# Avatar (2009)



## Rodders

*James Cameron's Avatar*

Hello,  I'm a big fan of James Cameron and it's fair to say that he's been off the mainstream screen for far too long. I was reading a small article on this in SFx the other day that stated that JC's new film is estimated to cost over 200 Million dollars. What!!!

It did say that most of this was in developing the appropriate technology to make the film. Does anyone know anything about this film? Specifically, what kind of technology is being developed? 

Also, with the economy not doing too well at the moment and swine flu, does anyone else think that this kind of money is a little too profligate for a movie?


----------



## Pyan

*Re: James Cameron's Avatar*



> Also, with the economy not doing too well at the moment and swine flu, does anyone else think that this kind of money is a little too profligate for a movie?



If the taxpayer isn't paying for the development costs, and his investors are happy to support the work, I don't see that it's anyone else's concern how much he spends on any film - presumably they think they'll get it back at the box-office...


----------



## pete_scifi

*Re: James Cameron's Avatar*

Titanic was fairly awful, but I think this is going to be great. It's interesting that with Star Trek Terminator Salvation forming the current zeitgeist nobody is talking about Avatar. Come the end of the summer you know the publicity machine will go into overdrive.


----------



## Rodders

*Re: James Cameron's Avatar*

Well, I can't wait. James Cameron is truly a cinematic Genius.


----------



## ravenus

*Re: James Cameron's Avatar*

The movie will be in 3D. And I'm hoping it will not be like the underwhelming eyestrain 3D that was Monsters v/s Aliens.


----------



## Blackrook

Well it was just announced that James Cameron (Titanic) is making a science fiction movie called Avatar.

The premise of the movie is there are 10' tall blue elves (they look like WOW characters) who inhabit this planet and humans are taking over and generally acting nasty.

The humans have all the latest weapons and equipment and the elves have nothing more than bows to fight back.

A paraplegic Marine undergoes some sort of genetic modification that turns him into an elf, so I'm not sure how that works out for him.

It could be good but it might be very, very bad.


----------



## Susan Boulton

It's made and being released in December. The trailer looks superb!


----------



## Foxbat

I've just read a press report which states that Paramount intend all their offerings in 2010 to be in 3D.

Frankly, I've never understood this obsession with 3D. To draw an analogy, in art - charcoal, oils, watercolours etc. etc. In other words the right tool for the right job. 

As for Avatar....well... Cameron created the truly horrific Titanic so I'm expecting lots of whizzbang flashing lights and big noises, but any substance to be cliched and cringeworthy. Storyline sounds like Dances With Wolves in space.


----------



## Pyan

Mentioned in May...

http://www.sffchronicles.co.uk/forum/50379-james-camerons-avatar.html


----------



## Michael01

Hmm.  The trailer looks interesting.  I might check it out.


----------



## Rodders

I'm really looking forward to this. James Cameron has been away from the big screen for far to long.


----------



## Blackrook

Based on the comments I saw posted, there is a lot of hostility towards this movie.  People are complaining that it is yet another "evil white man oppresses the innocent natives" movie.


----------



## biodroid

There is no such thing as a bad James Cameron movie, I think that does not even exist in the movie industry. This is going to be good


----------



## Susan Boulton

Blackrook said:


> Based on the comments I saw posted, there is a lot of hostility towards this movie. People are complaining that it is yet another "evil white man oppresses the innocent natives" movie.


 
No, it's an 'advanced culture' exploiting the land of what they consider to be a more 'primitive culture.' (Romans anyone?) As to the exact storyline of the film, I haven't read anything, as I want to enjoy the film as is.

As for the "evil white man oppresses the innocent natives" folks who think that need to get rid of the chip on their shoulder, and grow up, everything is not "getting" at them, or about them.

For many western culture/way of life is very unimportant


----------



## Hilarious Joke

I'm certainly looking forward to this!


----------



## Kayla

Having just seen the trailer I will defiantly go and see it, not only for the development of the genre through out but to see the beauty of the story becoming reality through graphics and digital art. Its the next step and all sci fi/ fantasy films will have to live up whatever this sets as a new benchmark.

Evidently the progression of 3D will make it a superb watch whatever but to me its the war of technology against, what is essentially nature which will be awesome to see develop!

Saying that it could be awful, but i'm being positive!


----------



## TK-421

Looks great. I heard Cameron has been working on this for almost a decade or something. Apparently he released an 21 minute sneak peek in IMAX/3D, which is the format it's supposed to be seen in and the reviews were out of this world.

For those looking for the teaser, here it is:
Apple - Trailers - James Cameron's Avatar


----------



## Shadow Trooper

I watched the trailer provided on YouTube.

I really don't know about this one! I actually agree with the comparison made regarding the Native Americans as that is what came to mind on seeing the 'look' of the aliens (their blue colour aside LOL). Especially on the last frames that I watched with 2 of then embracing, the male definately looked 'last of the mohican' like. Of course this doesn't mean the aliens will have any other traits of the Native American Indians.

The action looked very good, but I also worry that the overly CGI look to it may tarnish my enjoyment of the film.

Of course my comments on a small trailer of a film that hasn't even been released yet, and with me watching it in it's non-3D glory may be totally incorrect. It could end up blowing me away. I hope so, as so much hope for a new era of film seems to have been placed on this movie.


----------



## Winters_Sorrow

Should be a decent 'spectacle' visually speaking, although like Foxbat I'm not sold on this being the whole "future of cinema" idea - it's just a new toy which I'm sure some directors will love and some will hate.

As so far as the movie itself goes, I don't think he undergoes genetic enhancement, my understanding was that his consciousness is transferred into a cloned replica of the aliens. Perhaps to act as a fifth column and undermine the enemy from within. Anyway the Dances with Wolves analogy may be pretty apt as it seems that the main character quickly goes 'native' to assist the aliens against his own kind.

My main reservation so far is the CGI - the aliens appear very videogamey and about as fake as most of the Star Wars prequels. So there may be an advancement in 3D camerawork going on but there's no leap in the CGI so far as I can see.

Needs to be judged on the final film though as trailers can be very misleading.


----------



## biodroid

Winters Sorrow - Have you heard of the "Uncanny Valley"? Its a term that describes 3D animated characters that don't look quite real when they move and talk, just look at Beowulf and Final Fantasy - Spirits Within and other show like the Mummy 2 when the Skorpion King turns into a CG skorpion. Cameron has apparently found a way to bridge that uncanny valley and make the characters look and move like they would in the real world. That is a massive feat on its own.


----------



## ktabic

Winters_Sorrow said:


> As so far as the movie itself goes, I don't think he undergoes genetic enhancement, my understanding was that his consciousness is transferred into a cloned replica of the aliens. Perhaps to act as a fifth column and undermine the enemy from within.



Think you are right about the consciousness transfer thing. But from the clip, I think they are doing it to make soldiers who can operate better in that environment, rather than infiltrators.
The normal humans all wear breathing gear. And after he has been put in the alien body, you see him moving around in what looks like a flak jacket and with a rifle, which isn't going to be very covert.



Winters_Sorrow said:


> Needs to be judged on the final film though as trailers can be very misleading.



Yes, the final product is what needs to be judged. Although I will point out, that was just a teaser, not a trailer.


----------



## Winters_Sorrow

biodroid said:


> Winters Sorrow - Have you heard of the "Uncanny Valley"? Its a term that describes 3D animated characters that don't look quite real when they move and talk, just look at Beowulf and Final Fantasy - Spirits Within and other show like the Mummy 2 when the Skorpion King turns into a CG skorpion. Cameron has apparently found a way to bridge that uncanny valley and make the characters look and move like they would in the real world. That is a massive feat on its own.


 

No I haven't come across that term before Biodroid. Of course the 3 films you refer to all involve trying to create a CGI _human_ which I actually think is harder than creating aliens - after all we all know what humans look like so it's easier to see the flaws. If you say that Cameron's movie has managed to 'bridge the Uncanny Valley' in your words then great. I just wasn't convinced by the trailers I saw - the aliens and vegetation still looked superimposed, which is the major drawback on CGI to me - it's hard to convince the viewer that what you're seeing is really there with what it's interacting with. As much as the shark in Jaws was crappy and the creatures in Alien & Predator were people in rubber costumes, they were physically real and it was easier for me to buy into the fact that they were whatever they were dressed up to be. Until CGI manages to convince me that something which _isn't _there when the camera rolls _is_ there, then it'll always be a failure to me.



ktabic said:


> Think you are right about the consciousness transfer thing. But from the clip, I think they are doing it to make soldiers who can operate better in that environment, rather than infiltrators.
> The normal humans all wear breathing gear. And after he has been put in the alien body, you see him moving around in what looks like a flak jacket and with a rifle, which isn't going to be very covert.


 
Oh, interesting. But then how are they going to tell the enemy from other Avatars then? Friendly fire is hard enough when the enemy is dressed differently, must be a near certainty when everyone looks the same!


----------



## Rodders

I'll go and see it. I like James Cameron and it should be an enjoyable romp and i think that this will be one of those films that just has to be seen at the cinema. 

There are a few of this sort of film coming out now. As well as Avatar, there's a new Bruce Willis film call Surrogates (i think) and one called Gamer.


----------



## Urien

When I was a child I went into the uncanny valley. There were flooded railways and sabre toothed dogs, hunting horses and wild cars, the wreckage of cities and a lost stairwell.

Ambitious fantasy/sf takes you back there.


----------



## clovis-man

While you wait for the film premiere, you could do worse than to read "Call Me Joe" by Poul Anderson, a short story from 50 years ago which explores the same theme. Don't know if Cameron intentionally made the connection, but it's too close to ignore IMHO. Hate to rely on Wiki for info, but:

Call me Joe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is available in a collection of Anderson's short fiction with the short story title also being the title of the book.


----------



## CBellenis

*The idea behind Avatar*

I've just watched this trailer and it seems to be based pretty firmly on Ursula Le Guin's _The word for World is Forest_. Does anyone know if this acknowledged anywhere?


----------



## biodroid

*Re: The idea behind Avatar*

I know that Cameron had to add to the credits for using some SF author story in the Terminator. i think it was Harlan Ellison and royalties had to be paid or something like that. It would not surprise me if JC used another book as he said he has read so many of them that is why he got into movies.


----------



## dustinzgirl

*Re: The idea behind Avatar*

Actually its very based on Hinduism and in my humble opinion has nothing to do with Ursula's _The word for World is Forest. 

Avatar: The Last Airbender - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
_
Avatar is a family favorite around here and I really enjoyed it. Its also pretty original, but reminiscent more of The Golden Child than anything else.


----------



## biodroid

*Re: The idea behind Avatar*



dustinzgirl said:


> Actually its very based on Hinduism and in my humble opinion has nothing to do with Ursula's _The word for World is Forest.
> 
> Avatar: The Last Airbender - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> _
> Avatar is a family favorite around here and I really enjoyed it. Its also pretty original, but reminiscent more of The Golden Child than anything else.



I think you got the wrong Avatar, the one mentioned is from a James Cameron movie Avatar (2009)


----------



## CBellenis

*Re: The idea behind Avatar*

Sorry - I should have been more specific with the reference!


----------



## jojajihisc

*Re: The idea behind Avatar*



CBellenis said:


> Sorry - I should have been more specific with the reference!


 
No, you really didn't need to. You did mention trailer which means it is a movie and not a kids show and someone else mentioned Cameron.


----------



## Overread

*Re: The idea behind Avatar*

Except that Avatar: The Last Airbender also has a new live action movie being released soon as well   so there are trailers out for both. 

and isn't there like 2 or 3 films coming out similar to this? I think Disney is making one similar in full CGI (as opposed to half and half). Must say the overall look of hte film here looks good - at least the CGI is fitting into the look of the real world actors.


----------



## Culhwch

*Re: The idea behind Avatar*

There was a bit of a buzz going around the interwebs that it looked very similar to an animated film of the last year or so - so much so that it was suggested there might have been a little bit of, erm, creative borrowing going on. I can't recall the film at the moment, but I'll see if I can track it down...

EDIT: That movie would be 2008's _Delgo_:

The 7 Eeriest Parallels Between Avatar and Delgo | Movieline


----------



## biodroid

*Re: The idea behind Avatar*

I think the kiddies Avatar is done by M. Knight Shyamalamamaanamaa (joke on name) and I think it's just called the Last Airbender.


----------



## Rodders

So, it now seems that the final toll for this could be nearer the half Billion dollar mark. WOW!!! I appreciate that most of that has gone into developing the new 3D technology, but crikey, this had better be one hell of a life changing movie.


----------



## Culhwch

That's a _lot_ of money for a movie that's going to sink like the Titanic...


----------



## Connavar

Whose trailer made me laugh at how cool it looked.... if it was 2000 and a Final Fantasy video sequence.


Its beyond silly that a generic story and decent effects cost that much to make.

Its hollywood and James Cameron history of hit films that made it expensive.   No one else would get that much money on a movie like this.


----------



## Thadlerian

Having seen the trailer a couple of times, I don't feel any particular need to watch this movie. The trailer scenes, coupled with what I've seen in similar movies, gives me the feeling that I can tell to a detail exactly what is going to happen.


clovis-man said:


> While you wait for the film premiere, you could do worse than to read "Call Me Joe" by Poul Anderson, a short story from 50 years ago which explores the same theme. Don't know if Cameron intentionally made the connection, but it's too close to ignore IMHO. Hate to rely on Wiki for info, but:
> 
> Call me Joe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> This is available in a collection of Anderson's short fiction with the short story title also being the title of the book.


Interesting. I don't think there's much else in this movie that could have been original.


----------



## clovis-man

Apparently I'm not the only one to notice the resemblance of the *Avatar* story to the Poul Anderson work from the 1950s.

Is James Cameron’s AVATAR a Ripoff of Writer Poul Anderson | GeekTyrant

The illustration of the magazine containing the Anderson story (looks like Kelly Freas work) is the one I had when I first read it in my early teens.

I know I won't be able to not see this movie, whether it lives up to its hype or not.


----------



## Dave

I don't know what the obsession with 3D movies is either, because they are generally not very good. Having said that, the experience of an IMAX was good, and a film actually and specifically made to be shown in that format should work well. It is a pity the BFI IMAX is showing it at such odd hours. There is a little more on the plot and some images here:
Avatar - An IMAX 3D Experience (12A) | BFI


----------



## biodroid

I just hope they produce $300 mil images as I this is very hyped.


----------



## clovis-man

Connavar said:


> Its beyond silly that a generic story and decent effects cost that much to make.
> 
> Its hollywood and James Cameron history of hit films that made it expensive. No one else would get that much money on a movie like this.


 
Here's the funny part: I'll still get in to see it for the standard price and I'll be able to buy the DVD later, if I want, for a modest price just like any other DVD.

So spend all the money you want.


----------



## Rodders

I'm looking forward to this and will see it a the cinema. (That's if the wife and i ever get a day off together.)


----------



## Tillane

Dave said:


> I don't know what the obsession with 3D movies is either, because they are generally not very good. Having said that, the experience of an IMAX was good, and a film actually and specifically made to be shown in that format should work well. It is a pity the BFI IMAX is showing it at such odd hours. There is a little more on the plot and some images here:
> Avatar - An IMAX 3D Experience (12A) | BFI


What I've found really annoying is that my local cinema has screened a couple of films recently in _3D only_ - with no option of a standard version - and it looks like they're going to do this with _Avatar_ as well.  As someone who has poor eyesight and poor depth perception, this basically means that I'm stuffed if I want to go and see certain films.  I'm not saying that 3D isn't great, but I do worry that if it takes off in a big way, people such as myself will find themselves effectively cinema-less.


----------



## Culhwch

Me, too - 3D screws with my head. I'm hoping it's a passing fad. Again.


----------



## Niolani

I love James Camerons work except for Titanic which I still haven't been anle to bring myself to fully watch. I don't know what to think of Avatar yet, I hate when things are too "CGI'd"- I find it hard to look at, lik emy eyes want to slide off the object of focus. I also despise 3D.

I guess I'll just have to wait and see if it's only in 3D at my local cinema.


