|
On January 12 2010 05:56 TealLurker wrote:
I listened to a James Cameron interview and he stated that it was never explicitly stated in the movie, but the unobtainium was needed to solve an energy crisis on Earth. He could done better to flush this part out of the story because I didn't notice that at first. I also have friends that believe the reason they want the unobtainium was because it was worth a lot of money. This is one of many gripes I have with the story, but I'm probably gonna get crucified speaking ill of THE GREATEST MOVIE EVER MADE!!!
People complain the story is too simple and then can't put any pieces together themselves...
Where in the movie would they put that exposition without having it be a glaringly awkward fourth wall issue? Presumably every single person on Pandora knows what Unobtanium is good for and it would have been extremely weird if someone sat a character down and delivered them a monologue about it. Reminding Grace what the company's priorities are is a realistic way to introduce the audience to what is going on. I've certainly heard management say similar sorts of things to me in my job. They tell me that priorities should be on certain projects because of the importance of the client accounts they represent, they don't describe to me what the projects are because as a member of the project team I sort of already know.
Having a scene where someone explains to someone else what Unobtanium is good for would be as awkward and jarring as a general in a WW2 movie telling a corporal why they need to secure oil fields. It wouldn't make any sense because in that universe everyone already knows what it's for and the audience needs to take as an article of faith that it's important enough to spend trillions of dollars trying to obtain.
|
Just read the trivia on IMDB and this caught my eye:
In the beginning of the movie when awakened from cryosleep, the passengers of the Venture Star are informed they have been asleep for five years and nine months. Given that Pandora is in the Alpha Centauri system (4.4 light years away), the theory of special relativity dictates that the ship's average velocity with respect to Pandora over the whole trip was about 61% of the speed of light (113,000 miles/second) and due to time dilation, during the voyage seven years and three months elapsed on Pandora.
Also I wonder if it will break the TDK this week, it is so very close.
|
|
|
On January 13 2010 00:40 zeppelin wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2010 05:56 TealLurker wrote:
I listened to a James Cameron interview and he stated that it was never explicitly stated in the movie, but the unobtainium was needed to solve an energy crisis on Earth. He could done better to flush this part out of the story because I didn't notice that at first. I also have friends that believe the reason they want the unobtainium was because it was worth a lot of money. This is one of many gripes I have with the story, but I'm probably gonna get crucified speaking ill of THE GREATEST MOVIE EVER MADE!!! People complain the story is too simple and then can't put any pieces together themselves... Where in the movie would they put that exposition without having it be a glaringly awkward fourth wall issue? Presumably every single person on Pandora knows what Unobtanium is good for and it would have been extremely weird if someone sat a character down and delivered them a monologue about it. Reminding Grace what the company's priorities are is a realistic way to introduce the audience to what is going on. I've certainly heard management say similar sorts of things to me in my job. They tell me that priorities should be on certain projects because of the importance of the client accounts they represent, they don't describe to me what the projects are because as a member of the project team I sort of already know. Having a scene where someone explains to someone else what Unobtanium is good for would be as awkward and jarring as a general in a WW2 movie telling a corporal why they need to secure oil fields. It wouldn't make any sense because in that universe everyone already knows what it's for and the audience needs to take as an article of faith that it's important enough to spend trillions of dollars trying to obtain.
'explaining' isn't just about using dialogues... You can explain such a thing with moving pictures, without dumbing down the dialogue even more.
|
On January 14 2010 03:21 Shauni wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2010 00:40 zeppelin wrote:On January 12 2010 05:56 TealLurker wrote:
I listened to a James Cameron interview and he stated that it was never explicitly stated in the movie, but the unobtainium was needed to solve an energy crisis on Earth. He could done better to flush this part out of the story because I didn't notice that at first. I also have friends that believe the reason they want the unobtainium was because it was worth a lot of money. This is one of many gripes I have with the story, but I'm probably gonna get crucified speaking ill of THE GREATEST MOVIE EVER MADE!!! People complain the story is too simple and then can't put any pieces together themselves... Where in the movie would they put that exposition without having it be a glaringly awkward fourth wall issue? Presumably every single person on Pandora knows what Unobtanium is good for and it would have been extremely weird if someone sat a character down and delivered them a monologue about it. Reminding Grace what the company's priorities are is a realistic way to introduce the audience to what is going on. I've certainly heard management say similar sorts of things to me in my job. They tell me that priorities should be on certain projects because of the importance of the client accounts they represent, they don't describe to me what the projects are because as a member of the project team I sort of already know. Having a scene where someone explains to someone else what Unobtanium is good for would be as awkward and jarring as a general in a WW2 movie telling a corporal why they need to secure oil fields. It wouldn't make any sense because in that universe everyone already knows what it's for and the audience needs to take as an article of faith that it's important enough to spend trillions of dollars trying to obtain. 'explaining' isn't just about using dialogues... You can explain such a thing with moving pictures, without dumbing down the dialogue even more.
