Avatar

The KWMdB.

Moderators: dANdeLION, sgt.null

Post Reply
babybottomfeeder

Post by babybottomfeeder »

I did a study showing the effects of Avatar on the average Political movie goer over a two month period. The study takes into account the age, race and gender of the participants as well as the region in which they live. Here are the results.



8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) ;) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)


My findings show that Avatar decreases the overall reinforcement of an inherent cultural message present within its narrative, with minimal differentiation among participants. WTG!
Top
User avatar
Cagliostro
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 9360
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Colorado

Post by Cagliostro »

dANdeLION wrote:
Cagliostro wrote:Jeez, Dan, I can't tell if you are joking or not.
Yeah, I was pulling a gag, accusing you of mis-characterization, while mis-characterizing you at the same time. What the hell, I figured it'd be more entertaining than going to see the movie.......
Well, I caught the irony of it all, but good to know it was all a clever ruse. I was starting to make the same gesture as in your avatar pic.
Image
Life is a waste of time
Time is a waste of life
So get wasted all of the time
And you'll have the time of your life
Top
User avatar
dANdeLION
Lord
Posts: 23836
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 3:22 am
Location: In the jungle, the mighty jungle
Contact:
Contact dANdeLION

Post by dANdeLION »

Clever?!? HOW DARE YOU!!!!





Oh, that's what it means. nevermind.
Dandelion don't tell no lies
Dandelion will make you wise
Tell me if she laughs or cries
Blow away dandelion

I'm afraid there's no denying
I'm just a dandelion
a fate I don't deserve.

High priest of THOOOTP

:hobbes: *

* This post carries Jay's seal of approval
Top
User avatar
Cagliostro
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 9360
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Colorado

Post by Cagliostro »

Ok, I finally saw it, and I was lucky enough to still be able to find the one place in the area that is still showing it in 3-D. I'm very glad I hunted down the 3-D as that seemed to be what made the movie. That scene at the beginning with removing people from the cryo chambers was visually eye-popping and was a great illusion.
But the story was pretty much meh like I suspected, and the visuals were actually better than I expected. I dug the floating chunks of land even if it made not a lick of sense, and the Billie Jean nature of the footsteps, which also made me just go, "enjoy it and don't think too hard."
I was especially disappointed that the psycho military leader was depicted as he was. Most places would have booted his ass out, I would think. But mainly with the long drawn out fight sequence at the end. Can we eventually move from this action film trope of having to have the biggest bad guy show up at the end and drag the film out for another 15-20 minutes to finally show the guy get his? That's what I liked about the Fellowship of the Ring - while it wasn't the big baddie, it was Lurtz, the big disposable baddie of that film, that at first looked like a long drawn out fight sequence, and I was just settling in to be bored, when suddenly....ended.
But I'm glad I saw it overall, and went for the 3-D big screen experience. I can't imagine seeing it on my tv. It just really wouldn't have the same impact.
Image
Life is a waste of time
Time is a waste of life
So get wasted all of the time
And you'll have the time of your life
Top
User avatar
Worm of Despite
Lord
Posts: 9546
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 7:46 pm
Location: Rome, GA
Contact:
Contact Worm of Despite

Post by Worm of Despite »

Cagliostro wrote:But mainly with the long drawn out fight sequence at the end. Can we eventually move from this action film trope of having to have the biggest bad guy show up at the end and drag the film out for another 15-20 minutes to finally show the guy get his? That's what I liked about the Fellowship of the Ring - while it wasn't the big baddie, it was Lurtz, the big disposable baddie of that film, that at first looked like a long drawn out fight sequence, and I was just settling in to be bored, when suddenly....ended.
Yeah. The people at my theater clapped when Aragorn chopped Lurtz's head off. Talk about a real fight... Had Cameron done the fight the emotion would've been low to zero, and they'd have fought for 20 minutes on every conceivable piece of terrain--including two boats going over that waterfall.
Top
User avatar
matrixman
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 8361
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2003 11:24 am

Post by matrixman »

Just came back from AVATAR IMAX 3D. 8)

I'm glad I bought a ticket a couple of hours before the show, because it was sold out when I returned. I had a prime seat, right in the center.