----------



## Rothgar

I'm willing to give James Cameron an honest chance with this movie. There are so many crap sci-fi movies made these days, a lot of times due to poor scripts, but mostly because of a lack of funds to develop good films. Hollywood rarely gets behind science fiction or fantasy and I'm not about to complain when they do finally invest heavily into a movie because it helps to promote the genre in the public eye. 

I still haven't read Harry Potter and have little interest in it, but look at what that has done for the types of movies coming out, and what an influence it has had on the latest generation of kids.  Its success has spilled over through the rest of the genre to give a shot to many fantasy stories that would have never been produced.  

I also think that Cameron has a solid track record with sci-fi.  I think the story will end up being better than many people seem to think.  

That said, I've never seen Titanic and have no plans to ever do so.


----------



## littlemissattitude

*Re: The idea behind Avatar*



CBellenis said:


> I've just watched this trailer and it seems to be based pretty firmly on Ursula Le Guin's _The word for World is Forest_. Does anyone know if this acknowledged anywhere?



There are also some similarities to John Scalzi's *Old Man's War* universe that are blatant enough that when I saw the trailer for the film, the first thing that crossed my mind was to wonder if Scalzi knew about the whole deal.  Turns out he did (he wrote about it on his blog, "Whatever") and doesn't seem to have any particular problems with those similarities.

As an aside, I'd recommend Scalzi's blog to anyone who cares about science fiction or good writing, or both.  I don't have the link offhand, but I'm sure you can find it by Googling either John Scalzi or Whatever.


----------



## clovis-man

*Re: The idea behind Avatar*

Already mentioned by me in another thread, but still apropos:

Did James Cameron Rip Off Poul Anderson's Novella? - Avatar - io9

and another:

JAMES CAMERON STOLE AVATAR FROM 1957 SCI-FI STORY CALL ME JOE | FilmDrunk: Movie news you can make fun of

A synopsis of *Call Me Joe*:

Call Me Joe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Draw your own conclusion.


----------



## jezelf

*The language of Avatar revealed*

BBC News - The language of Avatar revealed

Might be of particular interest to the 'aspiring writers'.

"*It all started with what Professor Paul Frommer now describes as a "fateful e-mail."*

The linguistics expert from the University of Southern California is the brains behind the language used by James Cameron's 10-foot-tall alien tribe in the much-anticipated science fiction epic, Avatar. "

"...Crucially, it had to be a language that could be articulated. 
"This is an alien language but obviously it has to be spoken by human actors," explains Professor Frommer. 

"It has to be sounds that human beings are comfortable producing." 
It is a unique language, with its own syntactic and grammatical rules. 
Its creator says some of Cameron's original words had "a vaguely Polynesian feel". Others have suggested that it sounds like German or Japanese."


----------



## Rodders

*Re: The language of Avatar revealed*

It will be interesting to see if this becomes a full language in years to come. (Like Klingon?)


----------



## Rodders

Judging from what i've read, the feedback for this film is very positive. Looks like it could make a profit. Even the wife wants to see it.


----------



## Moonbat

I am seriously looking forward to watching this film, I do have a few comments though. Firstly someone posted a link to 7 similarities with Delgo. Most of them were fairly generic.
A tough male lead (well it would be unlikely to have a camp hero) running through woods (would you prefer it if is was D13 style running through inner cities)
An tough but emotional female lead (well duh! If the female lead is tough, which they almost all are these days, then she's hardly going to be unemotional or how would we know she isn't a he!)
riding winged reptilians (almost any winged creature that isn't a terrestrial bird will be described a reptilian.
Big scary beasts with teeth (how else are we supposed to scare the audience, with a small fluffy chracter with drooling gums!)

Sorry, I'm just annoyed with the weak comparisions. But what I have found most interesting, and slightly comical, is *Unobtanium *This is the element/mineral/power source that the humans are mining for, it is also what makes the huges rocks float in mid air, apparantly it has magnetic properties. What I find so amusing is the name they have given it, it is as if they decided to implant a subtext within the name of the element. Just in case we don't realise that it is rare and hard to come by, they call it *unobtanium*.
Now if I'm right, this element would have been discovered by humans, then catalogued into the periodic table of elements. Somewhere between Californium and Einsteinium  What right minded scientist or Chemist, would name a newly discovered (albeit rare and hard to come by) element Unobtanium. Surely they would name it after themselves, or thier cat or something.
I can only assume that it was discovered by Uma Natalie Obtain. 
I was wondering how the rocks floated, but its all explained by thie element. Horay for creative license. Still I will suspend my believe for the durationof the film, probably through proximity of *Unobtanium*. Some people think that words really do effect reality, so maybe if Cameron had named it Plentyfulium the story would have come out differently.


----------



## Tillane

Yeah, good old Unobtainium...


----------



## HareBrain

Some of us cyclists have had it for years.



> Oakley, Inc. has registered Unobtainium as a US trademark in connection with a hydrophillic rubber compound that has increased grip when wet with perspiration.[10] They have used the term in connection with the nose-pieces and ear-stems of their sunglasses since 1987[11] and for watches since 2002.[12] US trademark laws means that the word is only protected for use in connection with similar goods and services as listed in the trademark registration.[13]


 
From this wiki page

Who'd have thought that in the future so many people would need sunglasses because of climate change that Oakley would have to invade another planet to acquire enough of the stuff?


----------



## Winters_Sorrow

Yeah I thought I'd heard of that "element" before. I wonder if James Cameron just ripped it off from *The Core* or actually thought he was being original when he clearly wasn't (and that wouldn't be the first time...).

Having said that, the film will probably be an interesting watch, more to see Cameron's ego unleashed than anything else.


----------



## biodroid

Cameron is a visionary IMHO, if it wasn't for him we probably wouldn't have the T1000 in T2. He belongs in the very elite club with Lucas, Spielberg and Jackson. I also thought that Titanic was a very expensive chick flick but that was only like the first hour of the movie and then the trouble starts.


----------



## AE35Unit

I was totally unaware that this was based on a game and when i saw the trailer i thought, ooh that looks interesing! Now a gamer friend that I work with was like Noooooooo, but sometimes you got to see past that and just see it as a film, then judge later!


----------



## AE35Unit

biodroid said:


> Cameron is a visionary IMHO, if it wasn't for him we probably wouldn't have the T1000 in T2. He belongs in the very elite club with Lucas, Spielberg and Jackson. I also thought that Titanic was a very expensive chick flick but that was only like the first hour of the movie and then the trouble starts.



I must be the odd one out cos I'm a bloke but I loved Titanic! Yes you know what happens in the end but I rate it as one of the best films made along with Jurassic Park!


----------



## Winters_Sorrow

I still think that "A Night to Remember" is a superior Titanic film in every sense bar special effects. Cameron's bombastic portrayal just rubbed me up the wrong way, though I did like the "story-within-a-story" of the modern day divers who start out as treasure seekers and then come to realise the immense scale of tragedy which the wreck represented.


----------



## Rodders

Yeah, i'm in agreement with Winters Sorrow here. I haven't seen Cameron's Titanic, (i do want to see the ship sinking, as i'd imagine it's very well done), but for me a Night to Remember will always be the titanic Story. (That and Dr. Ballard's book about the disovery of the Titanic.) 

I'm hoping that the wife and i will get some days off together soon. I really want to see this.


----------



## clovis-man

Latest news: *Avatar* has received four Golden Globe nominations; one for best drama and one for best director. Highly unusual for a science fiction film.


----------



## CBellenis

Just seen it in 3D and you know what...so what that's it's derivative. Excellent film, and really well put together to make a new story. 
I'd certainly recommend it!


----------



## WizardofOwls

OMG this movie was simply AMAZING!!!!!

Just saw this movie yesterday, and I must say that it is simply the best movie I have ever seen in my life!!!!! The special effects are spectacular, and the plot is like Fern Gully meets Dune!!! I WILL have this movie on DVD when it comes out, and I WILL have the soundtrack, book adaptation, action figures and anything else they put out!!!!

And it has STRONG pagan roots! I actually believe I felt the deity in the movie calling to me!!!! Is that even possible???? She is Eywah the Savage Planet!!!!!


----------



## Connavar

clovis-man said:


> Latest news: *Avatar* has received four Golden Globe nominations; one for best drama and one for best director. Highly unusual for a science fiction film.



The guy won oscar for Titanic.   He has hype in awards like no other director of SF.


----------



## Caledor

I dont know if it was because of the Imax 3D experience, but I cant remember ever being drawn into a film as much as I was into Avatar. Im a huge fan of fantasy and watching a fantasy movie that actually had the funding to make it look realistic was a real treat. I hope that its the beginning of many more like it, and I would especially like to see a sequel to Avatar.


----------



## purple_kathryn

Wow

First film I've seen in 3d. A lot better from what I remember of 3D 

Amazing!  Althought I love Sci Fi anyway however my SiL who said even thought she doesn't like sci-fi/action films really enjoyed it too.

I found some of the dialogue a bit clunky but I think I can overlook it.


----------



## AE35Unit

purple_kathryn said:


> Wow
> 
> First film I've seen in 3d. A lot better from what I remember of 3D


I can't see 3D-have no concept of what its like!


----------



## Moonbat

I was all prepared to take my girl friend to the Waterloo Imax (something like the largest loudest cinema sound system in europe) to see Avatar next week but they are all booked up, might have to see it elsewhere, but still in 3D


----------



## thesoothsayer

Just back from the 3D version of Avatar. My first 3D movie, so I'm not sure if other movies are like this, but I was impressed with the 3D quality that made some of the things really stand out. I was tempted to reach out and touch some of the floating stuff and objects jutting out from the screen.

It was a little strange, having just finished reading Forge of God today where Earth takes a beating from alien robots, and watching Avatar, where humans try to hand out a beating to an alien planet.

Story itself wasn't anything original, but after so many years of sci-fi books and movies, I'm not sure if there's much of anything left to turn into an original movie. Some things didn't quite make sense like why the humans didn't just nuke the Na'vi or burn down their forest (unless they were interested in the timber as well). I was also wondering if they used WiMAX to connect the humans with their avatars, and was surprised that every creature in the world seemed to have organic USB interfaces.

If you immerse yourself into the beautiful 3D world, it's a pretty decent and enjoyable experience.


----------



## Ursa major

I can't imagine what the film looks like in 3D (or in the cinema, for that matter), but I have to say that the clips used in the review on _Film 2009_ did not convince me of the realism of the aliens.

Okay, I was watching in analogue (and certainly not in HD), but animals in nature programmes (even the strangest ones) look real on my TV whereas the cgi creatures shown on _Film 2009_ did not.


----------



## thesoothsayer

Some parts will definitely still look a little fake. Think it'll take a few years more for really realistic CGI rendering.


----------



## purple_kathryn

AE35Unit said:


> I can't see 3D-have no concept of what its like!


 
It's a bit surreal to be honest, especially when things really do jump out at you.

Do the 3d classes not work at all for you?

I know I can't see the picture in those stupid dot pictures because I need to wear glasses but 3d is fine.


----------



## AE35Unit

purple_kathryn said:


> It's a bit surreal to be honest, especially when things really do jump out at you.
> 
> Do the 3d classes not work at all for you?
> 
> I know I can't see the picture in those stupid dot pictures because I need to wear glasses but 3d is fine.



No I can only see thru my right eye so have never been able to see 3D. To me everything is 3D!


----------



## Rosemary

I haven't seen the film yet but watched the 'making of Avatar' on the television.  Much of what they showed looked really good but there were a few aspects that I didn't like.  The story line sounded good though.


----------



## ScottSF

In a word: sublime.  It's the best thing I've seen since LOTR.  Just lump in my throat edge of the seat awsome.  Also has everything Cameron does well in sci-fi (Aliens, Abyss, Terminator) x 100.  Found myself oohing and ahing all all the shiney nature stuff as well as enjoying all the human scientific and military gear and vehicles.


----------



## Rodders

I must say that i am really looking forward to seeing this. 

Is it true that JC has planned this as a Trilogy?


----------



## ScottSF

looks like it

Cameron Plans “Avatar” Trilogy : Slice of SciFi

I know I would like to see the next story happen generations later.


----------



## Harpo

I saw it today in 3D and loved it - loved the nature, loved the 3D, laughed at the military like one does, and want to go again.  If this sets a new benchmark for future films, then we should all see it


----------



## Pyan

Just came back from seeing it....blown away. Simply blown away....




Even if I did expect to see Ewoks at one point....


----------



## thesoothsayer

ScottSF said:


> looks like it
> 
> Cameron Plans “Avatar” Trilogy : Slice of SciFi
> 
> I know I would like to see the next story happen generations later.



Not sure if a trilogy about Jake and Neytiri, like what Cameron plans to do, would be a good idea. Quite agree with the article:



> Hopefully Cameron actually has an idea for making the films a legitimate trilogy and won’t follow the example of other recent trilogies like “The Matrix” and “The Pirates of the Caribbean.”



I haven't seen the Pirates of the Caribbean's sequels, but I do wished they had stopped after the first Matrix movie.

A story that happens generations later would probably be more interesting to me as well.


----------



## GOLLUM

Friend of mine saw it yesterday.

Overriding comment was: Special effects/visuals were awesome BUT the dialogue was fairly woeful.

Not sure if I'll wait for it to appear on DVD, although I can see how not seeing it on the large screen or at an IMAX theater would detract from the experience.


----------



## littlemissattitude

GOLLUM said:


> Friend of mine saw it yesterday.
> 
> Overriding comment was: Special effects/visuals were awesome BUT the dialogue was fairly woeful.


 
Yes.  A very good friend's son (18 and a sci-fi and gaming geek) saw it on the day it came out and said that it was all shiny and pretty visually, but that he didn't really think it was that good a film as far as story was concerned.

He also managed to get motion-sickness from the 3-D combined with all the action in the film.


----------



## purple_kathryn

littlemissattitude said:


> He also managed to get motion-sickness from the 3-D combined with all the action in the film.


 
I got quite ill during cloverfield (managed not to throw up but I did have to shut my eyes during all the bloody running scenes) but I was fine with this

I mustn't be as bad as I thought   I don't think I ever want to get on a boat though.


----------



## Thadlerian

Harpo said:


> I saw it today in 3D (...) and want to go again.


This, essentially. I liked this movie a lot, though I can't say why. But it's epic. Truly epic.


----------



## KESpires

I loved the movie. However, I thought the plot was slightly ripped from The Sky People by S. M. Stirling. There are just too many similarities. Then again, it isn't like the Going Native plot and the revamping of the European/Native American type story is new.


----------



## KESpires

On second thought, there were less similarities than I previously thought. The similarities end in generalities, and the same can be said for many films and books. I rescind my earlier comment.

Still, crazy epic movie. Worth seeing. And worth seeing in the theater.


----------



## clovis-man

Watched it this afternoon in 3-D. Visually stunning. Excellent premise for a story (thanks to Poul Anderson). Then the plot unfolded as part *Fort Apache*, part *Dances With Wolves*, etc. Nothing truly original. Even the unobtainium turned out to just be a "Macguffin". The Colonel was so stereotyped as to be pathetic. I couldn't believe the coffee-drinking-during-the-attack scene. I hoped for Sigourney Weaver's role to more than a reprise of her Diane Fossey portrayal, but I was disappointed.

I could find other quibbles, but I did enjoy the ride, so I'll just say that I hope Cameron doesn't fall into the George Lucas "If I could just add some more SFX it would be perfect" syndrome.


----------



## jojajihisc

Watched it in 3-D a few days ago and loved it. I hadn't seen a 3-D film since the eighties and those were full of cheap attempts to scare you with stuff flying off the screen. This had none of that. The 3-D was simply a way to enhance the look of the movie and make it feel that much more real. Visually at least, this was the most entertaining film I saw this year.


----------



## gully_foyle

Darrggh! Just tried to see it but all 3D sessions sold out.


----------



## Ursa major

And you (given your avatar) more able to cope with 3D than most....


----------



## Allegra

Going to see it on Sunday. Can't wait!


----------



## mygoditsraining

I got back online all ready to absolutely slate the writing in Avatar, only to discover that the rest of the internet got there first.  Really stunning visuals aside, the story arc is so bland that it's actually a little insulting.  I was left thinking; is that it? Two instances of _deus ex machina_ and a character who undergoes the major points of his journey in montage.

