Who's getting the Avatar DVD?

[Campe]

I'm not buying this film. I won't buy the bare-bones, I won't buy the special edition in the fall and I certainly won't but the 3D Blu-Ray.

I don't like the movie. Sure, you can talk all you want about the lack of originality of it, the inescapable hype around the movie, or the fact that its a movie that was designed to bring 3D to the forefront of filmmaking (a mistake, IMHO), and yes those things bothered me. But, what truly bothered me was that I was bored. Yes, the film is beautiful, but I just didn't find myself interested in the humans or the Na'Vi and their plight and the movie certainly could have survived 40 minutes cut out of the film and been just fine. I wanted to like it. I really did. I just couldn't. Call me heartless, but there are a lot of films I'd rather see again than this one. Sorry, Avatar lovers, but this one just wasn't for me.

 

[BolianAuthor]

I'll wait for the VHS copy.

 

[Smiley]

That strikes me as an odd set of rules to impose on yourself, Trekker. Someone who cares about special features, does not want to double dip, and knows that a better edition is coming in November should absolutely wait for the second release. Today's release of Avatar is perfectly fine for those who just want the movie, and there is no reason that they have to wait seven more months to buy the movie.

 

[Gojira]

I'm not buying this film. I won't buy the bare-bones, I won't buy the special edition in the fall and I certainly won't but the 3D Blu-Ray.

I don't like the movie. Sure, you can talk all you want about the lack of originality of it, the inescapable hype around the movie, or the fact that its a movie that was designed to bring 3D to the forefront of filmmaking (a mistake, IMHO), and yes those things bothered me. But, what truly bothered me was that I was bored. Yes, the film is beautiful, but I just didn't find myself interested in the humans or the Na'Vi and their plight and the movie certainly could have survived 40 minutes cut out of the film and been just fine. I wanted to like it. I really did. I just couldn't. Call me heartless, but there are a lot of films I'd rather see again than this one. Sorry, Avatar lovers, but this one just wasn't for me.

I truthfully don't think there is anything wrong with not liking a movie. There are plenty of movies I don't like.

Heck, I am a big science fiction geek and I cannot stand Blade Runner! Each time I tried watching it I can't get beyond 20 minutes before I am bored to death and I shut it off.

 

[T'Baio]

[
I knew it was bare-bones but Christ not even the damn trailer?! Really, it's just a shitty excuse for them to double-dip. (Something I will not do. This is the version they released first, this is the version I'm buying and that's it.)

That seems...stupid. Sorry, but it's not like they made it a secret they were releasing a special edition in November. Why didn't you just, you know, wait?

By the sounds of it, you didn't even love the movie. Me, it's up there for me in my all time favourites, and I'm waiting.

 

[Trekker4747]

That strikes me as an odd set of rules to impose on yourself, Trekker. Someone who cares about special features, does not want to double dip, and knows that a better edition is coming in November should absolutely wait for the second release. Today's release of Avatar is perfectly fine for those who just want the movie, and there is no reason that they have to wait seven more months to buy the movie.

There's also no reason to release a "bare bones" edition today and a more complete edition in seven months. Either the studio needs to wait that long to put it together (in which case today's release is stupid) or they want to double dip (more money!!!)

It just strikes me as dirty and disgusting to put out such a release like this knowing full-well a better edition is coming out in November. Why have today's release at all?

The movie already made 2 or 3 billion dollars so it's not like they need the money. It's just being greedy. Nothing more.

I bought it today not because I just "had to have the movie now!!!!" but because I wanted it, and I want to listen to the RT tonight. I don't care about special features as much as others, so I got it. If I did care about features I'd wait. I won't be buying the SE in November.

 

[T'Baio]

There's also no reason to release a "bare bones" edition today and a more complete edition in seven months. Either the studio needs to wait that long to put it together (in which case today's release is stupid) or they want to double dip (more money!!!)

It just strikes me as dirty and disgusting to put out such a release like this knowing full-well a better edition is coming out in November. Why have today's release at all?

