PDA

View Full Version : Avatar


Bond
12-20-2009, 02:16 PM
http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/edersher/images/AvatarMoviePoster.jpg

Alright, who has seen this? Impressions?

Bube
12-20-2009, 03:02 PM
I watched it yesterday. It was a beautiful movie, with nothing else going for it imo. Boring, predictable, and not a shred of originality.

But I have to hand it to them, the 3D was unbelievable. It was always the main characters that just popped out in previous "3D" movies. This time, everything has a depth, and this is best seen in indoor spaces, especially corridors. It's just like being in your own corridor.

BreakABone
12-20-2009, 03:18 PM
I watched it yesterday. It was a beautiful movie, with nothing else going for it imo. Boring, predictable, and not a shred of originality.

But I have to hand it to them, the 3D was unbelievable. It was always the main characters that just popped out in previous "3D" movies. This time, everything has a depth, and this is best seen in indoor spaces, especially corridors. It's just like being in your own corridor.

Completely and utterly agree.

Its a pretty movie, and it is probably one of the best looking movies ever

But underneath the hood, you find an average, run of the mill plot with some pretty one dimensional characters aside from the lead.

And even with a runtime nearing 3 hours, a lot of people hardly get any time

Bond
12-20-2009, 03:24 PM
The plot summary I read sounds like a very lame commentary on the Middle East.

Bube
12-20-2009, 04:07 PM
I'll add some more :)

Every little thing in the movie reminded me of some other movie. It was like watching the most original parts of the best movies of the last 10 years or something. And even though it wasn't a movie aimed at children, a lot of stuff would've been more at home in a movie made for kids.

And at times it just got very boring. Why do they stretch every unimportant scene, boring me to sleep? Why do I watch the guy flying on a bird for 10 minutes, when it adds nothing to the story? 3 hours is just too long, they could've wrapped it up in half that time.

Oh, and I hope we don't see any more of those stupid ritual-type things where the locals dance stupidly and hum and chant - it's just not atmospheric.

Ok, glad I got that off my chest :)

Vampyr
12-20-2009, 07:57 PM
Saw it tonight, thought it was amazing. :)

Angrist
12-21-2009, 06:55 AM
I'm trying to to expect anything from this, so reading negative comments works. :)

I'll probably see it in 3D with my brother.

Typhoid
12-23-2009, 07:55 PM
I'm seeing it in 3D tonight.
Impressions to follow.

Swan
12-23-2009, 09:47 PM
Saw it today in 3D.


Better then I thought it would be. Beautiful movie to look at but I thought the writing was pretty bad. The dialogue at points felt like it was written by George Lucas

Fox 6
12-23-2009, 09:55 PM
Very good movie. Probably the most beautiful movie ive ever seen.


The only problem I had was that kinda stupid name for the material they were mining.

Typhoid
12-24-2009, 04:30 AM
By far the best thing I've ever seen.

Movie was good.
Visuals were amazing.

Vampyr
12-24-2009, 10:38 AM
For people complaining about the story:

They took a lot of risks with this movie, and I think the story is kind of cliche because they didn't want to take a risk on that as well.

The important thing is that the story is solid, moving, and powerful, even if it is predictable.

Teuthida
12-24-2009, 01:06 PM
Argh, I'm conflicted. I really don't like seeing movies in theaters but not seeing this in 3D seems like I might be missing out on quite the experience. Is it worth $17.50?

Fox 6
12-24-2009, 02:32 PM
Argh, I'm conflicted. I really don't like seeing movies in theaters but not seeing this in 3D seems like I might be missing out on quite the experience. Is it worth $17.50?

I would say yes.

Bube
12-24-2009, 03:25 PM
Argh, I'm conflicted. I really don't like seeing movies in theaters but not seeing this in 3D seems like I might be missing out on quite the experience. Is it worth $17.50?
I still stand by what I said - the movie is bad. But yes, it is worth the price, just for the visuals.