On the plus side, it had Wes Studi in it and that, along with the scene where Sam Worthington apologises to a deer-thing he's killed, made me want to go and watch _Last of the Mohicans_ again.


----------



## Moonbat

I've seen it, that is to say I saw it. I hope you guys don't mind if I get a little bit critical. Ok it looked amazing, particularly the flora, the alien plants and the world did look amazing, the fauna, the animals look pretty good too. I liked the black panther/dog things, I liked the hammerhead rhinos too. But I didn't think it was that good a story, I don't even think the 3D added anything to the film.
It looked great, but the 3D sometimes got in the way of the fast paced action. The story was predictable, but at some points very tense. I liked it when Jake was eating as his avatar was about to be squished by the giant JCB things.
I laughed out loud when I saw the general holding a cup of tea (coffee) as they go into battle. But so many problems.
Unobtanium was almost irrelevant, why blow up the tree when there were floating mountains, why were they floating? it didn't really say, they would expect us to assume that they were mountains of unobtanium, but then why not drag a mountain back to thier base instead of blowing up a massive tree that was 'sitting on the largest pile of unobtanium for 20 clicks'
Isn't a click about a mile or a kilometre? so are they that lazy that they can only be bothered to forage for this immensely expensive (imaginary) element within a radius of 20 kilometres on a forest moon light years from earth.
Where was this moon, it took 6 years to get there but they didn't say how, or where it was.
how come the general was able to breathe the air for more than 20 seconds, unlike everyone else he could just stroll out in it and start shooting (with his breath held?)
what was going on with the hair thing, how can a plait (I think thats the spelling) somehow include the optic fibre things that can act like brain wiring neurons? They just plait the hair together and magically the end has some things that talk to all the creatures, and then Jake even shaves some of his head, so how does that not effect the plait things?
I see James Cameron has upgraded his robot suit things from Aliens, cool.
the end battle was good when you got to see how big the Na'vi were compared to humans, the giant arrows were cool. Although at one point they couldn't pierce glass and they later on they could.
sorry for my rant, but I only liked the look of the flora and very little else about this film.  Shame


----------



## Thadlerian

I think it was more like the mountains floated because the unobtainium in the ground. Things like the moon's unspecified location and the USB man-animal connections I can easily accept as artistic freedom. As for the arrows, the first time they were shooting from below, at obtuse angles, while the second time they were shooting from above, at  right angles, getting far greater penetrative force.


----------



## clovis-man

Well, the willing suspension of disbelief can go a long way toward allowing one to enjoy an otherwise quite unbelieveable movie.

And you first have to decide whether it's an issue for you at all.


----------



## Ursa major

clovis-man said:


> Then the plot unfolded as part Fort Apache, part *Dances With Wolves*, etc. Nothing truly original.


 
I've seen the film described (The noughties are defined by fakery | Hadley Freeman | Comment is free | The Guardian) as _*Dances with Smurfs*_.

I've still not seen the film myself, so I couldn't possibly comment.




(And a click - or klick - is a kilometer.)


----------



## nj1

I saw it on boxing day, my first 3D film. I for one really enjoyed it. It wasn't the best plot but at times it sucked you right in and the visuals were stunning with some wicked looking animals (i liked the way those little lizards flew). 
All in all I would recommend it to anyone and for the first time in a long time I felt that it was worth forking out to go to the cinema rather than wait for DVD (would the DVD be in 3D?)


----------



## elvet

Another milestone movie for me, right up there with Blade Runner, Jurrasic Park and Lord of the Rings. Absolutely jaw-dropping visually, though familar themes made most of the movie predicatable. I'm going to try and see this one again on an IMAX screen.


----------



## tangaloomababe

I am glad I am not alone in my thinking here. Went to see Avatar with my partener, who loved it, came out saying it was the best, awesome, fantastic etc etc, whilst I was thinking yes it was watchable and the special efects and CGI and whatever were brilliant, the plot was pretty average, probably your boy meets girl etc storyline just set in some futuristic world.  
Its not something I would see again and I probably don't understand all the hype around it and it was way to long, however it was one of those movies where it didn't matter if you had to leave for a necessary break because it just wasn't that exciting.


----------



## Rothgar

Finally saw the movie today in 3D IMAX. I had no idea the technology had advanced so far! 

It was fantastic! When I say that I mean it in two ways. 1: it's a science fiction fantasy story- it isn't a hard science film which means it's going to require some suspension of disbelief. 2: as a film in 3D it was amazing. I haven't been drawn into a film like that in years. Is it perfect? Of course not. But there is real character development and as the story progresses you really care about these characters when they and their world are facing total destruction. 

For those who complain about it not being 'original'- What truly is completely original these days? Yes, it has similar story elements to 'Call Me Joe' and 'Dances with Wolves' but you can relate it to a lot of other stories also. 'The Last Samurai' with Tom Cruise, 'Aliens' with the evil corporation messing with a world they don't understand, 'John Carter of Mars', 'The Matrix' running around in bodies that aren't your own, 'Starship Troopers' with beefed up mech suits, 'Dune', there were even a couple moments that reminded me of 'Excalibur'. 

The bottom line is that this movie can stand on its own. If you don't care for it that's fine, but decide that after you've seen it.


----------



## Mary Hoffman

Saw it last night with husband, who goes to very few films, and both really enjoyed it. The dialogue is clunky and the plot predictable at every point. And the 3D did not add much to the film in my opinion, but the characters were attractive, especially when they were Na'vi (is that where the apostrophe goes?).

The images linger in the mind.


----------



## Parson

Let me say that I am glad I did not read this thread before I went to the movie. I loved it and I'm not sure I would have if I had known about all of the carping about the details. I sat on the edge of my seat with my heart pounding the whole time. Okay, you knew how it had to end. But I had to reassure my wife, she was ready to walk out because she was afraid of a bad ending. I would not hesitate a second to recommend this movie to anyone who wants to see a good movie. For me this movie ranks right up there with the original Star Wars movie, which to me, is far and away the best SF movie I've ever seen.


----------



## bobbo19

Moonbat said:


> I've seen it, that is to say I saw it. I hope you guys don't mind if I get a little bit critical. Ok it looked amazing, particularly the flora, the alien plants and the world did look amazing, the fauna, the animals look pretty good too. I liked the black panther/dog things, I liked the hammerhead rhinos too. But I didn't think it was that good a story, I don't even think the 3D added anything to the film.
> It looked great, but the 3D sometimes got in the way of the fast paced action. The story was predictable, but at some points very tense. I liked it when Jake was eating as his avatar was about to be squished by the giant JCB things.
> I laughed out loud when I saw the general holding a cup of tea (coffee) as they go into battle. But so many problems.
> Unobtanium was almost irrelevant, why blow up the tree when there were floating mountains, why were they floating? it didn't really say, they would expect us to assume that they were mountains of unobtanium, but then why not drag a mountain back to thier base instead of blowing up a massive tree that was 'sitting on the largest pile of unobtanium for 20 clicks'
> Isn't a click about a mile or a kilometre? so are they that lazy that they can only be bothered to forage for this immensely expensive (imaginary) element within a radius of 20 kilometres on a forest moon light years from earth.
> Where was this moon, it took 6 years to get there but they didn't say how, or where it was.
> how come the general was able to breathe the air for more than 20 seconds, unlike everyone else he could just stroll out in it and start shooting (with his breath held?)
> what was going on with the hair thing, how can a plait (I think thats the spelling) somehow include the optic fibre things that can act like brain wiring neurons? They just plait the hair together and magically the end has some things that talk to all the creatures, and then Jake even shaves some of his head, so how does that not effect the plait things?
> I see James Cameron has upgraded his robot suit things from Aliens, cool.
> the end battle was good when you got to see how big the Na'vi were compared to humans, the giant arrows were cool. Although at one point they couldn't pierce glass and they later on they could.
> sorry for my rant, but I only liked the look of the flora and very little else about this film.  Shame


 
Yo dude, he could not reveal everything now could he, how else is he gonna make a trilogy? lol

And the palnet is in the Alpha Centauri A system, aka one of the closest stars to our dearest Sol.


----------



## Allegra

Watched it yesterday and really enjoyed it largely because of the visual effect. It's a shame a film like this does not have remarkable music.


----------



## Allegra

The film's animation supervisor talks about the techniques:

YouTube - A LOOK AT THE ANIMATION TECHNIQUES OF AVATAR


----------



## Moonbat

> And the palnet is in the Alpha Centauri A system,


 
Did they actually say that in the film? Because I had read/heard that it was, but not from dialogue in the film but from stuff I saw beforehand. Maybe I missed the line when they said Alpha Centurai A.

It has borken box office records for best opening takings, partly due to it being more expensive to see in 3D, but amazingly it hasn't even opened in Italy yet, so that is quite impressive that it has earned over $1'000'000'000 and isn't even fully released everywhere.
By the time it sto9ps playing at cinemas it will probably be the most succesful film ever.


----------



## Rodders

That's great news. It's always good to see SF Films take the box office by storm. Who says that SF is dead?


----------



## The Procrastinator

I just saw this in 3d and what fun! I have to say it reminded me of Star Wars too - something of the same feel. The story was hackneyed, but it was satisfying in that hackneyed kind of way (just like Star Wars), and the visuals were beautiful. What I loved about it (apart from all the wish fulfillment about cat people and dragons) was the fact that all the "alien" life was inspired by our own - much of it from under the water - but to me the feel was very much a celebration of our own biodiversity. "They killed their mother", the aliens said of the sky people - and the whole film was like a mishmash of what our mother has made, given back to us as a reminder of how wonderful and precious she is. /mysticism

I won't pretend I have no quibbles - of course there are many, including the music score - but in the end this film evoked a kind of wonder and involvement in me that precious few sci-fi movies (or movies for that matter) manage to do, so be damned to the quibbles. I liked it.


----------



## ctg

I have to admit that I saw a pirate copy, and even though the picture was a bit fussy and the sound was very distorted, I was feeling as if I was watching Star Wars back in those days when I at the height of a fire-extinguisher (tall one). 

Although some of the plot-elements were predictable, they didn't jar me as much as Dr Who's Christmas/New Year Special. In some cases I was thinking parallels of Borough's Tarzan or Mars saga's. So, the plot critics can go in hell if they didn't find any of it enjoyable. The same applies to those who're saying acting was wooden. 

Avatar is one of those movies that you can watch without your brain turned on, and enjoy it as much as any other good movies. And I hope Cameron gets funding to expand this to the trilogy... but here's the thing... if it's an Avatar trilogy, then are we going to see other worlds, or is all of it going to be based on the same moon?


----------



## Ian Whates

Saw Avatar yesterday, and have to say thet I thought it was fabulous. 
Yes, there were Roger Dean's sky-floating islands, Anne McCaffreyian one-on-one bonding between dragons/banshees and people, elements of ERB's Barsoom books and Andre Norton's Janus books, not to mention Alan Dean Foster's _Mid-World_, and all sorts of other referents, but so what?

It was a good, absorbing and entertaining story -- romance, underdog vs superior technology, pathos, some fabulous action sequences, some beautifully depicted alien flora and fauna, and corporate humanity as the villain. Good science fiction laid out before a mass audience. Yes, those of us who are immersed in SF and fantasy may have seen a lot of similar plots before, but we've never seen them presented like this.

So glad to have caught this in the 3D version too, which I thought _did_ add considerably to the experience. They showed trailers for a couple of forthcoming 3D movies beforehand, and these looked like pop-up books, with characters standing proud of a flat background. Then Avatar started, with a view down a long corridor, all depicted in convincing 3D, and you could immediately see that they'd invested the time and money to get the effect right.

Anyone who hasn't yet seen this should; don't be put off by the film's detractors. It's easy to find fault in things, and, inevitably, Avator is not perfect, but it _is_ very, very special.


----------



## Rothgar

Ian Whates said:


> So glad to have caught this in the 3D version too, which I thought _did_ add considerably to the experience.


 
It seems people have had different takes on the quality of the 3D. I saw it at an IMAX theater, which from what I've read uses a digital projector to give true HD quality. I haven't been able to find out what the non-IMAX theaters are using but maybe they aren't projecting the 3D in HD quality. If anyone finds some good info on this topic please let me know. 

While I was looking for info I found this interesting article about the technology used for the film. Some quotes from James Cameron are also included answering some of the questions that have been posted. Specifically the floating mountains, and where Pandora was located. Inside the Scene-Stealing 3-D Technology Behind James Cameron's Avatar | Popular Science



> *Science Advisers are Annoying:*
> I have just enough of a science background to get me in trouble. When I’m writing, I’m thinking: What can cause a mountain to float? Well, if it was made out of an almost-pure room-temperature superconductor material, and it was in a powerful magnetic field, it would self-levitate. This has actually been demonstrated on a very small scale with very strong magnetic fields. Then my scientists said, “You’ll need magnetic fields that are so powerful that they would rip the hemoglobin out of your blood.” So I said, “Well, we’re not showing that, so we may just have to diverge a little bit from what’s possible in the physical universe to tell our story.”


----------



## Anthony G Williams

This is my take on it:

I finally managed to see this one, although it was a close-run thing. I was determined to get the maximum benefit from the much-praised 3D CGI by seeing it on the huge IMAX screen, and duly booked to go to the nearest one, a train journey away. On the morning I was due to go, a heavy overnight snowfall had added to the chaos of almost three weeks of freezing weather and snow, causing major transport disruption with doom-laden warnings for those foolish enough to poke their noses outside their homes. I nearly didn’t bother to make the attempt, but in the end I slogged the half-mile through the snow to the station, to find that not only did my train turn up (and arrive at its destination) on time, but the one home did as well. Just occasionally, everything goes right!

So, to the film. This review will contain some spoilers but I don’t think this matters because the story has been written up so widely; also because the plot is straightforward and predictable with no unexpected twists, so knowing what happens is unlikely to spoil anyone’s enjoyment of this highly visual entertainment. 

The plot has been much criticised, with reason. It is very simplistic, divided into good and bad guys with no grey areas; the characters are little more than caricatures. The good guys are the humanoid natives (purely CGI) of the planet Pandora, who live in harmony with their environment at a stone-age level of technology, aided by a handful of the humans who have arrived on the planet. The bad guys are all the rest of the heavily-armed humans, who are systematically strip-mining the planet for a valuable ore without regard for the natives or their environment, and are motivated by a combination of ruthless corporate greed and gung-ho militarism. 

The few good humans are mostly scientists who have developed avatars to deal with the natives. These avatars are vat-grown bodies which look like the natives but have a mixture of genes from them and from specific humans. These humans can mind-link with their avatars and effectively inhabit their bodies as if they were their own for hours at a time. One of the avatars belongs to Jake, a crippled former US marine, who accidentally becomes accepted by one of the native tribes and literally goes native himself. He eventually leads them in their fight against the human invaders, an opportunity for some dramatic – and rather overlong – battle scenes. 

I’m not quite sure exactly what the director, James Cameron, had in mind (it’s never wise to assume that you can tell – I’ve had reviewers be quite wrong about the source of inspiration for my books). The film seems to me to be a condensed allegory of the 19th century clash between native North American Indians and the European-origin settlers. This is rubbed home by the fact that the culture of the natives is reminiscent of the Indians while the bad humans are American; a source of unhappiness to some in the USA, although they should take comfort in the fact that the good humans are American as well (in contrast, I am told by film buffs that Hollywood usually employs English actors only to play the bad guys…). Just to make audience support for the natives even more certain, they are preternaturally appealing - especially the females, who have huge wide eyes, sexy voices and supple bodies which move with fluid grace. 

So there is nothing special or original about the plot, a standard tale of brave natives helped by a hero who has changed sides to battle against the evil members of his own kind, plus a dollop of cross-cultural (in this case interspecies) romance. It has been rightly observed that the plot closely resembles *Dancing With Wolves*, with a dash of *Dragonflight* thrown in. The only time I was taken by surprise was right at the end, when Jake’s voice-over commented on the “aliens returning home” – a nice touch which inverted normal assumptions.

