Oh, is it "in" to proclaim it's genius now?
Jesus, I just can't follow what's "in" regarding this movie. Weeks before its release, you were called an idiot for saying it looks good.
James Cameron's "Avatar" (grading and discussion)
- Thread starter chrisspringob
- Start date
Oh, is it "in" to proclaim it's genius now?
Jesus, I just can't follow what's "in" regarding this movie. Weeks before its release, you were called an idiot for saying it looks good.
Yes, after 59 pages and nobody bringing up that criticism but you, it seems reasonable that it's really what everyone has been thinking.
Does not win? Sure he wins, albeit with the help of the divine intervention of Eywa.
Your point that he doesn't save his love interest is a good one, however. Although the broader beats of the story stick to convention (Jake gets the girl and the villains are defeated), Cameron definitely subverts plenty of other genre expectations.
Two words: Patrick McGoohan.
But, honestly, I don't even like the soundtrack. This film won several Oscars?
I will say this much at least. Nobody has a right to sneer at Avatar's thematic messages or how it delivers them /if/ they love Wall-E.
Wall-E actually made me roll my eyes far more than Avatar did, with its simplistic, paint-by-numbers message about the environment towards the end of the film. Not to mention that Wall-E is far more damning of technology (WHEN THE HERO IS A ROBOT SNIGGER SNIGGER) than Avatar.
(Despite how it strikes some people, Avatar is not damning of technology and especially not modern science; modern science is the only voice of reason for humans in the film, and the "magic" of the natives is predicated on a scientific explanation that is essentially biotechnology and organic computer networks.)
Wall-E actually made me roll my eyes far more than Avatar did, with its simplistic, paint-by-numbers message about the environment towards the end of the film. Not to mention that Wall-E is far more damning of technology (WHEN THE HERO IS A ROBOT SNIGGER SNIGGER) than Avatar.
(Despite how it strikes some people, Avatar is not damning of technology and especially not modern science; modern science is the only voice of reason for humans in the film, and the "magic" of the natives is predicated on a scientific explanation that is essentially biotechnology and organic computer networks.)
^
I thought the romantic theme was suitably lush, even a little tragic. Otherwise, though, er... yeah, it winning Oscars is just proof a big budget epic that got a lot of money can rake in the acclaim, I suppose.
Can't begin to fathom how I could segue that thought back to Avatar, though.
I thought the romantic theme was suitably lush, even a little tragic. Otherwise, though, er... yeah, it winning Oscars is just proof a big budget epic that got a lot of money can rake in the acclaim, I suppose.
Can't begin to fathom how I could segue that thought back to Avatar, though.
It is not reasonable to swallow claims Avatar's story is cliche, when the story hasn't been done that often, or that it is predictable, when it isn't. It is not a matter of opinion. Since these are untruths, which is a polite word for lies, the question then, is why are they lying? Which includes lying to themselves, by the way, so conscious malice simply is not an issue.
Paul Atreides wins in Dune. That's a White Messiah. Mother Nature stampeding to the rescue just lacks the proper heroic bravura. Which lack is the most likely reason for some to feel the story is flat.
Paul Atreides wins in Dune. That's a White Messiah. Mother Nature stampeding to the rescue just lacks the proper heroic bravura. Which lack is the most likely reason for some to feel the story is flat.
Last edited:
Or, proof that the best animated Oscar is a field with little competition, and, also, usually populated entirely by films made for children (despite the existence of animated features for adults, such as the superb A Scanner Darkly). Many of these films, of course, are made with crossover appeal in mind, but there can be no doubt that there primary audience is that of kids.
I like most of Wall-E. The first two-thirds are sublime. Once the humans are introduced, though, all subtlety is abandoned for a message that is like being hit in the face with an iron mallet. Repeatedly. Also, I never understood the use of live action footage in the film, when all of the fat humans are computer generated cartoons.
As to how all this relates to Avatar, uh, the environmental message is about the same in both films. And the fate of Earth looks to be the same, too.
Yeah, I got nothin'.
I like most of Wall-E. The first two-thirds are sublime. Once the humans are introduced, though, all subtlety is abandoned for a message that is like being hit in the face with an iron mallet. Repeatedly. Also, I never understood the use of live action footage in the film, when all of the fat humans are computer generated cartoons.
As to how all this relates to Avatar, uh, the environmental message is about the same in both films. And the fate of Earth looks to be the same, too.
Yeah, I got nothin'.
So, uh, is he with the ancestors in the Tree of Souls now?
Yes, this movie is fucking genius. Some people don't like it for reasons, but others are just determined to be contrarians. No one's kvetching is going to dull the impact and influence Avatar is going to have on the business, because people the world over are voting with their wallets. The audience is always right.
If you like the movie, I'd also recommend buying the book "Avatar: The Field Guide to Pandora: A Confidential Report on the Biological and Social History of Pandora (an Activist Survival Guide)".
Ooo - got lots of pictures?
Ok, if the Navi and the avatars are significantly bigger than humans, why is Jake Sully's avatar able to carry a regular sized shotgun?
It is not regular sized.
Oh yes, but it's not what we Brits call a "coffee-table layout" or large format type of book. It provides much more technical background to Pandora, its flora, fauna, and ecology, and also broadly suggests how the story may develop.
I have it. I like how it provides a little more "background" on the biology and humanoid culture on Pandora as well as an introductory "history" of life on 22nd-century Earth.
Yup, I guess film two is the empire strikes back.
Based on Cameron's usual approach I'd expect that in the second one human beings return with far more overwhelming firepower.
There are weapons - including knifes - of varying sizes in the human arsenal, many of them designed to be used by the mechanical "hands" of the large mech suits.
I did appreciate that the Na'vi were not at all reluctant to use human weaponry, BTW. Made them seem more plausible and a little less simply actors in a polemic about noble primitivism.
There are weapons - including knifes - of varying sizes in the human arsenal, many of them designed to be used by the mechanical "hands" of the large mech suits.
I did appreciate that the Na'vi were not at all reluctant to use human weaponry, BTW. Made them seem more plausible and a little less simply actors in a polemic about noble primitivism.
Technically speaking the film is a marvel.
From a story standpoint there is absolutely nothing original about it (Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within covered most of the same basic themes and even had some similar characters, except in this movie the Dr. Sid character is female). I actually found a great deal of the movie, instead of engaging me emotionally, annoying the hell out of me (to be fair that does not include most of the Pandora natives sections). I'll post more detailed thoughts later, but for now I voted Average. And the rating would have been lower if it weren't for the SFX and the performances.
Alex
From a story standpoint there is absolutely nothing original about it (Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within covered most of the same basic themes and even had some similar characters, except in this movie the Dr. Sid character is female). I actually found a great deal of the movie, instead of engaging me emotionally, annoying the hell out of me (to be fair that does not include most of the Pandora natives sections). I'll post more detailed thoughts later, but for now I voted Average. And the rating would have been lower if it weren't for the SFX and the performances.
Alex
There was a piece on the shortlist for the BAFTAs which has just been released, on BBC breakfast this morning. The presenter mentioned An Education and some others... "and then of course, the financial juggernaut that is Avatar". Cameron's bankability must have notched up even higher.
The story wasn't at all original when Final Fantasy borrowed it, either. Most stories aren't. I haven't seen an "original story" in decades, and when I was young they only seemed original because I hadn't seen them before.
All that matters is treatment. Many of the story beats were more familiar than they could have been, though Cameron was clever enough to avoid two or three of the most obvious...thank goodness.