The color, the clarity, the detail...oh my. And then the IMAX sound system kicked in. My heart was thumping.

The only bad part of the experience was that the IMAX 3D glasses were even more uncomfortable than the glasses for "regular" 3D. Nevertheless, I now wish I could see all my favorite big budget films in IMAX 3D.
Top
User avatar
Usivius
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 2767
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 8:09 pm

Post by Usivius »

good man. Yep Imax, nevermind 3D Imax, is totally kickass. It's fantastic!
:)
~...with a floating smile and a light blue sponge...~
Top
User avatar
Seareach
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 5860
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 1:25 am

Post by Seareach »

So I finally saw it!!!!! I'm peeved I never got to see it in the cinema. :(

I'll read through this thread in the next day or two but here's my comments (not having read anyone else's opinion here):

I've heard criticisms of the movie being too similar to Pocahontas (although I've only seen that movie once and I don't remember it too well). As I watched it "Dances With Wolves" came to mind in places.

HOWEVER

This is kind of the type of thing that SRD talks about. He says "there are no new stories" and, so, sure, you can compare the story line to other movies *however*...

Seriously! WHOA! I was like a kid in a candy store with this movie. I'm extremely visually orientated and the visual effects...WOW! I noticed at that Weta Workshop (aka the genius behind LOTR) was in charge of all that. I'm not surprised. They're leagues ahead of anyone else.

I just wanted to cry for the joy of it! That world is stunning (although, again, an example of "there are no new stories": those floating islands reminded me of a setting in a Miyazaki movie). But, WOW (!!!!), how that world lit up at night: Stunning. Absolutely stunning! And the characters were believable, the characters consistent, nothing to me was outlandish or pushing the realms of believability (I didn't need to put my "suspend disbelief" goggles on at all :)).

And I'm wondering whether anyone else was reminded of the wraiths of Andelain when those little white things land on the main character the first time (sorry, I can't remember people's names or thing names!). And there was something else that reminded me of the Chronicles but I can't remember what right at this moment.

Long and short of it: I loved it. I'm kicking myself I didn't see it in the cinema and I'm praying that at some stage it'll come back to cinemas (as the Star Wars trilogy and also Bladerunner did).

Looking forward to reading the whole of this thread to see what everyone else thought. :)
Image
Top
User avatar
Seareach
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 5860
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 1:25 am

Post by Seareach »

so I've kinda skim read the entire thread...and was surprised that most of it the comments were slanted towards the negative.

<shrug>

I don't necessarily *not* understand some of the criticism but I tend to think "I don't care". What I mean by that: the more movies/books/music/whatever we have the harder it is to be original but that doesn't necessarily mean that the artist isn't good or is ripping off someone else's work or what ever. When I read a book, sit in a cinema, listen to a piece of music I'm not looking for similarities with something else. What I do is just immerse myself. Sometimes you can't, because it's bad...or there are other reasons... But what I want is something that I can believe, that allows me to go on a journey and that takes me someplace where I forget about the real world and just experience. Avatar did that for me.

As I said before, there were parts that did remind me of other things, but I pushed those things aside so I could enjoy the experience.

I kinda laughed at your comment, Cag, about the "billy jean" nature of the footsteps. That whole thing reminded me of this time I was on the coast and I was walking along the beach at night and saw this blue fringe to the water lapping on shore. I walked up to it and then noticed that where my footprints were there were these iridescent imprints of my feet. I stopped and put my hands down onto the sand where the water was lapping and then my handprints appeared. It was these tiny organisms into the water who'd washed up onto the beach, which glowed when they were...well...agitated I guess. The magic of nature. And so I remembered that when seeing the iridescent footprints. The world is truly a beautiful place, and that was what I was reminded of when watching Avatar.

And I think it's topical. And I think it's important. The world's going to sh*t at the moment and Avatar is a movie which parallels what's going on in our real world; and I suppose being an archaeologist who has worked with the indigenous people of Australia I can empathize with the plight of those in Avatar.