DarkMaster
12-24-2009, 03:57 PM
The movie is not bad, it has 85% at rotten tomatoes and Ebert gave it 4 stars. It's a great, highly entertaining movie. For me it was similar to watching Star Wars (originals) for the first time. If you guys were bored by the 10-15 minute flying dragon scene, which was easily one of the most amazing and thrilling scenes of the movie, then the movie was definitely not made for you.

Bube
12-24-2009, 04:03 PM
I think it wasn't made for me, I agree with that - I rarely say that I absolutely hated a movie.

But to be honest, even though I can see why people liked it, I think 85 is an unbelievably high score for such a cliché movie.

BreakABone
12-24-2009, 04:09 PM
Argh, I'm conflicted. I really don't like seeing movies in theaters but not seeing this in 3D seems like I might be missing out on quite the experience. Is it worth $17.50?

I would go as far as to say, if you don't see the movie in theatres, don't bother watching it.

The movie is not bad, it has 85% at rotten tomatoes and Ebert gave it 4 stars. It's a great, highly entertaining movie. For me it was similar to watching Star Wars (originals) for the first time. If you guys were bored by the 10-15 minute flying dragon scene, which was easily one of the most amazing and thrilling scenes of the movie, then the movie was definitely not made for you.

See, I think this is where the disconnect comes in. I thought the visuals and setpieces were awesome.

But the plot and characters, you know the thing that should hold the movie together, were bland.

And it created a stark comparison in my mind. I wanted to like the movie for being imaginative but it was so.... standard.

Typhoid
12-24-2009, 04:29 PM
But the plot and characters, you know the thing that should hold the movie together, were bland.

I completely disagree.

I think the storyline of the movie was great, I also think the characters were really well written. Could they have been better? Probably. But you can improve on every movie.

I stand by what I said about this being one of the best things I've seen in a long time. The movie without 3D would still be a good movie. But it wouldn't be an experience like it is in 3D.


But to be honest, even though I can see why people liked it, I think 85 is an unbelievably high score for such a cliché movie.

What - to you - was cliche? Im not saying the movie wasn't, I'm just curious.
Because I want to know in what realm does a movie being "cliche" suddenly make it an abomination to movie-kind.

Fox 6
12-24-2009, 05:02 PM
I am going to have to agree with Typhoid here.

Combine 017
12-24-2009, 06:21 PM
I didn't really find the movie cliche but it was pretty predictable at some parts.
And it felt like some things weren't explained well enough.
But it was a good movie, and the crazy looking animals were cool.

Bube
12-25-2009, 05:13 AM
What - to you - was cliche? Im not saying the movie wasn't, I'm just curious.
Because I want to know in what realm does a movie being "cliche" suddenly make it an abomination to movie-kind.

I never said it was an abomination. I just said it was a bad movie, and that I hated it :)

It's not that it was just cliche, there were a lot of things, but especially the dialogue, plot, and the twists were very familiar.

For example, how many times have you heard this dialogue before:
-You knew about this?
+Yes, I came here to warn you. But then I fell in love with this planet, these people...with you..
-I trusted you, I trusted you!

Blech, that made me want to leave the theater right then and there. And why in hell did the Navi trust the guy and agree to train him in the first place? There was just no reason at all for them to do that.

How about Sigourney Weaver talking to somebody (:D), saying that the tree is a network or whatever, and that what they're about to do is wrong, and the reply is a badly acted "what the hell have you been smoking"? It's always the same, x is important, some guys want to destroy it, they drive the people out of their home. I agree with Bond's comment - it is like a Middle East movie.

And tell me that you didn't expect the security guy to turn bad and take a beating from our hero, but not before pummeling him half to death?

They tried to mix technology (which was straight out of the Halo universe) with sticks and stones, using some fabulous visuals (which for some reason reminded me of LotR in some places), added a dab of The Matrix and a hurriedly cobbled up love story (which was just like James Cameron's other blockbuster, Titanic - two people from different classes coming together despite family objections) into it, with no strong points at all.

To be honest, the reason I hated it was because it offered nothing new to me. Like I said in my first post, it was like watching the best parts of the best movies of the last 10 years. And that, to me, is a bad thing.

Fox 6
12-25-2009, 11:22 AM
Edward Norton wasnt in the movie. What have you been smoking?




