|
On December 29 2009 13:33 Jonoman92 wrote:I went to see Avatar today with somewhat low expectations in terms of the actually content but the story far surpassed my expectations and I was pleasantly surprised by the fact that the ending was not predictable, not to me at least. One big LOL moment for me though was: + Show Spoiler +The evil general guy is in his goliath machine at the end and he pulls out a knife, like that machine really comes with a big jumbo knife for hand to hand combat with large animals.... People plugging their hair into large carnivorous flying reptiles was fine though.
Actually, in one of the very early scenes when the goliath dude was talking with the protagonist about bringing info to him etc, you can see the knife on the goliath thing. It was not something that was just randomly brought out in the last scene.
Throughout the movie, the amount of detail that went into everything is astonishing.
|
On December 02 2009 08:52 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2009 20:46 tomatriedes wrote:
My brother did some of the CG on this movie so I hope it does well. I wish they would stop hyping it so much. It's hard to enjoy a movie when you've already heard way too much about it and seen all the best bits. My dad is James Cameron.
If you don't believe me I can PM you his name and you can check the credits for yourself.
He's currently working for Weta Digital in Wellington, used to work for Cinesite Europe in London.
|
Well, it was visually incredible.
And otherwise, utterly mediocre.
Still, it was worth it if for no other reason than the spectacular scenery pron.
|
James Cameron on what the sequel can be about.
James Cameron has been talking about making an "Avatar" sequel way before the first film hit theaters. Now that "Avatar" has become a great success, there is no doubt that 20th Century Fox would want to proceed with a second installment.
But since "Avatar" did not leave a door open for a follow-up, one has to wonder how Cameron could continue the story. Up until this point, he has declined to comment on the topic, but recently told LA Times that the sequel might leave the planet of Pandora.
Since Pandora is a moon and in the movie you can clearly see other moons, LA Times asked if the follow-up will focus on the other moons and maybe the planet that they're orbiting.
Cameron explained: "The planet in Pandora's sky is called Polyphemus and its a primary for a system of moons just like in our solar system. We have some story ideas about how to branch out into other moons of Polyphemus and the Alpha Centauri A (ACA) solar system."
If done correctly, James Cameron can pretty much create his own Star Wars with unique planets/moons, races, creatures, language, culture, etc at this point. I hope Cameron and co. will keep the movie under wraps like the first Avatar to create hype and suspense.
|
On December 29 2009 14:05 zoLo wrote:James Cameron on what the sequel can be about. Show nested quote +James Cameron has been talking about making an "Avatar" sequel way before the first film hit theaters. Now that "Avatar" has become a great success, there is no doubt that 20th Century Fox would want to proceed with a second installment.
But since "Avatar" did not leave a door open for a follow-up, one has to wonder how Cameron could continue the story. Up until this point, he has declined to comment on the topic, but recently told LA Times that the sequel might leave the planet of Pandora.
Since Pandora is a moon and in the movie you can clearly see other moons, LA Times asked if the follow-up will focus on the other moons and maybe the planet that they're orbiting.
Cameron explained: "The planet in Pandora's sky is called Polyphemus and its a primary for a system of moons just like in our solar system. We have some story ideas about how to branch out into other moons of Polyphemus and the Alpha Centauri A (ACA) solar system." If done correctly, James Cameron can pretty much create his own Star Wars with unique planets/moons, races, creatures, language, culture, etc at this point. I hope Cameron and co. will keep the movie under wraps like the first Avatar to create hype and suspense.
I have extremely low hopes of Cameron creating a universe with even 1/10th the cultural intrigue and "history" that exists in the Star Wars universe, judging from what I've seen in Avatar.
|
It can't be like Star Wars. Star Wars had their own universe, has its own SW universe alien races, it has variety of things, while Avatar has only two races: humans and Na'vis.
|
On December 29 2009 14:37 LilClinkin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2009 14:05 zoLo wrote:James Cameron on what the sequel can be about. James Cameron has been talking about making an "Avatar" sequel way before the first film hit theaters. Now that "Avatar" has become a great success, there is no doubt that 20th Century Fox would want to proceed with a second installment.