Avatar was joy to me...but I didn't get involved in the hype before it...just went and saw it...well, actually waited until it came out on DVD but that's only because we don't have a cinema where I live,

To me it's a beautiful, wonderful delight. :)
Image
Top
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19634
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am

Post by Zarathustra »

Seareach wrote:The world's going to sh*t at the moment ...

Avatar was joy to me... To me it's a beautiful, wonderful delight. :)
Sorry about the brutal edit of your post, but these two statements are the ones that stood out to me the most. You decry the world, and praise a pretty bland movie, imo. I don't think the world is going to shit. I think movies are going to shit, and Avatar is a prime example of this. The world is just fine. Pretty awesome, actually. But there's lots of money to be made off the belief that it's going to shit. This movie seems to be pretty popular with people who think this way. :roll:
Joe Biden … putting the Dem in dementia since (at least) 2020.
Top
User avatar
JazFusion
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 1007
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 2:41 am
Location: R'lyeh
Contact:
Contact JazFusion

Post by JazFusion »

Watched it the other night. It was about what I was expecting. A very generic and bland Sci-Fi movie. The CGI was pretty amazing, and kudos to those that made it come to life. I mean, wow. But Cameron has disappointed me once again. He should have stopped at Terminator 2.

I'm not a huge fan of the Na'vi aesthetically. I felt the beginning and the ending was pretty shaky. Too much Deus Ex Machina for my taste. And I could never really connect emotionally with Jake Sully or Neytiri.
Seareach wrote:I've heard criticisms of the movie being too similar to Pocahontas
Image

Oh, and....the Colonel was totally Duke Nukem.
Last edited by JazFusion on Thu May 13, 2010 1:45 am, edited 2 times in total.
"Everything was beautiful, and nothing hurt." - Kurt Vonnegut
Top
User avatar
JazFusion
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 1007
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 2:41 am
Location: R'lyeh
Contact:
Contact JazFusion

Post by JazFusion »

oops double post
Last edited by JazFusion on Thu May 13, 2010 1:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Everything was beautiful, and nothing hurt." - Kurt Vonnegut
Top
User avatar
finn
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 4349
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 5:03 am
Location: Maintaining an unsociable distance....

Post by finn »

Is there anyone in any of the Avatar threads that has even suggested Shakespeare-like qualities to the story? None that I can recall.

The thing people have enjoyed is the whole new level of presentation that this movie and created, the new world that has replaced the deserts or Matte backdrops and is so far from polystyrene rocks and big guys in cossies lumbering about backlots. Avatar has presented a new world with different wonders of nature and has done so in a manner that holds together holistically and presents a working ecosystem from a different point of reference.... a magnificent feat.

I think people who enjoyed it would be the sort of people who enjoy getting out into the country, woodlands, mountains, coasts.... its not about dissatisfaction with their lot so much as a need to have some connection to nature. Japanese with shoe boxes for apartments keep bonsai, folks in cities keep plants, folk in offices keep cacti....there's a whole industry in office plants supply and maintenance.

There have been good stories presented in a terrible manner, this is a bland story presented in an explosively spectacular visual feast... if people have appreciated the work that has gone into that and enjoyed the colours and sounds and scope of those visuals, how come they are somehow deficient..... do people really believe that people who have enjoyed this movie have done so because they are too dumb to spot a effete plotline?

C'mon!

Show me an original plot. Pretty much every basic storyline has been done before, the visual above (Pocahontis) could just as easily be A Man Called Horse or Dances with Wolves or Last Samurai....... strange no-one panned these in the same manner, in fact they were widely acclaimed Oscar winners! Most stories can be dissected and you'll find the same root in Dickens, Shakespeare, Aesop, Arabian Nights etc. Heroes and Princesses, Tramps and Thieves, Kings and Kingdoms, Warriors and wizards...... its all been done before...... so what? Do we stop making new movies? Try Kurasawa's RAN and substitute the characters with the names Goneril, Regan, Cordelia and King Lear! Lets not get started on The Magnificent Seven.