It's ok, Shauni. You fought the good fight. A lot of people don't understand that this is the entire point of what makes good storytelling.
|
On January 13 2010 00:40 zeppelin wrote:
Having a scene where someone explains to someone else what Unobtanium is good for would be as awkward and jarring as a general in a WW2 movie telling a corporal why they need to secure oil fields. It wouldn't make any sense because in that universe everyone already knows what it's for and the audience needs to take as an article of faith that it's important enough to spend trillions of dollars trying to obtain.
If the Earth is really dying because of a lack of unobtanium, then have a scene showing the earth without it. Show, don't tell.
|
LOL and before people were complaining that Avatar showed them everything. They whined how it forcefed them everything instead of letting them figure it out.
|
On January 14 2010 05:35 Archerofaiur wrote:
LOL and before people were complaining that Avatar showed them everything. They whined how it forcefed them everything instead of letting them figure it out.
"letting you figure it out" is showing. "forcefed" is telling.
|
it's kinda sad that people are trying so hard to diss this movie
|
On January 14 2010 05:33 jalstar wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2010 00:40 zeppelin wrote:
Having a scene where someone explains to someone else what Unobtanium is good for would be as awkward and jarring as a general in a WW2 movie telling a corporal why they need to secure oil fields. It wouldn't make any sense because in that universe everyone already knows what it's for and the audience needs to take as an article of faith that it's important enough to spend trillions of dollars trying to obtain. If the Earth is really dying because of a lack of unobtanium, then have a scene showing the earth without it. Show, don't tell.
There is 20 minutes of Earth scenes that was supposed to be in the intro, but was cut out so that the movie won't pass the 3 hours mark (IMAX only allow 170 minutes).
The special effects are DONE for the Earth Scenes according to the French company that worked on it. We don't know if its on the DVD release, but there's a chance that it will be.
Maybe, it will be included in a rerelease of Avatar on Cinemas.
|
On January 14 2010 08:28 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
it's kinda sad that people are trying so hard to diss this movie
This is ridiculous! It's this sentiment that annoys me. Any minute criticism of a film is seen as a diss. Of course, everybody ignores it when I gush love over the visuals or Zoe Saldana's performance is captured onto Neytiri, but minor critiques of a film such as some improvements in the story is seen as a diss. Apparently, Avatar is now this fragile child that needs protection from any and all criticism. I just find that a significant number of people in this thread are uppity with fact that others don't share their viewpoint in that this movie is awesome, the best movie ever, etc. I'm not saying it's the worst movie of 2009, but I don't think it's best movie of 2009 either.
|
This is one of the best movies I have seen in a very long time.
I saw Ice Age 3 in 3D (bare with me..) and it used 3D as a showcase feature. The 3D was used almost as a rollercoaster or theme park ride. In Avatar the 3D is used as a tool as part of the storytelling process just as lighting, sound, colour change and other tools at the producers side are. I have seen this movie in both 3D and 2D and can safely say that while it is more encompassing and real with the 3D it is not at all one of the defining or important parts of the movie.
The story itself is great. It has copped some criticism since its release, for example feminist groups are claiming that the aliens create a bad expectation of what girls should look like (being tall and skinny). o.O ... ... This is the most stupid thing I have ever heard. Did any of you get turned on by the aliens at all? Ok.. here's 2 questions which will prove the stupidity of this and similar claims. (1) Who was the hottest chick in the movie? + Show Spoiler +. (2) Who was the fattest chick in the movie? + Show Spoiler +. Feminist fail. Actually every single claim I have seen about this movie (racial issues, other story reused, etc) are all fail and achieve nothing more than to increase the awareness of the movie.
