PDA

View Full Version : ***OFFICIAL: I'VE HAD MY FACE ROCKED OFF BY AVATAR THREAD***



JohnnyMack
12/18/2009, 05:32 PM
Tomorrow at 2:45 for me. On da IMAX.

Anyone been yet?

Mjcpr
12/18/2009, 05:38 PM
From the very first time I saw a commercial for this, I thought this had the potential to be one of the all time busts. But everyne seems to think it will be good, so maybe I'm wrong.

NormanPride
12/18/2009, 05:43 PM
Waterworld 2.0

bri
12/18/2009, 05:50 PM
I have no desire to see Avatar. THIS, on the other hand, I would line up for:

dt_7_2hpANo

XingTheRubicon
12/18/2009, 05:56 PM
Potential investor- what's the budget??

broker- 300M

Potential investor- what's the plot?

broker- people send clones to kill blue people for special rocks.

investor- perfect

NormanPride
12/18/2009, 05:57 PM
Matt Damon!

I lol'd heartily.

1890MilesToNorman
12/18/2009, 05:58 PM
Special Rocks? I think I need some of those.

OUHOMER
12/18/2009, 08:34 PM
my daughter went tonight..

Crucifax Autumn
12/18/2009, 09:15 PM
For some reason I'm hoping it sucks and is a giant flop. Unfortunately, if it sucks it will probably be the biggest movie ever.

Veritas
12/18/2009, 09:48 PM
From the very first time I saw a commercial for this, I thought this had the potential to be one of the all time busts. But everyne seems to think it will be good, so maybe I'm wrong.
Yeah...I kept seeing commercials for this movie with the blue aliens and goofy animation and told my wife "this movie looks retarded."

Then I kept hearing about this movie that they spent $500 million on.

At some point I figured out the two were one and the same.

proud gonzo
12/18/2009, 10:05 PM
i have no desire to see it. looks pretty meh.

soonerinabilene
12/18/2009, 10:13 PM
I have no desire to see Avatar. THIS, on the other hand, I would line up for:

dt_7_2hpANo

thats f'n great.

picasso
12/18/2009, 11:07 PM
From the very first time I saw a commercial for this, I thought this had the potential to be one of the all time busts. But everyne seems to think it will be good, so maybe I'm wrong.

Agreed. Cheesy story line that reminds one of the Indian wars. And I'm not all that jazzed about so many special effects.

Looks like LOTR on steroids.

SicEmBaylor
12/18/2009, 11:27 PM
Agreed. Cheesy story line that reminds one of the Indian wars. And I'm not all that jazzed about so many special effects.

Looks like LOTR on steroids.

LOTR really sucked major ***. I hate that movie above all others.

JohnnyMack
12/18/2009, 11:44 PM
LOTR really sucked major ***. I hate that movie above all others.

Dead to me.

bri
12/19/2009, 12:11 AM
LOTR really sucked major ***. I hate that movie above all others.

You were just p*ssed 'cause destroying the One Ring freed the slaves.

hawaii 5-0
12/19/2009, 01:41 AM
Kinda predictable storyline but the special effects make it well worth seeing on the Big Screen. Tremendous.

:cool: 5-0

JohnnyMack
12/19/2009, 07:35 PM
Pretty close to epic. The storyline is formulaic and the dialogue is a bit campy, but the visuals are stunning. Go see it on IMAX.

Viking Kitten
12/19/2009, 07:54 PM
Dumb dialogue in a James Cameron movie? The hell you say.

GottaHavePride
12/19/2009, 08:08 PM
The most recent reviews I've seen (on facebook) have pretty much all said Avatar = Dances with Wolves.

JohnnyMack
12/19/2009, 08:17 PM
I think next time I go see it I'll eat a special brownie first...

RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
12/19/2009, 11:33 PM
Profile of the movie: http://www.themovieinsider.com/m3393/avatar/

Some reviews of the movie: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/avatar/

adoniijahsooner
12/20/2009, 04:14 PM
What really matters


James Cameron launched his science-fiction epic "Avatar" into a safe orbit as the costly film soared to No. 1 with $73 million domestically and $159.2 million overseas, for a $232.2 million worldwide total.

Veritas
12/20/2009, 05:04 PM
Dear sweet lord, it sucked. I'd rather watch Cars twice than that piece of ****. Thank goodness my ticket was comped.

Boomer.....
12/20/2009, 09:30 PM
I've heard people rave about it and then others say it sucked ***. I don't really have any interest in seeing it.

Fraggle145
12/20/2009, 09:41 PM
I thought it was awesome. That dude really must have played a lot of Final Fantasy...