Does anyone think that Fantasia is any less magnificent, any less of a classic because it has NO plot at all? Perhaps we should not attend fireworks displays because there is a lack of intellectual substance in the presentation! 8O
"Winston, if you were my husband I'd give you poison" ................ "Madam, if you were my wife I would drink it!"

"Terrorism is war by the poor, and war is terrorism by the rich"

"A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well."

"The opposite of pro-life isn't pro-death. Y'know?"

"What if the Hokey Cokey really is what its all about?"
Top
User avatar
Worm of Despite
Lord
Posts: 9546
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 7:46 pm
Location: Rome, GA
Contact:
Contact Worm of Despite

Post by Worm of Despite »

finn wrote:Try Kurasawa's RAN and substitute the characters with the names Goneril, Regan, Cordelia and King Lear! Lets not get started on The Magnificent Seven.
Lol. Kurosawa's Ran actually was good and did some interesting stuff with Lear (improved it, even, by my estimation; Lear is not a fool anymore but a tyrannical, murderous despot fallen from grace; there's new themes of warfare and nihilism Kurosawa always does so well). Really; Avatar is more comparable with paper-thin epics from the 90s and last decade than a life statement masterwork made by arguably the Shakespeare of cinema.

Avatar did nothing interesting for me with its story.

It's not WHERE THE STORY CAME FROM. I don't give a flying frick if it is word for word Pocahontas. It's HOW IT TELLS IT. IT TOLD IT SHITTILY. SHITTILYYYY.

I'm done.
Top
User avatar
JazFusion
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 1007
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 2:41 am
Location: R'lyeh
Contact:
Contact JazFusion

Post by JazFusion »

finn wrote:Is there anyone in any of the Avatar threads that has even suggested Shakespeare-like qualities to the story? None that I can recall.
haha And for good reason.
finn wrote:The thing people have enjoyed is the whole new level of presentation that this movie and created, the new world that has replaced the deserts or Matte backdrops and is so far from polystyrene rocks and big guys in cossies lumbering about backlots. Avatar has presented a new world with different wonders of nature and has done so in a manner that holds together holistically and presents a working ecosystem from a different point of reference.... a magnificent feat.
This statement is kind of the equivalent of reading a book and loving it, based solely on the awesome cover art.

The world of Pandora was presented almost explicitly in CGI. Something that the video gaming world has been doing for years now. It's not really something I'd call groundbreaking. It was very well done CGI, and, as I said, kudos to those that made it happen. My husband is a digital artist, and I know firsthand how hard it is to render so eloquently say, a leaf, in the digital world.

As for the "world" of Avatar....yes, it was pretty generic. The Na'vi were nothing but alien Native Americans or maybe some tribal Africans. Humans come to a world (always Americans, too) and want some sort of mining expedition (unobtainium? sigh. they really needed to consult with some scientists for this term). The movie never really explained why they needed it, only that they did. And it was really expensive. Just to clarify a bit, Unobtainium is a scientific term, but it's usually used as a term for something physically impossible. I felt it was a little amatuerish on the writers' part for not coming up with some other science-y sounding name.
finn wrote:I think people who enjoyed it would be the sort of people who enjoy getting out into the country, woodlands, mountains, coasts.... its not about dissatisfaction with their lot so much as a need to have some connection to nature. Japanese with shoe boxes for apartments keep bonsai, folks in cities keep plants, folk in offices keep cacti....there's a whole industry in office plants supply and maintenance.
I wouldn't say I don't enjoy nature. In fact, I quite enjoy nature a lot. But I'm human and live on Earth. I don't hold a lot of love for a red rock on Mars. It's not sentimental. It means nothing to me other than a) it's exotic and b) it's probably worth a lot of money. This is the kind of mentality I've been hearing about with this movie. "Ooooh, it looks shiny!" when in reality it's just a rock.

