Author Topic: Avatar Movie  (Read 25130 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Avatar Movie
« Reply #45 on: January 14, 2010, 06:33:35 PM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
Also, one wonders what would have happened if a black actor had morphed into a native in the movie.  I can already picture the blogs complaining about how an African-American actor was being portrayed as something subhuman and quasi-animal.  It's impossible to win with some crowds.

I don't know - all the major alien characters were just CGI-skinned black or Native American actors, and I haven't heard anyone complaining about that.

I really liked the movie, but anything this successful always gets overanalyzed to death.  I did think it was funny that the plot can be summarized as "white guy joins the tribe, in 3 months learns to do everything better than them, their hottest, highest-status female falls in love with him, and then he becomes their leader and teaches them to stand up for themselves. Oh and he quasi-rapes two pterodactyls along the way."  But you really have to stretch to get offended by something like that.
Well in that case I think we owe a huge apology to all the blue guys and girls on other planets out there, and to Little Big Man, Dances with Wolves, and The Last Samurai for plagiarism.

Re: Avatar Movie
« Reply #46 on: January 24, 2010, 12:49:16 AM »

Offline bucknersrevenge

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1967
  • Tommy Points: 170
Some stories are just too odd to be made up

http://movies.yahoo.com/news/movies.ap.org/vatican-says-avatar-no-masterpiece-ap

I wonder if the Vatican will be taking on New Moon and Harry Potter next.

And I always kind of wonder who this person "The Vatican" is. The Pope. I know who that is. I don't know who "The Vatican" is.

It would be like if you read "New York says that Avatar is bad".  Or "The District of Columbia says...."

The Vatican didn't have great things to say about Harry Potter, either, at least in years past.

I thought the odder story was the various authors and blogs complaining that Avatar is based on racist themes, of a white man "saving" natives.  Of course, that neglects that it's the native that kills the villain at the end of the movie, and that it's really nature that saves the day, rather than a human.

Also, one wonders what would have happened if a black actor had morphed into a native in the movie.  I can already picture the blogs complaining about how an African-American actor was being portrayed as something subhuman and quasi-animal.  It's impossible to win with some crowds.

Well as someone who I suppose could speak to that inference I know I didn't really take it to that place. Though I most certainly did catch some some socio-political tones in the movie which seemed like a metaphor for our Iraq War. The way some people felt we were really invading Iraq and taking it over was really for the oil was something I couldn't help but draw a comparison to.
Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity...

Re: Avatar Movie
« Reply #47 on: January 24, 2010, 09:57:11 AM »

Offline Redz

  • Punner
  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30897
  • Tommy Points: 3765
  • Yup
My wife and I drove 50 miles to see this in 3-D last weekend (sadly no theaters on Cape Cod are showing it in 3-D).  We had been convinced that it would be worth the trip, and I have to say it was.  I really liked the effects of the trees and plant life.  I'm a big fan of gigantic trees anyhow...The floating dandelion puff type things were cool too.

It was strange how they went with some very cliche army macho characters.  I guess they wanted to accentuate the juxtaposition of the two races.

All in all, well worth the trip.
Yup

Re: Avatar Movie
« Reply #48 on: January 24, 2010, 10:20:25 AM »

Online Amonkey

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2053
  • Tommy Points: 203
Also, one wonders what would have happened if a black actor had morphed into a native in the movie.  I can already picture the blogs complaining about how an African-American actor was being portrayed as something subhuman and quasi-animal.  It's impossible to win with some crowds.

I don't know - all the major alien characters were just CGI-skinned black or Native American actors, and I haven't heard anyone complaining about that.

I really liked the movie, but anything this successful always gets overanalyzed to death.  I did think it was funny that the plot can be summarized as "white guy joins the tribe, in 3 months learns to do everything better than them, their hottest, highest-status female falls in love with him, and then he becomes their leader and teaches them to stand up for themselves. Oh and he quasi-rapes two pterodactyls along the way."  But you really have to stretch to get offended by something like that.
Well in that case I think we owe a huge apology to all the blue guys and girls on other planets out there, and to Little Big Man, Dances with Wolves, and The Last Samurai for plagiarism.

I just saw The Book of Eli and in the movie, Denzel Washington (a black actor) was killing a bunch of white guys in order to protect society.  Is that racist?
Baby Jesus!