StoopTroup
12/21/2009, 11:24 AM
Dear sweet lord, it sucked. I'd rather watch Cars twice than that piece of ****. Thank goodness my ticket was comped.

Did you see it in 3D? I have to tell you...as a storyline...it wasn't all that great....but I can see this becoming a huge video game. It's the Tron of the 22nd Century. The 3D was really cool and the facial expressions and the way he got them on the avatars will change things in the movie industry for awhile is my guess. My kids enjoyed it. It might be a little risque for some folks to take their kids though. I'd caution folks about that. A couple of scenes I put the blinders on my Son. They give you ample warning for it though. He didn't want to see that gross stuff anyway...:D

Mjcpr
12/21/2009, 11:30 AM
They already have a video game for it. It came out before the movie did.

sooneron
1/8/2010, 11:38 PM
Saw it in Imax 3d yesterday. Ridiculous film (mostly in a good way), although, the plot was predictable and the dialogue was... well... Michael Bay-esque. If you appreciate sci fi or special effects movies, don't let it leave the theater without seeing it . Especially in 3D.

I really don't like Cameron as much as the next guy, but you can tell he busted his *** getting this made. Don't wait for cabel or dvd, as you'll be disappointed.

CrimsonandCreamForever
1/8/2010, 11:45 PM
Saw it on imax 3D the other day. Graphics and effects were cool as hell. The script totally sucked. Think Pochahontas meets LOTR.

Crucifax Autumn
1/9/2010, 02:36 AM
Saw it on imax 3D the other day. Graphics and effects were cool as hell. The script totally sucked. Think Pochahontas meets LOTR.

I thought the consensus was "Dances With Wolves" in space?

LosAngelesSooner
1/9/2010, 10:50 AM
It awesome. Total spectacle. What you'd expect out of James Cameron. Greatest movie ever? No. Amazing dialog and outrageous plot? No. Spectacle worth your $15 to see in IMAX 3-D? Totally.

It was a damn fun ride.

By the way, those of you "blindly rooting against it" need to come around and root FOR it (not that it needs it now that it has done so well) because THIS movie ALONE is gonna decide whether the next 10 years of Hollywood movies will CONTINUE to be remakes/tv shows/board games/etc or ORIGINAL story ideas with no prior name recognition or fan base.

So if you want more GI Joe, root against it. If you want some new stuff (LIKE Team America), root for it.

Most of Hollywood was panning it...until the opening two weekend numbers came in. Now, all of a sudden, the spec script market (my job) has BLOWN WIDE OPEN...and this is a GOOD thing.

Just lettin' ya know how it works out here.

StoopTroup
1/9/2010, 12:27 PM
The next craze isn't really Hollywood....it's how about how many fools will run out to Sears and Walmart to get a 3D TV to replace the $2600 Bravia they got last year.

At least...that's what I'm hearing....

http://www.ethioplanet.com/news/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/ac1b9_3d-tv.jpg

JiuJitsuSooner
1/9/2010, 01:01 PM
It was predictable, but i think 90% of movies are!!

But that being said, it was a Very very cool film!!

OUHOMER
1/9/2010, 09:56 PM
just saw it tonight in 3d, i like it a lot, it keep me entertained the entire time.

sooneron
1/9/2010, 11:51 PM
The next craze isn't really Hollywood....it's how about how many fools will run out to Sears and Walmart to get a 3D TV to replace the $2600 Bravia they got last year.

At least...that's what I'm hearing....

http://www.ethioplanet.com/news/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/ac1b9_3d-tv.jpg

That idea = lead balloon. Espn is going to have a 3d channel that will show limited events a month. FAIL.

Let 3D remain the gimmick that it is in Digi 3D and Imax. I can't imagine it being cool at home on anything smaller than a 50 inch. Supposedly, there are some flat panels that are out there that can be switched to stereo video mode or whatever. I haven't researched which ones are, tho.

Crucifax Autumn
1/10/2010, 01:33 AM
It awesome. Total spectacle. What you'd expect out of James Cameron. Greatest movie ever? No. Amazing dialog and outrageous plot? No. Spectacle worth your $15 to see in IMAX 3-D? Totally.

It was a damn fun ride.

By the way, those of you "blindly rooting against it" need to come around and root FOR it (not that it needs it now that it has done so well) because THIS movie ALONE is gonna decide whether the next 10 years of Hollywood movies will CONTINUE to be remakes/tv shows/board games/etc or ORIGINAL story ideas with no prior name recognition or fan base.

So if you want more GI Joe, root against it. If you want some new stuff (LIKE Team America), root for it.