But since "Avatar" did not leave a door open for a follow-up, one has to wonder how Cameron could continue the story. Up until this point, he has declined to comment on the topic, but recently told LA Times that the sequel might leave the planet of Pandora.
Since Pandora is a moon and in the movie you can clearly see other moons, LA Times asked if the follow-up will focus on the other moons and maybe the planet that they're orbiting.
Cameron explained: "The planet in Pandora's sky is called Polyphemus and its a primary for a system of moons just like in our solar system. We have some story ideas about how to branch out into other moons of Polyphemus and the Alpha Centauri A (ACA) solar system." If done correctly, James Cameron can pretty much create his own Star Wars with unique planets/moons, races, creatures, language, culture, etc at this point. I hope Cameron and co. will keep the movie under wraps like the first Avatar to create hype and suspense. I have extremely low hopes of Cameron creating a universe with even 1/10th the cultural intrigue and "history" that exists in the Star Wars universe, judging from what I've seen in Avatar.
Dozens of authors have developed the Star Wars universe over the decades.
so... yeah?
|
I think the fact that a movie spawned 48 pages on TL after 11 days of being out says enough about it.
omg last post b4 1k
|
On December 29 2009 05:22 TanGeng wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2009 05:19 Mooga wrote:
Did they intentionally make the blue creatures look, dress, and worship the land like Native Americans? Hmm I wonder what their motives were when they were making the plot to this movie? It seems like another guilt-trip, which I already had enough of by the 5th grade.
It's almost like they took the plot of a Native American battle against the European colonialists and used that as the script of the movie. Except they changed the setting to another planet and the Native Americans to blue aliens.
I wish they put more effort into the plot and dialogue. It would've been a great movie if the plot was even remotely interesting. It's a sci-fi movie and they still couldn't come up with an interesting plot? Dancing with Wolves!!! in space! blue aliens! exotic flora and fauna! with floating rocks! Yeah, it's not very original.
There are a lot of differences between these movies, the main being the endings. Don't just say shit because everyone else is. Cameron has even said he took inspiration from Dances With Wolves.
|
I actually enjoyed it alot
The plot was pretty predictable, Pocahontas in space, but still didn't bother me that much, and the epic 3-D landscape and battles were awe inspiring. The only other thing is it could have used some big name actors imo, because honestly some of the acting sucked. It was definitely worth a trip to the theater, although maybe not the revolutionary movie some were expecting.
|
On December 29 2009 15:24 zeonmx wrote:
It can't be like Star Wars. Star Wars had their own universe, has its own SW universe alien races, it has variety of things, while Avatar has only two races: humans and Na'vis.
That is because we haven't seen much yet. So what if Avatar has only 2 races shown. Cameron and co. can easily introduce more things in the next 2 films. Star Wars have their own universe because it's fiction while the alpha centauri A is real. In the Star Wars movie, we only see about 4 or 5 planets/moons, which Avatar can do since we only saw one side of the gas giant.
|
Avatar is a visual masterpiece, no doubts there. Sure it may lack in plot and characterization however it is a film, where the visual aspect has great importance. if i wanted to enjoy a complex storyline with intricate characters and plot i would of read a book.
|
How do you guys do it when you shut your brains off when watching a movie?
James Cameron says that you should feel the movie and not think, a very simple concept but it also sets double standards. He tells us that he tried to mix older-styled science fiction (pure escapism) with the newer more intellectual sci-fi in Avatar. In short - political messages versus a journey into an alternate reality. The problem this co-relation creates is that the political message is far too simple and one-dimensional to reward our brains even the slightest, yet it is disturbing enough to take away the focus from the cute little fantasy world.
He wants us to feel the anti-bush propaganda and the value of our nature. It might sound nice in theory but mixed into a blockbuster film for visual entertainment it is unnecessary and suggestive. This is why I'm saying that you should either decide to do one or another, a movie without brain or a movie with a brain (a movie that doesn't try to push you over with its values). As it is now, it collapses into a simple and predictable moral story, not unlike children's way of thinking (hence the black and white, good and evil references used by others in this thread).