The different flora and fauna of Pandora are imaginative and varied. But so are a lot of other movies. And books, for that matter. But I don't love a book or a movie just because I think the backgrounds look amazing. I need to feel. I want to become so wrapped up in the main character that I want to bleed with them. I want to fight their fight. I want to feel what they feel. And I never felt anything while watching Avatar. It just didn't feel like there was any soul to it.

I akin Avatar to Star Wars Episode 2. It was entertaining enough, but not something to make me sit back and say, "Wow, that was incredible". The characters were wooden and it was just missing so much soul.
finn wrote:There have been good stories presented in a terrible manner, this is a bland story presented in an explosively spectacular visual feast...
So...basically you agree with me. But yet...you're arguing that it's a spectacular movie?
finn wrote:if people have appreciated the work that has gone into that and enjoyed the colours and sounds and scope of those visuals, how come they are somehow deficient..... do people really believe that people who have enjoyed this movie have done so because they are too dumb to spot a effete plotline?
No, but I expect for a movie to be something great, it needs substance to it. When I read a book, I don't see any real visuals. The visuals are in my head. I don't need someone to draw for me what an orchid looks like to be able to see it. I don't paint a stunning piece of art and call it poetry.

And I didn't watch this movie and call it great. Should I be burned at the cross for this? Was this movie holy? Did I trespass onto hallowed ground and should be beaten for my trangressions? It was just an opinion. Specifically, my opinion. I never said how you should keep yours.
finn wrote:Show me an original plot. Pretty much every basic storyline has been done before, the visual above (Pocahontis) could just as easily be A Man Called Horse or Dances with Wolves or Last Samurai....... strange no-one panned these in the same manner, in fact they were widely acclaimed Oscar winners! Most stories can be dissected and you'll find the same root in Dickens, Shakespeare, Aesop, Arabian Nights etc. Heroes and Princesses, Tramps and Thieves, Kings and Kingdoms, Warriors and wizards...... its all been done before...... so what? Do we stop making new movies? Try Kurasawa's RAN and substitute the characters with the names Goneril, Regan, Cordelia and King Lear! Lets not get started on The Magnificent Seven.

Does anyone think that Fantasia is any less magnificent, any less of a classic because it has NO plot at all? Perhaps we should not attend fireworks displays because there is a lack of intellectual substance in the presentation! 8O
And so we go back to this old hat trick. No, nothing is ever really "original". But some are more creative than others.
"Everything was beautiful, and nothing hurt." - Kurt Vonnegut
Top
User avatar
Worm of Despite
Lord
Posts: 9546
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 7:46 pm
Location: Rome, GA
Contact:
Contact Worm of Despite

Post by Worm of Despite »

finn wrote:do people really believe that people who have enjoyed this movie have done so because they are too dumb to spot a effete plotline?
I think the movie itself is stupid, but if others can enjoy it so be it. Revelatory stuff, huh?

Do I think they're dumb? Some of them, yeah. I've met dumb people. Do I think their taste is bad? Sure, why not? What am I supposed to be--the Magic, Objective Man? I really don't want to be. I'd like to have my own personal views and my own opinions of things I don't like, like anyone else on the planet.

It seems to me, psychologically, that those who like Avatar feel more victimized than those who don't like it. This is sometimes called mass hysteria or cultism. Jim Jones did it too. Now it's James Cameron's turn.

But I kid (see what I did there with the underlying sense of victimization that Avatar fans feel? Good stuff). I'm not some cultural elite. I won't claim that, despite knowing Avatar is movie-making piffle. I too like dumb movies. It's like junk food--it greases the gears. Avatar just happens to be the one bag of junk I pass by on the candy aisle.
finn wrote:Does anyone think that Fantasia is any less magnificent, any less of a classic because it has NO plot at all? Perhaps we should not attend fireworks displays because there is a lack of intellectual substance in the presentation! 8O
Ironically, Avatar is pretty much an artistic firework of flash, and that's why I'll never watch it again. Here's the little gem at the earth's core of my point: Avatar does not, like Shakespeare, take its origin ideas and make them its own. What was the origin story for Hamlet? Who cares! Hamlet obsoletes the origin story! I didn't feel that with Avatar. I felt it only transmuted it into sci-fi swords and sorcery (swords and sorcery that the LOTR movies did far better).
Top
User avatar
finn
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 4349
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 5:03 am
Location: Maintaining an unsociable distance....