Re: Avatar Movie
« Reply #49 on: January 24, 2010, 11:24:43 AM »

Online Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30940
  • Tommy Points: 1607
  • What a Pub Should Be
My wife and I drove 50 miles to see this in 3-D last weekend (sadly no theaters on Cape Cod are showing it in 3-D).  We had been convinced that it would be worth the trip, and I have to say it was.  I really liked the effects of the trees and plant life.  I'm a big fan of gigantic trees anyhow...The floating dandelion puff type things were cool too.

It was strange how they went with some very cliche army macho characters.  I guess they wanted to accentuate the juxtaposition of the two races.

All in all, well worth the trip.

Finally saw it myself last night.  Did the 3D experience in a regular theater here in downtown Chitown. 

I was blown away by the visual effects and the technological achievements this film made.  Seeing it in 3D is a must in my opinion.

The story wasn't terribly original and pretty predictable but still very entertaining.  I thought Stephen Lang did a great job playing the evil Colonel.  I think Cameron really scored with capturing and presenting the scenery of Pandora.  Seeing things floating around in 3D and jumping out at you is pretty cool.  Also liked Sigourney Weaver's character.  She really does an excellent job of capturing strong women as an actress.  Kinda underrated these days because we don't really see her too much.

I'd probably give it A-/B+ territory.  You HAVE to see it in 3D, though. 


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: Avatar Movie
« Reply #50 on: January 24, 2010, 12:00:22 PM »

Offline Redz

  • Punner
  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30897
  • Tommy Points: 3765
  • Yup
My wife and I drove 50 miles to see this in 3-D last weekend (sadly no theaters on Cape Cod are showing it in 3-D).  We had been convinced that it would be worth the trip, and I have to say it was.  I really liked the effects of the trees and plant life.  I'm a big fan of gigantic trees anyhow...The floating dandelion puff type things were cool too.

It was strange how they went with some very cliche army macho characters.  I guess they wanted to accentuate the juxtaposition of the two races.

All in all, well worth the trip.

Finally saw it myself last night.  Did the 3D experience in a regular theater here in downtown Chitown. 

I was blown away by the visual effects and the technological achievements this film made.  Seeing it in 3D is a must in my opinion.

The story wasn't terribly original and pretty predictable but still very entertaining.  I thought Stephen Lang did a great job playing the evil Colonel.  I think Cameron really scored with capturing and presenting the scenery of Pandora.  Seeing things floating around in 3D and jumping out at you is pretty cool.  Also liked Sigourney Weaver's character.  She really does an excellent job of capturing strong women as an actress.  Kinda underrated these days because we don't really see her too much.

I'd probably give it A-/B+ territory.  You HAVE to see it in 3D, though. 

Mind you I haven't see a whole lot of 3D movies, but the stuff I found especially fascinating was when some of the scenery (usually a plant) would sort of wrap around the action.  That seemed pretty original to me.  The fallout after the big tree explosion definitely felt like it was dropping down on the theater seats too.
Yup

Re: Avatar Movie
« Reply #51 on: January 24, 2010, 12:05:04 PM »

Online Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30940
  • Tommy Points: 1607
  • What a Pub Should Be
My wife and I drove 50 miles to see this in 3-D last weekend (sadly no theaters on Cape Cod are showing it in 3-D).  We had been convinced that it would be worth the trip, and I have to say it was.  I really liked the effects of the trees and plant life.  I'm a big fan of gigantic trees anyhow...The floating dandelion puff type things were cool too.

It was strange how they went with some very cliche army macho characters.  I guess they wanted to accentuate the juxtaposition of the two races.

All in all, well worth the trip.

Finally saw it myself last night.  Did the 3D experience in a regular theater here in downtown Chitown. 

I was blown away by the visual effects and the technological achievements this film made.  Seeing it in 3D is a must in my opinion.

The story wasn't terribly original and pretty predictable but still very entertaining.  I thought Stephen Lang did a great job playing the evil Colonel.  I think Cameron really scored with capturing and presenting the scenery of Pandora.  Seeing things floating around in 3D and jumping out at you is pretty cool.  Also liked Sigourney Weaver's character.  She really does an excellent job of capturing strong women as an actress.  Kinda underrated these days because we don't really see her too much.

I'd probably give it A-/B+ territory.  You HAVE to see it in 3D, though. 

Mind you I haven't see a whole lot of 3D movies, but the stuff I found especially fascinating was when some of the scenery (usually a plant) would sort of wrap around the action.  That seemed pretty original to me.  The fallout after the big tree explosion definitely felt like it was dropping down on the theater seats too.