So what is the moral of this movie? To act upon your own morals and conscience and question your own orders received by others and also your world-view and your inner self. Which is quite funny, because the movie execution is the polar opposite of what it preaches. Very ironic, don't you think?
Cameron should halt his goal of becoming a thought-provoking director who is asking and answering questions because it's highly embarrassing as audience to see.
|
Absolutely loved this movie. What an amazing movie to watch. It may not be the best movie I've ever seen, but it was by far the best movie-watching experience that I have ever seen. 2 hours and 40 minutes went by way too fast.
I just disregarded the anti-Iraq War underlying plot and just enjoyed the movie and enjoyed the movie I did. I was fine with the simple plot that they provided. I find that low(er) budget movies make much better complex and interesting movies rather than big-budget movies whereas $400 million budget movies like these make the experience of watching the movie so damn enjoyable. It might also have something to do with the fact that this was my first 3-D film.
Still, a great great movie. Exactly what I wanted from this movie.
On December 18 2009 20:32 {88}iNcontroL wrote:
I would have watched this for 10 hours.
This might be the best movie I have ever seen. Don't read reviews. Don't read this thread. Don't watch trailers.. GO SEE IT.
holy shit was that a good movie.
Just started going through the thread and ran into this post. This is EXACTLY how I felt when it was over. The movie got out a few hours ago and I can't stop thinking about it. I have never gotten so immersed into a movie before, I wish there were like 5 sequels that I could go and see already.
|
On December 30 2009 01:45 Shauni wrote:
How do you guys do it when you shut your brains off when watching a movie?
James Cameron says that you should feel the movie and not think, a very simple concept but it also sets double standards. He tells us that he tried to mix older-styled science fiction (pure escapism) with the newer more intellectual sci-fi in Avatar. In short - political messages versus a journey into an alternate reality. The problem this co-relation creates is that the political message is far too simple and one-dimensional to reward our brains even the slightest, yet it is disturbing enough to take away the focus from the cute little fantasy world.
He wants us to feel the anti-bush propaganda and the value of our nature. It might sound nice in theory but mixed into a blockbuster film for visual entertainment it is unnecessary and suggestive. This is why I'm saying that you should either decide to do one or another, a movie without brain or a movie with a brain (a movie that doesn't try to push you over with its values). As it is now, it collapses into a simple and predictable moral story, not unlike children's way of thinking (hence the black and white, good and evil references used by others in this thread).
So what is the moral of this movie? To act upon your own morals and conscience and question your own orders received by others and also your world-view and your inner self. Which is quite funny, because the movie execution is the polar opposite of what it preaches. Very ironic, don't you think?
Cameron should halt his goal of becoming a thought-provoking director who is asking and answering questions because it's highly embarrassing as audience to see.
What were you saying before about being constructive/understanding enlightening?
I didn't shut my brain off in the movie, I enjoyed it.
There really aren't any explicit political messages in the movie (except don't go around murdering, pillaging, and burning less militarily powerful nations than yours just for greed; if you want to be enlightened instead of uncivilized that is).
Funny thing about you mentioning the director telling us to "don't think, feel" as if everyone is going to view the movie as he wants us to. Perhaps, just maybe, someone somewhere in the world saw this movie and never even knew he said that (I did)? Would that be so crazy to believe?
If James Cameron was actually trying to make this movie about a political environmental message and anti-bush movie (I haven't heard anything other than it's about "protecting the environment), then I could agree with you that he really did fail in that sense. Nowhere in the movie is anything explicitly preaching environmentalism or condemning the bush administration.
For me it was purely a fantasy/sci-fi immersion into an alternate reality. I didn't find anything really cheesy and I enjoyed the film in a way I haven't in a long time. Sure, the plot structure wasn't exactly original, but the world, the characters, their experiences were, and how this was portrayed into the audience was original. It was a great experience, I went in uncertain what to expect, but open-minded and accepted the film for what it was - an amazing cinematic experience.