Hahahhahaha j/k.

Its Giovanni ribisi

Bube
12-25-2009, 11:34 AM
Edward Norton wasnt in the movie. What have you been smoking?




Hahahhahaha j/k.

Its Giovanni ribisi
I've known that guy as Edward Norton all my life. And I guess the friends I went with did too, as we all talked about him :D

Typhoid
12-25-2009, 04:17 PM
I don't see how it would be a Middle East movie.
I mean, you can take what you want from something to morph the view to fit something else IE; Nostradamus' "predictions" - but if anything I would say this is just a combination of every anti-corporate movie mixed with Indians.


For example, how many times have you heard this dialogue before:
-You knew about this?
+Yes, I came here to warn you. But then I fell in love with this planet, these people...with you..
-I trusted you, I trusted you!

Many times.
It makes for a decent movie, which is why it keeps getting done in different ways. If it wasn't a good idea and didn't work, writers and directors wouldn't keep using it.

hey tried to mix technology (which was straight out of the Halo universe)

That would be a good point unless:
Avatar had been in development since 1994 by Cameron, who wrote a 114-page scriptment for the film.[5] Filming was supposed to take place after the completion of Titanic, and the film would have been released in 1999, but according to Cameron, "technology needed to catch up" with his vision of the film.


Also: as to the name of the mineral: "Unobtanium" - he didn't create that. It's a widely used humerous canon for any type of mineral that is hard to obtain.

Engineers have long (since at least the 1950s[2]) used the term unobtainium when referring to unusual or costly materials, or when theoretically considering a material perfect for their needs in all respects save that it doesn't exist.

It sucks - Bube, that you hate this movie. Because he's making 2 more.

Vampyr
12-25-2009, 06:20 PM
Yeah, the unobtainium was a bit of an inside joke.

Really though, you should have been able to tell from the trailers that the story was going to be predictable.

As other people have said, it's been done before, but IMO never this well.

Bube
12-26-2009, 03:35 AM
Oh well, whatever, I won't be watching the other 2 then, just like my decision to not watch Twilight after I saw the first one :)

My taste in cinema doesn't get along well with others, this isn't the first time :)

Gambit_X
12-29-2009, 06:14 PM
I would say that the story formula they used was definitely tried and true, but I would argue that the story itself and the way it was presented is what made the movie original. Never have I ever[ felt so deeply immersed in such a believable fiction. The cinemetography was astounding to say the least. I felt like Pandora was a real planet and the Na'Vi were a real people. Were there some cheesy moments? Yes, and I agree that unobtainium is the worst name for a mineral ever, inside joke or no. I thought the acting was pretty solid (although that general dude was a little too over the top G.I. Joe for my taste). Here in Rochester it was only $11.50 (and that's damn expensive compared to a non-3D movie at $8.00 a pop, $6.00 with my Mayo Clinic employee discount), and I thought that it was well worth it.

Dylflon
12-30-2009, 04:22 PM
Everyone started arguing so I stopped reading.

The depth on screen created by the 3d makes it worth the $16. Holy crap was that amazing.

Sure the story is basically Pocahontas, but it didn't drag and even when it did, it was interesting enough to look at so that I wasn't bored.

Seeing it while high probably skews my opinion a bit, but I found it to be an incredible experience and I've been recommending it to everyone.

Typhoid
12-30-2009, 05:46 PM
Everyone started arguing so I stopped reading.

No, no - you got it all wrong.
Nobody was arguing. I was just informing Bube about how his personal opinion was wrong.

Angrist
12-30-2009, 06:09 PM
Ok you're now on my ignore list. All of you.

Typhoid
12-30-2009, 06:11 PM
:lol:

The Germanator
12-30-2009, 10:54 PM
Well, I just got back from seeing it in 3D and I'm ready to side with Bube.

I'd say it's about average at best. I went because of the visuals and I was still disappointed by it. Many friends had said how much they got sucked into the world of Pandora, but I can't say it worked for me.