The story was amazing, the length (3 hours) was perfect, the way they showed both (all 3?) sides of the world they created and how everyone perceives it was very well done. The CGI technology was also spot on. There were very few times when an animation or creature looked fake or out of place.
I give this movie a 5/5.
|
On January 14 2010 09:21 DeCoup wrote:This is one of the best movies I have seen in a very long time. I saw Ice Age 3 in 3D (bare with me..) and it used 3D as a showcase feature. The 3D was used almost as a rollercoaster or theme park ride. In Avatar the 3D is used as a tool as part of the storytelling process just as lighting, sound, colour change and other tools at the producers side are. I have seen this movie in both 3D and 2D and can safely say that while it is more encompassing and real with the 3D it is not at all one of the defining or important parts of the movie. The story itself is great. It has copped some criticism since its release, for example feminist groups are claiming that the aliens create a bad expectation of what girls should look like (being tall and skinny). o.O ... ... This is the most stupid thing I have ever heard. Did any of you get turned on by the aliens at all? Ok.. here's 2 questions which will prove the stupidity of this and similar claims. (1) Who was the hottest chick in the movie? + Show Spoiler +. (2) Who was the fattest chick in the movie? + Show Spoiler +. Feminist fail. Actually every single claim I have seen about this movie (racial issues, other story reused, etc) are all fail and achieve nothing more than to increase the awareness of the movie. The story was amazing, the length (3 hours) was perfect, the way they showed both (all 3?) sides of the world they created and how everyone perceives it was very well done. The CGI technology was also spot on. There were very few times when an animation or creature looked fake or out of place. I give this movie a 5/5.
Its almost comical
People have have tried everything to take this movie down, said it encourages smoking cause it has smoking in it, said it doesnt portray marines as scholars, said its anti american cause it looks like american foriegn policy, said it is racist cause a white guy saves the savages, said it praises to hugo chavez but my all time favorite is today
The vatican said it trys to replace nature with god.
|
On January 14 2010 10:03 Archerofaiur wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2010 09:21 DeCoup wrote:This is one of the best movies I have seen in a very long time. I saw Ice Age 3 in 3D (bare with me..) and it used 3D as a showcase feature. The 3D was used almost as a rollercoaster or theme park ride. In Avatar the 3D is used as a tool as part of the storytelling process just as lighting, sound, colour change and other tools at the producers side are. I have seen this movie in both 3D and 2D and can safely say that while it is more encompassing and real with the 3D it is not at all one of the defining or important parts of the movie. The story itself is great. It has copped some criticism since its release, for example feminist groups are claiming that the aliens create a bad expectation of what girls should look like (being tall and skinny). o.O ... ... This is the most stupid thing I have ever heard. Did any of you get turned on by the aliens at all? Ok.. here's 2 questions which will prove the stupidity of this and similar claims. (1) Who was the hottest chick in the movie? + Show Spoiler +. (2) Who was the fattest chick in the movie? + Show Spoiler +. Feminist fail. Actually every single claim I have seen about this movie (racial issues, other story reused, etc) are all fail and achieve nothing more than to increase the awareness of the movie. The story was amazing, the length (3 hours) was perfect, the way they showed both (all 3?) sides of the world they created and how everyone perceives it was very well done. The CGI technology was also spot on. There were very few times when an animation or creature looked fake or out of place. I give this movie a 5/5. Its almost comical People have have tried everything to take this movie down, said it encourages smoking cause it has smoking in it, said it doesnt portray marines as scholars, said its anti american cause it looks like american foriegn policy, said it is racist cause a white guy saves the savages, said it praises to hugo chavez but my all time favorite is today The vatican said it trys to replace nature with god.
