Kevin's Watch

finn wrote:.....by those of either opinion!

Nah. I'm pretty much right. It's a hard onus to bear.

I think in that context onus is spelled with an 'a'

finn wrote:I think in that context onus is spelled with an 'a'

I must say my anus is rather shapely, yes. Thanks sir! To segue smoothly back into topic: one might say my anus, since it shuns Avatar, is much healthier (having not conformed its shape to that of a fantasy fan's or one who has watched the film an inordinate amount of time, thus getting a case of bucket butt).

wayfriend wrote: But one thing that you cannot deny is that it resonates with a lot of people, in a lot of different ways. A movie doesn't do that unless it connects with the audience, and then says something profound to us when connected.

Almost, but not quite. The movie connected with a lot of people, sure, but it never once said anything profound. In fact, the banality and superficiality of the movie were among the things that drove me away from it.

Rigel wrote:

wayfriend wrote: But one thing that you cannot deny is that it resonates with a lot of people, in a lot of different ways. A movie doesn't do that unless it connects with the audience, and then says something profound to us when connected.

Almost, but not quite. The movie connected with a lot of people, sure, but it never once said anything profound. In fact, the banality and superficiality of the movie were among the things that drove me away from it.

And that's typical of Cameron movies, which is unfortunate. He took a throwaway character (Ellen Ripley) and turned her into a machine. Pretty much single-handedly put action films on their ear with her. Between the script and the performance, got Sigourney Weaver an Oscar nomination (and she should have won).

But with the exception of that one role, his characters are, by and large, broad stereotypes that exist only to further his message.

Rigel wrote:

wayfriend wrote: But one thing that you cannot deny is that it resonates with a lot of people, in a lot of different ways. A movie doesn't do that unless it connects with the audience, and then says something profound to us when connected.

Almost, but not quite. The movie connected with a lot of people, sure, but it never once said anything profound. In fact, the banality and superficiality of the movie were among the things that drove me away from it.

I don't think it would connect with so many people if it didn't say something to them. While I wouldn't call it a complex movie, I wouldn't call it "banal" and "superficial" either. Just simple. And simple things can be profound. In that respect, Avatar is similar to, for example, Unforgiven.

wayfriend wrote:

Rigel wrote:

wayfriend wrote: But one thing that you cannot deny is that it resonates with a lot of people, in a lot of different ways. A movie doesn't do that unless it connects with the audience, and then says something profound to us when connected.

Almost, but not quite. The movie connected with a lot of people, sure, but it never once said anything profound. In fact, the banality and superficiality of the movie were among the things that drove me away from it.

I don't think it would connect with so many people if it didn't say something to them. While I wouldn't call it a complex movie, I wouldn't call it "banal" and "superficial" either. Just simple. And simple things can be profound. In that respect, Avatar is similar to, for example, Unforgiven.

Expect a very pissed-off Clint Eastwood to come punch you in the mouth for that one.

Unforgiven is a hundred times the movie that Avatar is.

Cail wrote:

wayfriend wrote:

Rigel wrote: Almost, but not quite. The movie connected with a lot of people, sure, but it never once said anything profound. In fact, the banality and superficiality of the movie were among the things that drove me away from it.

I don't think it would connect with so many people if it didn't say something to them. While I wouldn't call it a complex movie, I wouldn't call it "banal" and "superficial" either. Just simple. And simple things can be profound. In that respect, Avatar is similar to, for example, Unforgiven.

Expect a very pissed-off Clint Eastwood to come punch you in the mouth for that one.

Unforgiven is a hundred times the movie that Avatar is.

The most true post. Ever. In all histories of Internets.

And as I've pointed out earlier--the fact so many people lapped this up shows the banality and superficial nature of the collective mass of this planet. If films this poor keep making the #1 in box office, I hope a black hole ends our mediocrity.

Lord Foul wrote:The most true post. Ever. In all histories of Internets.

Really? A post that twists my words to make it appear I said something that I didn't say - namely, that Avatar is as good as Unforgiven - is the truest post you ever read? I feel sorry for you and your bare acquaintence with truth.

wayfriend wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:The most true post. Ever. In all histories of Internets.

Really? A post that twists my words to make it appear I said something that I didn't say - namely, that Avatar is as good as Unforgiven - is the truest post you ever read? I feel sorry for you and your bare acquaintence with truth.