Okay, first the story/screenwriting, etc. You guys have pretty much covered it, but I have to reiterate that it was taken out of the screenwriting 101 text book. Does that make it bad? Not necessarily, but cheesy lines and a predictable story arc and completely one dimensional characters are boring and uninteresting. Again, it did the job of getting you to more action scenes and fireflies flying into your eyeballs, but I never really cared about why it was happening and that's a pretty big failure.

One more thing about story. My film teacher used to say, "Every movie you'll ever see is the same. Boy meets girl, boy gets girl, boy loses girl, and then it's all about how you tell the story." Well, I thought Avatar's was too simple. Also the "pre-war" speech was straight outta Braveheart

Now to the visuals. This is easily the most impressive CGI I've ever seen. There are probably a lot of technical aspects I don't understand, and many things looked very nice. In the end, I hated the general color scheme. Everything had that weird neon glow stick look, I just kind of got sick of it. The creatures were okay, but everything was slimy, there wasn't that much variety in the world of Pandora. The action scenes were great and half-way through I just kind of found myself waiting for them and nothing else, but you can't have just a movie with action scenes.

Anyway, I expected to be blown away, and I wasn't.

People keep saying that this movie will change the industry forever, but...really? Is that it? I'd still rather see Miyazaki's beautiful 2D drawings and the world/story he creates than Cameron's any day. Or Pixar for that matter. They create brilliant and beautiful worlds around a great story rather than the visuals like Cameron seems to do.

Anyway, so I'm with you, Bube! :)

PS: I didn't really see the Mid-East connection until these blatant lines.

General Whatever: WE FIGHT TERROR WITH TERROR

Doctor Whatever: They're starting some "Shock and Awe" campaign

That last one especially is a pretty direct reference to the beginning of the Iraq war.

Bube
12-31-2009, 05:29 AM
Well, at least we're up to 3 people now, if we include BaB, who hasn't done much to support us yet :p

Oh, and let me fuel the fire - I also hated Titanic :D

Angrist
12-31-2009, 10:40 AM
You hated Titanic, or you think it's overrated? Because I also think it's overrated, but if I see it once every 5 years, I'll still enjoy it.

I'll probably watch Avatar on Saturday or Sunday. I discovered our cinema here shows it in 3D after all. :) My brother won't come, he thinks he won't like it.

Bube
12-31-2009, 12:35 PM
I hated it, and therefore think it's overrated :)

I don't know, I've always been fascinated by the Titanic, and it's tragic story, but when I saw that it had been turned into a love story, it was another tragedy for me :)

BreakABone
12-31-2009, 03:21 PM
Well, at least we're up to 3 people now, if we include BaB, who hasn't done much to support us yet :p

Oh, and let me fuel the fire - I also hated Titanic :D

I don't know what you expect

Our side, won't magically be convinced that the movie wasn't more than a tech demo for 3D effects.

And their side won't see it as bland and unoriginal. Prolonging the debate does nothing.

Angrist
12-31-2009, 06:32 PM
Don't worry, I'll settle the dispute in a few days. ;)

Bube
01-01-2010, 07:19 AM
I don't know what you expect

Our side, won't magically be convinced that the movie wasn't more than a tech demo for 3D effects.

And their side won't see it as bland and unoriginal. Prolonging the debate does nothing.
I was joking of course :) I myself didn't even want to get into a debate, but when asked direct questions, I had to answer them :)

Bond
01-05-2010, 12:41 PM
I am seeing this tonight and will offer my opinion.

Bond
01-06-2010, 01:21 AM
I liked this movie quite a bit, and the 3D was a nice touch, but I don't think it made the movie - the CGI did. Halfway through the movie I forgot it was CGI, I was totally immersed in the world of Avatar, and you know that is when CGI has truly reached its potential.

Avatar's greatest strength was the total immersion into Pandora, but it also created its greatest weakness - the lame, blatant, and unneeded direct allusions to the Iraq War. "Terror with terror." "Shock and awe." Those lines were pathetic - and totally removed me from the immersion of the movie - it brought me away from Pandora and back to Earth.

The meaning of the movie could have been made much more profoundly, in my view, if it were made more subtly.