I think it was the last movie I've seen in 3D since Captain Eo at Epcot back in the late 80s.

Its definitely made big time advances. (As it should in 20+ years)


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: Avatar Movie
« Reply #52 on: March 06, 2010, 11:17:05 AM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
I live in a slightly rural area and FINALLY saw this last night.


I can't say how bad I thought it was. Just absurd. Most overhyped fall short type movie since Waterworld, which I kinda liked better. And the special effects were just not that special.

Granted I didn't get to see it in 3D, but maybe that's good.

Re: Avatar Movie
« Reply #53 on: March 06, 2010, 11:41:39 AM »

Offline ACF

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10756
  • Tommy Points: 1157
  • A Celtic Fan
I live in a slightly rural area and FINALLY saw this last night.


I can't say how bad I thought it was. Just absurd. Most overhyped fall short type movie since Waterworld, which I kinda liked better. And the special effects were just not that special.

Granted I didn't get to see it in 3D, but maybe that's good.

I haven't seen it yet (yes, that is actually true) but you are the first person I've heard of that didn't like (or even love) it.

Re: Avatar Movie
« Reply #54 on: March 06, 2010, 11:46:13 AM »

Offline Mr October

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6129
  • Tommy Points: 247
I live in a slightly rural area and FINALLY saw this last night.


I can't say how bad I thought it was. Just absurd. Most overhyped fall short type movie since Waterworld, which I kinda liked better. And the special effects were just not that special.

Granted I didn't get to see it in 3D, but maybe that's good.

I can understand someone complaining about the lack of originality of the story, bit to complain about the visuals seams out of left field. What exactly was bad about them?

And seeing that you have a star wars prequel avatar, do you think the star wars prequels were better films than avatar?

Also I need to ask, did you go into the theater looking to hate the movie, or did you go in with an open mind?

Re: Avatar Movie
« Reply #55 on: March 06, 2010, 11:47:14 AM »

Offline Roy Hobbs

  • In The Rafters
  • The Natural
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33333
  • Tommy Points: 6430
  • Doc could learn a thing or two from Norman Dale
I live in a slightly rural area and FINALLY saw this last night.


I can't say how bad I thought it was. Just absurd. Most overhyped fall short type movie since Waterworld, which I kinda liked better. And the special effects were just not that special.

Granted I didn't get to see it in 3D, but maybe that's good.

I haven't seen it yet (yes, that is actually true) but you are the first person I've heard of that didn't like (or even love) it.

I've heard a lot of people say they were underwhelmed by the movie, and really, it's a lesser Dances with Wolves with fancy visuals.  I'd put it in the "good but not great" category, but I can see where some might be even more let down than that.

Eja is probably the first person I've heard who wasn't impressed with the visuals, though.  I imagine part of that is a factor of hype, though.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

Portland CrotoNats:  2009 CB Draft Champions

Re: Avatar Movie
« Reply #56 on: March 06, 2010, 04:24:47 PM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
I live in a slightly rural area and FINALLY saw this last night.


I can't say how bad I thought it was. Just absurd. Most overhyped fall short type movie since Waterworld, which I kinda liked better. And the special effects were just not that special.

Granted I didn't get to see it in 3D, but maybe that's good.

I can understand someone complaining about the lack of originality of the story, bit to complain about the visuals seams out of left field. What exactly was bad about them?

And seeing that you have a star wars prequel avatar, do you think the star wars prequels were better films than avatar?

Also I need to ask, did you go into the theater looking to hate the movie, or did you go in with an open mind?
Let me explain. First I went in expecting to loooovvvveee the movie, which may be part of the problem. I heard stuff like "Will change movies forever". 

The visuals were good. Very good. I was just expecting visuals I had never seen, and I just can't say that I think that the cgi was that much better than say the dinos of Jurassic Park, or the clones, droids, space battles, Yoda, etc of Star Wars, or the Matrix stuff, and that was years ago. I'd say it might be a toe step forward, but not much more than that.

I definitely thought all Star Wars was much better.

But let me go into some depth

SPOILER ALERT. 

It's a sci fi film, so I will try to get by the interstellar travel 154 years from now. I'll allow for the 5 years of cryogenic hybernation.  I'll even go so far as to allow for combining dna from humans and aliens successfully, even though currently scientists find it more likely to combine dna from a human and a cucumber, but now we're pushing it. I'll even allow for the avatar technology.  I'll even go so along with the huge brain of a planet that's interconnected.