However, it wasn’t the plot which made me (and I suspect most other viewers) want to watch *Avatar* but the spectacle, and on that score the film does indeed deliver spectacularly. The exotic landscape, flora and fauna of Pandora are richly portrayed; the quality of the CGI would have seemed miraculous only a few years ago. The 3D greatly adds to the effect without being obtrusive, and so does the big IMAX screen which allows viewers to become immersed in the film.  Whatever you may think of the plot, this is a wonderful visual treat and is well worth seeing for that reason alone. It really does raise standards to a new level, and any future SFF films with fictional CGI environments will be judged technically against *Avatar*. Do try to see it at an IMAX if at all possible, or at the very least in 3D at a cinema. This is one film that I don’t expect I will ever bother to watch on TV since it would lose the great majority of its impact. To sum up: the story is easy to poke holes in, but the film must be seen.

(An extract from my SFF blog)


----------



## Lamont Cranston

I started reading The Word for World is Forest by Ursula K. Le Guin last night and before the first page was done I was reacting OH MY GOD THIS IS AVATAR.


----------



## Anthony G Williams

Cameron did say something to the effect that *Avatar* was based on all the science fiction he'd ever read...


----------



## Lamont Cranston

I remember that from ComicCon, the authors he was naming were the nuts & bolts '50s guys because he's a regular joe blue collar fella. Harlan Ellison was missing from the list too 
But this story is exactly the same: the Earth is a dying concrete wasteland, a colony on a far away planet must harvest resources for it, doing so is endangering the native indigenous population, they live in an airy fairy harmony with their eco-system, the psychotic military commander, Vietnam motifs abound, and it just goes on like that.


----------



## biodroid

Lamont Cranston said:


> I remember that from ComicCon, the authors he was naming were the nuts & bolts '50s guys because he's a regular joe blue collar fella. Harlan Ellison was missing from the list too
> But this story is exactly the same: the Earth is a dying concrete wasteland, a colony on a far away planet must harvest resources for it, doing so is endangering the native indigenous population, they live in an airy fairy harmony with their eco-system, the psychotic military commander, Vietnam motifs abound, and it just goes on like that.


 
All directors borrow extensively from some other source and claim it their own I'm sure.


----------



## Moonbat

> This is one film that I don’t expect I will ever bother to watch on TV since it would lose the great majority of its impact.


 
My housemate has watched this in both 3D and 2D and stated that 2D looked better as it was brighter and sharper. He, along with me, felt the 3D effects added nothing to the visuals of the film and actually detracted from it at times. So I think it will look just as good in 2D.


----------



## Winters_Sorrow

Well I've avoided this thread for quite a while before I got round to watching it, which I did last night.

I must say that I disagree slightly with Moonbat (although I haven't seen the film in 2D yet) that the 3D added nothing to the film. It may have been a little distracting in certain shots but when it worked it really added an additional depth to the movie. Some of the scenes where the natives are running through the forest were excellent because the leaves seemed to bounce back out into the audience and really suck you into the scene.

One minus side though was the fight scenes, especially the ariel battles in which the camera whirled around so much that I felt a little nauseous (although you could argue this is the 3D doing it's job too!) and, as it is a long movie, the prolonged effect of 3D glasses and visuals did give me a mild headache.

The storyline I'm not really going to pass judgement on as it is fairly generic but well done. It is essentially "Dances with Wolves in Space" but it's done competently and the plot holes aren't game-breaking.

The CGI for the natives is probably among the best I have seen so far in a movie and at one point I wondered whether the human scenes were CGI as well as there seemed little contrast to them. The only times it did seem to dip a little was in the human/native interaction scenes (like the lab scene where Jake first inhabits his avatar) as they still haven't 100% sorted out the issue with humans having to interact with air until the aliens are 'airbrushed in' so there is a little bit of random flailing around. Hopefully this is something which can be tackled in any future movies.

On the subject of sequels I'm really not sure where they can go with this. A prequel (human's first arrival on the planet) could work but I don't see a story for a sequel without it being very similar.


----------



## Thadlerian

Lamont Cranston said:


> I started reading The Word for World is Forest by Ursula K. Le Guin last night and before the first page was done I was reacting OH MY GOD THIS IS AVATAR.


It's not. If I recall correctly, the plots of the two stories are vastly different, even if the setting seems similar.


----------



## nj1

My mate went to watch it over the weekend. 
What did you think I asked? 
'Rubbish' he said. 
'Really?' I replied, 'didn't you like the 3D?' . 
'3D?' he said 'No, we watched it in 2D and it was just a long, predictable, boring film' 

I then went on the explain to him that the whole point of the film was to watch it in 3D. He blamed his missus for being too tight to pay the extra £2 odd per ticket for 3D and he had to watch an average film as a result (his words, not mine)


----------



## CyBeR

I went and saw the film a couple of days ago in 3D as well. 
It's been long since I've had such a great experience at the movies honestly. Sure, it's not the most thought provoking film, nor is it the most original...but sure as Hell it's the best experience. 

Indeed the 3D adds to the experience. It was my first time seeing a 3D film and I was expecting to get either sick or get a headache, which I can't say was the case. As such, I focused on that beautiful world of Pandora and I wish the second act of the film would've gone on for at least another half-hour if not a whole full hour. 

For me, "Avatar" is easy to summarize: great first act, an extraordinary second act and a good, if otherwise pretty mundane third act. 

I don't find this film to be about story. It's big and beautiful and the immersion either wins you or loses you. Cameron may have had a host of influences for his world, but he crafted them together beautifully and Pandora was simply alive and untamed. It indeed seemed like a real far away place that could be there (let's not get into technicalities, ok? Ruining the wonder for sheer pleasure of it I've always found to be in bad taste), waiting to be discovered. 

Yes, it would seem I'm not a very hard to please film goer. For me it boils down to: "Did I have a good time watching this?" and the subsequent answer. There are films to watch with your brain turned on, and there are films to watch with your sensibilities turned on...the later was the case here.


----------



## Thadlerian

Lamont Cranston said:


> But this story is exactly the same: the Earth is a dying concrete wasteland, a colony on a far away planet must harvest resources for it, doing so is endangering the native indigenous population, they live in an airy fairy harmony with their eco-system, the psychotic military commander, Vietnam motifs abound, and it just goes on like that.


This is an example of why I believe that a lot of the criticism Avatar receives is unfair. You haven't summarized the _story_, only the _setting_ and part of the premise. 

The _story_ is about a man who is lent a new body, which makes his life far more comfortable and interesting. He is sent out to do a job, and has a lot of fun and adventure along the way. Only, half-way through, he is forced to come to terms with the fact that this new way of life implies some heavy responsibilities as well. Especially when he starts getting confused as for what he actually is - human or Na'vi?

That's the story. It's not at all Dances With Wolves or Pocahontas. As mentioned earlier in the thread, the premise is the same as Poul Anderson's Call Me Joe, but then again, that story is completely different.


----------



## elvet

> James Cameron's completely immersive spectacle "Avatar" may have been a little too real for some fans who say they have experienced depression and suicidal thoughts after seeing the film because they long to enjoy the beauty of the alien world Pandora.


Audiences experience 'Avatar' blues - CNN.com
I've heard it all now!


----------



## Ursa major

* Wonders: Have they also been experiencing a need to visit a personal injuries lawyer. *


----------



## HareBrain

I must admit, many years ago I had a milder case of that after reading about Andelain (and the Land in general) in Stephen Donaldson's Covenant books.

However, this:



> "I even contemplate suicide thinking that if I do it I will be rebirthed in a world similar to Pandora and the everything is the same as in 'Avatar.' "


 
is, frankly, terrifying.


----------



## Parson

elvet said:


> Audiences experience 'Avatar' blues - CNN.com
> I've heard it all now!



This is just wrong! People who can't separate fantasy from reality shouldn't be allowed to watch a film like this.

Even on the level of the movie you have to suspect that there is some hidden darkness. We have two big hints in that direction. First: the NAME!!! Pandora is associated with the myth of letting evil loose, which can't be put back in the box. Second, you will notice that the Na'vi know and respect what a warrior is. They know how to fight and they have weapons. This suggests strongly that there have been wars, and probably still are. No, Pandora only seems like Paradise, and that's only if you don't count the dangers that are shown; note that some of the animals eat the natives.


----------



## Moonbat

Wow! People actually feel depressed when the movie ends and they have to go back to reality. It seems 'BTL' is not too far away.


----------



## Ursa major

Isn't _Avatar_ meant to be the first of a trilogy, Parson? If so, your comments may provide clues as to what happens in the later films.


----------



## The Procrastinator

Ironic that Cameron has managed to create an "alien" world so near to our own that its giving people homesickness. Get outside more, people! 

In a way I can understand their feelings (I had a touch of the Andelain thing too - and Middle-earth - and Narnia...) but surely if we don't want to end up like the baddies on Pandora then we should appreciate our own planet a bit more?


----------



## Pyan

Perhaps they could put out an alternative "therapy ending", in which the Na'vi lose, and the planet is turned into one enormous strip-mined dustbowl...


----------



## Parson

pyan said:


> Perhaps they could put out an alternative "therapy ending", in which the Na'vi lose, and the planet is turned into one enormous strip-mined dustbowl...



LOL & FOF!!! That's too rich!!

Moonbat> BTL=Branching Temporal Logic? This is the best guess I could summon from acronym finder.


----------



## Moonbat

BTL - Better than life. It's from Red Dwarf, a virtual world that is everything you would ever dream of.


----------



## Winters_Sorrow

I believe Moonbat was thinking of "Better Than Life!" the reality simulation game which was used in an episode of the Red Dwarf TV series (series 2 I think?). Classic episode.

EDIT: And there we go


----------



## Parson

Ahh! British SF humor. (Parson says thinking that Red Dwarf has never appealed to him on any level.)

If Avatar wasn't meant to be a trilogy, it is now, after the astounding income numbers it is continuing to put up.


----------



## Ursa major

pyan said:


> Perhaps they could put out an alternative "therapy ending", in which the Na'vi lose, and the planet is turned into one enormous strip-mined dustbowl...


 
There's always someone who wants a happy ending....


----------



## Pyan

Moonbat said:


> BTL - Better than life. It's from Red Dwarf, a virtual world that is everything you would ever dream of.



And here was I thinking it was a sandwich with more tomato than lettuce, but more bacon than either...

There's some news on possible sequels...



> According to a recent LA Times Hero Complex interview, which occurred on Avatar’s opening night, Cameron is considering exploring the other moons surrounding the gas-giant planet Polyphemus, which Pandora orbits. This confirms an earlier rumor by Market Saw, and it gives us an idea about the increased scope of the Avatar universe.


More Avatar Sequel News


----------



## J-WO

I can kind of see where these people are coming from.  I've had similar (if no way near-intense) feelings every time I've finished reading a novel set in the Culture and then have to go to a low paid job for eight hours.  Real life, for the main, is quite simply arse. And the people in charge of it have little furrowed brows and squat on cash bonuses while children starve in countries no one recalls the names of.

But one should get angry, not suicidal. Sf should make people want to change things, never wallow in their own bellybutton.


----------



## gully_foyle

WizardofOwls said:


> the plot is like Fern Gully meets Dune!!!


Can't say I've seen Fern Gully even though it is based on the place where I grew up (so someone told me).

But I have seen and read Dune and couldn't help but notice the minor similarities. One was about a young man on the side of the big mining concerns who goes native, falls in love with the daughter of the native's leader, and manages to control the planet's ecosphere in the final battle with the baddies. And the other one was the same.

But the ripped off story line plays second fiddle to the amazing effects and visuals in this movie. It was pure eye candy. 4/5 from old (Fern Tree) Gully.


----------



## Pyan

Well, the Hollywood Foreign Press Association liked it enough to give it two Golden Globes - Best Director for James Cameron, and Best Film Drama ...



> *Blockbuster sci-fi epic Avatar has been named best film drama at the Golden Globe awards, boosting its chances of further glory at the Oscars in March.*
> 
> Its director James Cameron was also honoured at the event, held at the Beverly Hilton Hotel in Los Angeles.


BBC News - Glory for Avatar at Golden Globes


----------



## Moonbat

It's hardly the best drama though is it!
I mean as far as the story line goes it is a bit light on drama, I'm not saying it shouldn't win best director as it is amazing to look at but I don't think it deserves best drama.
Last count I read it was upto $1.6 billion, so only $200 million left to earn until he beats his own biggest earner in Titanic. Come on you Na'vi

Anyone know what the ' in Na'vi does to the pronuciation? does it do anything, I'm calling it the same as I would if it were Navi, should it just have a pause in like Na Vi?


----------



## Thadlerian

Moonbat said:


> Anyone know what the ' in Na'vi does to the pronuciation? does it do anything, I'm calling it the same as I would if it were Navi, should it just have a pause in like Na Vi?


Does it have to do anything? Everybody knows that apostrophes are compulsory in alien-sounding Fantasy naming conventions.


----------



## Anthony G Williams

'The Hurt Locker' was favoured to win. Two curious connections between the films: they both feature an awkward US soldier as the hero, and the directors used to be married to each other. Apart from that, they are as different as two films could be. 'The Hurt Locker', concerning the work of a bomb-disposal team in Iraq, is grimly realistic and very intense, a far better drama with much superior characterisation. Yet the Golden Globe judges have opted for pure, simplistic, escapist fantasy instead. I wonder what that says about the mood in the USA?


----------



## Moonbat

> Everybody knows that apostrophes are compulsory in alien-sounding Fantasy naming conventions.


But if it doesn't make it sound any different and only looks more alien then how can it make it more alien-sounding, it should be alien-looking.

I read that Cameron actually used Na'vi the language in his acceptance speech 

and as for Hurt locker, that is one of the most over rated films I have seen this past year. Not nearly as good as people make it out to be. Not as good as the director's last effort; Point Break, now that was a film. Actually Hurt locker smacked of alot more nationalism than Avatar. The British soldiers are useless compared to the bomb disposal soldiers of America, the good guys have to save the child and the evil Iraqi's blow up children!


----------



## Rodders

I think it's great news for Cameron, although i haven't seen the film i would imagine that the award would have been more for technical excellence. One thing's for sure, everyone's going to want to get on the bandwagon and like it or lump it SF and F will be right up there. There will be a lot of poor rubbish, but there will also be some gems. Great news for Science Fiction i reckon.


----------



## Moonbat

We've already had Gamer and Surrogates dealing with the same SF scenario; inhabiting/controlling other bodies. Both of these came out before Avatar but were definitely put into production after. So wiould you say that these two films have alreayd been part of the Avatar banddwagon, is hollywood that sinmple that they copy each other's movies in an attempt to cash in on the big movies sucess?


----------



## clovis-man

Rodders said:


> I think it's great news for Cameron, although i haven't seen the film i would imagine that the award would have been more for technical excellence.


 
Although it's commonplace for films receiving a "best picture" award to also have the director receive top honors, it seems odd for such a CGI dominated movie to have its director win. If this is a valid accolade, then it seems that he should have at least received a nomination in 1986 for *Aliens* or in 1991 for *Terminator 2*. But he didn't. Not for the Academy Awards either. Maybe I need to go see *Avatar* again and not fixate on derivative influences.


----------



## Thadlerian

clovis-man said:


> Maybe I need to go see *Avatar* again and not fixate on derivative influences.


I think that's a very good idea. I hope many others will do the same. As soon as I looked beyond the "Dances with Wolves rip-off" part of the plot, I found the character story (Jake Sully's story) to be very well made, and refreshingly deep for a Hollywood blockbuster.


----------



## woodsman

pyan said:


> Perhaps they could put out an alternative "therapy ending", in which the Na'vi lose, and the planet is turned into one enormous strip-mined dustbowl...



See this is what I wanted. 

I thought the film was some sort of commentary/judgement on the rape of earth through resource exploitation etc. 

If this was the point, I can't help but feel a dramatic ending where they failed to save the goddess would have been more shocking. 

Then again I'm not a fan of happy endings, especially not ones that you can see a mile off. 

I enjoyed seeing the film, great visuals etc. but I didn't walk out feeling that it had made any real impact upon me personally.


----------



## Jimmy Magnusson

I saw it for the third time tonight, and most of the criticism I had after the second viewing (loved the first showing, which was in 3D) kinda disappeared. What a great movie. I especially like Neteyri and the Colonel (Quadrich).


----------



## Justin_B

I'm not sure it was entirely a happy ending.. 
Oh, sure, the Na'vi were celebrating at the end, but even as the few hundred would be exploiters were sent packing, without actually spelling it out for the audience, it's not hard to figure that 'the corporation' would be back & wouldn't pussy-foot around with diplomatic solutions next time. 