Typhoid
01-06-2010, 02:41 AM
Avatar's greatest strength was the total immersion into Pandora, but it also created its greatest weakness - the lame, blatant, and unneeded direct allusions to the Iraq War. "Terror with terror." "Shock and awe." Those lines were pathetic -

In the writers' defense - what would you rather they said? I didn't see it as anything to do with the Iraq war. Fighting terror with terror is a good strategy. And it's the new "Fight fire with fire." And since when does the phrase "Shock and Awe" directly refer to Iraq?

Like I said, if anything - it's more of an allusion to Native Americans than the Iraq War.

Bond
01-06-2010, 06:34 PM
In the writers' defense - what would you rather they said? I didn't see it as anything to do with the Iraq war. Fighting terror with terror is a good strategy. And it's the new "Fight fire with fire." And since when does the phrase "Shock and Awe" directly refer to Iraq?

Like I said, if anything - it's more of an allusion to Native Americans than the Iraq War.
"Shock and awe" is an American military term. From Wikipedia: "The doctrine was written by Harlan K. Ullman and James P. Wade in 1996 and is a product of the National Defense University of the United States." This might be an American thing, but the term is very heavily associated with the Iraq War.

"The battle plan is based on a concept developed at the National Defense University. It's called "Shock and Awe" and it focuses on the psychological destruction of the enemy's will to fight rather than the physical destruction of his military forces."

It's interesting you point out the Native American angle, though, as I saw the movie with one, and he also thought it alluded more to Native Americans than the Iraq War, but I'm not so sure.

Vampyr
01-06-2010, 08:20 PM
Personally I got more of an anti unregulated capitalism message.

Bond
01-06-2010, 08:23 PM
Personally I got more of an anti unregulated capitalism message.
Got this from the Blackwater allusion?

Typhoid
01-06-2010, 10:04 PM
It's called "Shock and Awe" and it focuses on the psychological destruction of the enemy's will to fight rather than the physical destruction of his military forces."

I didn't know that.
Maybe I don't associate it with the (current) Iraq War because the phrase has been around for 15 years.

It's interesting you point out the Native American angle, though, as I saw the movie with one, and he also thought it alluded more to Native Americans than the Iraq War, but I'm not so sure.

I don't see how it couldn't, really. I mean, sure - there is a mineral they're trying to get (to be fair, they're not after oil in the Iraq War), but I mean - the indigenous race of the planet is pretty...native-esque. Everything is sacred, everyone is connected, everything has an energy. I don't know about you - but Iraqis are a little more civilized than some bows and some talk about life energy.

But that's just me.:p

Typhoid
01-07-2010, 06:11 PM
http://photos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs132.snc3/17950_583762589137_120605469_34854419_6988532_n.jpg

Bube
01-08-2010, 07:13 AM
So that's why it felt so similar.. :p

Angrist
01-08-2010, 09:14 AM
Related news: I bought 'Dances With Wolves' on DVD. :) Together with The Day After Tomorrow and I,Robot.

But I still haven't seen Avatar...

DarkMaster
01-08-2010, 08:43 PM
So James Cameron stole Disney's Pocahontas story and Disney stole it from real life. James Cameron also stole the story of Titanic from real life. What a guy.

Vampyr
01-08-2010, 09:27 PM
This just in: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings was not an original story.

The Germanator
01-09-2010, 01:00 AM
So James Cameron stole Disney's Pocahontas story and Disney stole it from real life. James Cameron also stole the story of Titanic from real life. What a guy.

And Titantic was a sappy, boring love story and not a that good of a movie. I understand that not much is original these days, but Avatar didn't even surprise me once.

http://www.boingboing.net/2009/12/29/five-storytelling-ri.html

Read the above link. If the film had even attempted to do some of those things the story may have been interesting, but it didn't.

I know, I'm sure James Cameron is crying into his $2 billion right now because I didn't like his movies. Terminator was rad though.

KillerGremlin
01-09-2010, 02:27 AM
Fuck! Typhoid beat me to posting how Avatar = Pocahontas, Dances with Wolves, FernGully, Etc.

Average story/George Lucas-esque dialogue with amazing special effects. I enjoyed it quite a bit but had more fun at Star Trek this summer.