Most of Hollywood was panning it...until the opening two weekend numbers came in. Now, all of a sudden, the spec script market (my job) has BLOWN WIDE OPEN...and this is a GOOD thing.

Just lettin' ya know how it works out here.

So...Thanks to the greatness of Avatar we'll get reworked ideas with overblown eyecandy instead of standard remakes and toys made into movies. Not much better IMO.

As long as movies like Moon, Antichrist, Across the Hall, 5 Dollars a Day, The Man From Earth, The Ministers, W Delta Z, Staten Island, Harry Brown, Capers, He Was a Quiet Man, Wristcutters, and hundreds of other great indie/foreign movies of high quality and originality are unable to get major studio funding and distribution we will continue to see popcorn movie crap one way or another.

As long as Hollywood prefers one liners and flashy trailers over depth of character and plot we will continue to be spoonfed garbage with only the occasional Coen Brothers, Tarantino, or Paul Thomas Anderson Flick to show us interesting twists on the old stories or, at the very least, awesome camera work and cinemetography like the Coens so brilliantly give us,

If you are mister script guy, help bring us more stuff like those I listed above. I love comic book movies as much as the next guy, but the Man From Earth was nearly 2 hours of people talking in one room and I was friggin' riveted to the screen. Antichrist was scarier than an mainstream horror movie since the Exorcist and it didn't have one stupid "boo!", monster, or unkillable serial killer. Across the Hall was a Noir story that coulda came out in the 50s, but had such cool camera work and a nice slow build that made it great. W Delta Z was Saw without being stupid and gratuitous. Capers was over the top silliness on a level with the dumbest "dumb comedies" with a unique little twist (being shot 3 different ways in 3 different styles depending on the c haracters in the scene) that made it stand above the rest.

Point being, it's not a lack of original scripts or ideas holding Hollywood back. It's their unwillingness to take risks and market movies correctly. Dark City came out a year before The Matrix and the studio marketed it as a horror movie rather than Science Fiction and then wondered a year later why another movie based on the same source material made a huge profit while the first one flopped. Bad marketing. Same EXACT thing happened to the 13th floor a year later when the inferior Matrix beat it as well, despite 13th floor being a better movie. Hollywood poured a ton of money into marketing the flashy effects movie while just dumping the better product out there with nothing in the way of support. Today both 13th Floor and Dark City are ranked much higher on IMDB than the big blockbuster thanks to having better stories and less of the flash and "cram it down our throats" BS that The Matrix had.

Sell the movies correctly and we WILL have more great movies than we do now.

yermom
1/10/2010, 02:05 AM
saw it tonight. i think it's Dances with Blue Gungans: A Wow Film

but yeah, i still liked it. and it looked incredible. the story was mostly done before, but still was enjoyable.

i think the way movie special effects are done just changed. i mean it takes a LOTR, Matrix or Star Wars to come along and revolutionize things every so often. if you give a crap about watching movies you should see this in 3-D IMO

the glasses need work though. i'm not sure exactly how they work, but i was getting too much glare on the inside. i could see the reflection of my eyes at times. the lenses were also too small and i could see the edges of the frames in my field of vision, which was a little distracting too

LosAngelesSooner
1/10/2010, 05:00 AM
So...Thanks to the greatness of Avatar we'll get reworked ideas with overblown eyecandy instead of standard remakes and toys made into movies. Not much better IMO.

As long as movies like Moon, Antichrist, Across the Hall, 5 Dollars a Day, The Man From Earth, The Ministers, W Delta Z, Staten Island, Harry Brown, Capers, He Was a Quiet Man, Wristcutters, and hundreds of other great indie/foreign movies of high quality and originality are unable to get major studio funding and distribution we will continue to see popcorn movie crap one way or another.

As long as Hollywood prefers one liners and flashy trailers over depth of character and plot we will continue to be spoonfed garbage with only the occasional Coen Brothers, Tarantino, or Paul Thomas Anderson Flick to show us interesting twists on the old stories or, at the very least, awesome camera work and cinemetography like the Coens so brilliantly give us,

If you are mister script guy, help bring us more stuff like those I listed above. I love comic book movies as much as the next guy, but the Man From Earth was nearly 2 hours of people talking in one room and I was friggin' riveted to the screen. Antichrist was scarier than an mainstream horror movie since the Exorcist and it didn't have one stupid "boo!", monster, or unkillable serial killer. Across the Hall was a Noir story that coulda came out in the 50s, but had such cool camera work and a nice slow build that made it great. W Delta Z was Saw without being stupid and gratuitous. Capers was over the top silliness on a level with the dumbest "dumb comedies" with a unique little twist (being shot 3 different ways in 3 different styles depending on the c haracters in the scene) that made it stand above the rest.