You're pretty much never going to enjoy a movie if you go about looking for hidden and subliminal political messages preaching specific messages, then judging it on how well it does based on that. Almost every film has some sort of "hidden" message (perhaps unintended) that could be related to numerous things such as philosophy, psychology, politics, religion, the list goes on and on. If that's what the movie's about for you though, good luck enjoying movies.
For me though, I love finding subtle messages (most of the time I think they're unintended, but I could see someone (like you) as interpreting them as being the whole message and point of the movie)
IMO, at it's foundation, movies should be about viewing the world from an alternate perspective for a few hours to appreciate life from the point of view of someone else. You can build upon that foundation in a variety of ways which will determine how you experience movies, but that should be the foundation if you ever want to enjoy a movie.
|
How do you guys do it when you shut your brains off when watching a movie? How do you shut off your 'brain' when you go see a play and want to shout out "HEY MORON, YOU ARENT ACTUALLY HAMLET. YOU, THERE, YOUR NAME IS TIM McKIBBONS, I HAD A BEER WITH YOU AT THE PUB BEFORE WE CAME HERE. YOU, THE BLONDE, YOU'RE NOT OPHELIA, YOU'RE SARAH ARGO ACCORDING TO THE PLAYBILL, WHAT IS THIS FARCE; THATS NOT EVEN A FUCKING A REAL SKULL THAT YORICK WAS HOLDING UP"?
I mean, I keep doing that and getting tossed out, so any help people have would be greatly appreciated.
|
If James Cameron was actually trying to make this movie about a political environmental message and anti-bush movie (I haven't heard anything other than it's about "protecting the environment), then I could agree with you that he really did fail in that sense. Nowhere in the movie is anything explicitly preaching environmentalism or condemning the bush administration.
I'm not saying that you should view the movie like Cameron intended. Everyone interprets a movie in their own way, it might even be true for a shallow example such as Avatar. I just think it's strange that you neither noticed any political messages (they weren't exactly hidden) or have any understanding for people who did. It's not just me, and as for my previous post, yes it was things he said himself in various interviews I read. Do a movie have to SPELL THINGS OUT for you to notice them? If you want to believe that there are no political messages - and I'm not just talking tangible things such as bush-administration, I'm talking generally, environmentalism, protecting the nature, anti-imperialism is also a part of the political message - then fine. But just because they do not exist in your world doesn't mean other people didn't read it in from Avatar. He failed with his moral message, political message and everything from the 'modern' sci-fi era. I don't understand why you are even arguing this...
For me it was purely a fantasy/sci-fi immersion into an alternate reality. I didn't find anything really cheesy and I enjoyed the film in a way I haven't in a long time. Sure, the plot structure wasn't exactly original, but the world, the characters, their experiences were, and how this was portrayed into the audience was original. It was a great experience, I went in uncertain what to expect, but open-minded and accepted the film for what it was - an amazing cinematic experience.
It feels just like a child describing a new wonderful experience of his. It might feel this way for you but to people having seen more than a dozen movies it was just about any cliché movie repackaged. District 9, Pocahontas, The Last Samurai, Delgo, Starship Troopers, Dances with Wolves and his own movies of course. The list could be made a hundred times longer but you get the idea. The reason why people keep comparing the movie with others is because it feels like we've seen it before. I'm sorry but nothing was even remotely original about the contents of this film. I'd understand if it was just the plot since it's not relevant in comparison with the whole storytelling but everything feels recycled to me. Does it have to be original? No, especially not if it is a movie for children but for a 'mature' movie? Masterpiece? Seriously?
You're pretty much never going to enjoy a movie if you go about looking for hidden and subliminal political messages preaching specific messages, then judging it on how well it does based on that. Almost every film has some sort of "hidden" message (perhaps unintended) that could be related to numerous things such as philosophy, psychology, politics, religion, the list goes on and on. If that's what the movie's about for you though, good luck enjoying movies.
I didn't LOOK for them. I came to the cinema with a blank mind, expecting to mildly enjoy a simple movie. I did not see it to be fucking lectured by James Cameron.
You're pretty much never going to enjoy a movie if you go about looking for hidden and subliminal political messages preaching specific messages, then judging it on how well it does based on that. Almost every film has some sort of "hidden" message (perhaps unintended) that could be related to numerous things such as philosophy, psychology, politics, religion, the list goes on and on. If that's what the movie's about for you though, good luck enjoying movies.
