 horang3 wrote: [QUOTE]On December 27 2009 14:29 Archerofaiur wrote: Thats the point. Its a plot device. Its something people want but cant obtain. Its not shallow, its part of the directors message. It doesnt matter what people want, its always something and its always what they cant have. Its oil or land or money or power or any of a thousand other possesions that one man has and another doesnt.[/QUOTE] I would say that he meant shallow in the sense of being easy to understand and without intricacy, either technically or metaphorically, not in the sense of being unimportant or morally questionable.[/QUOTE] Or "shallow" in the sense that it could have easily fit into a 90-120 minute movie and that much of the movie is cinematic masturbation. [QUOTE]On December 27 2009 16:24 Archerofaiur wrote: Shallow tends to imply without worth. Blizzards games are easy to understand but you wouldn't call them shallow.[/QUOTE] Blizzard's games actually have complicated plots uhh no?[/QUOTE] morally complicated, the last blizz game with clear-cut good and evil was wc2. | ||
|
iloveambiguity
United States81 Posts
The Company comes back and BBQ's the jungle with the trusty Harvard invention: Napalm. All the natives and wildlife incinerates, including the foolish hero of the first movie. In the mean time, one of the other tribal chiefs, who is the real hero here, makes a deal with 'big bad Corp,' and fully cooperates with the profiteers. Some liberal journalist picks up their story so they actually get a good deal. They begin farming, so they finally have time for the luxury of using their big heads to invent useful shit. They help human scientist discover new plants and animals, and in the jungle they find a chemical cure for aids and cancer. Some engineers tap into the electrochemical signals of the gaia brain. and translate it into binary. Now that our computer gadgets are synced to the information stream of the Planet, or really, life itself, we can OPTIMIZE nature by artifically maintaining ecological balance and stop nature from consuming its most valuable children, the humans and the blue humanoids. In Avatar 3, weuse the "20 million a kilo ... See Morerock" to build weapons capable of conquering other civilizations. The smart is assimilated and form withus a culture which is neither human, or alien, or techocrat, or naturalist, but a symbiosis of those elements. And as the credits roll, some hero and heroine are holding hands as they stare into the unknown and yet unconquered vastness of the galaxy, followed by the image of the huge tree from the first movie, growing towards the sky, but never quite reaching it. Now THAT would be a trilogy worth watching. | ||
|
ShaperofDreams
Canada2492 Posts
| ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On December 27 2009 16:29 ShaperofDreams wrote: I have'nt ever seen a blizzard game as morally complicated as Avatar, I don't think you know what you're talking about., BW? WOW? Diablo? there's nothing morally complicated about avatar at all, nearly movie ever made is more morally complex than avatar | ||
|
ShaperofDreams
Canada2492 Posts
On December 27 2009 16:31 jalstar wrote: there's nothing morally complicated about avatar at all, nearly movie ever made is more morally complex than avatar That statement is retarded, and you still haven't explained how you could possibly think that a blizzard game is deep or morally complicated. | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On December 27 2009 16:33 ShaperofDreams wrote: That statement is retarded, and you still haven't explained how you could possibly think that a blizzard game is deep or morally complicated. the villains in avatar are the most one-dimensional villains ever outside of cartoons blizzard games, while not "deep", at least have a sort of lesser evil vs greater evil thing going on, ripped off of warhammer and warhammer 40k of course, it's simple compared to most movies but complex compared to avatar hell, even the dialog in starcraft is good when you compare it to avatar "queen bitch of the universe" vs "we're not in kansas anymore" | ||
|
ShaperofDreams
Canada2492 Posts
edit for clarification. | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On December 27 2009 16:41 ShaperofDreams wrote: The fact that you describe a "lesser evil vs greater evil" as morally complicated doesn't say much for you. Yes the main villains in avatar are stereotypes, but no 'team' is evil (as is every character in every blizzard game, a stereotype, that is), however the conflicting causes in avatar are not void of moral complexity. edit for clarification. The overarching plot had a lot of potential for moral complexity, and if the themes had been explored more, or moral dilemmas like saving the humans vs saving Pandora had come up, then I would have said Avatar has the complexity of a typical hollywood action movie. (which is more than Starcraft's) As it is, Avatar had the moral complexity of a Saturday morning cartoon. You can read into it as much as you want, but the humans are always portrayed negatively while the Navi are portrayed positively. | ||
|
horang3
United States261 Posts
On December 27 2009 16:41 ShaperofDreams wrote: The fact that you describe a "lesser evil vs greater evil" as morally complicated doesn't say much for you. Yes the main villains in avatar are stereotypes, but no 'team' is evil (as is every character in every blizzard game, a stereotype, that is), however the conflicting causes in avatar are not void of moral complexity. edit for clarification. lesser evil vs greater evil is more complex than good versus evil. | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
-the length -the lack of intense scenes besides when the colonel gets close to jake's real body. | ||
|
ShaperofDreams
Canada2492 Posts
On December 27 2009 16:46 jalstar wrote: You can read into it as much as you want, but the humans are always portrayed negatively while the Navi are portrayed positively. ...because it is from their point of view for 90% of the movie, you say it would be more morally complex if humanity had more coverage, ok, feel free to watch your fantasy 1,000,000,000$ 300 minute long movie. | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On December 27 2009 16:52 ShaperofDreams wrote: ...because it if from their point of view for 90% of the movie, you say it would be more morally complex if humanity had more coverage, ok, feel free to watch your fantasy 1,000,000,000$ 300 minute long movie. i just said that the movie should be shorter but ok. most of the humans seemed ok, maybe a short clip about whether it's ok to blindly follow orders would have been nice. the real problem is that the villains are bland and spout cliches, the villain should be someone that you love to hate, but the colonel and the corporate guy were just kind of, there, and did i mention the cliches? they spoke in cliche the whole movie. i didn't care about the characters, good or bad, and that's unacceptable for a movie. | ||
|
ShaperofDreams
Canada2492 Posts
| ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On December 27 2009 17:01 ShaperofDreams wrote: Neither did I, they didn't get screen time because there wasn't any. All the time is used for visual awesome or very very basic, core plot development, maybe the romance is unnecessary but even then most of it is spent in the forest showing off visuals. I guess the rivalry characters could be cut too. I agree, I thought it was silly how quickly the guy who was supposed to marry Jake's eventual wife (I can't remember any of these Navi names) forgave him for stealing the love of his life. | ||
|
SiDX
New Zealand1975 Posts
| ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On December 27 2009 17:04 SiDX wrote: so so story good visuals nothing amazing imo i prefered dark knight i liked Star Trek 09 even though it had a basic good vs evil story like avatar. kirk was much more likable and badass than jake and there were a lot more intense scenes, even if the effects weren't as good as avatar's. | ||
| ||