I love the name for the rare mineral.. Unobtainium


----------



## Anthony G Williams

justinbentley1 said:


> I love the name for the rare mineral.. Unobtainium


An old SF joke!


----------



## Pyan

And this latest application has already made its way onto what is, IMHO, one of the most browsable sites on the net...

Unobtainium - Television Tropes & Idioms


----------



## HareBrain

pyan said:


> And this latest application has already made its way onto what is, IMHO, *one of the most browsable sites on the net*...
> 
> Unobtainium - Television Tropes & Idioms


 

By "browsable" you mean "a deadly attention-trap, from which you'll be lucky to escape with half your weekend left".


----------



## Pyan

Yep, uses up the other half of the weekend that the Chrons sometimes leaves...


----------



## Moontravler

TVTropes is terrible. Scary. I thought I'd escaped from it, please don't push me back into that black hole, I have things to do in my life....   aaaaarrggghhh!!!


----------



## CBellenis

Not a site I'd seen before - and having just torn myself away, I am far from grateful!! thanks Pyan!


----------



## Parson

The Hallelujah mountains have been located (were located?) in China. 

Chinese mountain renamed for â€˜Avatarâ€™ - Movies- msnbc.com

Who says the Chinese aren't first class capitalists?


----------



## Moonbat

Avater has done it, it is now officially the highest grossing film ever. It has, reportedly, earned £1.15 billion. What is even more impressive is the short amount of time that it has taken to earn so much. Titanic only became the highest earner after several years of release, Avatar has achieved it in a couple of months.
Admittedly the higher cost of seeing it in 3D has contributed to the profits, but still very impressive.
And they say that video piracy is destroying the cinema experience! Although I wonder how long it will be before 3D camcorders and 3D televisions are capable fo reproducing the same effects as the expensive 3D cinema screens.
anyhoo, I feel like going to watch it again, but I wont. Too many other good films out there to see.


----------



## Xelah

I haven't read the whole thread here, but if anyone has ever wondered what doing acid is like... go see Avatar.  The plot is okay and the villains were flat, but you'll wish you'd brought your weed for the visuals.


----------



## J-WO

Acid turns you into a tribal smurf? Keep clear, kids!

Hey, just supposing-I mean, just _supposing_- the corporation in *Avatar* is the same as the one in *Aliens*... wouldn't it be a crazy sequel if they dropped millions of Xenomorphs onto Pandora to sort out the locals once and for all. That'd teach 'em!


----------



## AE35Unit

Amazingly they're already working on a sequel! Unbelievable


----------



## biodroid

I really enjoyed Avatar but the plot was done before. I preferred the new Star Trek story, more engaging to me and the characters were just more natural to me as well. Still going to get Avatar on dvd.


----------



## J-WO

Whichever way you cut it, SF is gonna storm the Oscars! _*Crosses fingers*_

I mean, come on; in retrospect, Braveheart is an awful version of Avatar, and that won best film!


----------



## Themistocles

AE35Unit said:


> Amazingly they're already working on a sequel! Unbelievable



Yes, but where can they go with this?

1) The humans return to take back their mining operations

2) While searching for a new Home-tree, there is a feud between other tribes.

or, my favorite:
3) A prequel to when the red flying creature (forget its name) was last used, and don't include humans in the story.

There are countless other possibilities...


----------



## The Procrastinator

They could grow an avatar for one of the blue cat people - send it back to Earth...


----------



## J-WO

I think you're right Procrastinator. Human avatars. I'd put money on it. For a start, the name will still make sense. Also, Zoe Saldana would get to be human rather than big and blue (and her stocks rising what with the Trek franchise and Pirates of the Caribbean, so the executives will probably want more 'visibility' on that score), plus you can't have leads who are not human all the way through (We've no problem with that but you know Hollywood!).

Not so sure about Earth though. Still, never know.


----------



## Pyan

I wouldn't be so sure that the reverse avatar idea would go down so well - let's face it, 90% of the attraction of the original film is the world-setting and the visuals. Hard to see one of the Na'vi in a human avatar on Earth is going to have the same impact...


----------



## Interference

3D is fabulous.


----------



## The Procrastinator

But I believe we've pretty much wrecked Earth in this future Py (or that's the impression I got). It would be kinda nifty for a Na'vi avatar to try and save or salvage Earth's biosphere. After all:
_In the Na'vi
You can learn to climb a tree
In the Na'vi
There's no tax or stamp duty
In the Na'vi
Feeling blue is feeling free
In the Na'vi
In the Na'vi!_


----------



## Boneman

Lol, procrastinator.... I like that!

Just saw it last night - very impressive, if a little 'hollywood' (that's where it was made for god's sake, Boneman!). Didn't you just know that he was going to ride the big bad winged thing when she was showing him the skeleton head? - the gun on the mantlepiece if ever there was one... I was really hoping the little squirt who sanctioned the attacks was going to die horribly!


----------



## J-WO

Boneman said:


> I was really hoping the little squirt who sanctioned the attacks was going to die horribly!


 

Impaled on his own golf club.


----------



## Mary Hoffman

J-WO said:


> Impaled on his own golf club.



That is Giovanni Ribisi you are dissing! Not one of his finest moments I agree.


----------



## J-WO

Oh, no; I _praise_ Mr Ribisi! It takes a lot of acting chops to portray someone so reprehensible yet still possessing a modicum of humanity. It would have been simple to act pure evil, but Ribisi goes for morally weak and blindly greedy.

The guy doesn't get enough exposure. Hopefully he'll be in the sequel.


----------



## Themistocles

Heading back to Earth is a great idea. Didn't think about the reverse Avatar concept. Would be kinda neat if they tried to save Earth. Perhaps they revitalize Earth with life from Pandora???


----------



## The Procrastinator

Well they can't exactly do a repeat of Avatar on Pandora, so they have to go somewhere else, and if the Avatar concept has to remain relevant then why not save the earth while they're at it? Its all about wish-fulfilment anyway. As far as the practicalities go, I was struck while watching the film by the similarity of Pandora's linked ecosystem to Sheri Tepper's Arbai device - an underground fungal/thread network physically linking the biosphere in a subtle empathetic (voluntary) bond. Pandora's would need engineering to fit the different chemical balance of our world, but it could be done. This could be the "Pandora's Box" scenario hinted at in the title of the world...


----------



## GOLLUM

I may be one of the few people on the planet yet to watch this much hyped movie. Most of my friends who have seen it were not overly impressed by the plot or the dialogue, albeit the graphics were reportedly stunning.

I'm one of those old fashioned types who normally prefers intelligent content over pure show when it comes to film.

Go figure...


----------



## Winters_Sorrow

Hmm. This really may not be the film for you then Gollum. Any interesting ideas or concepts seem to get washed away in the music and effects, although I will say the dialogue and performances are not so bad as the movie first starts out. It does tends to get more "boo-hiss" scenery-munching towards the end of the movie and it's climax


----------



## GOLLUM

In that case I'll buy some beers instead....


----------



## Parson

The Procrastinator said:


> Well they can't exactly do a repeat of Avatar on Pandora, so they have to go somewhere else, and if the Avatar concept has to remain relevant then why not save the earth while they're at it? Its all about wish-fulfilment anyway. As far as the practicalities go, I was struck while watching the film by the similarity of Pandora's linked ecosystem to Sheri Tepper's Arbai device - an underground fungal/thread network physically linking the biosphere in a subtle empathetic (voluntary) bond. Pandora's would need engineering to fit the different chemical balance of our world, but it could be done. This could be the "Pandora's Box" scenario hinted at in the title of the world...



I'm thinking of  Jack Chalker's "Four Lords of the Diamond" series. This series had a concept like this as well. But I think that when the sequel, and there will be a sequel, comes out the location will be Pandora not earth. There are too many avenues to explore there, and it gives another shot at the CAG wizards to make us ohhh and ahhh again.


----------



## Moonbat

There was alot of Pandora left to explore, and many other 'tribes' of the Na'vi to look into.


----------



## Thadlerian

GOLLUM said:


> I'm one of those old fashioned types who normally prefers intelligent content over pure show when it comes to film.


Oh, there's enough nuance and ideas in Avatar. You just have to look out for it. To put it another way: Many people have beforehand decided it's a stupid movie (I did), so they allow themselves to watch it with stupid eyes. They're told what the movie is like, so when they watch it, they see only the stuff that verifies what they've been told.

Go see it. It's awesome.


----------



## Hilarious Joke

Yeah I think you should see it, Gol. I don't think the story's bad, maybe not very original, but it still fires the imagination. 

None of the dodgy dialogue complaints or whatever hindered my enjoyment of the movie.


----------



## Interference

For me, as a 3D novice (nearly said virgin, but that may have given the wrong impression), the experience was phenomenal given that every aspect of the imagery was created from scratch - not painted grass or anything silly like that.  It was like being in another world, quite literally ... which was worth the price of admission imho.


----------



## GOLLUM

Well if you insist....

I'll still watch it as I enjoy a visual feast. It's just that I normally I prefer my films to be backed up by some semblance of intelligent commentary.

I'm especially going to be looking out for those elusive insights Thadlerian suggests are there....


----------



## Interference

GOLLUM said:


> It's just that I normally I prefer my films to be backed up by some semblance of intelligent commentary.



Silly boy.  Two words:  James ... and Cameron.


----------



## Themistocles

The Procrastinator said:


> Pandora's would need engineering to fit the different chemical balance of our world, but it could be done. This could be the "Pandora's Box" scenario hinted at in the title of the world...



"Pandora's box" makes perfect sense! That is definitely a possibility. To get to Earth, it would probably have to be some kind of rescue operation. Several Pandorans get kidnapped, and a rescue mission is launched... Then they discover the state of Earth, and discover a way to heal it.


----------



## Mouse

I finally saw this on Wednesday (Orange Wednesday!) in 3D. 3D's good but unless you're looking at the main focus point of the screen everything else is blurred, which is a bit annoying with a film like Avatar where you kinda want to look at everything on screen.

I enjoyed the film, even though it was massively predictable and certain bits of dialogue was massively dodgy!


----------



## J-WO

Themistocles said:


> Then they discover the state of Earth, and discover a way to heal it.



Given this new technology, I think they could make Earth (a total opposite to Pandora- all super cities and chemical oceans etc) look spectacular.


----------



## Rodders

I haven't seen this yet, but i will soon. I have a feeling that any sequels will turn out like the Matrix trilogy. A Great first part, with much weaker, less thought out follow ups that will bring down the entire story. For some reason (and forgive me, but i am aware that without seeing it, i am on the side of ignorance here), i don't get the impression that there's much more story to tell. Any sequels will be franchised.


----------



## Parson

Rodders said:


> I haven't seen this yet, but i will soon. I have a feeling that any sequels will turn out like the Matrix trilogy. A Great first part, with much weaker, less thought out follow ups that will bring down the entire story. For some reason (and forgive me, but i am aware that without seeing it, i am on the side of ignorance here), i don't get the impression that there's much more story to tell. Any sequels will be franchised.



They wouldn't have to be. I may be in the minority here, but I am quite sure that the next sequel will be on Pandora, and we will begin to see what's in the box. If you remember the myth, the box was so intriguing that Pandora could not help herself, although she'd been warned, and opened the box. I think the same thing is going to happen here. 

Human philosophy tends to follow the ying and the yang. We have seen the bad with the good in the humans. Now the next step is  to see the good with the bad in the Pandorans. 

If you've been following this thread, you may remember one of my earlier posts when I pointed out that the Pandoran's both knew what a warrior was and appreciated it. You will also remember that our heroine comes within an eyelash of killing the hero before he's done anything wrong. Although the race is in harmony with nature and detests killing without a good reason, killing is still part of their life and vocation. 

I think we will be reminded of the old human adage: "Beauty is only skin deep."

You also have to remember that we have the Pandoran "Gia" to be considered. Who or what is this mysterious life force. Is it truly all of nature bound together or is there some binding agent that is in control. 

There are many possible stories and I'm willing to bet that any really good ones happen on Pandora, not on earth.


----------



## J-WO

And then, of course, there's all those other moons floating around that big ol' gas giant...


----------



## Moonbat

Wasn't Gia sort of like a brain with 10 to the something amount of connections through al lthe living things on the planet, something about the communication travelling up through roots and form one plant to anohter, sort of like a giant brain with the all the interconnected neurons. Maybe the Gia/Pandora will be a big brain and will figure out that humans suck and so blow them all away, or at least try to, so then the humans will kill of Gia/Pandora with some clever poison and pave over the planet to make a giant parking lot/skate park.


----------



## littlemissattitude

Okay.  I finally saw *Avatar*.  Not in 3-D, but that hardly seemed necessary, given how gorgeous the film is in 2-D.

I have to say, I went in not really expecting to like the movie very much.  I've only seen two other James Cameron movies, to my knowledge: *Titanic*, which I really hated, and *The Abyss*, which is among my favorite films.  In fact, I only went at the last minute, with friends, and we had been thinking of seeing *Sherlock Holmes*, but the showing started too late (I had to be at work this morning, and two of the people I saw it with had to drive back to Utah this morning).  So, we saw *Avatar* instead.

And...I liked it very much.  Much more than I expected to.

And after the movie we were talking about what the moral of the story was.  One (not the one I came up with) was, "Never let your troops go native."  The one I came up with was, "When you visit someone's house, don't walk off with their stuff; it might make them angry, and for good reason."


----------



## J-WO

littlemissattitude said:


> And after the movie we were talking about what the moral of the story was.  One (not the one I came up with) was, "Never let your troops go native."  The one I came up with was, "When you visit someone's house, don't walk off with their stuff; it might make them angry, and for good reason."



The moral I drew was 'if you stick a body part into any animal it will do whatever you tell it.'

Since then,I've been banned from my local zoo and I've gained a prosthetic leg.


----------



## Dave

I finally got to see this today. Apologies for a very long post, but this is a very long thread to read through too.



ravenus said:


> I'm hoping it will not be like the underwhelming eyestrain 3D that was Monsters v/s Aliens.





Tillane said:


> As someone who has poor eyesight and poor depth perception, this basically means that I'm stuffed if I want to go and see certain films.


I have good eyesight, but my eyes still feel tired now. 3 hours is a long time to be messing with your eyes like that. I'd say that Sky 3D TV totally wasted their money on their advert before the film.



littlemissattitude said:


> He also managed to get motion-sickness from the 3-D combined with all the action in the film.


I didn't find it that bad, but I wouldn't recommend it if you have a fear of heights.



Moonbat said:


> I was all prepared to take my girl friend to the Waterloo Imax (something like the largest loudest cinema sound system in europe) to see Avatar next week but they are all booked up, might have to see it elsewhere, but still in 3D


They've been booked up since before Christmas, but they were also showing it at silly times. You would think that with something actually half-decent to show they would put it on every night at peak times. I saw it at a local Odeon, but there is also an IMAX in Greenwich for your future reference.



ScottSF said:


> It's the best thing I've seen since LOTR.





Blackrook said:


> The premise of the movie is there are 10' tall blue elves.


When I first saw them and the whole look of the film, I thought "they are going to have to remake _Lord of the Rings_ again!"

Firstly, I find it absolutely astounding the number of people that it is claimed that James Cameron has managed to rip-off this story from:


clovis-man said:


> While you wait for the film premiere, you could do worse than to read "Call Me Joe" by Poul Anderson, a short story from 50 years ago which explores the same theme.





CBellenis said:


> ...it seems to be based pretty firmly on Ursula Le Guin's _The word for World is Forest_.





KESpires said:


> I thought the plot was slightly ripped from The Sky People by S. M. Stirling. There are just too many similarities. Then again, it isn't like the Going Native plot and the revamping of the European/Native American type story is new.





clovis-man said:


> ...the plot unfolded as part _Fort Apache_, part _Dances With Wolves_





ctg said:


> I was thinking parallels of Borough's Tarzan or Mars saga's.





Ian Whates said:


> Yes, there were Roger Dean's sky-floating islands, Anne McCaffreyian one-on-one bonding between dragons/banshees and people, elements of ERB's Barsoom books and Andre Norton's Janus books, not to mention Alan Dean Foster's _Mid-World_, and all sorts of other referents, but so what?