I was totally immersed in the world of Avatar and was feeling quite euphoric when he walked through the forest and things started glowing, and the part where he rode the dragon thing for the first time. The movie may or may not had racist undertones, and the whole story where the civilized white people destroy then save the savage natives is pretty fucking cliche (and racist...?...).

All in all it was good cinema, although it dragged on 40 minutes past its welcome. And the interspecies fucking was weird.

manasecret
01-11-2010, 07:17 AM
I finally saw the movie yesterday in regular 3D. Tried to see it in IMAX 3D, but it was sold out for the next two showings.

The movie is a spectacle, and I admit I became totally immersed in the world of Pandora like a movie has not done for me probably since I was a kid. It brought out the mostly dormant sense of wonder in me, and for that, I love the movie.

For me, much of the plot was the visuals. For example, Jake is brought to a new world and is awed by seeing all of these amazing, wonderful sights for the very first time. At the same time, for me and I'm sure many others, we are seeing a 3D movie for the first time and equally awed by the amazing sights. Put simply, I felt what the character felt, which is what a good movie does.

Also, I really liked the scene when Jake first tried out his Avatar. I could feel the joy it must have been to go from paralyzed legs to not just working legs, but the strength and agility of his new avatar. I appreciate that they did this with subtlety. Jake doesn't come out and say he likes having legs again, which I think would be out of character, you simply understand the joy he has in it when he runs and runs and runs.

This theme is repeated throughout the film. Humans controlling avatars, avatars/Navi controlling animals, and finally human becoming Na'vi. The story of a broken human being finding his soul and saved because of it.

The allusion to the Iraq War is there but I think only in passing. Yes, the "shock and awe" and "fight terror with terror" are direct references, but I think meant only as ideas that the audience immediately understands. Oil and unobtanium could be seen as one in the same, but like Typhoid said, a Native American-type people connected to the earth and fighting with bows and arrows isn't anything like a Middle Eastern people. So, no, I don't think the movie is meant as an allusion to the conflict in the Middle East.

Teuthida
01-14-2010, 09:54 PM
<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KpXL0dmoEWE&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KpXL0dmoEWE&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

Stole me pic for video.

EDIT: Nice guy. Might do work for him.

manasecret
01-15-2010, 10:43 AM
Work freelance for him?

Teuthida
01-15-2010, 11:39 AM
Yeah I suppose since he does this for a living. Told him to email me if had any ideas. Would be a nice side thing to my comics. The exposure itself is amazing though. He linked to my rarely used (until Avatar came out) DeviantArt page. The bar graph for page views cracks me up:

Monday: 0
Tuesday: 5
Wednesday: 4
Thursday: 13
Today:780

BreakABone
01-15-2010, 12:17 PM
Yeah I suppose since he does this for a living. Told him to email me if had any ideas. Would be a nice side thing to my comics. The exposure itself is amazing though. He linked to my rarely used (until Avatar came out) DeviantArt page. The bar graph for page views cracks me up:

Monday: 0
Tuesday: 5
Wednesday: 4
Thursday: 13
Today:780

Look at you, imagine how many more hits you would have got if he linked to it correctly the first time.

Teuthida
01-15-2010, 12:27 PM
Heh, I know right? His video had well over 300,000 views before I emailed him.

Teuthida
01-22-2010, 05:58 PM
From the guy who did the Watchmen cartoon show intro.

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0D8IRIYBSnk&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0D8IRIYBSnk&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

Angrist
02-04-2010, 06:17 AM
So I finally saw Smurfs the Movie. I mean Avatar.

I don't see what the fuzz on both sides is about. Yes, it's a very entertaining and pretty movie, but it's not the best movie ever. Yes, the story was mediocre and cliché, but it was told well.

The 3D really added to the experience, but I don't see the hype about that either. I'm glad I saw it in 3D. By the way, I can totally see this movie staying in cinemas for several years. People will keep wanting to see this in 3D on the big screen. It's better than the generic sea life documentaries they air all the time.

And was there anyone else a bit in love with... Eyliti or whatever her name was? It reminded me of Alyx of Half-Life. You somehow bond with these 2 digital girls.