I think you mean the other way around.
|
On January 14 2010 10:24 StorkHwaiting wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2010 10:03 Archerofaiur wrote:On January 14 2010 09:21 DeCoup wrote:This is one of the best movies I have seen in a very long time. I saw Ice Age 3 in 3D (bare with me..) and it used 3D as a showcase feature. The 3D was used almost as a rollercoaster or theme park ride. In Avatar the 3D is used as a tool as part of the storytelling process just as lighting, sound, colour change and other tools at the producers side are. I have seen this movie in both 3D and 2D and can safely say that while it is more encompassing and real with the 3D it is not at all one of the defining or important parts of the movie. The story itself is great. It has copped some criticism since its release, for example feminist groups are claiming that the aliens create a bad expectation of what girls should look like (being tall and skinny). o.O ... ... This is the most stupid thing I have ever heard. Did any of you get turned on by the aliens at all? Ok.. here's 2 questions which will prove the stupidity of this and similar claims. (1) Who was the hottest chick in the movie? + Show Spoiler +. (2) Who was the fattest chick in the movie? + Show Spoiler +. Feminist fail. Actually every single claim I have seen about this movie (racial issues, other story reused, etc) are all fail and achieve nothing more than to increase the awareness of the movie. The story was amazing, the length (3 hours) was perfect, the way they showed both (all 3?) sides of the world they created and how everyone perceives it was very well done. The CGI technology was also spot on. There were very few times when an animation or creature looked fake or out of place. I give this movie a 5/5. Its almost comical People have have tried everything to take this movie down, said it encourages smoking cause it has smoking in it, said it doesnt portray marines as scholars, said its anti american cause it looks like american foriegn policy, said it is racist cause a white guy saves the savages, said it praises to hugo chavez but my all time favorite is today The vatican said it trys to replace nature with god. I think you mean the other way around.
See the vatican is right! James Cameron made me replace god with nature!
|
hahahahaha that was slick XD
|
On January 14 2010 09:08 TealLurker wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2010 08:28 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
it's kinda sad that people are trying so hard to diss this movie This is ridiculous! It's this sentiment that annoys me. Any minute criticism of a film is seen as a diss. Of course, everybody ignores it when I gush love over the visuals or Zoe Saldana's performance is captured onto Neytiri, but minor critiques of a film such as some improvements in the story is seen as a diss. Apparently, Avatar is now this fragile child that needs protection from any and all criticism. I just find that a significant number of people in this thread are uppity with fact that others don't share their viewpoint in that this movie is awesome, the best movie ever, etc. I'm not saying it's the worst movie of 2009, but I don't think it's best movie of 2009 either.
Well put. Personally it reminded me of the Star Wars prequels; huge box office hit, awesome special effects, but just a little disappointing overall when you've seen that director do better.
|
On January 14 2010 16:38 jalstar wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2010 09:08 TealLurker wrote:On January 14 2010 08:28 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
it's kinda sad that people are trying so hard to diss this movie This is ridiculous! It's this sentiment that annoys me. Any minute criticism of a film is seen as a diss. Of course, everybody ignores it when I gush love over the visuals or Zoe Saldana's performance is captured onto Neytiri, but minor critiques of a film such as some improvements in the story is seen as a diss. Apparently, Avatar is now this fragile child that needs protection from any and all criticism. I just find that a significant number of people in this thread are uppity with fact that others don't share their viewpoint in that this movie is awesome, the best movie ever, etc. I'm not saying it's the worst movie of 2009, but I don't think it's best movie of 2009 either. Well put. Personally it reminded me of the Star Wars prequels; huge box office hit, awesome special effects, but just a little disappointing overall when you've seen that director do better.
Hahahahahaha I think you may need to re-watch those prequels. A little disappointing? Hoohoohoo you crack me up.
|
Finally done.
Went in with bad expectations and already knowing it was a pocahontas story, and this is how it went down.
1. Saw it in 2D -- my mind was in a conflict with itself in how to judge the movie(i rank all my movies by score on a website) because I couldn't lie to myself that I had really enjoyed it -- but i was telling myself the story wasn't anything new and it really was just a fun movie, not a memorable one.
2. Couldn't stop thinking about it, so I saw it again in 3D IMAX a few days later. Still loved every bit of it.
3. Ranked it. It is the only movie I have ever given a score of 100.
All time favorite. Must get blu-ray.
|
Wow, has no one here mentioned how the final battle can be told via StarCraft references? The Navi were more or less Protoss, the humans Terran, and the the wildlife Zerg: the final battle boiled down to Mutas versus (SC2) Banshees and a BC in the air, and Goliaths/Marines/Firebats vs Ultraling on the ground. And the Zerg won, probably because it had been on more bases than the Terran, who did make an expansion attempt but wasn't able to capitalize on securing the expansion before losing. They also went after the Overmind but got wiped out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