There was even someone else in the news claiming that *He* wrote this story, but I can't find a reference now.



Anthony G Williams said:


> Cameron did say something to the effect that _Avatar_ was based on all the science fiction he'd ever read...


I also read that in an interview too, so he doesn't deny helping himself to others ideas, but I personally thought it was mostly ripped-off _Dune_: Paul Atreides goes native with the Fremen, learns how to survive the harsh environment, rides a Sandworm, becomes their leader, and takes them to victory against technologically superior forces.



biodroid said:


> All directors borrow extensively from some other source and claim it their own I'm sure.


Of course they do. The beauty is how you assemble all the parts together in an original new way, and _Avatar_ does that.

Maybe everyone just sees in the film what they want to see?



Ursa major said:


> I've seen the film described as _Dances with Smurfs_.


Well, that's certainly another point of view.



tangaloomababe said:


> ..the plot was pretty average, probably your boy meets girl etc storyline just set in some futuristic world.


Like Mowgli at the end of Disney's _The Jungle Book_, maybe?



dustinzgirl said:


> Actually, its very based on Hinduism...


I'm not sure if dustinzgirl was talking about another film, but many religions incorporate the idea of Gaia, or a Mother Earth Goddess. It is a firm 'eco-hippie' favourite too, but they actually referenced that in the film itself, saying that it wasn't some Pagan religion but a real phenomena. There was certainly a "Save the Earth" message in there somewhere.





WizardofOwls said:


> And it has STRONG pagan roots! I actually believe I felt the deity in the movie calling to me!!!! Is that even possible???? She is Eywah the Savage Planet!!!!!


See, I knew it!



Harpo said:


> I ...loved the nature...


SF films never get the worlds right. They always have flowering plants - mostly Coniferous Forests. Yet, flowering plants on Earth are a fairly recent evolution. Look at the money spent on _Star Wars_ cgi aliens, but they still have battles in forests of trees that look just like Earth. The Biology of Pandora was part of the story; it needed to be different and alien, and they really managed to do that. 





Moonbat said:


> ...amazing, particularly the flora, the alien plants and the world did look amazing, the fauna, the animals look pretty good too. I liked the black panther/dog things, I liked the hammerhead rhinos too.


I also like the flying dinosaurs (or were they dragons?) and the parallel evolution of dog-things, horse-things and rhino-things.



Tillane said:


> Yeah, good old Unobtainium.





Anthony G Williams said:


> An old SF joke!


I thought the flying rocks were a little too much to believe. 





clovis-man said:


> ...the Unobtainium turned out to just be a "Macguffin".


I also wanted it explained why our dying Earth's problems could be solved by this fantastic mineral. Still, if this is going to be a trilogy, then there is plenty of time to explain that in the sequels. 



bobbo19 said:


> Yo dude, he could not reveal everything now could he, how else is he gonna make a trilogy?


My sentiments precisely. 



Parson said:


> You also have to remember that we have the Pandoran "Gia" to be considered. Who or what is this mysterious life force. Is it truly all of nature bound together or is there some binding agent that is in control.


My guess is that the Unobtainium is responsible for everything on Pandora. There was the highest concentration of it under the old tree city.



Moonbat said:


> ...why blow up the tree when there were floating mountains ...are they that lazy that they can only be bothered to forage for this...element within a radius of 20 kilometres on a forest moon light years from Earth.





Thadlerian said:


> I think it was more like the mountains floated because the Unobtainium in the ground.


 I'm not so sure, the way the vines had grown around them looked to me like the force was from within them.



Moonbat said:


> ...what was going on with the hair thing, how can a plait somehow include the optic fibre things that can act like brain wiring neurons?





Thadlerian said:


> Things like the moon's unspecified location and the USB man-animal connections I can easily accept as artistic freedom.


Only, all the other animals had them in special appendages, so why not the Na'vi too?



bobbo19 said:


> the planet is in the Alpha Centauri A system...





Moonbat said:


> ...I had read/heard that it was, but not from dialogue in the film but from stuff I saw beforehand. Maybe I missed the line when they said Alpha Centurai A.


Me also, and I think I would have remembered some trivia like that had I heard it in the film.



Moonbat said:


> I see James Cameron has upgraded his robot suit things from _Aliens_ cool.


Has every film these mech-suits in them? They were also in _District 9_. They are the Soldier-Boys from Joe Haldane's _Forever Peace_.



Moonbat said:


> Wow! People actually feel depressed when the movie ends and they have to go back to reality. It seems 'BTL' is not too far away.


Funnily enough, that is a theme in _Surrogates_. It is something Neo must consider in _Matrix Revolutions_ when freeing everyone. It has been a theme in novels, but I expect we are going to get many more films on this theme now that we have people role-playing in cyber-space for long periods of their recreational time.



woodsman said:


> I thought the film was some sort of commentary/judgement on the rape of earth through resource exploitation etc. If this was the point, I can't help but feel a dramatic ending where they failed to save the goddess would have been more shocking.


I would have been much more shocking. You would certainly have people depressed enough for suicides after that, but the problem would be no sequels after that!



Themistocles said:


> Yes, but where can they go with this?





The Procrastinator said:


> They could grow an avatar for one of the blue cat people - send it back to Earth...


I also had that idea, but why do you think the Na'vi look like cats? Elves or Smurfs maybe, but cats?



J-WO said:


> Human avatars. I'd put money on it... Not so sure about Earth though.


You might be right, Earth is apprently devastated from what Jake said. It wouldn't make such a cinematic experience.





pyan said:


> 90% of the attraction of the original film is the world-setting and the visuals. Hard to see one of the Na'vi in a human avatar on Earth is going to have the same impact...





Themistocles said:


> Perhaps they revitalize Earth with life from Pandora???


I think we've just written the two sequels already! 



Rodders said:


> I have a feeling that any sequels will turn out like the Matrix trilogy. A Great first part, with much weaker, less thought out follow ups that will bring down the entire story. Any sequels will be franchised.


Possibly, as that is usually the way with sequels, but it would depend entirely on who the director was. James Cameron did alright with _Aliens_ didn't he?

And if you haven't seen this, you must go to see it, and see it in 3D. For all the dodgy lines and faults it is a great cinematic experience, and one that is on a par with the other ground-breaking films mentioned by people earlier in the thread.


----------



## Parson

All I can say is "Wow!" Dave what a post. Well thought out with multitudinous* insights.

*(A $64 word for a $64 post  )

Got to see this in 3D!


----------



## Wiglaf

Is IMAX 3-D worth the extra cost over regular 3-D.  Both are with polarized glasses, right?  (Old red-n-green sucked)  The IMAX here isn't really different from a regular screen and its the only option in the county. The one in the park downtown is a half-dome but it only shows educational films.  CECUT (in Mexico) wouldn't show it either.  So since the IMAX isn't a dome IMAX, what's the difference?


----------



## Dave

I think everyone would have a different view on whether IMAX is worth the extra, and it depends on how much extra. I can't really say as I've only ever seen one IMAX 3D film and that was an animation, though I've seen the 180° and 360° cinema films that they had in domes at amusement parks.

I may be wrong, but I though all IMAX were just big flat screens though. The main point to it all, I believe, is that you can't see the edge of the screen when watching, and so it seems more real-life. There is always going to be some suspension of disbelief though, even with the VR goggles of the kind that Moonbat mentioned in _Red Dwarf_ or a _Matrix_ style link-up.


----------



## Constantine Opal

Well I have to say, this is the first time I've read a 14 page thread on here! I don't much care if the story was a bit 'basic', it meant I could concentrate more on the stunning visuals brought so well to life with 3D. Why else do you think they made it a 3D film? Not because it enhanced the script or storyline! Can I just say, I thought Zoe Saldana was incredible in it. (In the same way Andy Serkis was incredible in LOTR obviously). I thought her character gave a very raw performance in a way some human characters never have. The horror of finding her father dying, and of Home Tree being destroyed, the 'betrayal' she felt on finding out Jake was, in effect, working under cover... this performance had me enthralled all the way through. It's a pity she probably won't even get a nod at Oscar time. 

I have never been so completely embraced by a film, to the point where the cinema could have blown up around me and I wouldn't have noticed. Just immensely beautiful and rich in all the places it should have been, and a gentle introduction to the world of Pandora and it's people. 

Time for more convoluted story lines later on!


----------



## clovis-man

As this thread (and the film) keep rolling along, I have to say that *Avatar *has certainly become something of a phenomenon. People I know who would never go to a science fiction movie have not only been to see this one, but have gone again. My friend in Oregon called to ask me if I'd seen it. When I replied, "Twice", he burst out laughing and said, "Me too!" Another friend, who just turned 70 this past weekend, said the same thing.


----------



## The Procrastinator

Dave said:


> I also had that idea, but why do you think the Na'vi look like cats? Elves or Smurfs maybe, but cats?



Dude, they totally look like humanoid cats. I'm not talking tabby here, I'm talking large feline. They move like cats, too. Check it out.

Smurfs - well they are blue. But they lack the hats.
Elves - well they are slim and graceful and they live in a forest. And they have pointy ears.
Cats! Broad flat noses, broad cheekbones, cat eyes (big cat), cat ears. Graceful cat movements. Cat tail. I dare say most artists have imagined and drawn cat people while growing up - I sure did - and they looked remarkably like the Na'vi. Recognised them instantly. Very cool. Marvellous to see them in a movie!


----------



## Dave

The Procrastinator said:


> Dude, they totally look like humanoid cats. I'm not talking tabby here, I'm talking large feline. They move like cats, too. Check it out.


Sorry, I never drew cat-people as a child. On more reflection, I see the ears, the broad noses and the tails, but still, to me, cats mean carnivores; long, sharp claws; large, sharp, canine teeth; pouncing not running; and fur. I think I see aliens cats like the Kzin. When I watched the film they just didn't strike me as cats, that is all, especially since there was another large cat-like-thing that attacked them. I never said I was the only opinion allowed.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Dave said:


> I never said I was the only opinion allowed.


Sure you did. I heard you.

As far as the sequels go, I don't think they would have the _Matrix_ effect. Those were different because the Wachowski's saw the success of the movie, and then decided to make sequels, arrogantly claiming that they had always envisioned it as a trilogy. What a load of horse radish!

Cameron, however, announced even before _Avatar_ was released that he and fellow writers had enough story (or at least the outlines of one) for a trilogy, but that he was waiting to see how this was received before deciding if he would bother. If that is true, then the overall story arc should be cohesive and would turn out quite well.

Of course, that doesn't mean it will hold the same sense of wonder, since now we've already seen the gorgeous world of Pandora. But I, for one, would love for JC to make the sequels.

Oh, and the Unobtainium. What makes you guys think that mineral is what's giving the planet all these magical properties? I don't remember any suggestion to that effect in the film. Unless I'm very much mistaken (which I never am), the reason for the hunt for the mineral is simply because it's extremely rare and, therefore, extremely valuable. The ones who are after it are, after all, a corporation. And like all corporations, their actions are motivated by profit, not out of some belief that this mineral will help resolve Earth's problems.


----------



## Dave

Devil's Advocate said:


> Oh, and the Unobtainium. What makes you guys think that mineral is what's giving the planet all these magical properties? I don't remember any suggestion to that effect in the film. Unless I'm very much mistaken (which I never am), the reason for the hunt for the mineral is simply because it's extremely rare and, therefore, extremely valuable.


I've only seen the film once, and it was over a month ago now, but I'm sure it was a mentioned that Unobtainium was needed to save planet Earth. I don't think they said exactly how, but that was why the Military was supporting the Corporation in exploiting it. Can anyone else confirm that?


----------



## Thadlerian

Dave said:


> I've only seen the film once, and it was over a month ago now, but I'm sure it was a mentioned that Unobtainium was needed to save planet Earth. I don't think they said exactly how, but that was why the Military was supporting the Corporation in exploiting it. Can anyone else confirm that?


I think Jake says quite explicitly, in a voice-over, that the troopers are hired contractors, not governmental military forces.


----------



## CBellenis

Some post Dave!! Great synthesis. Hints at some kind of genius in Cameron to have given the film so may different resonances for different people.
Another thought - as it is just a film it contains so much - To really get the most out of LotR you had to have read the books (or have someone irritating like me sitting next to you, gabbing on 'explaining' stuff), but as it's just a film, _Avatar_ isn't missing anything.  AN argument for making films from scratch, rather than from books.


----------



## Dave

Thadlerian said:


> I think Jake says quite explicitly, in a voice-over, that the troopers are hired contractors, not governmental military forces.


What about the other question: that the Unobtainium was required to save the Earth?

If the troopers are hired contractors, then the Corporation must hold some power back on Earth. I expect that Earth is very unlike the Earth we know today - run by powerful Corporations, ecologically damaged. If he does decide to set the sequel on Earth with the Pandorans visiting Earth, then I think there is scope for a reasonably interesting sequel there.


----------



## clovis-man

Dave said:


> What about the other question: that the Unobtainium was required to save the Earth?


 
I think I may have touched on this somewhere at the beginning of the thread, but:

IMHO, the unobtainium is nothing more than a MacGuffin, i.e., something that everybody wants and which drives the characters to do what they do. Good recent examples can be found in the movies *Pulp Fiction* and *Ronin*. It's not really important what it is. The important thing is the interaction among the characters. Even the name is a big tip-off.

But read into it whatever you like. "Suit yourself. I'm easy." (Marty Feldman: *Young Frankenstein*).


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Oh, yes, there's not doubt that it's just a MacGuffin. But even MacGuffins have some excuse for existing, even if that excuse is ultimately irrelevant to the greater story.

We were wondering what Avatar's 'excuse' was? Just the monetary value? Or because it can save the Earth?


----------



## Thadlerian

Dave said:


> What about the other question: that the Unobtainium was required to save the Earth?


Keep in mind that several of the characters (the bad guys) may be considered unreliable informers. Quaritch tells the soldiers that everything on Pandora will try to kill them; this is an overstatement he uses in an attempt to bind them to his will. I believe Selfridge is the one who says it will "save Earth". This might well enough be rhetorics on his behalf - maybe something he tells himself to justify the things they're doing. Maybe some piece of official company propaganda. The truth might be far more mundane and profit-oriented.


----------



## Dave

Very true, but something I had never considered.


----------



## Thadlerian

Dave said:


> Very true, but something I had never considered.


I think very few consider this option. People go watching Avatar expecting to see a shallow movie, so moderately advanced concepts, like that of unreliable informers, must necessarily be too smart for it.

This is one reason why I will insist that Avatar was a rich movie, even though 99% of the people I'll ever discuss it with will say it's all effects and no story.


----------



## Scifi fan

Just saw the movie, and it was an obvious take on the Disney movie, so it was quite predictable and, at times, boring. Hate to say it, but the plot wasn't anything to keep me on the edge of my seat. 

The 3D effects were nifty, though.


----------



## Rosemary

At last I can see 'Avatar' (minus the 3D glasses)!  It's already out on DVD


----------



## biodroid

Rosemary you should see it on Blu-Ray, it's even better than the cinema or 3D version


----------



## Rosemary

Errrm, what's Blue Ray?


----------



## Parson

What's Blue Ray? Is this a serious question? If it is (I still think your joking!) Western Australia must be even more remote than Iowa! Blue Ray is the relatively new DVD format championed by Sony (and unlike Beta Max) has won the competition to become the dominate new HD format. 

I do not have Blue Ray and so cannot say whether it is worth the expense. Clearly Biodroid believes so.

 Parson has this feeling that he's just become the but of a joke. Oh well, I can laugh at myself. (Usually!)


----------



## ktabic

Meh, blueray. I had higher resolution LCDs years back. Still, at least they got a winning format pretty quick.

If you *really* want to see Avatar as it should be seen, forget blueray. You want 3D at an IMAX.