The movie already made 2 or 3 billion dollars so it's not like they need the money. It's just being greedy. Nothing more.

I bought it today not because I just "had to have the movie now!!!!" but because I wanted it, and I want to listen to the RT tonight. I don't care about special features as much as others, so I got it. If I did care about features I'd wait. I won't be buying the SE in November.

Why not release both? As long as they announce the fact this is what they're doing, which they did, I have no problem with it. They're still currently working on the extra features, so they do need the time. They're releasing the bare bones edition because some people don't care and just want the flick, because Cameron wanted to use the Earth Day release as a way to promote some of his pet environmental projects and concerns, and *gasp*, God forbid, because they want to make as much money as they can. It is show business.

Your moral outrage about the whole thing is a little silly. Dirty and disgusting? They told you todays was bare bones, November's is special edition. What's the problem?

 

[Rii]

The notion that the film paints the military in a negative light is absurd in any case.

Explain.

No, you.

Ignoring the possibility that these guys were mercenaries, arguing that the film portrays the military in a negative light is like arguing that The Fugitive portrays cops in a negative light.

The 'good guys' fought the military, but they weren't opposed to it per se, they were opposed to the presence and actions of humans on their world which the military was facilitating. If the military hadn't been there, if the humans hadn't been doing what they were doing, they wouldn't have been the enemy. And the military wasn't there of its own accord. Even suggesting that the corporations are the bad guys is too limiting; who is it that permitted them to be there? Who was it that permitted and encouraged the emergence of such amoral structures in the first place? Who is it that supplies the demand for their products and turns a blind eye to exactly where those products come from? The film is an indictment of a culture. The military is just the animal's teeth. Blaming the military for Pandora is like blaming a knife for stabbing someone.

At the individual level there's Lang, who's certainly an objectionable human being, but so what? The fiction that the military is populated by Knights of the Round Table is just that. The military is populated by human beings, and some of them are assholes. Lang served the film's need for a personal adversary, that's all. The Eye of Sauron may work for LotR, but it's certainly an unconventional approach. The argument that Lang speaks for the military is bullshit when it comes from those who argue that by portraying a flawed lesbian character the author is saying something about lesbianism, and it's bullshit here.

I've never actually seen a film that seriously criticises the military. It can certainly be done, I've read books which have done so. I think that in most cases the accusation that the film is anti-military is coming from people who approach it from a perspective distorted by a lifetime of consuming flag-waving propaganda.

 

[od0_ital]

... And the BD release? Comes with a DVD version! Seriously. A whole other disc including a lesser version of the movie. How many DVDs came out 13 years ago included a VHS copy of the movie?

Ya say that like no other movie has a DVD version included.

Toy Story/Toy Story 2 just got released a couple of weeks ago with both DVD & blu in one case (and ya have the option of buyin' these movies in DVD cases or blu cases, too).

The Thomas Crown Afffair (1999), which was released for the first time on blu just a couple of weeks ago, included the original flipper DVD.

Wal-Mart has bundled about a half dozen movies on blu with the DVD of the same movie, with the cardboard wrap around sayin' one is for your high def tv, the other for your computer.

I know I won't be poppin' the DVD in any time soon, but the package does specify its a DVD/blu combo, and its not like you're payin' more...there isn't a blu-only release of Avatar out there for less, ya know.

So, why complain about this...just 'cause ya got nothin' else to point at to say its a horrible purchase? Any one can turn the package over while at the store to see it doesn't have special features and everyone in this thread knows not to expect any.

Geez...

 

[Gryffindorian]

Trekker wrote:

It just strikes me as dirty and disgusting to put out such a release like this knowing full-well a better edition is coming out in November. Why have today's release at all?

Because it's Earth Day today. Heheheh.

I feel for you. I'm having second thoughts about getting the BD today.

 

[Cmndr J Crichton]

I'll wait for the VHS copy.

I'm still waiting for my Betamax version!

 

[Samurai8472]

I'll wait for the VHS copy.

I'm still waiting for my Betamax version!

Someone should try reverse engineering the blu ray down to a grainy betamax and send it to Cameron.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The film is an indictment of a culture. The military is just the animal's teeth.