Post by finn »

JazFusion wrote:
finn wrote:The thing people have enjoyed is the whole new level of presentation that this movie and created, the new world that has replaced the deserts or Matte backdrops and is so far from polystyrene rocks and big guys in cossies lumbering about backlots. Avatar has presented a new world with different wonders of nature and has done so in a manner that holds together holistically and presents a working ecosystem from a different point of reference.... a magnificent feat.
This statement is kind of the equivalent of reading a book and loving it, based solely on the awesome cover art.
No it is not, regardless of how condescending and trivialising your remark attempts to be.
JazFusion wrote:Did I trespass onto hallowed ground and should be beaten for my trangressions? It was just an opinion. Specifically, my opinion. I never said how you should keep yours.
.......and I never said how you should keep yours either: what exactly is your point here?
JazFusion wrote:No, but I expect for a movie to be something great, it needs substance to it.
Is it that I/we are not living up to your expectations?
JazFusion wrote:As for the "world" of Avatar....yes, it was pretty generic. The Na'vi were nothing but alien Native Americans or maybe some tribal Africans.
For you and your expectations and perspectives they might have been, but for Russians and Chinese and Aussies and Kiwis and Brits and French and Germans its probably unlikely that they were viewed as Native Americans; I think that probably only an American perspective which likely puts that view in the minority.
JazFusion wrote:I wouldn't say I don't enjoy nature. In fact, I quite enjoy nature a lot. But I'm human and live on Earth. I don't hold a lot of love for a red rock on Mars. It's not sentimental. It means nothing to me other than a) it's exotic and b) it's probably worth a lot of money. This is the kind of mentality I've been hearing about with this movie. "Ooooh, it looks shiny!" when in reality it's just a rock.
By all means have your expectations and views and mentality, I'm not criticising them, but equally I have mine and many of the people who have enjoyed this movie seem to be victims in this thread of a bit of snobbery about what is and is not a good movie. For you it doesn't ring your bells, but for others it does...I'm not dissing your dislike of it but I'm not really prepared to let you diss my liking it because you feel your levels of expectation and somehow superior to mine. They are clearly different, but I am not saying you're mentality is clearly one thing or another, or that the movie is on a plane where you are clearly not sensitive enough to travel to, or you are more likely to think a certain way because you do not like Avatar. In return I'd like to enjoy the same courtesy.
Last edited by finn on Thu May 13, 2010 3:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Winston, if you were my husband I'd give you poison" ................ "Madam, if you were my wife I would drink it!"

"Terrorism is war by the poor, and war is terrorism by the rich"

"A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well."

"The opposite of pro-life isn't pro-death. Y'know?"

"What if the Hokey Cokey really is what its all about?"
Top
User avatar
finn
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 4349
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 5:03 am
Location: Maintaining an unsociable distance....

Post by finn »

Lord Foul wrote: I'm done.
Well not quite I guess as you then wrote....
Lord Foul wrote: I think the movie itself is stupid, but if others can enjoy it so be it. Revelatory stuff, huh?
But I can live with that, never really asked for more..... ;)
"Winston, if you were my husband I'd give you poison" ................ "Madam, if you were my wife I would drink it!"

"Terrorism is war by the poor, and war is terrorism by the rich"

"A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well."

"The opposite of pro-life isn't pro-death. Y'know?"

"What if the Hokey Cokey really is what its all about?"
Top
User avatar
Worm of Despite
Lord
Posts: 9546
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 7:46 pm
Location: Rome, GA
Contact:
Contact Worm of Despite

Post by Worm of Despite »

finn wrote:
Lord Foul wrote: I'm done.
Well not quite I guess as you then wrote....
Lord Foul wrote: I think the movie itself is stupid, but if others can enjoy it so be it. Revelatory stuff, huh?
But I can live with that, never really asked for more..... ;)
You misunderstand; I was joking "I'm done" in relation to my semi-angry, declarative tone at the end of that post (where the words were all in bold).