----------



## biodroid

I'm sure IMAX is awesome but for home use Blu-Ray is the ultimate until 3D LED tv's come down in price. Rosemary - Blu-Ray is very hi-def, if you look you will see dvd is a bit blurred but Blu-Ray is so clear you can see the pores of the characters skin and count the individual hairs on their heads (if you really want to ), very highly detailed pictures because they do not need to be compressed like dvd. You also get the best uncompressed sound quality. Check Blu-ray.com - What is Blu-ray? (Blu-ray, Blu-ray Disc, not Blue-ray or Blu-ray DVD)


----------



## J-WO

A friend of mine has just got Avatar and--though he really likes it as a film--is frothing at the mouth about the fact the Na'vi have four limbs whilst every other species on Pandora has six. His inner-Darwin has turned muscly, green, and is wearing ripped purple shorts about it, in fact. 

I hadn't really thought about it myself.


----------



## Moonbat

> the Na'vi have four limbs whilst every other species on Pandora has six


 
what a good point, I hadn't thought about that. That really is a simple but brilliant point. I'm surprised no one mentioned it to James C.

If the Na'vi only have 4 limbs and all others have 6 it would suggest that they evolved sperately but 6 limbs on animals looks alien, then the Na'vi have to be human enough for hollywood to empathise with them.

Brilliant!


----------



## J-WO

Damn. Now I wish I said that I came up with it...


----------



## purple_kathryn

Does the DVD have any extra footage does anyone know?

I'd buy the DVD but only if it was like some kind of special extended version (a la LOTR)


----------



## AE35Unit

J-WO said:


> A friend of mine has just got Avatar and--though he really likes it as a film--is frothing at the mouth about the fact the Na'vi have four limbs whilst every other species on Pandora has six. His inner-Darwin has turned muscly, green, and is wearing ripped purple shorts about it, in fact.
> 
> I hadn't really thought about it myself.


I don't see the problem to be honest. After all here on earth we have creatures with 4 limbs living next to those with 6,8,10 etc etc.  Its diversity,and on an alien planet who knows what would go! There are no rules when you don't even know what the game is!


----------



## Moonbat

The current DVD has no extras on, but there is talk of a extra packed DVD being released later in the year.



> don't see the problem to be honest. After all here on earth we have creatures with 4 limbs living next to those with 6,8,10 etc etc. Its diversity,and on an alien planet who knows what would go! There are no rules when you don't even know what the game is!


 
Ok, so to be honest we don't know that the Na'vi and thier horses, hammerhead rhinos and black panther like things are from the same evolutionary branch, much like we Humans are to mammals, so it could well be that the na'vi aren't related to the 6 legged beasts in any way, but it is a good point.

the next Avatar is supposed to be focusing on the oceans and the marine life, so maybe it'll be interesting to see how alien the fish are, althuogh maybe they aren't fish.

Actually can the Na'vi be called mammals? I suppose they can't as they aren't part of the branch that we descended from, do they have warm blood, give birth to live young and all the rest (hair, milk, sweat glands). Strange, but not impossible, that they wouldn't be mammals but are humanoid! Or are we simply Na'viod


----------



## J-WO

They're analogs, I guess.  Look at Sharks, Icthiosaurs and Dolphins--different families (Fish, reptiles and mammals respectively) but all evolving into similar shapes so as to pursue similar functions.

My suspicion is, wherever you get earth-like oceans with advanced life, the above general body shape will probably happen.


----------



## bobbo19

not too sure with the next one being based in the oceans, but knowing jim he will come up with the goods!


----------



## Jimmy Magnusson

bobbo19 said:


> not too sure with the next one being based in the oceans, but knowing jim he will come up with the goods!



Well, the Abyss was good, so I'm confident.


----------



## Moonbat

> Sharks, Icthiosaurs and Dolphins


 
There are quite a few obvious differences between these three animals, not least the shape of the face and/or the tail and fins.
Na'vi have four limbs, positioned exactly the same as humans and yet all three of the similar shaped animals have different placings and shapes of their limbs/fins.


----------



## HareBrain

Just seen Avatar for the first time -- and on an IMAX screen in 3D. Being a Hollywood cynic, I was expecting it to be a visual feast but in no other way engaging. But it was fantastic, and I'm glad I made the effort to see it in that format.


----------



## Rodders

I've had this on DVD for months and still haven't seen it. I don't understand why not. I think i shall have to make a special effort wto watch it this Saturday night.


----------



## No One

Hmm, interesting. I haven't had time to read through this thread more thoroughly, but I'm genuinely surprised at the lack of derision. Really.

Granted it's a visual feast (even if I didn't see it in 3D), granted there's some good thought been worked into the ecosystem of the world, etc, but simply put - I _hated _it.

That is, I liked it at the outset, but was beaten into submission by the awful, awful dialogue and utter, utter predictability of the plot. My god, how could Cameron resort to anything so formulaic? Matt Stone and Trey Parker got it spot on in South Park - this film should've been called Dances with Smurfs!

Sadly, this was far from the return to form I'd hoped for from Cameron (Aliens, Terminator, The Abyss - all classics). Instead, Cameron seems to be regressing in his talent, leaving him somewhere in the George Lucas bracket (which is low. Very).

Seems I'm in the minority here, but that's my two cents.


----------



## Parson

It seems "No One" shares your view.


----------



## J-WO

Parson said:


> It seems "No One" shares your view.



Well, my dad said _'All I got from that film were an aching arse.'_ so I suppose he agrees.

I don't think he'll be quoted on the DVD cover any time soon.


----------



## Dave

_And the cross eyes!_


----------



## No One

J-WO said:


> Well, my dad said _'All I got from that film were an aching arse.'_ so I suppose he agrees.
> 
> I don't think he'll be quoted on the DVD cover any time soon.



I want to live in a world where J-Wo's dad is quoted on DVD covers.


----------



## steve12553

I ordered the Blu-Ray as soon as it was available and received it a couple days after it showed up in stores (it pays to plan ahead) but didn't get around to watching it for a couple of weeks. I found the film interesting. The effects were believable (I saw 10 foot tall, blue people). I just this year bought my large, HD TV and blu ray which means I won't consider replacing them with new technology (3D) for at least six to ten years (unless I win a lottery [course, I would have to buy a ticket first]) If the 3D effects were that critical to the experience, then I probably missed out. I felt the story ws OK but not spectacular or even very original.


----------



## AE35Unit

Every now and then 3D rears its head again. But its a fad, a phase and even if I were able to see 3D I wouldnt be investing in it!


----------



## HareBrain

The 3D was pretty crappy when there was lots of movement, but I think it added a lot to the forest scenes. Forests are meant to be seen in 3D -- that's why almost all photos of them turn out crap (as I know from bitter experience of beautiful depthly vistas being reduced to rows of flat planks).

I'm not sure I'd bother seeing Avatar again, or on a small screen -- and sure, the plot was full of holes and the acting wasn't exceptional -- but I was quite happy to stare at the pretty pictures for three hours. Because many of them were pretty, and I don't remember the last SF film where I could say that about it.


----------



## J-WO

No One said:


> I want to live in a world where J-Wo's dad is quoted on DVD covers.



Don't encourage him!


----------



## Tinsel

*Avatar*

I'm watching it tonight. I'm middle aged, so I've seen many movies, although in recent years I have watched only a few. I should do a review of "The Wolfman" later on, but I should watch it again. I did watch it once but here is Avatar finally. It looks like it is a bit of a long one. I'll give my review late tonight/early next morning. Why not. This was a popular film. That should mean something, so I am hopeful.

Let me know what you think of it, as well.

Review to come shortly: *...*


----------



## Dave

*Re: Avatar*

Threads merged.
http://www.sffchronicles.co.uk/forum/32064-before-beginning-a-new-thread.html


Tinsel said:


> This was a popular film.


Popular enough to have a 13 page thread. A little difficult to miss it.


----------



## Tinsel

I watched it and there were some neat creatures, than the conflict took place during the rest of the movie. The love story aspect was decent and probably the best part of the movie. There was some inviting environments where at least to some degree it created empathy between the characters and the audience, but the battle was lacking in rationale and it seemed more like a device of criticism.


----------



## Pyan

Tinsel said:
			
		

> but the battle was lacking in rationale and it seemed more like a device of criticism.



Sorry, I don't understand what you mean here - can you elucidate?


----------



## No One

My main gripe with the final battle (putting aside the diabolical dialogue) is more of a criticism in the storytelling. 

The destruction of the tree represented an incalculable loss to the smurfs and by far the greatest tragedy the race has likely ever known. This is followed by a feast of special effects (big whoop) and an essentially minor victory against the invading forces.

If Pandora is so economically valuable, the humans would return with twice the numbers in a short time, glass the planet and take whatever they want. End of story. If Cameron did this for the inevitable sequel, then the film would have a _real _message (even if hordes of crying children leaving the cinemas might reduce the box office a touch ).


----------



## HareBrain

No One said:


> The destruction of the tree represented an incalculable loss to the smurfs and by far the greatest tragedy the race has likely ever known. This is followed by a feast of special effects (big whoop) and an essentially minor victory against the invading forces.


 
Not that I want to enter an argument on the side of James Cameron's plotting, but I thought that the second tree (tree of souls?) was actually more important, though not as big. The big tree was their home, the tree of souls was the main religious site.


----------



## Tinsel

pyan said:


> Sorry, I don't understand what you mean here - can you elucidate?



There didn't seem to be much intention heading towards mining the planet, and if they were going to fight the natives and they had that much fire power, why bother with espionage? Furthermore, it didn't appear that the natives were interested in natural resources, so there could have been some treaty made. The movie did not make much sense but there were some neat sections of the movie, but it could be equated with a B movie, yet it sold well which is scary, and so I would have to basically call this a horror.


----------



## Dave

Tinsel, could you really miss the point of his film? I thought it was heavily underlined with a black marker. This was clearly an environmental film. The Unobtainium that the miners wanted was what made Pandora special and kept the mountains flying in the air. The Pandorans were tree-hugging sustainable greenies, in touch with the natural energy of life. The Earth men were corporate greed personified, only motivated by acquisition, and raping the land for profit. Imagine Rio Tinto Zinc versus Madagascan natives, or the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge natives.



Tinsel said:


> ...so I would have to basically call this a horror.


A Horror? The only horror was in the length of the film.


----------



## Tinsel

Try reading "The Shadow Over Innsmouth" written by H.P. Lovecraft and than think about how this movie should have gone. It should have been about rumors and myths that were dispelled by an investigation rather than about seeing a healthy culture destroyed.

Nobody much has the ability to care for some small population on the other side of the planet much less back in history, but at least in the movies you have the chance to sit back and observe, and perhaps think a little bit.

Not that in H.P. any myth was absolved, but in that case the myths had a bases but it was a similar concept related to entering into the unknown place and the idea that myths persist in order to explain.


----------



## Tinsel

I am willing to add that all movies are now written this same way. It has to do with the type of people making movies now. The movies of the previous generation no longer exist. Now we have this. There appears to be an audience for it so I can say nothing, but I am watching a lot less of them for good reason.


----------



## Dave

That comparison with 'The Shadow Over Innsmouth' is an interesting one, but my impression was that Jake Sully, as a paraplegic, saw his transformation as a release, rather than something to be fearful of. At the end of the day, he could always return to being human again, but he began to like it.

I agree that there are no deep and meaningful messages to be found in this film, and that it is really rather shallow. While there are people who say their religion is Jedi and they follow the ways of the Force, or who think the 'Matrix' holds some great startlingly new philosophical arguments, I don't think you are ever going to find the meaning of life within a Hollywood blockbuster.

I do think there are often too many films that are essentially the same thing, but I disagree that the standards of storytelling have declined though.


----------



## Pyan

Tinsel said:


> There didn't seem to be much intention heading towards mining the planet



Apart from setting up a huge mining operation for Unobtainium, a unique anti-gravity element only found on this planet, and destroying an entire tree-city because it was on top of the richest lode... 



> and if they were going to fight the natives and they had that much fire power, why bother with espionage?



It wasn't originally espionage - the anthropologist wanted to find out more about the natives with a view to dealing more fairly with them, the mining company top honchos were quite ready just to blow them away - but if there was a cheaper way of getting what they wanted...



> Furthermore, it didn't appear that the natives were interested in natural resources, so there could have been some treaty made.



Whyinhell should they make a treaty that would destroy the ecology of their own world? It's their planet, and I'm sure they didn't invite them in.

Would you be happy for, say, a Chinese company to land in Canada, start an operation to strip-mine BC and Alberta, and then offer you a treaty that meant all the inhabitants had to move out?


----------



## Thadlerian

pyan said:


> It wasn't originally espionage - the anthropologist wanted to find out more about the natives with a view to dealing more fairly with them, the mining company top honchos were quite ready just to blow them away - but if there was a cheaper way of getting what they wanted...


I disagree. If you follow the movie's dialogue, you can see that the corporation greatly fears bad publicity. In a dialogue between the head honcho and the scientist, it is implied that an outright attack on the Na'vi would cause a PR backlash on Earth*. 

The attack came because Colonel Badass hijacked the whole operation. Selfridge tried to avoid this outcome for the longest time, while faced with the prospect of declining profits. Jake Sully's "You don't want this kind of blood on your hands" is an accurate statement. Recall that Sully was given yet another chance to solve the crisis diplomatically. When this too failed, Selfridge's pressured will was so malleable he fell victim to Quaritch's jingoism with ease: By acting swiftly, exploiting the Earth-Pandora communication time-lapse, Selfridge could solve the problem once and for all, and worry about consequences later.

I think there's a development within Quaritch as well, as the movie progresses. At first, he was satisfied with the infiltration scheme, it giving him the sense of influence and control he wanted, but he grew impatient as Jake Sully dawdled around in the Na'vi settlement. Quaritch is much more of a driving force than the corporation.


* Which also challenges the alleged "all humans are evil" message of the movie. Quaritch is the only person in the movie who needs to be evil for this plot to work out.


----------



## Steve Jordan

Thadlerian said:


> * Which also challenges the alleged "all humans are evil" message of the movie. Quaritch is the only person in the movie who needs to be evil for this plot to work out.



The movie's message wasn't really "all humans are evil."  It was "blind corporate acquisition is evil."  Cameron makes clear in the DVD's extra material that he was commenting on the process whereby powerful organizations/governments encroach on indigenous people, forcing them from their homes in order to rape the local area of whatever resource they desire in the most immediately cost-effective way possible.

The game of "blind corporate acquisition" doesn't even require evil people.  It only requires people in power who are willing to do the corporations' bidding, no matter who gets stepped on.  Always, they can provide some rationale for their actions: This is what I'm paid for; I have to satisfy my bosses/the stakeholders; We need this material for the good of Mankind or whatever; If I don't do it, they'll get someone else who will; The natives can live elsewhere just as easily; The natives are stupid, give them some beads and they're happy; etc.  It's usually a sign of obtuseness, ignorance, or greed, but not necessarily evil.  

And after all, who thinks of themselves as "evil"?  Even Quaritch can justify his actions (It gets the job done, and I can go home rich).  That's all you need to make a story like this work.


----------



## J-WO

Quaritch has seen a lot of nasty stuff back home on earth. Its possible he thinks that by doing 'what has to be done' on Pandora, Earth will have the resources to become a better place.


----------



## Dave

It is clearly Imperialism. European Imperialism was given justification which today we find uncomfortable, but which at the time was seen as logical, plausible and not at all controversial. Quaritch is defending Earth. Pandora is an 'empty land', which is not being used efficiently or productively.


----------



## Vertigo

Saw this film a couple of nights ago on DVD (no 3D) and have to say I was both massively impressed and blown away and also massively disappointed.

The special effects were quite astonishing and I was blown away by them; they really are getting steadily closer to reality with them.

The story was incredibly disppointing and yet could have been so much better. The basic idea and plot were very good and very promising. But the detail let it down massively. I felt that large elements of the story had been manufactured simply to show off the clever and remarkable special effects. This is surely the wrong way around.

My biggest problem with the film though was the complete lack of believability. Now I know that one should suspend disbelief for these kind of things and maybe I'm being picky but I really felt that they pushed this too far.

Pandora is a low gravity world so, yes, people and animals would be able to grow bigger. But they would be much, much more fragile and weaker than anything coming from a higher gravity. The film even admitted as much in the scene where the colonel was exercising. And yet the natives were far tougher as well as bigger than the humans (witness them tossing humans out of the shuttle with such ease).

The kind of weaponry that the humans would have had would have given them a _much_ greater advantage over the natives than was shown.