However I'm a little tired of these disguised no war for oil films where the evil military is evil just cause it's evil, and in 154 years we will be even less culturally and sentient rights sensitive than we are now.

I won't go along with a people essentially in the stone age successfully fighting modern weaponry 154 years in the future. Not only are they stone age...they're pre-agricultural, yet we have nothing that they could want. Oh gee. Let's see. We have traveled to your planet, can recreate things that look like you in a pod, have weapons way way stronger than yours, but we can't possibly have anything they want.

I also don't buy this whole "Oh we have sooo much to learn from nature" BS that Hollywood finds sacred or something.

Also it didn't help that they took a plot I've seen at least three times now and stretched it into something like 3 hours, or at least it seemed that way.

I was just expecting to see something original and good, and didn't get either. I don't want my money back or anything. I just reject the premise of the film in a big way. If I can't buy into a film I don't usually like it.

Re: Avatar Movie
« Reply #57 on: March 06, 2010, 04:38:51 PM »

Offline Redz

  • Punner
  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30897
  • Tommy Points: 3765
  • Yup
I live in a slightly rural area and FINALLY saw this last night.


I can't say how bad I thought it was. Just absurd. Most overhyped fall short type movie since Waterworld, which I kinda liked better. And the special effects were just not that special.

Granted I didn't get to see it in 3D, but maybe that's good.

I can understand someone complaining about the lack of originality of the story, bit to complain about the visuals seams out of left field. What exactly was bad about them?

And seeing that you have a star wars prequel avatar, do you think the star wars prequels were better films than avatar?

Also I need to ask, did you go into the theater looking to hate the movie, or did you go in with an open mind?
Let me explain. First I went in expecting to loooovvvveee the movie, which may be part of the problem. I heard stuff like "Will change movies forever". 

The visuals were good. Very good. I was just expecting visuals I had never seen, and I just can't say that I think that the cgi was that much better than say the dinos of Jurassic Park, or the clones, droids, space battles, Yoda, etc of Star Wars, or the Matrix stuff, and that was years ago. I'd say it might be a toe step forward, but not much more than that.

I definitely thought all Star Wars was much better.

But let me go into some depth

SPOILER ALERT. 

It's a sci fi film, so I will try to get by the interstellar travel 154 years from now. I'll allow for the 5 years of cryogenic hybernation.  I'll even go so far as to allow for combining dna from humans and aliens successfully, even though currently scientists find it more likely to combine dna from a human and a cucumber, but now we're pushing it. I'll even allow for the avatar technology.  I'll even go so along with the huge brain of a planet that's interconnected.

However I'm a little tired of these disguised no war for oil films where the evil military is evil just cause it's evil, and in 154 years we will be even less culturally and sentient rights sensitive than we are now.

I won't go along with a people essentially in the stone age successfully fighting modern weaponry 154 years in the future. Not only are they stone age...they're pre-agricultural, yet we have nothing that they could want. Oh gee. Let's see. We have traveled to your planet, can recreate things that look like you in a pod, have weapons way way stronger than yours, but we can't possibly have anything they want.

I also don't buy this whole "Oh we have sooo much to learn from nature" BS that Hollywood finds sacred or something.

Also it didn't help that they took a plot I've seen at least three times now and stretched it into something like 3 hours, or at least it seemed that way.

I was just expecting to see something original and good, and didn't get either. I don't want my money back or anything. I just reject the premise of the film in a big way. If I can't buy into a film I don't usually like it.

I guess I could see how it would be hard to enjoy this movie with those perspectives.

On the effects issue alone though, I'd say it's hard to properly judge this film w/o seeing it in 3D.
Yup

Re: Avatar Movie
« Reply #58 on: March 06, 2010, 04:42:18 PM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
One thing I don't understand about 3D is whether you can just take any movie and make it 3D or if AVATAR did something fundamentally different with the 3D.  If so then I guess I'm totally wrong there

Re: Avatar Movie
« Reply #59 on: March 06, 2010, 04:49:16 PM »

Offline Redz

  • Punner
  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30897
  • Tommy Points: 3765
  • Yup
One thing I don't understand about 3D is whether you can just take any movie and make it 3D or if AVATAR did something fundamentally different with the 3D.  If so then I guess I'm totally wrong there

I haven't seen a ton of them, but there definitely was a much more "natural" feel to, and a greater depth of the effects.
Yup