For me though, I love finding subtle messages (most of the time I think they're unintended, but I could see someone (like you) as interpreting them as being the whole message and point of the movie)
IMO, at it's foundation, movies should be about viewing the world from an alternate perspective for a few hours to appreciate life from the point of view of someone else. You can build upon that foundation in a variety of ways which will determine how you experience movies, but that should be the foundation if you ever want to enjoy a movie.
I'm not just being preached to by Cameron, you are now telling me how to enjoy a movie. Last paragraph I kind of agree with but relating it to Avatar is just ridiculous. Viewing the world from an alternate perspective? We were not given any perspective in Avatar, we were playing a damned video game where we act the hero, save the nice guys and kill the bad guys. How does that have anything to do with perspective?
I didn't shut my brain off in the movie, I enjoyed it.
Yes yes... I know you enjoyed Avatar very much. I don't know if you do this on purpose but... what you said here was contradictory. Shutting your brain off doesn't literally mean that you shut all your senses out during a movie. It just means that your critical/active thinking isn't functioning. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that I critically analyze every tiny piece of a movie. But if my consciousness notices a flaw that just keep growing, of course I can't help but pay attention to it. It's only natural.
On December 30 2009 05:49 L wrote: How do you shut off your 'brain' when you go see a play and want to shout out "HEY MORON, YOU ARENT ACTUALLY HAMLET. YOU, THERE, YOUR NAME IS TIM McKIBBONS, I HAD A BEER WITH YOU AT THE PUB BEFORE WE CAME HERE. YOU, THE BLONDE, YOU'RE NOT OPHELIA, YOU'RE SARAH ARGO ACCORDING TO THE PLAYBILL, WHAT IS THIS FARCE; THATS NOT EVEN A FUCKING A REAL SKULL THAT YORICK WAS HOLDING UP"? I mean, I keep doing that and getting tossed out, so any help people have would be greatly appreciated.
I know what you're saying but it's not the same thing. While speaking of movies, you might know about Dogville. A prime example of a movie that requires imagination to come alive (the whole movie is played out in a gymnastics hall - instead of houses and decorations it's just paint on the floor). I was captivated by it very easily, the same as with various theater plays I've seen. You do not need to turn off part of your brain to enjoy such things, you do not need to turn off your visual senses to enjoy a book. It's the same principle.
However, Avatar is not challenging to watch for any of your senses, it's just another movie that spoon-feeds you without mercy. I realize this is the purpose of the movie and I'm ok with it. What I'm not ok with is what it spoon-feeds you. If it was just visual landscapes and the creation of a new world I'd not be complaining. I don't see how I can possibly turn off my moral senses when the movie itself preaches morals.
|
All the questions Shauni asks about Avatar are the same questions I ask every time I meet a bible thumper. Neither on those occasions or during Avatar did I once feel uncomfortable. I just think its funny that you're letting Cameron's message affect you so much.
Maybe you should think about changing your beliefs because something in the movie is obviously speaking to you. You haven't stopped trying to fight a campaign against the movie since you saw it.
|
Somebody has to fight the war for the sake of humanity. Everyone is screaming hallelujah! praise the lord! while I'm standing beside wondering exactly where this salvation is coming from.
Maybe I'm just sensitive about these things, but once a movie tries to consciously change my beliefs I see red. A movie is not a fucking marketing campaign. It is not an ad, it is not a political speech. It is not a manipulation medium, it is not a medium for preaching ethics, morals, environment.
Yes, it happens all the time, not just in Avatar. But it's getting worse and worse, especially how the directors get away with these things without people even noticing.
|
A movie is just a medium to express a story. I really don't understand how you think you can disconnect storytelling and morality/morals. Yeah, Cameron didn't hide his motives, but who says you have to hide what you're saying? It's a decent message anyway - It's not like he's saying to kill all the asians in the world.
There are much more important things to worry about than James Cameron, trust me. He's about as harmless as you're going to get.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