Point being, it's not a lack of original scripts or ideas holding Hollywood back. It's their unwillingness to take risks and market movies correctly. Dark City came out a year before The Matrix and the studio marketed it as a horror movie rather than Science Fiction and then wondered a year later why another movie based on the same source material made a huge profit while the first one flopped. Bad marketing. Same EXACT thing happened to the 13th floor a year later when the inferior Matrix beat it as well, despite 13th floor being a better movie. Hollywood poured a ton of money into marketing the flashy effects movie while just dumping the better product out there with nothing in the way of support. Today both 13th Floor and Dark City are ranked much higher on IMDB than the big blockbuster thanks to having better stories and less of the flash and "cram it down our throats" BS that The Matrix had.

Sell the movies correctly and we WILL have more great movies than we do now.Just so you'll know, my oversimplification was more accurate than your oversimplification.

Also, using your logic we would never have gotten Star Wars or Empire.

Die.

;)

Crucifax Autumn
1/10/2010, 08:27 AM
Smartass.

I don't see where Star Wars comes into it as at the time that WAS different in it's own way.

My main point is that when Hollywood tries to make original things due to the success of something they deem to be original, we usually get the most UNoriginal crap they put out. And I fully stand by my assertion that a lot of the great Indie films should get picked up and distributed better if anyone really cares about the artistic side of things.

Okla-homey
1/10/2010, 09:28 AM
I thought the consensus was "Dances With Wolves" in space?

Yep. It's nothing more than a feature length animated film in which the indigenous people eventually succeed at sticking it to the man. That said, nice gimmicks, worth a look.

yermom
1/10/2010, 12:47 PM
Smartass.

I don't see where Star Wars comes into it as at the time that WAS different in it's own way.

My main point is that when Hollywood tries to make original things due to the success of something they deem to be original, we usually get the most UNoriginal crap they put out. And I fully stand by my assertion that a lot of the great Indie films should get picked up and distributed better if anyone really cares about the artistic side of things.

Star Wars was pretty derivative...

LosAngelesSooner
1/10/2010, 03:20 PM
Smartass.

I don't see where Star Wars comes into it as at the time that WAS different in it's own way.

My main point is that when Hollywood tries to make original things due to the success of something they deem to be original, we usually get the most UNoriginal crap they put out. And I fully stand by my assertion that a lot of the great Indie films should get picked up and distributed better if anyone really cares about the artistic side of things.
There's a place for independent films and filmmaking.

And your example holds true for the past 20 years, surely.

However, what I'm talking about ISN'T copying a success model with clones, it's allowing original ideas to be written, bought, produced and released. In other words Writer A writes a script that He/She thought up on their own that is based entirely on that writer's imagination. They then go into a studio to sell it and the Studio says, "Hey, I've never heard of this before...it's a solid script...let's do it."

Avatar is an example of this (and it is the only one in recent years and it only happened because that person was James Cameron).

I hope Hollywood will allow this model to resurface again.

Otherwise we'll have another decade of Transformers, GI Joe, Matrix, Scooby Doo, etc...etc...

Currently execs want to preserve their paychecks, benefits and expense accounts (my brother included) which is why they don't want to take risks on original ideas (my brother excluded) so they go after "ideas" (and I use this term lightly) that already have audiences. That's why we get movies based on video games, board games, tv shows, remakes of movies, etc.

And it's why we so rarely get original ideas like Confessions of a Dangerous Mind or Master and Commander (two of my brother's).

LosAngelesSooner
1/10/2010, 03:21 PM
Star Wars was pretty derivative...If you sit down and break PLOT down in EVERY movie EVER made then ALL movies are ALL "pretty derivative."

Not kidding.

StoopTroup
1/10/2010, 03:25 PM
I think Sigourney likes the idea of really being 10 feet tall with ears. I expect her to have some surgery soon. ;)

LosAngelesSooner
1/10/2010, 06:58 PM
She's already about 8 feet tall...

Okla-homey
1/10/2010, 07:06 PM
If you sit down and break PLOT down in EVERY movie EVER made then ALL movies are ALL "pretty derivative."

Not kidding.

I agree. I'm no cinema expert, but IMHO, "High Noon" and "Shane" have been remade about a thousand times.

Crucifax Autumn
1/10/2010, 11:36 PM
If you sit down and break PLOT down in EVERY movie EVER made then ALL movies are ALL "pretty derivative."