You see, I've heard at least (or it seems) 10 times on this thread someone say "Just because it's unoriginal doesn't mean it's bad!," which keeps appearing (I suppose because my posts are skipped since they're negative), and no matter how many times I've clarified that my beef isn't its lack of originality--it's what it does with its ideas--it keeps re-manifesting. I'm just saying, for the last time--please, KW, read this--I don't care where the ideas came from. I rarely do with a story, as long as it's innovative, well-told, or at least entertaining.

As for originality itself--I can point out plenty of stories that were never told in the past, so I really don't give into that broad generalization that "everything's been told before", because sometimes it just hasn't. Maybe in the fantasy genre, but in a lot of post-modern literature or regular literature you have stories that fit no mold (Finnegans Wake, Mrs. Dalloway, lots of books by Don DeLillo, Philip K. Dick; heck, my book is 9 short stories about a nuclear war, but the course or its plot and ending is like nothing I know of). There's books in the last century that each uniquely deal with the social fabric of society, and that web is too complex to all be lumped in one category. It's too easy to say everything has some predecessor, because even if something does, the likeness is so bare or vague that it doesn't help the reader in understanding either work. Frodo may be a Christ figure in Lord of the Rings, but is that why we like LOTR? I think we like LOTR for vastly different reasons.
Top
User avatar
Worm of Despite
Lord
Posts: 9546
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 7:46 pm
Location: Rome, GA
Contact:
Contact Worm of Despite

Post by Worm of Despite »

finn wrote:
Lord Foul wrote: I'm done.
Well not quite I guess as you then wrote....
Lord Foul wrote: I think the movie itself is stupid, but if others can enjoy it so be it. Revelatory stuff, huh?
But I can live with that, never really asked for more..... ;)
You misunderstand; I was joking "I'm done" in relation to my semi-angry, declarative tone at the end of that post (where the words were all in bold).

You see, I've heard at least (or it seems) 10 times on this thread someone say "Just because it's not original doesn't mean it's bad!," which keeps appearing, no matter how many times I've clarified that my beef isn't its lack of originality--it's what it does with its ideas. I don't care where the ideas came from. I rarely do with a story, as long as it's innovative, well-told, or at least entertaining.

As for originality itself--I can point out plenty of stories that were never told in the past, so I really don't give into that broad generalization that "everything's been told before", because sometimes it just hasn't. Maybe in the fantasy genre, but in a lot of post-modern literature or regular literature you have stories that fit no mold (Finnegans Wake, Mrs. Dalloway, lots of books by Don DeLillo, Philip K. Dick; heck, my book is 9 short stories about a nuclear war, but the course or its plot and ending is like nothing I know of). Yes, you could say my book is just another nuclear holocaust yarn, but that's really not it at all; doesn't come close to pegging it. Sometimes the Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon is not a suitable research method for investigating a work of literature, you know?

There's books in the last century that each uniquely deal with the social fabric of society, and that web is too complex to all be lumped in one category. It's too easy to say everything has some predecessor, because even if something does, the likeness is so bare or vague that it doesn't help the reader in understanding either work. Frodo may be a Christ figure in Lord of the Rings, but is that why we like LOTR? I think we like LOTR for vastly different reasons.

So, to me, Avatar's lack of originality has no excuse. And even if the lack was not a problem with me, I'd have a huge problem because it was so predictable. As I read about Avatar on Wikipedia, even a couple years before it came out, two of my best friends and I agreed that it would most likely be visually splendorous but lacking in the story department. I kind of hoped not, quietly, but as I viewed the film I saw every corner it turned before it turned it. Not only that, but it went a few places and played in the dirt far longer than I wanted (but, sadly, as I expected).

A great film that went somewhere I didn't expect was Children of Men. I'll keep citing that film as one way to kick ass, sci-fi-wise. And Blade Runner. And Moon.

And noooow. I'm done. ;)
Top
Post Reply

Return to “Flicks”