The floating mountains were never given any real explanation, how come they seem to defy gravity but everything on them doesn't and the rock with the big waterfall that they showed so often simply wasn't big enough to accumulate that much water.

If the natives could do that transfer of conciousness thing then they should have been effectively immortal (barring accident and war).

The happily everafter ending doesn't allow for the fact that when the humans get back to Earth they will simply return and nuke the natives who had "savagely massacred their peacefull first contact forces". There is no way the few humans that remained could lift the native technology quickly enough to survive a concerted and sensibly lead attack from space.

And finally who on Earth (literally) thought "Unobtainium" was a good name for the stuff they were mining. A name like that might have been suitable for a spoof like Galaxy Quest, but a relatively serious film like this I'm sorry but it is ridiculous.

There were many more small details that failed for me but those are a few that spring to mind.

It was a visually spectacular film but that is really all I can say in its support.


----------



## Rodders

See, the thing about this sort of movie is that it's entertainment and as I really enjoyed it, it definately did it's job. I'll be looking forward to seeing the sequels and this time, i'll be seeing them at the cinema and in 3D just as Cameron envisaged them. (I just hope that they're not as bad as the Matrix sequels.)


----------



## Rothgar

On that note, I read that they are actually talking about making more Matrix movies soon.  How or why I don't know.


----------



## Rodders

Yeah, there's another thread on these forums. Personally, i'm really looking forward to these. OK, the sequels weren't as good as we wanted them to be but i think that a prequel would be excellent.


----------



## Thadlerian

Vertigo said:


> And finally who on Earth (literally) thought "Unobtainium" was a good name for the stuff they were mining.


Probably the same kind of people who made up "quark". Not to mention "strange quark" and "charm quark", i.e. scientists.


----------



## Hilarious Joke

Bloody scientists!


----------



## clovis-man

Thadlerian said:


> Probably the same kind of people who made up "quark". Not to mention "strange quark" and "charm quark", i.e. scientists.


 
Yeah. Not to mention those pesky joules and ergs.


----------



## shaun45

amazing film well worth the money it cost to make it i hope the make another like it


----------



## brownwhite

Great Movie. I m bigfan of avatar and the last airbender........


----------



## Thadlerian

brownwhite said:


> Great Movie. I m bigfan of avatar and the last airbender........


We might not be referring to the same pop-cultural entity here. This thread is about the movie Avatar by James Cameron. You might be talking about the TV series _Avatar: The Last Airbender_, an equally brilliant show by Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko. As far as I'm aware, no thread exists for the latter, but that is easily remedied.


----------



## Starbeast

I thought the movie was ok, seemed like another "cowboys vs indians" to me, and I kept thinking of current countries being attacked with high technology while the native people fight back with rocks and faith in God. I probably won't watch it again.


----------



## Rodders

Personally, i loved Avatar and watched it several times. (I'm even considering getting a Blu Ray player so that i can see it in high definition.) 

I didn't see it in 3D, which is a shame.


----------



## TedKeller

I also enjoyed Avatar immensely, and yes, shoddy plot taped together by rule of cool spit and gum, but so what? Sure the Earthlings could have just done an orbital bombing without going all 'Nam on the Naavi. Sure it's a mishmash of apparently dozens of ripped off concepts from the gold age of sci-fi and beyond. But watching it gave such a rush. And I bet that just like Star Wars it gave a temporary boost to everyone pitching 'sci-fi' projects to the bigwigs.


----------



## Rodders

I don't agree with the naysayers on this one at all. Sure, there are a lot of second hand concepts, but it's hard to find originality these days. Besides, the beauty of this movie is in the story telling.


----------



## Stephen Palmer

It may be hard to find originality, but that's no excuse for filling every minute with cliche and tedium. I approached this film with excitement, which turned to boredom and then contempt as it unfolded. It's utter dross.


----------



## Mouse

I'd agree with that, Stephen. I saw it in 3D at the cinema. Thought it looked nice but had crap dialogue and was pretty boring.

Then I watched bits of it when it was on TV the other day and thought the 'special effects' looked awful. It looked so computerised! 

It's probably one of those films that's best at the cinema. Whilst you're wearing daft glasses.


----------



## Bowler1

This movie is only any good with funny glasses on, well said Mouse.


----------



## Interference

I have to say I've no desire or interest in seeing it again, although the original 3D experience was, to me, mind-bogglingly brilliant.  That, of course, was down to the near out-of-body experience that I felt I was sharing, being on an alien world that completely immersed me.  I doubt a second viewing, even in 3D, will affect me as profoundly.


----------



## Brian G Turner

Just watched Avatar again. Still really enjoy it - there's such a wonderful attention to detail in every part of the production.

The only thing that spoils it for me is that I'm always reminded of militant left arguments that the film is racist . Have eaten too much party food, though, so will leave that rant for another day.


----------



## Anne Spackman

I liked Avatar, even though others here have commented that it lacked originality.  Of course there are faults in it.  Still, I enjoyed it, though I hadn't expected I would. I didn't see Avatar when it came out in the cinema and had to wait to see it on DVD as at the time I wasn't very interested in it.  I will be interested to see how it holds up in the future, however.  It was quite a popular film, but perhaps more so with people who aren't truly science fiction fans.


----------



## Parson

Anne Spackman said:


> I liked Avatar, even though others here have commented that it lacked originality.  Of course there are faults in it.  Still, I enjoyed it, though I hadn't expected I would. I didn't see Avatar when it came out in the cinema and had to wait to see it on DVD as at the time I wasn't very interested in it.  I will be interested to see how it holds up in the future, however.  It was quite a popular film, but perhaps more so with people who aren't truly science fiction fans.



Good point. I think the more you are a hard S.F. fan (as opposed to fantasy S.F.) the less you liked the movie. One of my few quibbles with the movie was that there was a real lack of explanation about the science behind the action. At one level it was little more than a high tech love story.


----------



## BAYLOR

A very underwhelming film with a cast of characters human and alien  that I just didn't care about.


----------



## willwallace

I feel that you really need to see it in 3d on a big screen to get the full impact of the film.  It's definitely less impressive watching on TV.


----------



## BAYLOR

willwallace said:


> I feel that you really need to see it in 3d on a big screen to get the full impact of the film.  It's definitely less impressive watching on TV.



I did see it in the theater, The special effects were good , but didn't think the movie was all that good. It was hit because of the novelty value of the 3D but if cameron tries needs to come up with a far better story otherwise any sequels will not be so successful.


----------



## Rodders

I didn't see it at the theatre and it took me a year before i sat down and watched the DVD. Personally, I loved this movie. There was no pretention, it was pure entertainment.


----------



## Parson

What I can't believe is that it is now *6? years* since this movie came out? Unbelievable.


----------



## BAYLOR

Parson said:


> What I can't believe is that it is now *6? years* since this movie came out? Unbelievable.



I have doubts about how successful  the sequels will be.  Cameron waited too long.


----------



## Parson

Well, it didn't seem to hurt the Star Wars franchise. --- But I don't think that the story arc of Avatar has as much potential.


----------



## BAYLOR

Parson said:


> Well, it didn't seem to hurt the Star Wars franchise. --- But I don't think that the story arc of Avatar has as much potential.




The Film's overall story was weak . Its only saving grace was the novelty of its  3D effects.What worked the first time, won't work the second time around.


----------



## Rodders

Don't underestimate James Cameron's ability as a film maker.


----------



## Alexa

The landscapes and those floating mountains are incredible beautiful. I do not agree the story was weak. Na'vi are original, the wildlife and the forest are scary enough, Toruk and the other birds are impressives. This movie deserves to be seen. My only regret is that I didn't see it in 3D. I will not make the same mistake when the 2nd one will be released in December 2018.


----------



## RX-79G

Rodders said:


> Don't underestimate James Cameron's ability as a film maker.


But his stories are always about corporate corruption and greed, and his vision of human technological innovation is extremely limited. "Space marines".


----------



## Alexa

I agree for corporate corruption and greed. Some things never change in the real life, movies or novels as a result of human nature. Do you know any other movie with space marines ? You didn't like at all this movie ?


----------



## RX-79G

Alexa said:


> I agree for corporate corruption and greed. Some things never change in the real life, movies or novels as a result of human nature. Do you know any other movie with space marines ? You didn't like at all this movie ?


Cameron's _Aliens_ is also about space marines and corporate greed. Cameron's _Terminator 2_ is about corporate greed. The _Abyss _substitutes SEALs for space marines, but I'm sure there's some corporate greed in there. It's even in _Titanic_, just no marines.

Many of the greatest sci fi movies and books have nothing to do with corporations or infantry units. It is a James Cameron preoccupation, much like Michael Crichton's distrust of science.

It gets old.


----------



## Alexa

And if we let them aside, what do you think about this movie ?


----------



## RX-79G

Alexa said:


> And if we let them aside, what do you think about this movie ?


I don't know if I can set them aside - the plot and 'world' of a sci fi movie is pretty key. Beyond that the characters are not surprising or deep people.

What we are left with is how impressed or not we are with Cameron's use of CGI to create an alien world. As an experience during first viewing it was fun, but like nearly all CGI, it doesn't hold up in memory. It never looks real or right, which abstracts the thrilling "stunts" because you can see that what's on screen is no more real than Bugs Bunny.

I sometimes can't believe it when I hear people say that they were completely fooled by the CGI Tarkin in _Rogue One_ or other films. CGI only becomes transparent when it is used with a really light hand. It isn't good enough, yet. For a heavily CGI movie, I'd rather watch the _Incredibles_.

So I guess I don't see a lot of value in _Avatar_, outside of a fun way to blow 2 hours the first time I saw it.


----------



## Alexa

You are tough. Do you have a favorite movie ?


----------



## RX-79G

Alexa said:


> You are tough. Do you have a favorite movie ?


One film? Maybe _2001_. For non-sci fi _Tampopo, I Am Love, Orlando, Philadelphia Story.
_
Sci fi films that I enjoy much more than Avatar: 
_2001
Blade Runner
Empire Strikes Back
Star Wars
12 Monkeys
Strange Days
The Martian
Alien
Wrath of Khan
The Prestige
Close Encounters
Matrix
Sunshine
Fifth Element
Minority Report
Edge of Tomorrow
Upstream Color
Terminator
THX 1138
Inception
Tron 
Day the Earth Stood Still
Under the Skin
Summer Wars
Ghost in the Shell_


----------



## Alexa

Wow ! That's quite a list ! I didn't see all of them, but if I compare those I've already seen with Avatar, I'll conclude Avatar is not your type of movie.


----------



## RX-79G

Alexa said:


> Wow ! That's quite a list ! I didn't see all of them, but if I compare those I've already seen with Avatar, I'll conclude Avatar is not your type of movie.


Well, what do you like about _Avatar _compared to other films? Was it the spectacle, did you think it was a particularly good sci fi, was it the escapism of upgrading to a better body? Do you like military sci fi?


----------



## Alexa

It was the spectacle. This is not the kind of movie we can see every day. Nope, I don't like military sci fi.


----------



## Toby Frost

I think it's become rather fashionable to hate Avatar. It's got a lot of problems and it's ultimately pretty disposable, but it isn't the pinnacle of dross that people claim it to be. It's perfectly ok and quite entertaining at points. I'd give it 6/10, and at points, 7.


----------



## BAYLOR

RX-79G said:


> I don't know if I can set them aside - the plot and 'world' of a sci fi movie is pretty key. Beyond that the characters are not surprising or deep people.
> 
> What we are left with is how impressed or not we are with Cameron's use of CGI to create an alien world. As an experience during first viewing it was fun, but like nearly all CGI, it doesn't hold up in memory. It never looks real or right, which abstracts the thrilling "stunts" because you can see that what's on screen is no more real than Bugs Bunny.
> 
> I sometimes can't believe it when I hear people say that they were completely fooled by the CGI Tarkin in _Rogue One_ or other films. CGI only becomes transparent when it is used with a really light hand. It isn't good enough, yet. For a heavily CGI movie, I'd rather watch the _Incredibles_.
> 
> So I guess I don't see a lot of value in _Avatar_, outside of a fun way to blow 2 hours the first time I saw it.




Avatar doesn't have much of a story or any particularly likable characters.



Spoiler: Rogue One



In the case or Rogue one The Tarkin CGI is rather good.


----------



## Brian G Turner

Added spoiler - as I haven't seen _Rogue One_ yet, I'd appreciated it all members can refrain from posting spoilers in non-Star Wars threads. 

As for _Avatar _- it was the discovery of the world and the lives and ideas of the people within it that really hold interest. Ultimately, it's a spiritual film posing as an action-adventure, allowing for wider appeal. Which is cool.


----------



## Alexa

Finally a guy who gave it some credit. Thank you, Brian ! I start to question myself if I should include Avatar only in girls night movies.


----------



## Vaz

While it does have some interesting ideas, and its really beautiful; its basically just a prettier version of _Pocahontas._


----------



## Parson

I'm going to repeat what I said.... 7 years ago???!!! Can that be? ---- I just checked, yes it's true... So, I would say that it does indeed have a memorable story, and I still liked both the leads a lot. Neytiri and Jake Sully were well acted in my opinion.


----------



## Toby Frost

Brian G Turner said:


> As for _Avatar _- it was the discovery of the world and the lives and ideas of the people within it that really hold interest. Ultimately, it's a spiritual film posing as an action-adventure, allowing for wider appeal. Which is cool.



That's how I feel about it, too. One of these days I'll get around to writing a proper article in defence of Avatar, but my main feeling is: yes, it's simplistic and mawkish and crude, but have you watched a Transformers film recently? At least it's trying, and to my mind that counts for a lot.


----------



## Rodders

I'm not too sure where this hatred of Avatar came from, so it's nice to see people defending it.

Avatar was a blockbuster movie so i think it's only fair to view it as such. It's a well made movie and Cameron's world building here is exceptional.I will look forward to your defense of it, Toby. 

Thoroughly entertaining in my opinion.


----------



## Toby Frost

Yes. It was a blockbuster movie and - let's be honest about this - blockbusters aren't subtle and probably can't be if they are going to pay off. What this means is that if you are going to have an environmental message, it needs to be hammered home pretty brutally: generic pretty natives doing mystic stuff to the sound of Enya, in between scenes of robot suits fighting giant panthers. Even the Batman films, which are works of cinematic brilliance according to the internet, are thundering noisy things where every line is delivered with the subtlety of a punch to the eye. 

The three blockbusters that spring to mind that aren't crude like this are Prometheus, which is probably a failure and had a ready-made audience anyhow, Hellboy 2, which was not commercially successful and was pretty noisy as it was, and Mad Max: Fury Road, which is very noisy indeed but just about manages a fairly subtle message.


----------



## Alexa

I hope you'll have the time to write that article before the 2nd Avatar is released. I'll hate to see that one too smashed into tiny pieces.


----------



## BAYLOR

Rodders said:


> I'm not too sure where this hatred of Avatar came from, so it's nice to see people defending it.
> 
> Avatar was a blockbuster movie so i think it's only fair to view it as such. It's a well made movie and Cameron's world building here is exceptional.I will look forward to your defense of it, Toby.
> 
> Thoroughly entertaining in my opinion.



He's going ahead with the sequels.


----------



## RX-79G

Toby Frost said:


> Yes. It was a blockbuster movie and - let's be honest about this - blockbusters aren't subtle and probably can't be if they are going to pay off. What this means is that if you are going to have an environmental message, it needs to be hammered home pretty brutally: generic pretty natives doing mystic stuff to the sound of Enya, in between scenes of robot suits fighting giant panthers.



I don't think crudely packing a "message" into an action film does anything to elevate the film or message - especially when the message isn't subtle or new. It just makes something that is pushing believability already into the zone of an afterschool special. If someone is going to the trouble of making a $50 million film, why not invest in a story and script of elevated value as well?

To my mind, _Cloud Atlas_, _28 Days Later_, _Inception_, the _Arrival _or even the _Matrix _are blockbusters with themes and storylines that are considerably more thought provoking than the _Avatar's_ clumsy _Lorax/Wall Street_ thing. Imagine if Avatar used that body switching and neural sharing stuff to talk about the nature of identity, or madness, or mortality.

Maybe it is just a concern about playing it safe: Thoughtful, high concept sci fi often tanks on initial release. Loud and unsubtle is a probably a better bet.


----------