Not kidding.

Of course they are. The secret is to take that derivitave plot and make it fresh. Too many movies are derivitive in plot, character, setting, camerawork, etc. There is NO REASON a movie can't do a little mix and match of these elements to create something that at least SEEMS new.

LosAngelesSooner
1/11/2010, 12:36 AM
Of course they are. The secret is to take that derivitave plot and make it fresh. Too many movies are derivitive in plot, character, setting, camerawork, etc. There is NO REASON a movie can't do a little mix and match of these elements to create something that at least SEEMS new.So you're saying that Avatar was something you've seen before? Dude...

Crucifax Autumn
1/11/2010, 12:59 AM
What's new OTHER than the effects technology?

LosAngelesSooner
1/11/2010, 01:02 AM
What's new and fresh other than the completely new and fresh effects and technology that created what is probably the most visually astounding movie any of us have seen to this date?

Oh...not much, I guess.

Crucifax Autumn
1/11/2010, 01:14 AM
I was visually astounded by most Coen Brothers movies due to the angles and interesting shots, so I suppose I can appreciate a wider range of eye candy than just special effects. You'll notice I'm consistent in thinking that effects aren't the most important aspect from my earlier statement that both Dark City and The 13th Floor were superior movies to The Matrix during the last round of "revolutionary effects advances". I'm not saying the technology of Avatar isn't amazing, I'm just saying that technology alone is a rather funny reason to have a movie pushing 1.2 billion worldwide! The cinemetography in Antichrist is superior to most other films I've seen this past year and based on the number of top 10 lists an obscure, foreign-made horror film is on, I'm not the only one who was impressed with the visuals and a plot that wasn't spoon-fed to me.

LosAngelesSooner
1/11/2010, 01:16 AM
Seriously, though..how about just generally giving Cameron props for NOT sucking this one up? I mean...how many of the recent "blockbuster films" that Hollywood has churned out have turned out to be utter pieces of ****?

In 2009 ALONE we have:

X-Men: Wolverine, G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, Sherlock Holmes, The Twilight Saga: New Moon, Bride Wars, Paul Blart: Mall Cop, Balls Out: Gary the Tennis Coach, Without a Paddle: Nature's Calling, Underworld 3: Rise of the Lycans, Pink Panther 2, Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li, Watchmen, Race to Witch Mountain, Fast and Furious, Crank: High Voltage, Dragonball: Evolution, Ghosts of Girlfriends Past, The Goods: Live Hard Sell Hard, Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel.

All of those had big freakin budgets and major studios behind them and they ALL managed to suck.

Lessons to learn from this example?

#1) Don't make movies that have COLONS in the title
#2) Don't make romantic comedies
#3) A huge budget and great opening weekend does not guarantee a good movie
#4) Don't make movies with Matthew McConaughey playing a romantic lead
#5) TRY MAKING MOVIES WITH ORIGINAL IDEAS

That list just made me really depressed...thanks, Crucifix...:(

picasso
1/11/2010, 01:20 AM
#1) Don't make movies that have COLONS in the title
#2) Don't make romantic comedies
#3) A huge budget and great opening weekend does not guarantee a good movie
#4) Don't make movies with Matthew McConaughey playing a romantic lead
#5) TRY MAKING MOVIES WITH ORIGINAL IDEAS

That list just made me really depressed...thanks, Crucifix...:(

Oh man, you nailed #4. I don't hate the guy but you could see that dud coming from a mile away.

LosAngelesSooner
1/11/2010, 01:23 AM
I was visually astounded by most Coen Brothers movies due to the angles and interesting shots, so I suppose I can appreciate a wider range of eye candy than just special effects. You'll notice I'm consistent in thinking that effects aren't the most important aspect from my earlier statement that both Dark City and The 13th Floor were superior movies to The Matrix during the last round of "revolutionary effects advances". I'm not saying the technology of Avatar isn't amazing, I'm just saying that technology alone is a rather funny reason to have a movie pushing 1.2 billion worldwide! The cinemetography in Antichrist is superior to most other films I've seen this past year and based on the number of top 10 lists an obscure, foreign-made horror film is on, I'm not the only one who was impressed with the visuals and a plot that wasn't spoon-fed to me.Dude...what you don't seem to get is that you're comparing Apples to Oranges.

Oh...and you're completely wrong about The 13th Floor being superior to The Matrix. The Matrix owned The 13th Floor's BALLS.

That movie was dog ****.