So it's not just anti-military, it's anti-humanity. Right. Gotcha.

The notion that the film paints the military in a negative light is absurd in any case.

Explain.

Maybe because they weren't military? They were mercenary's, ex-marines.

Oh. Right.

But you know what they say...once a Marine, always a Marine.

People like to say the implication is that they were all ex-marines, and therefore it still paints the military in a negative light. But even if they were, and even if one could prove they were all crazy asshats...it's still only the ones who signed up for that particular job. How big do you think the military is in this time period? What percentage of all marines, ex and otherwise, do you think these guys make up?

Perhaps. But we'll see what the sequel does. If it has any military types who are 1) not murderous psychopaths, and 2) still *in* the military, and who unlike some characters we could mention, haven't turned traitor against their own race, then we'll talk.

 

[T'Baio]

How many marines do you think we actually saw in the film? A hundred? Maybe two hundred?

Of those, we know at least one thought their mission was bullshit. You can probably extrapolate maybe at least a few more.

How many weren't privy to the details of what the Na'vi were like? How many actually encountered them every day, got to know them? Probably not many. They were told by their commanders they were savages or animals. How many had the opportunity to witness any evidence to the contrary?

And out of all that, how many were actually portrayed to be jerk offs? Quaritch, the two guys making fun of Sully at the beginning. Any more?

So we have a few hundred voluntary mercenaries with no to very little direct contact with the native species, following orders for high pay to eliminate the "problem." Of those there probably are several asshats who just want to kill, but there's probably more who don't know the reality of the situation. Then there's the ones who disagree, the ones who just follow orders as most of humanity does in pressure situations and the ones who, say, have families to support...the film does say the economy on Earth blows...and in a choice between their families and some alien savage, chooses their family.

How exactly does this film portray the military in a negative light? The guy in charge, the bad guy, is an adrenaline junkie asshole. How does it portray the rest of them being the same way?

 

[Cmndr J Crichton]

Why is it okay to show soldiers in a negative light like in the Hurt Locker, but not okay in Avatar? At least in Avatar, the soldiers were following orders. In Hurt Locker, the guy's just being a deuche who thinks he's Maverick from Top gun.

 

[stj]

Despite the explicit statement that the soldiers were company mercenaries, and the fact that the movie quite admired Quaritch's bravery, skill and determination, the visual imagery reflects the US military. The mercenaries didn't even have corporate uniforms, but what looked like contemporary fatigues. Also, invading another "country" for a key natural resource is pretty much what the contemporary US military is doing. So, the people who dismiss the one line, no matter how explicit it is, have a case.

The resemblance between the fall of Hometree and the fall of the Twin Towers is way too compelling to take Avatar as irrelvant to the contemporary world. But it casts "us" as the villains.

In BattleStar Galactica, the enemies who fell in love with humans were the only ones worthy of survival. In Avatar, the opposite is true, the humans who fall in love with a Navi, or Pandora itself (the scientists,) are the worthy ones.

Avatar made boatloads of money in the US, but the last time I looked, it was still about a 30/70 split with world box office. There's a reason for that.

 

[T'Baio]

Avatar made boatloads of money in the US, but the last time I looked, it was still about a 30/70 split with world box office. There's a reason for that.

Because most major Hollywood blockbusters nowadays split like that?

 

[Rii]

The film is an indictment of a culture. The military is just the animal's teeth.

So it's not just anti-military, it's anti-humanity. Right. Gotcha.

Want a tissue?

 

[RoJoHen]

It's not even anti-humanity. It's anti-douchebags. All the mercenaries...giant douchebags.

Maybe if they had brought nicer humans there wouldn't have been such a problem.

 

[Trekker4747]

I'm watching the Rifftrax for it now.

Jake's goofing around in the Avatar body, runs into Sigourney Weaver's Avatar who says: "Heh, numbnuts!" or something to that effect.

Bill Corbet: "Hmmm. Thoughtful nick-name for someone who's paralyzed from the waist-down."