Your acquaintance with eyesight is flawed, good sir. I was responding to Cail's assertion that Unforgiven is 100 times better than Avatar. A tip of the hat, if you will. Or a knowing wink.

What Cail does with your words I'm not too concerned (though I saw no twisting myself; Cail's a fair player in my book). In fact, Unforgiven isn't so simple in Avatar's sense, as it does interesting things with the old tale of the West. Avatar, for me, did nothing with its old tale of white man meets the natives. In fact, Unforgiven comments on its own tropes and says some pretty provocative stuff about violence and heroism. Avatar left no juicy comments to leave me thinking or played, well, playfully with its conventions. Not for me. But that's neither here nor there. Glad you all enjoyed it, though, as I said. But since I am to be pitied by good wayfriend here, and my truthiness is so suspect, I will bow out.

Lord Foul wrote: I will bow out.

Are you back to talking about your anus again?

Only in Private Message. 600 White Gold Dollars.

New York Times Best Seller List:

"Lord Foul's Anus"

Lord Foul wrote:This one time...at Lord Foul's Anus Camp...

I stuck the Staff of Law in my....wait, wtf?

The Unforgiven, yeah! Great movie!

High Lord Tolkien wrote:

Lord Foul wrote: I will bow out.

Are you back to talking about your anus again?

......I think then that should have been "bowel" out !

finn wrote:KT: would seriously recommend the Uplift stories by Davin Brinn!

Just did some surfing on this and it does sound cool. Thanks finn!

Lord Foul wrote:In fact, Unforgiven isn't so simple in Avatar's sense, as it does interesting things with the old tale of the West. Avatar, for me, did nothing with its old tale of white man meets the natives.

Someone who chose to dislike Unforgiven could make a comment that's it's banal and superficial - claim that it's message, being nothing more than "killing people is bad", isn't profound. What does that tell us that we don't already know? they might ask. They could talk about how the story in Unforgiven isn't a new one, or how the ending wasn't a surprise, and how trite that makes it.

Of course, someone who liked the film could point out how it builds an emotional involvement through a few characters, so that the message is powerfully delivered. Or how it asks us to re-examine how we think about such things as the Western Hero. They might suggest that the movie resonates with viewers through the use of such things archetypal roles, and how it uses a single incident in a single place to say something epic.

I can't find any part of that that isn't also true about Avatar.

wayfriend wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:In fact, Unforgiven isn't so simple in Avatar's sense, as it does interesting things with the old tale of the West. Avatar, for me, did nothing with its old tale of white man meets the natives.

Someone who chose to dislike Unforgiven could make a comment that's it's banal and superficial - claim that it's message, being nothing more than "killing people is bad", isn't profound. What does that tell us that we don't already know? they might ask. They could talk about how the story in Unforgiven isn't a new one, or how the ending wasn't a surprise, and how trite that makes it.

Of course, someone who liked the film could point out how it builds an emotional involvement through a few characters, so that the message is powerfully delivered. Or how it asks us to re-examine how we think about such things as the Western Hero. They might suggest that the movie resonates with viewers through the use of such things archetypal roles, and how it uses a single incident in a single place to say something epic.

I can't find any part of that that isn't also true about Avatar.

I could argue that the purple unicorn is the best part of Avatar. You didn't see it, but I did. We can't prove or unprove it, of course. But I think it's a valid discussion, and we should keep going. I suppose it is an exciting prospect to know one could argue one way or another about anything. For, like, one person on the planet.

What I'm saying is you elucidated your stance; I elucidated mine. This is the part where we agree to disagree. It's time to let others (meaning everyone minus me) continue to discuss the film, because my reasoning for disliking the film has been quite well explained.

wayfriend wrote: Someone who chose to dislike Unforgiven could make a comment that's it's banal and superficial - claim that it's message, being nothing more than "killing people is bad", isn't profound. What does that tell us that we don't already know? they might ask. They could talk about how the story in Unforgiven isn't a new one, or how the ending wasn't a surprise, and how trite that makes it.

You're right, of course. Killing people is unquestionably bad, and we shouldn't demean the message just because it's a simple one.

In the same way, logging and mining are unquestionably bad, and we... wait, hold on... oh, um, I'm sorry, they're not. Never mind, then.