Crucifax Autumn
1/11/2010, 02:04 AM
I just enjoy plot over flash I guess. Out of your suck list though I agree almost completely, though I did enjoy Watchmen despite the changes. Of course I only saw that super long special edition. The rest of those movies are leas entertaining than watching a chicken take a shat and less worthy of being called art than a picture of that chicken.

Just curious though, what made the Matrix so much better than 13th Floor? The fact that the Matrix spells out the philosophy instead of letting you think? And why didn't you say The Matrix owned Dark City too?

LosAngelesSooner
1/11/2010, 05:17 AM
Because Dark City was teh awesome. Duh.

Crucifax Autumn
1/11/2010, 06:36 AM
LOL...Yes it was!

You'll have to excuse my judgemental movie attitude. Since I am not working at the moment I have watched, I shat you not, 81 movies since Christmas from all genres.
We'll have to disagree on 13th Floor though. I thought it was great, but would have been better with the original ending, but hey, that's why directors shouldn't listen to stupid people at test screenings.

If you haven't seen "The Man From Earth", I highly recommend it, specifically to you. I think you may be intellectual enough to enjoy what many people consider a slow movie for its strengths. It's intellectual science fiction, all set in one room as I mentioned before, with a lot of philosophy and "godless liberalism"! It is a truly great movie to have so little to look at and leaves you thinking which is the greatest strength of any movie IMO.

Another overlooked gem of the last couple of years is "Whatever Works". The cynicism and "I'm better than everyone else" attitude of the main character is pure genius.

"Unknown" flipped "Reservoir Dogs" on its end and made for a fun low budget film.

"Five Dollars a Day" was a Christopher Walken feast.

"W Delta Z" showed what a lower budget and a better idea can do with concepts that the popcorn directors would have turned into Saw-style torture porn.

I could go on and on I suppose, but I won't.

hellogoodbye
1/11/2010, 01:28 PM
Seriously, though..how about just generally giving Cameron props for NOT sucking this one up?

Props to him. If the movie depended on that plot for it's success, then he would have been in trouble. But it didn't - it is an awsome movie because of the environment it put you in. Cameron uses the technology to masterfull effect -a masterwork, not for the gimmick. He does get it.

My real beef was that I always pointed to Cameron's Alien as what an actual real alien would probably look like (IOW nothing at all remotely close to what humans look like). A big furry cat humanoid with the big manga eyes?

srsly...

LosAngelesSooner
1/11/2010, 01:34 PM
Fair enough...but it's a fairy tale, and a well done one at that, so I forgive it.

hellogoodbye
1/11/2010, 01:40 PM
Another guy who I think would get it would be Del Toro. The Hobbit in 3D would be great.

Veritas
1/11/2010, 01:41 PM
I'm personally just tired of the whole Noble Savage concept. It's just tired *** white man's guilt. Yes, we get it Hollywood, white people are bad and the world would be better off if we just had cast off modern civilization and lived as the Indians/Aborigines/Sand People/etcetcadnaseum had lived.

LosAngelesSooner
1/11/2010, 01:51 PM
I'm personally just tired of the whole Noble Savage concept. It's just tired *** white man's guilt. Yes, we get it Hollywood, white people are bad and the world would be better off if we just had cast off modern civilization and lived as the Indians/Aborigines/Sand People/etcetcadnaseum had lived.Dude...I don't know WHERE you got THAT.

Avatar has NOTHING to do with "white man" vs anything...

This whole "white man guilt" and "Hollywood Agenda" thing that someone sold a bunch of you is WAAAAY far from any reality. Trust me.

I've never been in a story meeting where a bunch of execs (usually all white men) said, "Hold on, now! We've gotta work in the anti-whitey stuff, ya know..."

LOL

hellogoodbye
1/11/2010, 01:53 PM
Yup, and it is a shame Cameron couldnt have made the movie back in the 90s when the whole avatar concept was new, and the possiblities derived from it were still umm .. exciting and\or relevent.

LosAngelesSooner
1/11/2010, 01:56 PM
That was when he thought it up, but the technology to do what he did wasn't invented yet...

hellogoodbye
1/11/2010, 02:00 PM
Is that technology a proprietary Cameron owned product? Or in other words, is it much different than what was currently going around?

LosAngelesSooner
1/11/2010, 02:17 PM
Is it much different than what HAS BEEN currently going around?

Yes.

Does he own it?

No.

He pioneered the technique and his work with WETA helped to create some new stuff, but you're about to see it used in quite a few new movies and it's the new direction that pretty much all special effects are gonna be headed.

NormanPride
1/11/2010, 02:23 PM
Dude...I don't know WHERE you got THAT.

Avatar has NOTHING to do with "white man" vs anything...

This whole "white man guilt" and "Hollywood Agenda" thing that someone sold a bunch of you is WAAAAY far from any reality. Trust me.

I've never been in a story meeting where a bunch of execs (usually all white men) said, "Hold on, now! We've gotta work in the anti-whitey stuff, ya know..."

LOL

I don't know that it's that far a stretch... I mean, it's not necessarily "white man's" guilt, but the guilt of all civilized culture. That, usually, is represented by greedy white American corporation executives.

hellogoodbye
1/11/2010, 02:40 PM
Is it much different than what HAS BEEN currently going around?

Yes.

Does he own it?

No.

He pioneered the technique and his work with WETA helped to create some new stuff, but you're about to see it used in quite a few new movies and it's the new direction that pretty much all special effects are gonna be headed.

thats good news - I guess thats a no brainer.

The emotional repsonse to the crafted use of 3D itself is interesting. Much like the color cut scene in The Wizard of Oz - a whole new dimension to the canvas. Exciting times, I would imagine!

Okla-homey
1/11/2010, 02:55 PM
thats good news - I guess thats a no brainer.

The emotional repsonse to the crafted use of 3D itself is interesting. Much like the color cut scene in The Wizard of Oz - a whole new dimension to the canvas. Exciting times, I would imagine!

I bet porn will pick up the 3D ball and run with it in a large way. I can just imagine the shots...no pun intended.

LosAngelesSooner
1/11/2010, 03:00 PM
I don't know that it's that far a stretch... I mean, it's not necessarily "white man's" guilt, but the guilt of all civilized culture. That, usually, is represented by greedy white American corporation executives.
It's a very far stretch.

That movie was an analogy for industrialization vs. ecology (the green movement) and naturalism. It was trade vs. civilization. It was colonization vs. aboriginal rights. Throughout history many races have imposed their wills upon each other, this is something that cannot be denied. We have also seen many nations strip another nation of their natural resources in order to further themselves with no thought of the consequences for the conquered people.

This has happened between almost every race.

And if we encountered an alien nation on a foreign planet who had something we desperately wanted...you tellin' ME that there wouldn't be people out there who'd want to repeat the process yet again?

But "white man's guilt?" You've gotta be kiddin' me. Seriously. HUGE freakin' silly soundin' stretch.

Oh...and I left out the spiritualism aspects of the story...but then I'd just be geeking out way too much. :)

NormanPride
1/11/2010, 03:15 PM
It's a very far stretch.

That movie was an analogy for industrialization vs. ecology (the green movement) and naturalism. It was trade vs. civilization. It was colonization vs. aboriginal rights. Throughout history many races have imposed their wills upon each other, this is something that cannot be denied. We have also seen many nations strip another nation of their natural resources in order to further themselves with no thought of the consequences for the conquered people.

This has happened between almost every race.

And if we encountered an alien nation on a foreign planet who had something we desperately wanted...you tellin' ME that there wouldn't be people out there who'd want to repeat the process yet again?

But "white man's guilt?" You've gotta be kiddin' me. Seriously. HUGE freakin' silly soundin' stretch.

Oh...and I left out the spiritualism aspects of the story...but then I'd just be geeking out way too much. :)

You got trade vs. civilization out of that movie? Despite the fact that they spent about 2% of the dialogue talking about the "unobtanium" and the reason why there was conflict? Instead 90% of the movie attempts to show the brilliance of nature and the pureness of tribal society as opposed to the dark gray world of the industrial societies.

You're right that the central theme is the green movement, but it is represented by a white exec and his old white dog of war with tons of white soldiers oppressing the blue people and their ethnic cohorts. The traitor pilot was hispanic, and the mole on the inside looked to be indian/italian/something. The only white people on the natives' side were two scientists that represented the scientific community, and the main character which was a vessel for the white man's rehabilitation through the movie. How is that a stretch?

I personally don't care about the racial roles here. It makes sense because that's what is mostly what is going on in real life. But to ignore the role that race plays in this movie is silly.

LosAngelesSooner
1/11/2010, 06:41 PM
You got trade vs. civilization out of that movie? Despite the fact that they spent about 2% of the dialogue talking about the "unobtanium" and the reason why there was conflict? Instead 90% of the movie attempts to show the brilliance of nature and the pureness of tribal society as opposed to the dark gray world of the industrial societies.

You're right that the central theme is the green movement, but it is represented by a white exec and his old white dog of war with tons of white soldiers oppressing the blue people and their ethnic cohorts. The traitor pilot was hispanic, and the mole on the inside looked to be indian/italian/something. The only white people on the natives' side were two scientists that represented the scientific community, and the main character which was a vessel for the white man's rehabilitation through the movie. How is that a stretch?

I personally don't care about the racial roles here. It makes sense because that's what is mostly what is going on in real life. But to ignore the role that race plays in this movie is silly.I guess all those black and Hispanic guys who were blowin stuff up don't count, eh?

Crucifax Autumn
1/12/2010, 03:28 AM
Speaking of bad Colon: Movies...

I just saw that there's a Smokin' Aces 2: Assassin's Ball

That sounds bad enough on its own of course, but consider this: In the first movie "Aces" dies. So calling a second assassination movie anything with Aces in the title is stupid.

And again, that sounds bad enough on it's own of course, but consider this: Apparently in this one the target's name is Weed. Thus, the new movie/sequel should actually be called...Smokin' Weed! LMAO

sooneron
1/12/2010, 01:18 PM
My real beef was that I always pointed to Cameron's Alien as what an actual real alien would probably look like (IOW nothing at all remotely close to what humans look like). A big furry cat humanoid with the big manga eyes?

srsly...

:confused:

Cameron's Alien designs were the pretty much the same as the original ones via Ridley Scott/ HR Giger. The mold had been cast about 6 years prior when Cameron showed up.

I think Avatar had the race overtones in it, but it was definitely more about greed vs. green. Mobil Exxon would have just nuked that place if it had been them...

hellogoodbye
1/12/2010, 01:31 PM
:confused:

Cameron's Alien designs were the pretty much the same as the original ones via Ridley Scott/ HR Giger. The mold had been cast about 6 years prior when Cameron showed up.


Yup my bad (forgot the original was Scott). Point was that an actual alien will more resemble that thing (or worse), rather than something considered a cute or unique\similar version of us.

scifi geek rant, carry on :O

jkjsooner
1/12/2010, 03:18 PM
Question, how important is the 3D aspect of this movie? I don't have binocular vision so I can't see the 3D effects in movies so I've been a little hesitant to see it.

NormanPride
1/12/2010, 03:28 PM
I guess all those black and Hispanic guys who were blowin stuff up don't count, eh?

Cannon fodder vs prominent character. Do the three black people in the back of the aggie band make them any less like the Hitler Youth? ;)

hellogoodbye
1/12/2010, 03:54 PM
Question, how important is the 3D aspect of this movie? I don't have binocular vision so I can't see the 3D effects in movies so I've been a little hesitant to see it.

That's a pity. The CGI is good enough to immerse yourself in, though. Im partially colorblind, so the effect is not as strong, but enough to still blow me away.

LosAngelesSooner
1/12/2010, 04:16 PM
Cannon fodder vs prominent character.Irrelevant
Do the three black people in the back of the aggie band make them any less like the Hitler Youth? ;)
No.

But that's a different story. :D

jkjsooner
1/13/2010, 11:50 AM
That's a pity. The CGI is good enough to immerse yourself in, though. Im partially colorblind, so the effect is not as strong, but enough to still blow me away.

It's only a pity if you know what you're missing. I have no idea how your brains merge signals from two eyes into one signal that provides depth perception. I just know it's something that I don't have but I don't really understand what that something is.

I suppose it's sort of like a fully color blind person trying to wrap his mind around what a color is...

There are other aspects of depth perception that I have - the size of objects, shadows, which object is in front, how they're moving in relation to other objects, etc.

LosAngelesSooner
1/13/2010, 01:32 PM
It's only a pity if you know what you're missing. I have no idea how your brains merge signals from two eyes into one signal that provides depth perception. I just know it's something that I don't have but I don't really understand what that something is.

I suppose it's sort of like a fully color blind person trying to wrap his mind around what a color is...

There are other aspects of depth perception that I have - the size of objects, shadows, which object is in front, how they're moving in relation to other objects, etc.You've tried putting ON the 3-D glasses, right? ;)

hellogoodbye
1/13/2010, 03:03 PM
It's only a pity if you know what you're missing. I have no idea how your brains merge signals from two eyes into one signal that provides depth perception. I just know it's something that I don't have but I don't really understand what that something is.

I suppose it's sort of like a fully color blind person trying to wrap his mind around what a color is...

There are other aspects of depth perception that I have - the size of objects, shadows, which object is in front, how they're moving in relation to other objects, etc.

Fantastic definition! I will have to remember that when people start buggin me about "what color is this what color is that". Im partial cb, so I typically tell them its like skewing the tint \ color on your vid display. But since I dont know what Im missing, its perfectly normal :D

huzzah to you, sir!